I've seen lots of discussion online about how much faster you can bike/run for each pound of weight lost. Assuming that all other factors remain equal and the weight lost is fat and the BF % remains in the healthy range, how much faster do you think a skier could race per pound (or kg) lost in a 15k? hill climb? sprint? controlled grade?
classic? skate?
FasterSkier Forums » General
Effect of weight loss on skiing speed
(10 posts)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
I do not have data to support this theory, but I'll put it out there anyway. Perhaps some student or faculty in Exercise Sport Science can use it. The relative effect would be greater for bike/run than skiing (and swimming) due to bipedal v. quadrapedal motion. Add in the effects of momentum in skiing and bounancy in swimming and I think weight starts to fade into the noise (holding your assumption that %-BF stays in the healthy range). This is why you see a much wider variety of body types at the sharp end of the results sheet in skiing and swimming than you do in running. Something to chew on...
Posted 1 year ago # -
I don't have any data or scientific knowledge to add, but I do have a little bit of experience. Last winter I was fairly out of shape. I had been skiing quite a bit, but didn't really start training until December. My endurance was fairly decent, but I was definitely a little heavier than when I had been training more seriously. I skied a solid but unspectacular Craftsbury Marathon, then just over a week later, came down with a nasty stomach bug. I didn't eat for almost 3 days, from tuesday night to thursday night, and I probably lost nearly 10 lbs in that period. Despite the sickness, I made the trip down to a local 10k skate race. The course didn't feature a lot of really tough climbing, and suited me in its transitions and rolling climbs, but I skied one of the better 10k skate races I've ever skied, solidly beating several skiers who beat me by 10-15 minutes in Craftsbury. So in my experience, weight loss has a strong positive effect on performance.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I found this article from the American College of Sports Medicine from 1992 with a quick journal search. Interesting (and old) findings.
Posted 1 year ago # -
A similiar article states that body mass will have less of an effect on performance than will VO2 max. Also, skiers with lower body mass will perform better on steep uphills and skiers with higher body mass (and presumably more power) will perform better on flats/downhills. Kind of a "duh" result, but good to see the analysis, and prioritization of VO2max over body mass.
Posted 1 year ago # -
VO2max, a frequently used measurement of aerobic capacity, is calculated as a function of bodyweight. By definition, if body weight decreases, Vo2max increases.
The concept is relatively simple - if you have the same ability to acquire and process oxygen, but have less mass to to move, you should be able to go faster. Obviously this is highly simplified, and doesn't account for all sorts of factors...
Posted 1 year ago # -
FasterSkier: I'm confused then as to how this study was able to investigate the effect of weight loss on VO2max. They found.."Seven (the cases) of the 33 subjects reduced a significant amount of body weight (BW) within a period of 2 months. The cases showed a significant decrease in VO2max and running speed relative to controls during the weight reduction period (WRP)."...I believe this means that VO2max in not simply a function of body weight...what do you think?
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0838.1991.tb00286.x/abstract?cf03388EF1=42666CEE!MjA0MDQ4OTYxOmNvcnByYWRpdXNzc28681uAgf2zo+GevDMudgcG9Q==
Posted 1 year ago # -
VO2 max is a measurement of the maximal amount of O2 which the body consumes in a given period of time. The rate of O2 consumption. It can be expressed a number of ways. For rowing where performance is largely weight independent it is often expressed as L/min (liter O2/min), in running ml/kg/min and in skiing which is less weight dependent than running but not quite as independent as rowing it has been suggested to express VO2 as ml/kg(2/3)/min.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3657480Posted 1 year ago # -
tetlowjm
Later in the description, it says that a year after the initial testing period the subjects who kept the weight off had all improved their relative vo2 maxs substantially. My guess would be that their vo2 max dropped during the time period they were losing weight because of the caloric defecit they were imposing on their bodies. It's hard to put in a good effort when your body is at least partially depleted of energy, I can't imagine a vo2 max test would be fun at all. And an important part of the studies comparing lighter and heavier skiers on climbs vs uphills is that those athletes are probably both at a lean weight, so the heavier/lighter thing can't really be applied to an individual, if youre relatively small you won't do any better on a flat course by putting on fat.Posted 1 year ago # -
Frequent Fasterskier contributor Inge Sheve, who must weigh 90 lbs dripping wet, complained to me at the World Masters that she hated working very hard to get to the top of climbs first, only to have the other women near her fly past on the fast, long downhills. In the end, she still did very well. I know she won at least one gold there.
Randy
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
