What do you think burns more body fat?

I don't get it. Of course you need to lose weight in order to lose body fat and the way to do that is by exercising(plus diet). Any form of exercise burns fat, not just running. I know that both, long distance swimming and sprint training, burn fat. My question was which of the two do you think burns more fat if you train each for an hour for example. Which burns more calories, a sprint workout or a distance workout? It depends. It depends on the workout and on how well you do it. I think it is possible to create a sprint workout and a distance workout, swim each to the best of your ability, and they would burn about the same calories. If you finish your main set and you can barely move, it shouldn't matter if you did sprint or distance, the calories needed to get to that point are about the same. This should be true from about 2:1 work to rest down to zero rest distance set. High rest sets and long and slow sets where you could go faster but just don't burn less calories. The key is swimming at your max, and I suspect it is easier for most people to swim one style or the other closer to their max than the other. If you find that you can't push yourself to put 100% into each sprint, or you find yourself too bored to go fast during anything longer than a 100, you have your answer as to which would be best.

I've been doing 40 mins 2x a weeks since the begining of year...those who saw me in the fall last year and again at Zones or Nats can tell you if I looked leaner. I think I did but sometimes your eye sees what it wants to see. Yeah, that may be so, but I know what I SAW: "Swimming Stud" plastered across your butt! :D :bolt:

Regardless of how you exercise, if you intake more calories then you use, you won't be losing weight. You also can't cut your calories too much or your body will think there is a famine and it will slow your metabolism down too much and you will lose muscle. I think the ideal calorie deficit is supposed to be 300-400 per day. I believe what Chris Stevenson said above is true. A sprint workout if it is intense enough will increase your metabolism for 24+ hours and burn more calories over the day. I started swimming with masters in September last year and I have gone from 194 to 178 pounds. I have been swimming 3x 1 hour a week and going to the gym 2x 30 minutes a week (no cardio). I would credit it mostly to eating very well and increasing my metabolism from swimming and lifting weights.

long swims in cold water.

I think what you are getting at is a comparison of lower-intensity work with little (or no) rest, compared to higher-intensity work with significant rest, where the overall workout time is comparable. Yes, that's what I meant. More sprints with less rest will burn more. Keeping the heart rate up as high as training will let you . That's sorta what I think but I'm not really sure. I believe what Chris Stevenson said above is true. A sprint workout if it is intense enough will increase your metabolism for 24+ hours and burn more calories over the day. That's what I always hear. It's kind of the HIIT principle. Right, I understand your question. What I'm saying and Chris and Q have said even better is there really is no difference in how each type of workout burns fat. In fact, everything you read states that the whole notion of a fat burning workout is kind of ridiculous. Ah, ok. Now I get what you meant. Regardless of how you exercise, if you intake more calories then you use, you won't be losing weight. I noticed this principle when I used to work as a bike messenger. I cycled about 10 hours a day for 5 days a week but even put on a little weight. The reason was that I probably burned tons of calories but I didn't have time to eat so I ate huge amounts of junk food(anything that would go quick). Having said that, my intension wasn't to lose weight. I just wanted to get the job done. If I normally workout I usually eat clean and watch the amounts I eat. Or do you mean, "which kind of workout is a more effective component of a weight-loss program?" I doubt the answer is clear on that issue because of many confounding factors including how much you eat when you are not working out and what your body fat % v. lean muscle % was to start with. The reason I ask is because I could never figure that out myself. I did a lot of long distance cycling(still do). I did HIIT on spin bikes. I did running. I used to do more long distance swimming and now do more sprint workouts but still couldn't answer which method is more effective in fat burning. I always read about which method is supposed to be more effective but can't tell from my own experience. I guess what some of you said is right: no matter how you train; if you're gassed out at the end of the workout it will be equally effective.

I've been told that with cardio workouts, 40 minutes is the magic number.. The first 20 minutes burns the blood sugar--the secoind 20 hits the fat store... This is something I heard--I didn't come up with this, I didn't research it, I have not ivestigate the claims to it's accuracy. I've been doing 40 mins 2x a weeks since the begining of year...those who saw me in the fall last year and again at Zones or Nats can tell you if I looked leaner. I think I did but sometimes your eye sees what it wants to see. I don't diet or go without cake, cookies or beer...so I'm not ripped anyhow.

The reason I ask is because I could never figure that out myself. I did a lot of long distance cycling(still do). I did HIIT on spin bikes. I did running. I used to do more long distance swimming and now do more sprint workouts but still couldn't answer which method is more effective in fat burning. I always read about which method is supposed to be more effective but can't tell from my own experience. I guess what some of you said is right: no matter how you train; if you're gassed out at the end of the workout it will be equally effective. The more time you are able to spend exercising, and in motion, and with your heart rate up, the more calories your body will burn. Also, the more intense the exercise the more calories it burns. So it's a combination - whichever exercise your body can sustan for a prolonged period of time. For example, running vs. walking: traveling three miles, whether you are running it, or walking it, will use up very close to the same amount of calories. If you ran it really fast, your heart rate will go up for a little while afterwards, and you will get some residual calorie burning. However, if you go at little less then sprint speed, in the upper end of aerobic heart rate, this may enable you to run or jog, 6 or even 12 miles, in the same time it may take to walk it., and since you are not sprinting it, you don't end up spent as fast. The overall effect is, you burned a lot more calories. Also, sprint exercises tend to use up the qickly available energy, which is in your blood and muscle. Typically, more prolonged exercise at little less then peak intensity gives your body time to go through the lengthier process of converting some of it's fast reserves into energy. Bottom line is, you want to go as hard as you can for as long as you can. it's a graph with intersecting curves - you go too fast, you may have to stop too soon, you go too slow, you don't cover as much ground. HIIT principle in general usually allows people to maximize the intensity vs. time spent training. But when you take a close enough look, and really want to fine tune the last 10% or so of maxing out the fat burning efficiency, it's best to keep track of how your body responds individually. At that level, your personal lean mass vs. fat reseves, general muscle mass and overall cardiovascular conditioning can come into play, and overall body weight can come into play. This is all asuming that you're not ingesting new calories, especially quick energy type stuff, while working out. Body will always go for the easily accessible energy first.

Yes, I know, however it is the commonly used colloquial meaning of calorie burning that we are talking about here, rather a strict phyisics definition. If we wanted to be strict about physics then we need to start talking about joules rather then burning calories anyway. Here's some information on that, for people that may not know: en.wikipedia.org/.../Joules To backtrack from joules to calories, follow from definition of joules, to definition of "work" en.wikipedia.org/.../Work_(physics) Then one can backtrack o calorie: en.wikipedia.org/.../Calorie Hoever, I highly doubt anyone here had a really burning desire to get that far into physics 101. I suspect lots of us have a burning desire to use our Physics 101 knowledge(see almost any thread involving swimming propulsion.) Calorie is useful in this context as it is the unit of energy traditionally ascribed to burning fuel,such as food and the bodily storing of energy(burning 1 gm carbs or protien gives 4 Calories,1 gm fat 9 Calories.It is generally said that you have to burn 3500 Calories to lose a pound.)

Yes, I know, however it is the commonly used colloquial meaning of calorie burning that we are talking about here, rather a strict phyisics definition. If we wanted to be strict about physics then we need to start talking about joules rather then burning calories anyway. Here's some information on that, for people that may not know: en.wikipedia.org/.../Joules To backtrack from joules to calories, follow from definition of joules, to definition of "work" en.wikipedia.org/.../Work_(physics) Then one can backtrack o calorie: en.wikipedia.org/.../Calorie Hoever, I highly doubt anyone here had a really burning desire to get that far into physics 101. Huh? Strict about physics? Calories and Joules are both units of energy.... Joules is the more commonly used unit of measurement, but anyone with a calculator could flip back and forth between the two... same as you could flip back and forth between yards and meters. There is no "backtracking". Do you mean converting units? One calorie = 4.184 Joules There's no need to throw out a bunch of Wikipedia links.

I suspect lots of us have a burning desire to use our Physics 101 knowledge(see almost any thread involving swimming propulsion.) That's what happens when a bunch of geeks post. We simply can't help ourselves! :)