Self-monitoring plays an important role for endurance athletes seeking their racing weight. We’ve already looked at the cause side of the cause-effect equation of performance weight management. Monitoring your Diet Quality Score and your carbohydrate intake will ensure that your diet does not hold you back from attaining your racing weight. Remember, this desired effect—your optimal performance weight—is defined as your body weight and body composition when you’re in peak racing form. Proper monitoring of the outcome of your diet and training therefore requires that you consistently track your body weight, body composition, and performance.
Competitive cyclists tend to be the most systematic of endurance athletes in their self-monitoring, and it frequently pays off. Consider Bradley Wiggins. Born in Belgium and raised in England, Wiggins got his start in the velodrome, where weight is not a handicap. His height of 6'3" and weight of 180 pounds were not impediments to his winning six Olympic medals in track cycling before becoming a full-time road racer.
Wiggins knew that in order to match his track success on the road circuit, he would have to lose weight. He created a plan with the aid of British Cycling coach Matt Parker that started with a goal weight of 158 pounds. This goal was based on calculations similar to those that I described in Chapter 2. Parker projected that 158 pounds was as light as Wiggins could get without losing any muscle mass or power and without lowering his body-fat level below the minimum amount needed for good health.
Then the tracking began. Wiggins weighed himself frequently and had his body composition measured regularly. But maintaining power and improving performance were no less important than losing fat, so Wiggins religiously tracked these variables as well. He repeated standard performance tests such as a 10-mile time trial to make sure he wasn’t getting weaker as he got lighter. While he couldn’t expect to become more powerful as a skinny roadie than he was as a beefy track specialist, he wanted to retain as much power as possible. The real goal was to improve his power-weight ratio, which would improve his climbing, so he also repeated a 30-minute climbing test.
The plan worked. Wiggins reached his weight goal at 4 percent body fat. He increased his average power to 475 watts in his 30-minute uphill time trial test. He was rewarded with a 4th-place finish in the 2009 Tour de France, wins at the Criterium du Dauphine in 2011 and 2012, and victories in the Tour de Romandie, Paris–Nice, and the Tour de France in 2012.
In your pursuit of racing weight, you’ll want to track the same three variables that Bradley Wiggins does: weight, body-fat percentage, and performance. Let’s start with the first two.
Some people believe that you shouldn’t weigh yourself too often when you’re trying to lose weight. They say that stepping on the scale causes unnecessary frustration because it’s normal for a person’s weight to sometimes hold steady or even creep upward a bit from one day to the next even when the general trend is downward. Opponents of frequent self-weighing also say that it encourages some people to adopt extreme and unhealthy measures to lose weight because they provide the only assurance that each day’s bathroom scale reading will be smaller than the last one.
This perspective makes sense in theory, but the reality is very different. Research has shown that frequent self-weighing is one of the most common and effective weight-management strategies among men and women who have lost significant amounts of weight and kept it off. Frequency of self-weighing is a strong predictor of weight regain after initial weight loss. Dieters who weigh themselves more often regain less weight; those who weigh themselves less often regain more.
Studies have also demonstrated that the notion that frequent self-weighing causes mental anguish and encourages extremism is largely mythical. Daily weigh-ins are problematic for some individuals, but for most people they increase the chances of success without causing any psychological harm in the process.
There’s no mystery to how self-weighing aids the prevention of weight regain. Without frequent weighing, it may take a month or more for a person who has gotten a bit slack with his diet and begun to regain weight to notice it through indicators such as waistband fit and the mirror test. A person who weighs himself every day, however, will catch the trend almost immediately and be able to take quick action to get his diet back up to standard.
There’s really nothing to weighing yourself, but some people still manage to make a mess of it. I’ve known people who, whenever they are trying to lose weight, step on the scale two or three times a day and drive themselves crazy by making too much of any upward fluctuations, which are normal over the course of a day even when someone is successfully losing weight.
If, however, you still want to weigh yourself every day, you’ll have research behind you to support this practice. In fact, a 2009 study involving men and women enrolled in a clinical weight-loss program found that, statistically, individual subjects lost an extra pound for every 11 times they weighed themselves, probably because of the heightened level of awareness that attends more frequent self-monitoring (Van Wormer et al. 2009). So if you wish to weigh yourself daily, go ahead; just be sure not to take daily fluctuations too seriously, and do weigh yourself at the same time each day and in the same circumstances for accurate comparisons. Don’t weigh yourself first thing in the morning on the upstairs bathroom scale wearing pajamas one day and then weigh yourself after dinner on the downstairs bathroom scale in the nude the next day.
At a minimum, weigh yourself at least once every four weeks on the same day you perform your periodic fitness-test workouts (described later in this chapter). These are your “official weigh-ins” for use in determining your optimal performance weight.
Keep in mind that some scales are better than others. I suggest you invest in the best scale that’s within your budget. One feature to look for is automatic zero calibration, which resets the scale to “true zero” weight after each use. You might also want a scale that gives readings to the ounce or tenth of a pound. Those little less-than-a-pound changes can be surprisingly motivating when you’re pursuing your optimal performance weight. Finally, since you are also monitoring your body-fat percentage, it makes a lot of sense to purchase a scale that can give you feedback both on your weight and on your body composition.
Until fairly recently, there was no convenient, affordable, and accurate way to measure your own body-fat level. The best option available was the skinfold method, which entails pinching skinfolds between calipers and running the measurements through a complex mathematical formula. It was affordable enough but a hassle to do, and it was often inaccurate when performed without formal training. Hydrostatic (or underwater) weighing was considered the most accurate method, but it required bulky, expensive equipment that was not widely available.
Hydrostatic weighing has been replaced by DEXA scanning as the most accurate way to measure body-fat percentage, and in fact it is the only method that directly measures body-fat levels instead of estimating them based on measurements of other things. A DEXA scanner uses advanced imaging technology to “see” the body fat inside you (it is also used to measure bone mineral density). But getting a body-fat analysis from a DEXA scanner requires that you make an appointment with a doctor who has one, so it’s no more convenient and affordable than hydrostatic weighing.
Thank goodness for body-fat scales! These use bioelectrical impedance technology for measurement and are now widely available at department stores, drugstores, sporting goods stores, and elsewhere. These devices are easy to use, affordable, and, while not as accurate as professional body-fat measurement methods such as DEXA scanning, accurate enough.
A 2007 study published in the journal Clinical Nutrition that compared measurements obtained from a Tanita body-fat scale and DEXA scanning reported a better than 96 percent level of agreement between the two methods (Thomson et al. 2007). Body-fat scales with this degree of accuracy are available for as little as $40.
Body-fat scales look just like regular bathroom scales. You step onto them and get a measurement. And they do in fact measure your body weight in addition to estimating your body-fat percentage. Body-fat scales work by sending an electrical signal into your body and measuring the degree of resistance (or impedance) encountered. Electrical signals pass through fat tissue more quickly than they do through muscle tissue, so the less resistance the body-fat scale registers, the higher your body-fat percentage must be.
To ensure accurate results, use your device in strict accordance with the instructions included with it. Different units have slightly different requirements. Here are some usage guidelines that apply to most body-fat scales:
•Always measure your body fat at the same time of day, preferably at least two hours after eating.
•Make sure you are well hydrated.
•Use the bathroom before stepping on the scale.
•Moisten a towel and step on it with bare feet before stepping on the scale (to enhance conductivity).
•Make sure the scale is on a flat, hard surface (such as bathroom tiles).
If you have good reason to believe that your body-fat percentage is already low (e.g., you have visible abdominal musculature), purchase a scale with an “athlete” mode. Scales without this feature are less accurate for lean individuals.
Popular brands of body-fat scales include Conair, Tanita (which also makes scales under the Weight Watchers, Ironman, and Jenny Craig brand names), Oregon Scientific, Phoenix, and Taylor. A company called Omron makes hand-held body-fat analyzers that use bioelectrical impedance as well, but these devices do not measure body weight. The difference between the higher-priced body-fat scales and the cheaper models is mainly in the number of features, not in their accuracy. You can find body-fat scales at department stores such as Wal-Mart, drugstores such as Walgreens, and sporting goods stores, including Sport Chalet.
Most of the fancier features on these devices have little or no value. For example, some devices purport to measure your hydration status. This sounds like a useful tool for athletes, who are often dehydrated after workouts and must rehydrate fully to maximize performance in their next workout. But the accuracy of this feature is poor. What’s more, the popular notion that endurance athletes commonly fail to properly rehydrate between workouts is false. An interesting study from the University of Glasgow, Scotland (Fudge et al. 2008), looked at the hydration status of elite Kenyan runners in heavy training over a five-day period. Despite becoming significantly dehydrated during their runs, and drinking little or nothing during or immediately after workouts, these runners were found to restore their bodies to normal hydration levels by the evening simply by drinking when thirsty throughout the day.
One fancy feature available in some body-fat scales that I do like is a basal metabolic rate calculator. This tool makes it easier to calculate the number of calories you burn each day, as you will do during your quick start periods (described in Chapter 10).
If you use a body-fat scale, you might as well measure your body-fat percentage as often as you measure your body weight, since you’ll get both measurements from the same device. Note, however, that day-to-day fluctuations in body-fat percentage are perhaps even less meaningful than day-to-day changes in your body weight. The body-fat measurements that really matter are those that you calculate roughly once every four weeks, on the same day you do your fitness-test workouts, in the process of determining your optimal performance weight.
Again, body-fat scales are not the most accurate tools for measuring body-fat percentage. For this reason, it is best not to use them to compare your body composition to that of other people. But when your goal is simply to track changes in your own body-fat percentage, it’s more important that your measurements be consistent (that is, your scale is measuring the same attribute to the same degree of accuracy on each occasion) than accurate, and body-fat scales do give consistent results when used properly. If the highest degree of accuracy is very important to you, there is a way to effectively increase the accuracy of your body-fat scale without taking on a lot of extra hassle or expense. Just make an appointment with a physician for a DEXA scan. Before you leave for that appointment, measure your body-fat percentage on your body-fat scale. Consider the difference between the two measurements the “margin of error” for your body-fat scale, and use that number to correct your scale’s measurements going forward.
Weighing and body-fat measuring are not the only forms of self-monitoring that are known to aid weight management. Keeping a food journal is another. Researchers at the Kaiser Permanente Health Research Center (Hollis et al. 2008) found that overweight individuals participating in an eight-month weight-loss program lost twice as much weight when they kept a daily food diary than when they logged their food intake irregularly or not at all.
You can keep your food diary anywhere—in a notebook, on a calendar, in a computer file—but I recommend keeping it in a place that goes everywhere you do, such as a smart phone. This way you can record the information when it’s fresh in your memory and you’ll be less likely to forget details or overlook entire meals!
Whereas self-weighing focuses on the effect side of the cause-effect equation of weight management, keeping a food journal sheds light on the cause side. Most people eat more food and have a lower-quality diet than they think they do. It’s easy to fool yourself about your diet when you’re not really paying attention. You eat one piece of fruit every other day and tell yourself you eat fruit often. You resist dessert once every ten days and tell yourself that you strictly limit your indulgence in sweets. When you keep a food diary, you’re no longer able to fool yourself in these ways. You’re forced to face the facts, and the facts give you an opportunity to make improvements that otherwise you probably would not make.
A food diary does not have to include calorie, macronutrient, or other nutrient counts to be effective. It’s more likely to be effective if you keep it simple enough that it doesn’t feel like a hassle. Your food diary should name everything you eat and drink in a day, broken down by occasion, in enough detail to allow for diet-quality scoring. Precise sizes are not necessary, but it’s a good idea to include information about portions, especially when they are very small or very large. For example, if you eat a half a sandwich, it’s better to write down “½ sandwich” instead of “sandwich.”
For example, suppose your body-fat scale gives you a reading of 17.0 percent and the DEXA scanner gives you a reading of 18.8 percent (the DEXA scanner is almost certain to be higher, by the way). In all of your future body-fat scale measurements, add 1.8 percent to your reading to get your “true” body-fat percentage.
Body weight and body-fat percentage have no meaning in isolation for endurance athletes. These variables have meaning only in relation to performance. Weighing 145 pounds is not better than weighing 155 pounds unless you perform better at the lighter weight. A body-fat percentage of 12 is better than a body-fat percentage of 13 only if you’re faster at 12 percent.
WEIGHING 145 POUNDS IS NOT BETTER THAN WEIGHING 155 POUNDS UNLESS YOU PERFORM BETTER AT THE LIGHTER WEIGHT.
Remember, optimal racing weight is defined as the body weight and body-fat percentage at which you perform best. Determining your racing weight requires that you track performance alongside your weight and body-fat percentage so that you know if the changes in your body are actually making you faster.
To determine your optimal performance weight, begin by creating a table that plots your body weight and body composition against your performance during a period of progressive training and carefully controlled diet in pursuit of a peak race performance. Once every four weeks, step on a body-fat scale and note your weight and body-fat percentage. On the same days you weigh in, perform a test workout that provides a good indicator of your race-specific fitness. For example, if you’re a runner, go to the track and do a 10-km time trial at 95 percent effort.
Create a four-column table with the date in the farthest left column, your performance test time in the next column, your body weight in the next column, and your body-fat percentage in the far right column. After you’ve completed and recorded three or four testing days, you will begin to notice a clear pattern, as demonstrated in Table 7.1. It is likely that you will achieve your best performance at your lowest body weight and body-fat composition. And if you train and eat right, you will reach your highest performance level at the time of your scheduled peak race.
You’re not done yet, however. Your weight at the time of your next peak race is not necessarily your optimal racing weight. If your current body-fat level is too high, you might not have enough time to reach your optimal performance weight by the date of your next peak race. And regardless of your starting weight, any one of a number of common training and dietary errors could prevent you from reaching your optimal racing weight in time for your next peak race. If you’re in this situation, you can’t rely on your test workouts or race performances to tell you what your optimal performance weight is—yet. It may take you two or three full training cycles to arrive at the point where your performance is no longer limited by your weight. In this case your focus should be on consistently practicing the six-step Racing Weight plan, which will eliminate the dietary and training errors that are currently holding you back. In the meantime, keep tracking your weight, body-fat percentage, and performance so that you can watch and draw motivation from your progress along the way.
As you track your progress, measure both your body weight and your body-fat percentage because you can reach any given body weight at more than one body-fat percentage and in most endurance athletes body composition has an even stronger relationship to performance than body weight. If you track only body weight, you may wind up making the all-too-common mistake of approaching performance weight management with a simplistic “lighter is better” mentality and then trying to slim down in ways that cause you to lose muscle along with fat (most likely by undernourishing your body). Consequently, while you may eventually reach your optimal body weight through these means, you will do so at a greater-than-optimal body-fat percentage. Your performance at this body weight/body-fat percentage combination will not be as good as it is when you are at your optimal body weight and body composition (that is, your true optimal performance weight). Tracking your body-fat percentage along with your body weight can function as a check against making this mistake. Yes, you want to be light (unless, perhaps, you’re a swimmer or rower), but you don’t want to be light at all costs. You want to be light and lean.
Here’s a concrete example of the process I’ve just outlined. A female runner completes five performance tests at four-week intervals spanning the duration of a full training cycle that begins with base training and culminates in a peak 10K race. Her performance test consists of a 10-km run on the track completed at a 95 percent effort level. She measures her body weight and body-fat percentage on the day of each performance test. Her results are seen in Table 7.1. Since her performance continues to improve as her body weight and body-fat percentage drop, she is able to conclude that she is moving toward her racing weight.
The following are suggested performance tests for the most popular endurance sports. Be sure to warm up properly for each of them.
CROSS-COUNTRY SKIING. Because snow conditions are ever changing and have a strong effect on cross-country skiing performance, it is seldom possible to do regular fitness tests outdoors on skis that provide a valid indication of changes in fitness. Therefore, I recommend that you use one of the following two alternatives instead.
Option 1. Ski as hard as you can for 20 minutes on a cross-country ski ergometer (an indoor ski machine with power-measuring capability). Note your average power output (watts).
Option 2. If you do not have regular access to a cross-country ski ergometer and you use cycling as a cross-training modality, perform the cycling test described below.
CYCLING. Ride 20 minutes at maximum effort on a flat, smooth road course or an indoor trainer. Note your distance covered, and use it to calculate your average speed or, if you use a power meter, note your average power. Whichever options you choose for your ride location and performance measurement variable, use them for every test for maximum validity of comparisons between tests.
MOUNTAIN BIKING. If your sport is mountain biking, you can use the cycling test described above or perform a 20-minute maximum effort on a stretch of trail that is easily accessed from your home. Be sure to ride the same stretch of trail every time you repeat the test.
ROWING. Perform a 5,000-meter time trial at maximum effort on a rowing ergometer. Note your time and calculate your average speed or note your average power output.
RUNNING. Run 10 kilometers at 95 percent of maximum effort on a running track or a smooth, flat road. Note your time, and calculate your average pace.
SWIMMING. Swim 5 × 100 meters on a 5:00 interval (with plenty of rest) in your main stroke discipline. Calculate your average time per 100 meters.
SWIMMING (OPEN WATER). If you want to use your performance test to prepare for open-water swimming, try one of the following options.
Option 1. Swim 1,000 meters at maximum effort in a pool. Note your time, and calculate your average pace per 100.
Option 2. Swim a marked open-water course that takes roughly 10 minutes to complete at maximum effort. Note your time. Be sure to swim in an area that is easily accessed from your home so that you can use it for all of your performance tests.
TRIATHLON. Each week perform one of the two cycling tests, the running test, or one of the two open-water swimming tests described above. Stagger the cycling and running tests so that you’re never doing them in the same week. It’s okay to do either the cycling and swimming tests or the running and swimming tests in the same week.
In the corporate world, senior executives are fond of the expression “What gets measured gets managed.” I like this expression, and I think it applies equally to health, fitness, and endurance performance. It expresses the idea that if you want to gain greater control over some aspect of your business (or your body), one of the best things you can do is to monitor it systematically using some kind of relevant measuring stick. The very effort to do so makes it a higher priority and helps you improve this aspect of your business or your body independently of other efforts.
You will find that estimating and tracking your progress toward your racing weight are similarly effective with respect to your objectives to become leaner and to maximize your race performance. Self-monitoring doesn’t guarantee that you will always make progress, but even when your progress stalls, it will let you know that right away. You can then go back to the “cause” side of the cause-effect equation of performance management to see what you can do to start moving forward again, whether it’s increasing your diet quality, filling holes in your training (see Chapter 9), or doing something else.
