how much do you weigh? - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

MikeWaters · 08-23-2007, 04:14 PM

me - 170 (which is the lowest since undergrad, taking two soccer classes in the same semester).

Archaea · 08-23-2007, 04:16 PM

159 but I need to be at 150 for cycling fitness. I hover between 160 and 165 during tri season.

RC Vikings · 08-23-2007, 04:17 PM

6' 2" 192 lbs I'm better on the flat ground.

MikeWaters · 08-23-2007, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archaea

159 but I need to be at 150 for cycling fitness. I hover between 160 and 165 during tri season.

Hmmm, maybe I do have the potential to beat you in the climbs if I work at it.

I expected you to weigh less.

bluegoose · 08-23-2007, 04:18 PM

Currently 170, but I should be at least 5-10 pounds lighter. 162 would be my ideal weight. Thats where I was 2 years ago in the best shape of my life.

Archaea · 08-23-2007, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Hmmm, maybe I do have the potential to beat you in the climbs if I work at it.

I expected you to weigh less.

After years and years of weightlifting, I've had trouble losing muscle mass in the upper body. I've lost about ten to fifteen pounds in the chest and arms but probably have some more to go.

If I got to my high school weight of 135, I'd be a climber but look like shit.

bluegoose · 08-23-2007, 04:22 PM

Maybe this should go elsewhere, but I heard something awhile back about some guys from Nova Scotia who wanted to ride Mont Ventoux while in France for the tour last year. They have no mountains in Nova Scotia, but lots of wind, so they planned their rides around doing 1-2 hours directly into a headwind to simulate the resistance needed to climb a mountain.

They had absolutely no problem making up Ventoux with this program. So its possible to become a good climber without any mountains, if you believe what these guys say.

bluegoose · 08-23-2007, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I expected you to weigh less.

Didn't you see those pics he posted from a triathlon last year? He's a beast. Cannons.

Archaea · 08-23-2007, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluegoose

Maybe this should go elsewhere, but I heard something awhile back about some guys from Nova Scotia who wanted to ride Mont Ventoux while in France for the tour last year. They have no mountains in Nova Scotia, but lots of wind, so they planned their rides around doing 1-2 hours directly into a headwind to simulate the resistance needed to climb a mountain.

They had absolutely no problem making up Ventoux with this program. So its possible to become a good climber without any mountains, if you believe what these guys say.

Here's a difference as well.

I can climb any mountain right now, and better further on. I know I could climb Ventoux now. However, I would be slow and suffer.

What is hard is climbing fast. When I try to exceed ten to eleven miles per hour for an extended climbed sometimes the power ain't there. Sometimes it is. If I try to get it to 14 mph, I just don't have it. How do I gradually increase climbing wattage to attack those climbs?

RockyBalboa · 08-23-2007, 04:27 PM

Mike I know this shatters your visual of me being a fat ass, but I just came in at 184.

08-23-2007, 04:14 PM	#1
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	how much do you weigh? me - 170 (which is the lowest since undergrad, taking two soccer classes in the same semester).

08-23-2007, 04:16 PM	#2
Archaea Assistant to the Regional Manager Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Orgasmatron Posts: 24,338	159 but I need to be at 150 for cycling fitness. I hover between 160 and 165 during tri season. __________________ Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα

08-23-2007, 04:27 PM	#10
RockyBalboa Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Salt Lake City Posts: 7,297	Mike I know this shatters your visual of me being a fat ass, but I just came in at 184. __________________ Masquerading as Cougarguards very own genius dumbass since 05'.

08-23-2007, 04:17 PM	#3
RC Vikings Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Rexburg, Idaho Posts: 2,236	6' 2" 192 lbs I'm better on the flat ground.

08-23-2007, 04:18 PM	#5
bluegoose Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Northern California Posts: 2,919	Currently 170, but I should be at least 5-10 pounds lighter. 162 would be my ideal weight. Thats where I was 2 years ago in the best shape of my life.

08-23-2007, 04:22 PM	#7
bluegoose Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Northern California Posts: 2,919	Maybe this should go elsewhere, but I heard something awhile back about some guys from Nova Scotia who wanted to ride Mont Ventoux while in France for the tour last year. They have no mountains in Nova Scotia, but lots of wind, so they planned their rides around doing 1-2 hours directly into a headwind to simulate the resistance needed to climb a mountain. They had absolutely no problem making up Ventoux with this program. So its possible to become a good climber without any mountains, if you believe what these guys say.