Jump to content

Recommended Posts

yes nunheadbelle a mile is a mile, but not in terms of a 'swimming mile' and a 'running mile'. A swum mile = the equvialnt of 5 miles run (thats just an example) That's what I want to know from someone who swims/runs regularly (a triathlete would be good! if there are any knocking about ED?)

Well, MW, you can work it out from the site that d_c posted.


Let's say you weigh 130 lbs:


Run for an hour at 6mph (fairly middling jogger pace), and according to these data tables you'd burn up 6 miles/590 calories. This works out at about 98 calories per mile.


Conversely a medium breast stroke is about 1 mph (top speed is around 4mph), and you'd burn up 1 mile & 590 calories in an hour. This is about 590 calories per mile.


Hence you'd need to do 590/98= 6 miles running for every one mile swimming breast stroke to burn up equivalent energy levels.


If we looked at front crawl we'd get a different answer. It's about 20% faster on average and easier on energy usage, so in an hour you'd burn up 1.2miles & 472 calories. This is 394 calories per mile.


Hence you'd need to do 394/98 = 4 miles running for every mile swimming a leisurely front crawl to burn up equivalent energy levels.


The ratios stay pretty much the same regardless of weight.

You can't work it out on time alone as it's all dependent upon exertion, surely... Most people won't swim a mile or swim for 30 mins at the same exertion level at which they would run a mile or run for 30 mins. If you have a heart rate monitor, run for half an hour at say 80% WHR and then do the same in the pool and see how far you get in both cases, and you should be able to work it out from there. I'm not sure there's a catch-all rule, and if there is I imagine it'd be VERY vague and unreliable...

All I know is that I ran 9 miles yesterday and it took 1 hour and 15 minutes. I was tired but not falling over tired. I swam for 1 mile in the pool the weekend before and DID nearly fall over afterwards.

Yes! Back to the pool. And the water is very cold in the pool I go to so that should burn off a few more vino calories....(she sighs)

:-$

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...