Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I'm wondering about something.

Some days, I put in 30 hard minutes on my bike an burn about 200 calories (well, that's what the machine says, anyway), and others, I bike at half the intensity but twice the time, still equaling a machine readout of 200 calories.

I'm wondering if one is inherently better than the other for weight loss or if they are equal. I would assume for overall fitness that more intense workouts are better. But for weight loss only, are the two workouts equal? If not, why?

My gut feeling tells me the harder workout is better for losing weight even if you're burning the same 200 calories, but my brain is telling me that logic dictates 200 calories is 200 calories regardless of effort and time.

Honestly, the BEST workout is an interval workout...meaning intensity ranges from high to low to high to low to high to low in a single workout.

So maybe you spend 30 minutes on the bike.

Do 5 really hard, fast minutes...then 3 slow ones...then 5 fast ones and so on.

The reason this kind of workout is best is it keeps your body in a fat-burning mode longer. If you ever look at the "weight loss" modes on treadmills or bikes or ellipticals, its always an interval workout...because it works!

I even do this in my Zumba classes that I teach. A couple super fast, hard, high intensity songs...then a slower song...then fast, then slow, etc.

Interval training is so much more effective. Your "calorie burn" on the machine may not be any different, but your body will respond differently to it.

No workout is best for losing weight. Working out makes you fit. If you want to increase your fitness level then it is best to challenge yourself and as Razorbackbritt said, you should interval train.

If you're just looking to burn calories then it doesn't matter how you burn those 200 calories, but I'm sure you want to challenge yourself a bit more.

I'm a big believer in the notion that the best workout is whatever I will actually do. One consequence of this is that I do several different types of workouts - depending upon such factors as how I feel, how much time I have that day, whether I did a particularly hard workout the previous day, whether i expect to do one the next day. So I switch up between interval workouts, short intense workouts, long runs, longer walks, strength training, combinations of cardio and strength training. Whatever fits best into my day on a particular day, that is what I do. For me, it is better to make sure I do something nearly every day, than to formulate some ideal workout and then only manage to fit it in a couple of times a week. I also think that mixing things up this way is good for my body, as it keeps me from becoming too acclimated to one kind of training, and ensures that I am training all different types of functional skills - strength, endurance, balance, overall cardiovascular health.

I completely agree with Carter. A good weekly routine has your body doing a bit of longer endurance work, some shorter intensity work, and interval work. There are benefits to all. There's a reason that runners who are in training will do one very long run, one interval run, and one "easy recovery" run a week