I'm confused. This may be data overload, but there are some big discrepancies in readings for calories burned during my training runs.
An example: I jogged 10.61 miles this morning at around a 10/min mile pace. My Garmin watch is telling me that's 1,382 calories burned; when I enter the elapsed time (1:43) into My Plate with an associated 10/min mile pace, it registers 1712.
So where do we go from here? I Googled the topic and came up with a great link from Runner's World at http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-242-304-311-8402-0,00.html. The article cites an academic study entitled "Energy Expenditure of Walking and Running" in the journal Medicine & Science in Sport & Exercise.
Here's the bottom line:
Total calorie burn per mile = .75 times your weight
Net calorie burn per mile = .63 times your weight
Net calorie burned is considered a "true" reading as it takes into account your base metabolism burn. In my case, my net burn is a puny 101 calories a mile. So my ten-miler is only pulling 1000 calories total.
Maybe there's some wiggle room here, but 1000 or 1700 calories for a workout is a huge gap. That's a meal in itself. Guess in the end more running and less eating is the only formula that truly works.