Competitive body fat %

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

kenyoncycleist
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 2:44 am

by kenyoncycleist

maquisard wrote:6ft and 120lbs ?!?!?!?! :shock:


I second that notion! :roll: :faint:

by Weenie


CoachPotatoBilly
Posts: 376
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 12:21 am
Location: Montgomery Village, MD
Contact:

by CoachPotatoBilly

kenyoncycleist wrote:
maquisard wrote:6ft and 120lbs ?!?!?!?! :shock:


I second that notion! :roll: :faint:



+2

That's even lighter than Pantani in race shape, and he was like 5 ft 4inches wearing a fake afro for added height..

Geoff
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 2:25 am
Location: Canada

by Geoff

I think it has a lot to do with your personal body make-up. I have been 4% since I was 15 years old (and that was a long time ago). I was tested again a year or so ago, and I was still 4%. I don't ride nearly the number of kms I used to when I was racing...

User avatar
rico
Posts: 953
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 3:49 am
Location: Kingston, the heart of UK weenie-ism

by rico

Agreed. I am naturally well below 10% and when I raced seriously was probably around 5%. It wasn't very pretty though...

maquisard
Posts: 1806
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 8:51 pm
Location: France

by maquisard

But seriously, 6ft and 120lbs.

At that height any pro-cyclist that I know of is in the 160-170lb range, and that is with single figure BF %.

120lbs is ridiculous, even if you have the lightest of light builds and bone structure! As other have pointed out, that is lighter than Pantani and he was no where near 6ft!!

User avatar
beatnik
Posts: 1237
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:38 pm

by beatnik

8% is considered very good.
Biomechanical spreadsheet. Sizing&Fitting.

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum ... 8e319d185b

Andrew69
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:52 am

by Andrew69

Koen wrote:Why is staying under 4% dangerous? I don't see an explanation in your reply rustychain. If you lower your bf superslow and your body won't get into starvation, where the risk then? And staying at 4% is eating statusquo kcalories, i don't see the harm there actually
At bf's that low you are risking organ damage.
You need at least 3% bf to cushion the organs. There is no way that if someone actually got to 4% (and I mean a true 4%, not internet 4%), they could hold it for more than several hours (think bodybuilders) without suffering a severe performance drop.

Cyclists at 4%..not gunna happen.

User avatar
Tapeworm
Posts: 2585
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am

by Tapeworm

A lot of these really low BF percentages have to be taken with a large grain of salt, there is degree of error. Unless you've had a dexascan or the like you could easily be few percent off the figure you have.

mattr
Posts: 3456
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: The Grim North.

by mattr

Tapeworm wrote:you could easily be few percent off the figure you have.


Callipers to flotation gave me almost a 100% error, from memory the callipers came in at around 6%, flotation came in at 11/12% ish........ (10 years ago now tho) guy doing the measuring said that sort of error wasn't particularly unusual, especially for extremely lean people (less subcutaneous fat to get in the callipers, but still a fair bit of fat inside.

Callipers for tracking trends, flotation for getting an absolute value.

Watts/kg for useful data. :wink:

kenyoncycleist
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 2:44 am

by kenyoncycleist

where can u get a dexascan and what does it do exactly?

User avatar
Tapeworm
Posts: 2585
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am

by Tapeworm

Dexascan is a low-yield x-ray scanning machine which gives a full body analysis of bone density, muscle composition fat percentage etc.

Universities may have them as well as health clinics, especially those that deal with osteoporosis or the like. I had one as part of a study, very interesting to see how much the bones weigh, muscle in each leg, and the fact a lot of fat is around my head..... ;)

mvogt46
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:03 am
Location: Melbourne

by mvogt46

I got tested through a health and fitness program at work last week. The testing was done with electrodes placed on the hand and foot. Then a tiny electrical current (you can't even feel it) is passed through the body and recieved at the other electrode. Apparently it tells you your body fat % as well as intra-cellular and extra-cellular water %, and lean body mass %. My body fat was 9.3%, the tester said that it is unusual to see people as low as 7% or less. I'm really skinny as it is, I wouldn't like to see me with 50% less fat again!

User avatar
Tapeworm
Posts: 2585
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am

by Tapeworm

mvogt46 wrote:I got tested through a health and fitness program at work last week. The testing was done with electrodes placed on the hand and foot. Then a tiny electrical current (you can't even feel it) is passed through the body and recieved at the other electrode. Apparently it tells you your body fat % as well as intra-cellular and extra-cellular water %, and lean body mass %. My body fat was 9.3%, the tester said that it is unusual to see people as low as 7% or less. I'm really skinny as it is, I wouldn't like to see me with 50% less fat again!


I could be wrong but I believe that this system too is subject to large variations depending on hydration.

otoman
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:25 pm
Location: Nashville!

by otoman

Andrew69 wrote:
Koen wrote:Why is staying under 4% dangerous? I don't see an explanation in your reply rustychain. If you lower your bf superslow and your body won't get into starvation, where the risk then? And staying at 4% is eating statusquo kcalories, i don't see the harm there actually
At bf's that low you are risking organ damage.
You need at least 3% bf to cushion the organs. There is no way that if someone actually got to 4% (and I mean a true 4%, not internet 4%), they could hold it for more than several hours (think bodybuilders) without suffering a severe performance drop.

Cyclists at 4%..not gunna happen.


4% is doable, it just has to be done very slowly. There is always that weight at which a person has trouble dropping below. Most cyclists know about what that weight is. For example, I am 6'3" or 190.5 cm and have a hard time dropping below 175 lbs or 79 kg. I can do it, it is just harder to stay down there without constant vigilance of what goes in the ol' pie hole. At that point, 1000 calorie per day (2 lb per week) weight loss is no longer healthy and a 500 cal per day (1 lb per week) weight loss should be done. Of course when I wrestled in high school, I just starved myself but got down to a flotation measured 4%. I was able to do 2.5 hour brutal practices with only a single 1 min break for water. The lack of body fat certainly did not hurt my endurance or power.
Elite Nordic skiers are another group of endurance athletes with crazy low bf %. You don't see too many of those guys with a spare tire....

Marius-H
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:45 pm
Location: Norway

by Marius-H

My fellow countryman Saxo Bank Kurt Asle Arvesen told Norwegian TV his bodyfat was down to 4% now. He used his entire pro carrer getting there.

Its hard loose fat without loosing muscles and performance...

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post