HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 16, 2009 2:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 2:44 am
Posts: 306
maquisard wrote:
6ft and 120lbs ?!?!?!?! :shock:


I second that notion! :roll: :faint:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 4:35 pm 
Offline

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
Posted: Sun May 17, 2009 4:35 pm 


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 17, 2009 6:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 2:25 am
Posts: 4490
Location: Canada
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...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 18, 2009 11:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2004 3:49 am
Posts: 950
Location: Kingston, the heart of UK weenie-ism
Agreed. I am naturally well below 10% and when I raced seriously was probably around 5%. It wasn't very pretty though...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2009 9:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 8:51 pm
Posts: 974
Location: France
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!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 19, 2009 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:38 pm
Posts: 1237
8% is considered very good.

_________________
Biomechanical spreadsheet. Sizing&Fitting.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 7:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:52 am
Posts: 134
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 7:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am
Posts: 2348
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 8:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 6:43 pm
Posts: 2025
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:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 8:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 2:44 am
Posts: 306
where can u get a dexascan and what does it do exactly?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 2:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am
Posts: 2348
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..... ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 12:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:03 am
Posts: 296
Location: Melbourne
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!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 30, 2009 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am
Posts: 2348
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 9:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:25 pm
Posts: 221
Location: Nashville!
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....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 10:45 pm
Posts: 64
Location: Norway
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...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:19 pm 


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Stammer and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Hows's 50/34 for non-competitive cross?

[ Go to page: 1, 2, 3 ]

in Cyclocross / Touring

weenie

33

1211

Wed Nov 12, 2014 6:28 pm

gummee View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Freewheel Body Weights

in Road

rayms

5

367

Thu Nov 20, 2014 2:13 am

rayms View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Cassette Body Replacement

in Cyclocross / Touring

GRRider

1

168

Sun Oct 12, 2014 1:10 pm

kramnnim View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. SRAM S30 freehub body

in Everything wheels

gherkin

3

256

Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:17 pm

rijndael View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Listen to your body or you will get injured like me

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Training

jimborello

15

1416

Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:36 am

loudtiger View the latest post


It is currently Wed Nov 26, 2014 6:58 am

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB