login
Ironman Ideal Race Weight..
-
No new posts
|
 2009-12-14 8:44 AM |
Champion  9600     Fountain Hills, AZ |  Subject: Ironman Ideal Race Weight..One of the things I noticed in myself and other athletes on the AG podium at IMAZ was the lack of really skinny athletes and it got me wondering if perhaps it's better to start an Ironman not quite as lean as we can actually become. I mean this in terms of AG athletes, not pro's. I know in my case I started the race 3 lbs heavier than I did in 2007 and the other guys on my podium all looked to be about the same as me, 5'10"-6', 160 lbs. When i was training for the Boston Marathon in 2008, I was as low as 153 and although for a marathon I think that's more ideal, for an Ironman I'm not so sure. Clearly we all have varying body types, but I wonder if having a little extra weight can be of a benefit for an IM vs. a short course race or marathon. I'm not an expert on the physiology of it all, but would be interested to hear others thoughts and experiences. Edited by bryancd 2009-12-14 8:44 AM |
| 2009-12-14 9:15 AM in reply to: #2557233 |
Expert 721 Chenequa WI | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Hard to say and its really subjective as you noted. At least I've never heard of a good objective "formula". I think it was Gordo Byrn who said that, when your weight is just right, you've gone too far. That sounds right. My general rule of thumb is to get as low as I can possibly get while eating enough to not hurt my training. I'm a 40-44 MOP usually and FOP sometimes at 6'3" and 171-174. I don't think I would train well or race well less than 170, although I could easily get there. |
| 2009-12-14 9:24 AM in reply to: #2557233 |
Master 1402 Cumming, Georgia | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. I'm interested in following this. I'm 6' and hover around 180 and can't imagine getting to 160. I got to 174 last year and my wife started complaining that I was too skinny. I'm doing IMCOZ in 2010 and I'm really thinking about trying to get my weight down to 170 if I can. |
| 2009-12-14 9:25 AM in reply to: #2557233 |
Veteran 416 | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. I hope maybe that's true. I've gained 10 lbs (currently 135, 5'5") in the last 2 years since training for the HIM/IM distance, but in addition to picking up a decent amount of speed, I also notice that I recover from hard workouts better than I did when I was lighter. I had to actually consciously choose between my "ideal" weight of 125 or IM success this last year. I was close to being back down to 125, but couldn't pull off the workouts properly. I seem to perform better at a well-fueled, well-recovered 130 than a "actually bonking during an hour long run" 125. This gives me something to think about though. I've been thinking a lot lately about getting back to my ideal before starting my focused training for IMMoo, but maybe that might not be as great as it sounds? |
| 2009-12-14 9:29 AM in reply to: #2557233 |
Master 1411 Lexington, KY | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Seems natural that an IM athlete would tend to be heavier than a pure long distance runner, simply because the IM athlete would get more of a payoff from the extra muscle mass developed for bike/swim. A pure runner would get less benefit from carrying the extra muscle mass developed for other tasks. |
| 2009-12-14 9:34 AM in reply to: #2557233 |
Pro 3705 Vestavia Hills | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Instead of focusing on pounds I was thinking that perhaps an athlete's percentage of body fat would have more of a direct correlation in terms of fitness. While the 'power to weight' ratio seems to be the ultimate measurement, there has to be some variable in terms of what kind of weight it is? |
| 2009-12-14 9:37 AM in reply to: #2557345 |
Champion 9600 Fountain Hills, AZ | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. brian - 2009-12-14 9:34 AM Instead of focusing on pounds I was thinking that perhaps an athlete's percentage of body fat would have more of a direct correlation in terms of fitness. While the 'power to weight' ratio seems to be the ultimate measurement, there has to be some variable in terms of what kind of weight it is? Good point. Clearly the actual composition of the source of the weight has a major bearing. |
| 2009-12-14 9:40 AM in reply to: #2557350 |
Expert 721 Chenequa WI | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. As an aside here, what type of body fat test is usefull? Calipers, weight scale, something else? I've always wondered what my percentage would be but the only test I've ever done is with calipers. Not sure how accurate those are. |
| 2009-12-14 9:59 AM in reply to: #2557357 |
Champion 9600 Fountain Hills, AZ | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Gritty - 2009-12-14 9:40 AM As an aside here, what type of body fat test is usefull? Calipers, weight scale, something else? I've always wondered what my percentage would be but the only test I've ever done is with calipers. Not sure how accurate those are. Calipers are pretty accurate. |
| 2009-12-14 10:24 AM in reply to: #2557233 |
Coach 10487 Boston, MA | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. bryancd - 2009-12-14 8:44 AM One of the things I noticed in myself and other athletes on the AG podium at IMAZ was the lack of really skinny athletes and it got me wondering if perhaps it's better to start an Ironman not quite as lean as we can actually become. I mean this in terms of AG athletes, not pro's. I know in my case I started the race 3 lbs heavier than I did in 2007 and the other guys on my podium all looked to be about the same as me, 5'10"-6', 160 lbs. When i was training for the Boston Marathon in 2008, I was as low as 153 and although for a marathon I think that's more ideal, for an Ironman I'm not so sure. Clearly we all have varying body types, but I wonder if having a little extra weight can be of a benefit for an IM vs. a short course race or marathon. I'm not an expert on the physiology of it all, but would be interested to hear others thoughts and experiences. IMO it doesn't. It is more about body composition and specific physiology for every athlete. For every guy you show me on an AG IM podium who isn't 'skinny' I can show you one that is 'skinny'... Just thinking from the top of my head of all the athletes we helped to qualify to Kona this year plus the friends/team members than also did and the difference is probably a 50/50 split and this includes both male and females. Edited by JorgeM 2009-12-14 10:25 AM |
| 2009-12-14 10:59 AM in reply to: #2557395 |
Pro 5169 Burbs | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. bryancd - 2009-12-14 10:59 AM Gritty - 2009-12-14 9:40 AM Calipers are pretty accurate.As an aside here, what type of body fat test is usefull? Calipers, weight scale, something else? I've always wondered what my percentage would be but the only test I've ever done is with calipers. Not sure how accurate those are. ... but only if the person using them knows what he or she is doing. The most accurate way to get yoru BF% is an autopsy  but short of that, I think the water displacement way is the most accurate. |
| 2009-12-14 11:56 AM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Alpharetta, GA | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Great topic Bryan and certainly one most are trying to figure out. My 2 cents. Power to weight is the name of the game here. Obviously the lighter you are while holding your power the better. I am 5"10 and have been at pretty much 145 lbs the past 3 years. I have raced as low as 138, but not while training for Iron distance (that was HIM distance). I think I was under fueling but could get away with it because the training sessions were shorter. Consequently my fastest times until last season were from when I was lightest. When training for Iron distance the big change is in refueling after the really long workouts. You have to get it back in or your next workout will suffer. I don't think it is a matter of not having enough fat, heck 1 lbs of fat is 3500 calories and considering you probably burn 50% fat on long training sessions, you could train for 10 hrs and only burn 1 lb of fat, so I don't thing that is it. If you don't recover correctly (by eating the proper calories) your body will start to break down muscle (not exactly but won't build it back properly), your power (ability to do work) will suffer, and the quality of your next workout will suffer. While burning all of the calories is easy, not breaking down muscle is the key. Again, just my 2 cents. |
| 2009-12-14 12:03 PM in reply to: #2557450 |
Champion 9600 Fountain Hills, AZ | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. JorgeM - 2009-12-14 10:24 AM For every guy you show me on an AG IM podium who isn't 'skinny' I can show you one that is 'skinny'... . Yeah, I wasn't mentioning that as any kind of evidence, it's just what got me thinking on the topic. Also, I don't recall where, but I remember reading an article about IM and body weight by some famous IM guy discussing that it's posible to be too lean when racing an Ironman. |
| 2009-12-14 12:12 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
Master 1359 South of SLC | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. I picked up a Tanita Body Comp scale a couple of years ago. It fluctuates from day to day, depending even on what time of day you measure. Regardless, it is what I use to partially determine my level of fitness. My race weight is 180 lbs and about 12% body fat. I am 6'00" and my body likes to be at about 195 lbs. For me, that is a good balance. Mike |
 2009-12-14 12:13 PM in reply to: #2557553 |
| Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. |
| 2009-12-14 12:20 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. |
| 2009-12-14 12:31 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Champion 9600 Fountain Hills, AZ | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Yeah, Fred, clearly being light is advantageous for the bike and run. I have to say, recently, or maybe I'm just paying more attention, I have seen locally some pretty big guys post some impressive IM times including fast runs, which I would normally not consider the case. I mean "big" in terms of very muscular in the upper body. Edited by bryancd 2009-12-14 12:32 PM |
| 2009-12-14 2:40 PM in reply to: #2557873 |
| Alpharetta, GA | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. PennState - 2009-12-14 1:20 PM Bryan, it's an interesting topic... I'm 5'11 and have raced at 160 and 166 for my 2 ironmans. I think you want to be light, but the mistake I see a lot of people make is that they try to lose too much weight too quickly in the months before their ironman. Weight changes should be done very slowly! Great point about loosing it slowly. I have been working recently with a CAT 1 / former U23 National Team Member guy, some VERY interesting thoughts on how those guys think about nutrition. He says 500 cal / day deficit is maximum. This works out to about 1 pound a week / 4 pounds a month. Anything more than that and you risk muscle degradation. I guess the day's of taking 2 pounds a week off weren't so bright.  |
| 2009-12-14 7:28 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Master 2158 | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Great topic. I have to say I agree that it is probably more about fat % but that the percentage would have to be right for a specific weight range. For example, if you are 6 ft and weigh 210 and have 12% bodyfat , I would guess that someone 6ft and 180 with 12 % bodyfat would be faster. However, I would think the initial goal would be to get your fat % right, and then work down the wieght? What do you think? |
| 2009-12-14 7:54 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Veteran 419 | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. I am about 5'10" and about 163 now. Last summer for my full I was at about 155. I found that below 155 (even a few pounds) my performance seemed to suffer. I have that "ironman whatever" scale (x-mas gift years a couple years ago) and use that once a week to "check" my numbers. It does all sorts of stuff, most of which I have no idea about. I figure if it is off for whatever reason, at least it is consistantly off the same amount. I try to keep my BF% about 13 at race time and never above 16 in the winter months. I have no idea what any of this means, but just throwing my experience out there. |
| 2009-12-14 8:28 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Master 2411 Goodyear, AZ | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Interesting... I was noticing during IMAZ (not on the podium) that there is a wide variety of body types out there. But the podium athletes looked very lean to me. In my training circle, those that come from a running background tend to be much "skinnier" than those from a swimming background. My goal this winter is to try to gain some muscle, my "snowman arms" get me nowhere in the water, LOL |
| 2009-12-14 9:38 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Extreme Veteran 438 Surprise, AZ | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. Bryan I know I get jealous of some guys in the area that have "petite" frames like Dan C and Mike Brown. During training I am at 170 and off season 175, I feel I could be a better tri runner if I was around 155-160. With my mass and frame there is no way I can go below that 170 mark because last time I got my body fat it was 3-4%. I wonder if I lost some of my muscle mass on my upper body I would be faster. I just can't get rid of my mass. I haven't touched a weight in 3 years but my mass just stays. I wonder if having more mass is better for biking strength?? (sorry this might be a bit of a hi-jack on your thread) |
| 2009-12-14 9:50 PM in reply to: #2557830 |
| Bob 2194 Binghamton, NY | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. PennState - 2009-12-14 1:13 PM trishie - 2009-12-14 11:59 AM . Ummmm no. Dexa scans are now considered the gold standard. Very few labs are using water displacement anymore. bryancd - 2009-12-14 10:59 AM Gritty - 2009-12-14 9:40 AM Calipers are pretty accurate.As an aside here, what type of body fat test is usefull? Calipers, weight scale, something else? I've always wondered what my percentage would be but the only test I've ever done is with calipers. Not sure how accurate those are. ... but only if the person using them knows what he or she is doing. The most accurate way to get yoru BF% is an autopsy but short of that, I think the water displacement way is the most accurate.I agree Fred. A Dexa scan or bone density has become the new "gold standard" but not many places will radiate someone (as little as it may be) just to get a BF %.  Hydrostatic weighing is accurate IF a person is very comfortable in the water and can exhale until they feel as if they are going to drown. Skin calipers are only as accurate as the person using them but are usually within a percent or two. I always thought the impedence method was not accurate but when I had the hydrostatic weighing done my Tanita scale was less than a percent off. Still way higher than I want it to be but that's just because I eat everything and have a sweet tooth like no other. |
| 2009-12-14 10:26 PM in reply to: #2557233 |
| Master 1411 Lexington, KY | Subject: RE: Ironman Ideal Race Weight.. I get a kick out of this related quote from Slowman (someone on BT had it in their sig line, forget who right now): "The trick is to keep losing weight until your friends and family ask you if you've been sick. Then you know you're within 10 pounds. If they start whispering to each other, wondering if you've got cancer or aids, you're within 5. When they actually do an intervention, you're at race weight." According to this, I was within 10 pounds of my race weight this season. |
| 2009-12-15 6:12 AM in reply to: #2558966 |
| Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. Edited by PennState 2009-12-15 6:18 AM |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK