Why are female swimmers fat while their male counterparts are ripped?

Correct...which is not 2%. That was my point. Top marathoners are 5-7% not 2%.

Alan

Marcus Allen and Hershel Walker had alleged body fat percentages of 1.6 and 1.4 %, respectively, which I highly doubt. They are like manually timed 40-yard dash times. Highly suspect.

Swimmers in general are going to be much bulkier than runners because water is 784 times denser than air. Swimmers need much more power (and muscle) to get through the medium they're traveling through. All the muscles they have are devoted to traveling through water as they do not have to support bodyweight. Also, unlike runners who sweat (and lose water) because of body heating while running, swimmers bodies are cooled by the water itself.

amkelley wrote:

But why is it that male swimmers don't also have this additional fat?

There are many male swimmers around 200 pounds.

Swimmers do carry much more fat than runners, as some additional fat can be helpful in the water. Top swimmer Katie Ledecky carries quite a bit of fat, which is apparently fine for swimming, but she would not do well as a runner.

gerrrronimo wrote:

Even bodybuilders on competition day (after water fasting for a week) are still only 3% bodyfat at a bare minimum.

Bodybuilders are more like 20 percent body fat. Their excess of muscle simply gives a misreading of their body fat percentages.

Sally V wrote:

gerrrronimo wrote:

Yup, you're pulling these numbers out of your ass. Even bodybuilders on competition day (after water fasting for a week) are still only 3% bodyfat at a bare minimum. That much is required to survive. I bet most top runners are somewhere just south of 10%, with the skinniest ones (evan jager, for example) being somewhere more in the middle between 5% and 10%.

sports in general though? shiiit, most athletes i'd say are probably somewhere in the middle between 10% and 15%. Ever seen most football, soccer, basketball players shirtless? For every dwyane wade and cristiano ronaldo with sixpack abs, you've got a dozen more guys who have to flex pretty hard before the turtle shows its shell.

The top marathoners are 2%. Not making up the numbers.

Shut up, yes you are.

Male Olympic-caliber marathoners are 6.4 +/- 1.4% body fat.

is not accurate.

Semi-serious post wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

Show me the research that says 2%.

Here's my research:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/6650717/

Alan

It say 6.4% plus or minus 1.3%. So the lowest tested is 5.1%

That's actually standard deviation not range. So 68% of the marathoners were withing 6.4 + or - 1.3%. 95% within 6.4 + or - 2.6. Of course it's a small sample though.

Les wrote:

Swimmers in general are going to be much bulkier than runners because water is 784 times denser than air. Swimmers need much more power (and muscle) to get through the medium they're traveling through. All the muscles they have are devoted to traveling through water as they do not have to support bodyweight. Also, unlike runners who sweat (and lose water) because of body heating while running, swimmers bodies are cooled by the water itself.

We know that across the board, regardless of sport, women have a higher fat percentage than men. The normal fat percentage for women is about 18-20% of body weight, compared to 10-15% for men.So there's that.What's more, your observations seem to be borne out by an Australian study on swimmers:

Swimmers, especially female swimmers, face an energy balance conundrum. Elite swimmers typically undertake 4000-20,000 m per day in training, burning thousands of calories. However, the typical body fat levels of these athletes are significantly higher than runners or cyclists who expend similar or even smaller amounts of energy in their training. Many female swimmers have fought well-publicized battles with their body fat levels and with their coaches! They are generally prescribed "land training" (running or cycling) in addition to their many laps of the pool in the belief that it is a necessary treatment to produce lower skinfold levels."

Possibly, this might have something to do with the fact that men burn fat more easily in exercise than women, and women depend more on fat stores when they exert themselves physically - and in fact (counterintuitively) sometimes they gain fat through exercise:

Sorry, the study wasn't Australian, but the article that cited it was.

Please Please Me wrote:

Thank you for all of the serious answers, but I am still curious as to how they are so big. I mean, they are training for hours every day, no doubt. Are they just eating like pigs?

This is what a 130 lbs synchronized swimmer eats on a typical day.

(About 6000 Kcal.)

Would a pro female synchronized swimmer really be eating pork cutlet and fried chicken on a regular basis?

Certainly not scientific but when I used to do hard swim workouts my appetite afterwards was enormous. I would often eat 2 dinners. But I am never really hungry after a hard running workout.

etonmess wrote:

Would a pro female synchronized swimmer really be eating pork cutlet and fried chicken on a regular basis?

I am not entirely sure. But the explanation I have heard is that eating a lot of fat is important for buoyancy. Those foods are also very calorie dense, which is also an important factor.

I am not sure if Phelps really eats this, either.

Cheetahs and antelopes = runners. Lithe.

Dolphins and Sharks = swimmers. Not lithe.

Marlin Perkins wrote:

Cheetahs and antelopes = runners. Lithe.

Dolphins and Sharks = swimmers. Not lithe.

Added fat has a hydrodynamic affect and reduces drag.

Nobody can be less than 5 percent and function as an athlete. I have heard of bodybuilders getting lower than that but all they do is flex. If you get down to 2 percent you will be in a morgue, looking lean and ripped and ready to become worm food.

Imho👌 wrote:

Marlin Perkins wrote:

Cheetahs and antelopes = runners. Lithe.

Dolphins and Sharks = swimmers. Not lithe.

Added fat has a hydrodynamic affect and reduces drag.