Alright then...I weigh 150 approximately, with 8 percent body fat. I´m wondering what is the lowest body fat I could run with and stay healthy, with the logic that if I could drop down to...say 4 percent, dropping 6 pounds, I´d be able to train with less fatigue on my legs, I´d be more efficient, etc, but I´d like to avoid having some of my organs quit on me in the middle of an 18 miler. Am I insane as well? Good day.
I'm no expert on this subject by any means, but I think it's pretty common for super-fit marathoner types to get in the 3-4% range. I imagine some of it has to do with your genetic make-up too, so it might not be all that productive for you to specifically make it your goal to lose fat--more likely you should train to get as fit as you possibly can, and lowering your body fat may or may not be a by-product of that training.
The important moment of when body fat percentage comes into play is at 2:00 a.m. when only the hogs are available for the inebriated Jack Spratlike cross country runners brave enough to bring home the bacon. Seriously, they don't give medals for caliper-test heroes or max vo2 lab records. Below 10 % it gets hard to be exact and what's more who gives a rip. Train hard and the flab will melt (tertiary goal) and your racing will improve (primary goal).
Fall over dead.
My body fat is now at 0%
If I could just get outa this box I know
I could PR!!!
Jim Fixx
Weighing less will make you faster up to a point, and then
it will make you weaker and slower. Everyone has an optimal
racing weight, below which their performance will decline.
For most people the optimimum is probably below 8% body
fat, but everyone is different. If you do try to shed
some weight be careful - you cannot train effectively
if you are running too much of a calorie deficit.
An easy way to lose 3-5 pounds and destroy your training
at the same time is too simply let your muscle glycogen
levels get depleted - run a lot of miles and restrict
your calorie intake (carbs in particular) for several
days and you will see your weight drop very quickly,
and you will also find yourself running slower and
slower (this is exactly what happens when you follow the
depletion phase of a carb-loading regimen).
Your screen name says a lot.
In theory, the less you way the better. However, in practice each person has his/her optimal training weight (and body fat %) and an optimal racing/high performance weight (and body fat %). These values might be pretty close and even with the error of measurement.
I would suggest focusing on the training and proper nutrition to make your training optimal and let the weight and body fat take care of itself.
Sickly thin..want to lose more wrote:
Alright then...I weigh 150 approximately, with 8 percent body fat. I´m wondering what is the lowest body fat I could run with and stay healthy, with the logic that if I could drop down to...say 4 percent, dropping 6 pounds, I´d be able to train with less fatigue on my legs, I´d be more efficient, etc, but I´d like to avoid having some of my organs quit on me in the middle of an 18 miler. Am I insane as well? Good day.
Organs are overrated. You don't really need all of them. Some are completely redundant. For example, you have two kidneys. That's wasteful. All you really need is one. So eat nothing but lettuce and run 100 miles per week. You'll get that body fat percentage down in no-time. You'll be dead soon, but you'll be thin.
In other words (for the sarcasm-challenged: If you are not yet insane then you are headed there. Try this: Eat healthy. Run a lot. Keep the scale if you must but get rid of the body-fat tests. The only number that matters is your race time.
What a waste of time. Im sure Geb and Bekele, or Goucher and Broe for that matter are worried about body fat percentage points leading up to their big races. No wait, they are proably more concerned with things like mileage and running kilo repeats and stuff like that.
For me, it went like this:
over 164 - slowed down for all distances
under 160 - sped up for 800/mile
under 154 - slowed down for 800/mile, sped up for 5k and up
under 150 - slowed down for all distances
So if I wanted to race well as a middle distance runner, my weight needed to be between 155 and 162 lbs. If I wanted to race well at longer distances, I did better between 152-158.
Once I went three or four pounds over or under those margins, I was slower at all distances.
The lowest percentage I ever head of on a healthy runner was Tony Sandoval's 2.0. He was mighty skinny
I doubt that 2% was accurate. Essential body fat is around 6% for men and around 12% for women. For most people below that would be detrimental. If you're a distance runner you should be under 10%. Just let your body assume the shape that it wants according to your running and dietary habits.
Alan
Mine is 2%
You'll find most high-level (I'll arbitrarily call that, say, 2:30 or faster marathoners) are definitely below 6% body fat.
When they used to test the distance guys on my college team, many of the readings were below 5%, a couple below 4%
I'm around 4% right now and, while I have no prayer of ever running a 2:30 marathon, I guarantee you, it isn't body fat (or lack thereof) that's holding me back.
Alan, you know better than that. Come on, you are educated. "Essential body fat is 6% for men"? Who fed you that line of BS? Like I posted earlier, before I set my 20K PR, my Half-Marathon PR (breakthrough), and came close to my 3K PR as well as setting my 10K PR, I was measured in an air-tight body fat unit at 4.2%, weighing 126lbs, with a lean body mass of 122lbs. I'm probably a little less than that heading into my marathon.
Paul Tergat has been tested repeatedly in the 2% range. However, there is no right body fat range for anyone. Each person is unique and an individual. I remember Frank Shorter testing near 3% in his glory days. Oh well. Extra weight is extra mass that just slows you down.
MY NUMBER ONE QUESTION: HOW WAS PATTI CATTALANO-DILLON RUNNING 150-MILES PER WEEK AND BEING BULIMIC???
I would have absolutely no energy. That is amazing.
I heard somewhere that Frank Shorter was around that 3% mark for body fat but Bill Rodgers was up around 7%. And that was a major factor why Boston Billy could run marathons closer together timewise where Frank had to take more time in between Frank tore his muscles up more in the marathon because he had less body fat so started burning muscle earlier in the race than Bill. Ron Tabb also had a higher body fat level and was able to run some double marathons within a short time period. It made sense to me.
Gary Tuttle out in Santa Barbara, CA area had a real low body fat level also. Sandoval was a toothpick but he could certainly run.
Charlie
I am 100% all muscle!
HA HA HAHAHAHAHA
My bad, meant 3% (range of 2-4%) was the essential body fat, that is the amount needed just to live and function normally. The recommended low is about 6% for men. I get my info from the American Council on Exercise and other such health/fitness organizations (scientific research).
Bottom line...if you are training hard and not eating like shit your body will adapt specifically and optimally for that workload. Whether that leaves you at 3% or 10% doesn't matter because that will likely be the most effecient body fat number FOR YOU and any attempt to raise or lower that number will likely lead to poor performance. Moral of the story: don't worry about your weight or body fat and just train.
Alan
My weight is 138 pounds, 5'11" and I just measured mine on that machine thing at my school and it reported me to be 2%. But I have usually been that percent in the past measurments.
you guys reporting 2 and 3% are likely way off. do a search for the name "ronnie coleman" and look at the guys contest pictures. it's doubtful even he's in the 2% range. if you are as ripped as that guy (i know you aren't as big), can see nearly every striation in every muscle, and nearly every major vein in your body, i'd say you are possibly at 2%. there is almost no way paul tergat is that low. he'd be toeing a very very thin line between life and death when he competed, and it's certain he couldn't run a marathon like that strictly on carbohydrates and not use ANY fat. i've never seen him die in a race either, though he does resemble skeletor somewhat. how many of you guys are using calipers, and how many are using machines not intended for athletes exercising more than 4 hours a week?
Another thing to remember about body fat percents is that weight has some, but not as much to do with it as you think. Case in Point- Lance Armstrong weighs probably 20 pounds more than Paul Tergat but has 3% body fat just like him. Why? Cause Lance has some super jacked legs and arms. Its all subjective and varies from person to person.