People here seriously think 5'10 170 pounds is Fat???

Kgpremed12 wrote:

Last thread I started people said 170 was fat.

If 5'10 170 pounds is fat BMI=24= normal. Then this place is fully of emaciated nerds. GSP is 5'10 170

http://www.whitegadget.com/pc-wallpapers/141696-gsp.html

Now I see why anorexia is so prevalent in this sport. No guy 5'10 should weigh less than 160, Men Need muscle mass, women find it attractive.

Those guidelines are for civilians, not trained runners.

I'm just getting back from an injury, I'm 6'2" and have ballooned to 152. I dont' worry about weight as I will go down a bit when I run more but I'm like 5 pounds overweight now. 170 is okay; if you are 6'7".

It's not fat, but if you lost weight, you would run faster. Your ideal body weight is 160 for your height. I realize that you can still be of normal weight without being ideal, but just thought I would throw that out there. Ideal for me is 170 pounds and I'm 165. If it wasn't for having to keep leg muscles for cycling/triathlons, I would get myself down to 150.

5\'10\" at 170lbs being fat is a meaningless statement. Context is important. It may or may not be fat depending on the body fat percentage. This is the crucial piece of information since it tells you about the composition of the human body in question.

If you are 5\'10\" at 170lbs with a very high body fat(maybe you lack a lot of muscle, work out non at all and have a very small amount of protein in your diet), then you could be considered fat for some appropriate definition of \"high body fat.\"

Im 5 11 and 170. I get compliments from women And men all the time. If you weigh 130 or 140 you look like you have aids. Do some pushups.

152 pounds? You fat tub of crap. I can out run you backwards

If you think 5'10" 170 is fat you are... ignorant. (I want to say SPED, but they have an excuse) I'm 5'10" 165 lbs, 12% body fat. I still need to gain another 10 lbs of muscle.

what kind of rabbit hole do you go down to find a 6 year old thread like this? Anyway, I'll bite. 5'10 170 is a good size for non-runners or a very true hobby jogger. If you are a competitive runner, it is too big for you to maximize potential.

At 5'10, I'd say 140 is a pretty good weight, just by where I've seen some pretty good runners stand. Guys who are around 5'8 tend to be around 130, give or take.

Fun thread that hits home.

I’d say it all depends.

In my college days I raced at 165 and I’m 5’10” I also had a 3% bfp. I was a 48,152,400(1500) guy so not terrible. Also 1:15 half marathon.

20 years later I’m 170 but a bfp of 20%. Big difference. Big belly no abs massive love handles. So yes like this 170 is fat.

I’ve been doing the Herschel Walker workout for 2 months now. Lost no weight but rearranged it so to speak. Not too many people would call me fat now so again I’d say it all depends

@ 5'11, 160# best runner. As fitness improved that was where my weight would equilibrate.

@ 170# feel, look strongest, best. All around solid.

@ 180# don't feel my best.

old&fat wrote:

Fun thread that hits home.

I’d say it all depends.

In my college days I raced at 165 and I’m 5’10” I also had a 3% bfp. I was a 48,152,400(1500) guy so not terrible. Also 1:15 half marathon.

20 years later I’m 170 but a bfp of 20%. Big difference. Big belly no abs massive love handles. So yes like this 170 is fat.

I’ve been doing the Herschel Walker workout for 2 months now. Lost no weight but rearranged it so to speak. Not too many people would call me fat now so again I’d say it all depends

There are always outliers. You, Chris Solinsky, etc. There is a hs distance runner in my part of the state who is a very similar build to what you were in college. He is no doubt a freak compared to everybody else on the track. Last year, as a Junior in HS he topped out at a 49 split and 1:56. Low 16 in cross for a 5k on a very easy course.

What dumb little bi*** wrote this? I love a boney boy on my meat.

5'6", 180lbs....am I fat? Or just tubby?

Alan

This really concerns me if your username is true because people like you should not be allowed to coach high schoolers. You are probably completely unaware of the damage you inflict on young athletes by holding such unhealthy beliefs.

Just think for a moment- how would a young athlete who is, say, 5’10 160lbs react if they read/heard something like this from you? This entire thread is inflicting so much body image negativity and disordered eating onto young and vulnerable athletes, and what you are saying is not informed by any understanding of biology or nutrition.

old&fat wrote:

In my college days I raced at 165 and I’m 5’10” I also had a 3% bfp.

Sorry but you weren't 3% even if that is what you were tested at. I was recently tested at 4.9% and I am probably closer to the 9-10% range. Nick Bare, lose him or hate him, just had a DEXA scan done and is at 9.3%.

Bet you're ugly, lonely, and old by now.

6-2

180

Any lighter, and I don't just look wimpy, I feel weak.

6’1 176 This morning.

I run D1 caliber times 600m-3k

Had a girl tell me I should gain some weight yesterday.

Goodness letsrun is so out of touch.

That's about my height and weight I'm about a half inch taller and 5 pounds heavier, I'm a sprinter though.

I’m 5’11/160 but I have a 6’4 reach, big feet etc so weight as just a number getting chucked out there can be deceptive. I probably look similar to someone 150 but carry that weight in things like useless arm length or having a bigger head rather than fat. If I actually get to 150 my ass hurts when I sit. Everyone has their own ideal weight. Saying there is a perfect weight for height is like saying 180spm is the ideal cadence for everyone.