Correct running weight?

A lot of the weight anecdotes are problematic because people are coupling weight loss with training. Is it the weight or the training that is the main effect? In my case I dropped 10 lbs and ran about 6 minutes faster in the marathon (3:06 to 2:59). But I also trained more while losing the weight.

There is no hard and fast rule to be applied.

I’m your height and entered college at 130 having never run before. Graduated at 140. Ran my best times at 140, but that was mostly because I had been running for four years by then.

Fast forward nearly 20 years and I was at about 155 (down from a fat 180 at one point) and thought that was a pretty good wait for 40-something me and I had decent success at that weight, running 15:58 as a masters runner.

Then I decided to see what would happen if I got under 150. At 148-149, I got back into the 15:40s and at 145, I was in the 15:20s as a 43 year old.

I was even lower at different points - as low as 140 in anticipation of my first marathon. It was the slowest of my 4 marathons, but it was the toughest course (NYC) and really windy weather (2014 - 25 mph winds). My two best times were at 145, but were on faster courses (Chicago). Still, my third best time was also at 145 and it was on a hot day in Boston.

So the idea that lower is always better isn’t necessarily right. For me, as a more mature runner, there is a sweet spot, and that sweet spot is 145 rather than 140.

General formula is 2 ibs x your height in inches, give or take 15 ibs. 5'8 range is about 121-151 ibs.

Here the data of some real marathon pros:

Galen Rupp - 5'10" 138 lbs

Dathan Ritzenhein - 5'8" 117 lbs

Jared Ward - 5'9" 135 lbs

Shaddy Biwott - 5'9" 125 lbs

What do they have in common? They are among our fastest marathoners. And they are MUCH lighter than you consider for yourself as "sweet spot". Do you have any scientific evidence that higher weight can lead to better performances in marathons or examples of athletes with your height AND weight who can compete with the athletes I mentioned?

I find it hard to believe that Ritz would be able to run similar times if he was to gain around 30 lbs, which you consider your ideal weight. These pros work extremely hard with high mileage, training AND nutrition to be at the weight they are at, so I wouldn't tell OP that being heavy can be performance-maximizing, I'd rather tell him that he would be faster if he starts to lose some lbs, but also warn him about the risks by pushing his boundaries like the elites are doing, like weaker immune system and higher risk of stress fractures. A hobby athlete has to evaluate whether that increased risk is worth it to him, just as you did to yourself.

I'm saying this as someone who is also 10-15 lbs over performance-maximizing weight, I just like eating too much but if I could pull a switch that would make me lose 15 lbs instantly on race day I'd do it in a heartbeat, and guarantee you I'd be faster too.

I wasn’t saying 145 would be his sweet spot; just that it seems to be mine.

Maybe the reason why they are elite is because they have smaller and narrower frames that result in high aerobic power to weight ratios. And maybe the reason why I was a 14:19 guy instead of a 13:19 guy is that my body is built in such a way as it’s optimal weight is too high to be able to run that fast.

Plus, using the pros as a model isn’t really the best approach as I see it. They are, by their nature, outliers. And there is plenty of variety within their ranks. Khalid Skah (tip 5000m/10,000m runner of the era when I was in college) was 5’ 7”, 130 in his prime. Pre was 5’ 9” and almost 140. Chris Solinsky is 6’ 1, 165

This is me at 145. I don’t lift, and I don’t carry much muscle or very much body fat (for a 46 year old (at the time)). Shaving 5 more pounds off of this left me feeling unwell. Carving 15 pounds off would’ve been near impossible.

https://imgur.com/a/zmG9r1i

Also, I’ve seen Ward, Ritz and Shaddy in person. None of them were carrying less muscle than me. I’d say all carried proportionately more muscle, but just had narrower frames and thus carry less weight.

2 x inches wrote:

General formula is 2 ibs x your height in inches, give or take 15 ibs. 5'8 range is about 121-151 ibs.

Correct, although for a true elite, you better be giving those 15 pounds, not taking them.

Correct running weight appears to be when you are a sickly looking stick figure like the woman who just set the WR in the mile. Good Gawd someone please give her a hamburger.

Also, what exactly does it mean to eat 'clean' these days. I hear that and instinctively want to punch the person who said it, but must admit I don't get what it is.

CorrectWhen wrote:

Correct running weight appears to be when you are a sickly looking stick figure like the woman who just set the WR in the mile. Good Gawd someone please give her a hamburger.

Also, what exactly does it mean to eat 'clean' these days. I hear that and instinctively want to punch the person who said it, but must admit I don't get what it is.

Eat clean = hippy BS

Want to be lean, got to be starving 24/7. To paraphrase Lance Armstrong.

I use to give weight advice like this: Don't bother! Your body will natural take care of your best weight if you train frequently and eat normal and mostly healthy with fruit and vegetables add to the meals.

Thanks for the feedback. I figured it would be a messy answer without a perfect yes or no. If I remember correctly, some of my cycling friends would got tested to see where on their body had the most body fat. Has anyone taken a test like this or know more about it?

The correct body weight is N+20#+C, where N equals the weight of most elite distance runners and C equals the calories found in one double cheeseburger.

No I believe Galen is 132. 138 was his track 5/10k weight.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Here the data of some real marathon pros:

Galen Rupp - 5'10" 138 lbs

Dathan Ritzenhein - 5'8" 117 lbs

Jared Ward - 5'9" 135 lbs

Shaddy Biwott - 5'9" 125 lbs

What do they have in common? They are among our fastest marathoners. And they are MUCH lighter than you consider for yourself as "sweet spot".

Do you think it makes sense for amateurs to replicate professionals?

Weight isn’t so much a number as a moving range. Depending on hydration etc. my daily weight has varied almost 10 pounds at times. At 5’10” I did my best efforts around 150 lbs.

The scale is an imprecise indicator of a more important metric - body fat to lean muscle mass, particularly that which contributes to fast, sustained running.

A good running weight isn’t beach body weight - your non running friends would probably say you look too thin or sick.

If you can see your “belly vein” you’re close.

Not sure where I heard this first, but anyway, the best answer to “how to know your ideal running weight ?”

1. Run twice a day for a year.

2. Step on scale.

When you get dizzy after standing up and fall and smack your head on the floor you are getting close.

Mo Farah wrote:

When you get dizzy after standing up and fall and smack your head on the floor you are getting close.

FTFY

+1 on this - you can't use pros as the examples since they are outliers like you mentioned and their frames are naturally more efficient than others'.

The fact that this thread exists is disgraceful. Every person and body is different, and given the prevalence of eating disorders and body dysmorphia in our sport, it doesn't do any justice. Find something else to argue about.