? 188cm tall, how fat?

richardb20 said:

I'm off criterium racing this year, at Cat4, Cat3 level.

I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?

R.

188cm = 6'3" ?

Joseph

Quoted message said:

richardb20 said:

I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?

188cm = 6'3" ?

No, 6'2". He should weigh 75.9 kg, have 11.7% fat and 7.2 l lung
volume. But the most important physical parameter for crit riders is,
of course, their 'crit.

--
E. Dronkert

email hidden said:

richardb20 said:

I'm off criterium racing this year, at Cat4, Cat3 level.

Quoted message said:

I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?

Quoted message said:

R.

188cm = 6'3" ?

Joseph

6 foot three inches..
R.

It depends. Will you be racing downhill? Will you be racing uphill? Will
you be racing in flat time trials? Will you be over trained? Will you be
under rested? Will you...

"richardb20" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'm off criterium racing this year, at Cat4, Cat3 level.

I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?

R.

Randy Beaver said:

It depends. Will you be racing downhill? Will you be racing uphill? Will
you be racing in flat time trials? Will you be over trained? Will you be
under rested? Will you...

....be super-motivated ? Will you have access to panache ? Will you have a
wasp in your inner tube ?

richardb20 said:

I'm off criterium racing this year, at Cat4, Cat3 level.

I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?

R.

The average BMI in the 1997 Tour was 21.47 kg/m^2. This corresponds to
1.88m^2 * 21.47 kg/m^2 = 75.9 kg.

Dan

Dan Connelly said:

The average BMI in the 1997 Tour was 21.47 kg/m^2. This corresponds to
1.88m^2 * 21.47 kg/m^2 = 75.9 kg.

Ha! I just guessed and I got 75.9 kg too.
(Actually, and to state the obvious, crit riders are heavier than Tour
riders, especially if they're cat 3 or 4.)

--
E. Dronkert

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Quoted message said:

richardb20 said:

I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?

188cm = 6'3" ?

No, 6'2". He should weigh 75.9 kg, have 11.7% fat and 7.2 l lung
volume. But the most important physical parameter for crit riders is,
of course, their 'crit.

7.2L lung /volume/, or do you mean vital capacity? Or maybe VO2max?
7.2L is pretty small for total lung volume... :^)

-Kieran

richardb20 said:

email hidden said:

richardb20 said:

I'm off criterium racing this year, at Cat4, Cat3 level.
I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?
R.

188cm = 6'3" ?

Joseph

6 foot three inches..
R.

188 / 2.54 = 74.016.

74.016 inches = 6 feet, 2.016 inches.

I've heard of exagerating & rounding up, but really! If you're really
6'3", then say so: 190.5cm

-Kieran

KC said:

7.2L lung /volume/, or do you mean vital capacity? Or maybe VO2max?
7.2L is pretty small for total lung volume... :^)

What you can exhale. Is that called vital capacity? And it's rbr not
rsr so they have smaller trunks I guess.

--
E. Dronkert

Ewoud Dronkert said:

KC said:

7.2L lung /volume/, or do you mean vital capacity? Or maybe VO2max?
7.2L is pretty small for total lung volume... :^)

What you can exhale. Is that called vital capacity? And it's rbr not
rsr so they have smaller trunks I guess.

I was just teasing... 7.2L isn't THAT small... but yeah, I think what
you're looking for is vital capacity, the max volume you exhale after a
maximal inhalation.

-K

Dan Connelly said:

The average BMI in the 1997 Tour was 21.47 kg/m^2. This corresponds
to 1.88m^2 * 21.47 kg/m^2 = 75.9 kg.

The average height in the Tours is less than 1.88m, and BMI doesn't scale
linearly with height.

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/nba-tdf-bmi.png

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/tdf97-bmi.png
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/tdf04-bmi.png
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/tdf06-bmi.png

Robert Chung said:

Dan Connelly said:

The average BMI in the 1997 Tour was 21.47 kg/m^2. This corresponds
to 1.88m^2 * 21.47 kg/m^2 = 75.9 kg.

The average height in the Tours is less than 1.88m, and BMI doesn't scale
linearly with height.

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/nba-tdf-bmi.png

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/tdf97-bmi.pnghttp://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/tdf04-bmi.pnghttp://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/tdf06-bmi.png

And BMI of course does not take into account body composition. There
are plenty of people 188cm (or 190 or whatever) with similar fat
percentages that have drastically different weights.

Joseph

Quoted message said:

And BMI of course does not take into account body composition. There
are plenty of people 188cm (or 190 or whatever) with similar fat
percentages that have drastically different weights.

Joseph

In cycling, body fat's not the issue, it's weight. Beyond a modest
level, more muscle won't help your cardiovascular system deliver oxygen
more effectively to generate more aerobic power. Even sprinting
specialists, in road racing, have relatively low muscle mass compared
with many other sports.

So "my body fat is low" isn't a defense for high BMI*, where BMI* is a
refined statistic which avoids potential limitations of the conventional
definition of BMI.

Dan

On Feb 1, 7:53 pm, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And BMI of course does not take into account body composition. There
are plenty of people 188cm (or 190 or whatever) with similar fat
percentages that have drastically different weights.

Quoted message said:

Joseph

In cycling, body fat's not the issue, it's weight. Beyond a modest
level, more muscle won't help your cardiovascular system deliver oxygen
more effectively to generate more aerobic power. Even sprinting
specialists, in road racing, have relatively low muscle mass compared
with many other sports.

So "my body fat is low" isn't a defense for high BMI*, where BMI* is a
refined statistic which avoids potential limitations of the conventional
definition of BMI.

Dan

I didn't mean to imply that fat percantage alone was the overriding
factor in cycling, just that BMI is a lousy yardstick.

But for crits, weight is certainly not the penalty it is in mountain
stages for example. I am also of the opinion that the importance of
weight is overrated for non top-level cyclists. It is important, but
not as important a factor as for pros.

Joseph

Quoted message said:

I didn't mean to imply that fat percantage alone was the overriding
factor in cycling, just that BMI is a lousy yardstick.

But for crits, weight is certainly not the penalty it is in mountain
stages for example. I am also of the opinion that the importance of
weight is overrated for non top-level cyclists. It is important, but
not as important a factor as for pros.

An issue with muscle mass is that there is a metabolic cost for it: it
takes oxygen from blood pumped by the heart to support, whether or not
it's contributing to turning the pedals. Thus losing excess muscle can
be advantageous, just as losing fat is. That said, I still agree with
you that losing weight is over-rated if you don't care about climbing.

Dan

On Feb 1, 9:17 pm, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I didn't mean to imply that fat percantage alone was the overriding
factor in cycling, just that BMI is a lousy yardstick.

Quoted message said:

But for crits, weight is certainly not the penalty it is in mountain
stages for example. I am also of the opinion that the importance of
weight is overrated for non top-level cyclists. It is important, but
not as important a factor as for pros.

An issue with muscle mass is that there is a metabolic cost for it: it
takes oxygen from blood pumped by the heart to support, whether or not
it's contributing to turning the pedals. Thus losing excess muscle can
be advantageous, just as losing fat is. That said, I still agree with
you that losing weight is over-rated if you don't care about climbing.

Dan

Even if you do care about climbing (at least to a passable level),
most cyclists are so far from their maximum potential in terms of
output, that it is easier for them to just gain more power. This is
when the weight is from muscle. Obviously, the easiest way to improve
climbing is to eliminate excess weight from fat. Then look to improve
power. When you reach an elite power output, but you still weigh too
much from too much muscle, that's the end of the rope. But most
cyclists are no where near their max power so it doesn't really matter
that they have extra weight to carry around.

Joseph

On Feb 1, 5:17 pm, Dan Connelly <d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m>

Quoted message said:

richardb20 said:

I'm off criterium racing this year, at Cat4, Cat3 level.

Quoted message said:

I'm 188cm tall (about 6'3" in the old money), how much should I weigh
to be sucessfull?

Quoted message said:

R.

The average BMI in the 1997 Tour was 21.47 kg/m^2. This corresponds to
1.88m^2 * 21.47 kg/m^2 = 75.9 kg.

Dan

The Tour has only one criterium and last year it was won by a rider
with BMI 24.187.
This corresponds to 85.4867 kg for 1.88 m.

-ilan

ilan said:

The Tour has only one criterium and last year it was won by a rider
with BMI 24.187.

Is this before or after his haircut?

Dan