UKC

Far too windy to be out running this lunchtime so went for a nosey round the shops.

Noticed in a book about running - think it was "The Competitive Runners Handbook" or some such - that your target weight (in pounds) should be twice your weight in inches, plus 10%. Apparently elite runners don't have the extra 10%.

I'm 6'3", so my target weight should be 165lbs, or 75kg. Bang on for me! My weight goes up or down by a couple of kg or so but it's generally around 75kg.

But elite runners, in the name of the wee man, they must have to run about in the shower to get wet! I don't think you get many 6'3" elite runners (just an observation but I think it's true) but they must weigh c.67.5kg, that's not even 11 stone!

In reply to DougG:

I'm pretty much spot on. Because I don't have the extra 10% does that make me an elite runner?

In reply to DougG:

So what's that in centimetres, metres and kilos...I can't quite work the inches bit out.
I am 5.6 and weigh 60 kilo

In reply to Heike:

5'6", that's 66 inches, x 2 = 132, +10% = 145 lbs, divide by 2.2 = 65kg, so you're under!

In reply to DougG: I'm under the twice my height level, let alone the +10% bit. Last time I was weighed I came in at 59kg (c.130lb), but from that rule at 66" high I should clock in at about 145lb.

I'm still a crap runner though.

In reply to DougG:
Hmm, 65 - that strikes me like a lot. I feel quite heavy at the moment as it is. Is there a distinction between male and female weight ratios?

In reply to DougG:

So that makes me about 1 and a half stone overweight (even with 10%)- no wonder I am so slow.

Martin

In reply to Heike and Ava - hold on!

A quick google suggests that formula was for men.

Will have another look some time and report back on the formula for women.

Sorry!

In reply to DougG:
Ahh, hmm would have been nice, but doesn't surprise me now...Look forward to the women's formula.

In reply to DougG:

i'm 5,9 so 132 in + 10% = 152 so my target weight is 69.9 kg which i'm 1-2kg off atm.

In reply to DougG: I can believe that - my (female) friend runs for Scotland and she is absolutely tiny, I often can't spot her if she stands next to a standard lamp. She probably has to have baths though

It seems odd that the target weight is that high - if my calculations are right (I've probably missed something so will be put hideously right by someone), I'm less than the 144 pounds that my target weight is (I'm 5'5'' and a half).
However, I'm mentioning this in the light of an online BF measurement I did last night (I know they're not accurate but I was interested) which indicated that I am obese with 32% body fat! I am never doing an online BF calcuation again. I'm hardly sylphe like but I'm surprised that even those ridiculous BF calculators are that bad.

(Who's going to be first to point out my calculation is wrong and I'm over weight?)

In reply to Heike:

I was wondering that too. I'm honestly not a 'runners' build and am by no means petite yet I'm apparently under the target too.

In reply to control freak: The 144lbs calc is correct for your height, but I'm confused as to how a online BF Measurement works?

In reply to the laydeez:

OK, found the female equivalent:

Start with 5'6", 120 lbs.
Add 3 lbs for every inch above this height, subtract 3 lbs for every inch below.

So, Heike - your target weight is 120lbs, or 54.5 kg
Control Freak - your target weight is 118.5 lbs.

In reply to DougG: First link I found on google suggests that women long distance runners need 100lb for the first 5 feet then 5 lbs per inch on top of that. So I would be 127.5lbs. So Heike and I are back to being overweight again

I haven't read the article so may have missed somethink else crucial in it...

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0048.htm

And the source for both of these (mens' and womens' formulas) is

"The Competitive Runner's Handbook" by Bob Glover and Shelly-lynn Florence Glover

In reply to DougG: Sounds more like it!

Liam - one of those silly 'stick your hip/waist/wrist measurements in and we'll give oyu a random figure' calculations which I know are wildly inaccurate. I'm not obese!

In reply to DougG: Wouldn't worry too much about weight. Go and see your local road running league race and you'll see the range of people in the top 10 or so. Ok many are wee slight guys, but many are quite a bit more 'normal'. Ok not elite, but these guys are running sub 33 10k's so no slouches. There's also people way down the field who look the perfect runner.

I weight about 82 kilo's, 6 foot and consistently run 5:40-5:45 minute miles and finish at the front end of races. I normally get comments that I'm big for a runner, which I am, but good training is more important.

In reply to IainRUK:

Ah, now I'm not being cheeky here, and I know there's a lot more in your life than just running, but would you be able to run even faster if you were lighter?

In reply to DougG: I have just this colculation and found out that I am 5 inchs too short...

how do I make myself taller

In reply to DougG: Ooops, 5kgs over then, thank god I am a climber and it's winter - extra fat keeps me warm (although, my best summer climbing weight is probably 56kg)

In reply to DougG: this would explain why I do so well in fellraces : )

In reply to DougG:

hmmmmmm.

I am 5'11" so using the above formula my target weight is 71kg.............as of this morning I was 85.7kg...........I guess playing rugby and running dont really mix that well.

In reply to DougG:
i'm 5''8 and about 13st (i think it's probably less than that at the moment but i dont have scales)

either way, you don't have to be a mathematical genius to work out i am not at my target weight. . . not by a longshot

In reply to DougG: Cheeky..

Of course being 5 kilo's lighter will help, but I'm coming from a background as a keeper where size and power were essential. So I'll slowly try and drop it but while eating a normal diet. Imagine running holding 5litres of water. You'll be slower with that weight, but weight alone is no reason not to be running fairly competitive times. The average build is no reason not to be putting in decent times. I think to break into that top bracket then yes, you've got to get the runners physique, but many concentrate too much on weight, almost like it's a handy excuse why they aren't running low 30 10k pace (not that I'm saying you are). If you catch my drift.

I beat guys who don't have an ounce on them, and guys will beat me who are bigger than me, because the ones who train best, do best.

One of the best runners in Wales came from a background as a flanker in Rugby, 6 foot plus, broad and powerful, he's dropped weight slowly and his times have improved. But almost immediately he was running very fast 10k's, but has now gone down to sub 31 10k's. But even as a relatively heavy runner he was lightening.

In reply to DougG:

Hmm... Puts me over a stone overweight. Now I know I've chubbed up by a few kilos over the winter, and I'm about half a stone over my normal weight, but I start looking very gaunt when I'm a stone lighter than now, let alone more than that. Think it just confirms that my body shape will never quite be right for running - too much muscle in the thighs and bum...

According to this Linford Christie was 20KG over weight or about 2 stone...

I always had him down as a fat lay about - of only he applied himself he cold have been good.

In reply to IainRUK: absolutely- i did the inverness half marathon yesterday- and was soundly beaten by people who looked physically more up for pub darts and ten pints.

In reply to IainRUK:

Aye, that makes sense.

My weight is bang on what that 'rule of thumb' says, but there's no way I'll be running low 30s 10k! Low 40s, OK, maybe!

In reply to johnSD:
>Think it just confirms that my body shape will never quite be right for running - too much muscle in the thighs and bum...


This is what I mean. Only once you are running good milage each week, well structured training, can you make that statement. There's many runners with non-stereotypical body shapes who do well.

In reply to IainRUK:


Aye, but it's a good excuse to give up and reach for the cookie jar...

In reply to Barber Baz: You also get beaten by some old guys who if you saw walking down the street you'd never guess they could be doing that.

We have a guy in our club, just turned 70 and 6 minute mileing for 5 k's. Can't run off road well as he can't see well enough and falls over.

In reply to johnSD: I shouldn't be on this thread as I just had a 'full welsh breakfast' for lunch. I'm on this low carb part of a carb loading plan for the weekend 20 mile road race, and cuningly convinced myself that a fry up was a good low carb option for my lunch...

In reply to DougG:

My brother's 6'4", he's a fell runner (he's one of the top runners in a Lake District club, I won't say which he'll get cross, not Borrowdale) and he weighs probably around 67 kg.

In reply to DougG:

I think maybe this doesn't work for women... I'm 5'8" and weigh 124lbs but my target weight according to this is 136lbs. Pretty sure that wouldn't improve my running! Paula Radcliffe is the same height as me and weighs around 120lbs. Is this for elite distance runners or sprinters? Was it Bob Glover's book - if so I've got it and it's great.

In reply to jeni222uk:

See further down the thread, Jeni!

Aye, it's Glover's book.

In reply to jeni222uk:

Ah - just found the womens' one - that'll teach me to jump in without readint the whole thread! So I should be 126lbs which is about right. I'll get my coat.

In reply to jeni222uk: How did you get on at the HPM? My mate who is one of the fittest guys I know sounded knackered when I spoke to him on Saturday, must have been a hard one, they finished sub 11 hrs so were happy with that.

In reply to DougG:
5.11 means i have tio weigh 68. round up to 70 and still


AAAAAAAAA ARRRRRRRRRRRRRGG GGGGGGGGGGG HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

In reply to DougG:

You 6 foot 3?


I thought you were smaller, must be the flat head.


I weigh in at 81kg, a good 10kg over the target. Howevr, I am rrrrippped and it is my sprinter's thighs.


































and pies, mostly pies.

In reply to Nevis-the-cat:

Aye, 6'3" "big streak of piss" my dad used to call me.

In reply to DougG:

Used to describe my brother as being 6 foot 3, "never knew they could pile shit that high".


He then got a bit older, filled out more and stuck 2 goals past Bradford City and 1 past Leeds United in the FA Vase.

In reply to IainRUK:

Hi Iain - thanks for asking but unfortunately not good! Was racing with a team who were there to win - personally I think they went out way too fast as they had to walk the last 10 miles. I had a chest infection and couldn't see where I was going (Alpkit Gamma wasn't quite bright enough) so ended up being towed through endless unseen quagmires before eventually collapsing and going back to Edale in a minibus. I now know what a grough is anyway ;0) Amazing event though and I would love to go back next year - your mate's sub 11 is brilliant - it's the toughest thing I've ever attempted.

In reply to jeni222uk:

Aye I saw your post on the 'weekend' thread, sounded rough, to put it mildly!

In reply to jeni222uk: Bad luck, sounded a harsh night, yeah I think I'll try and enter again but it just seems that it bring son injuries

Yeah Groughs aren't nice things, they were why I opted not to run as dragging yourslef in and out of them on may have damaged my arm again.

In reply to jeni222uk:

Depending an how and why you put the weight on you might be suprised. There was a concentarated effort in the late 90's early 2000's by the GB medical team to get the UK distance squad to add weight. They were all significantly under weight and under performing because of it. The situation in female distance runners was particularly bad. If you put on 6kg it is not "the same as carrying 6kg of water" Its an extra 6kg of tendons muscell and fuel reserves. Most runners will get far better results by training hard and effectively while eating adequately than be trying to alter their diet or actively loose weight.

In reply to IainRUK:

Sounds Ok all the calories none of the carbs. You'll feel like cr@p in your track session tonight but don't worry about it, thats the glycogen reserves going south. Good luck whats your target time BTW 2:05-2:10 seems like your style from the 1/2 marathon times.

In reply to DougG:

I am a dinky 5'2" and I am supposed to be 49kgs according to the calc!!!!! No way José!!! There would be nothing left of me!

In reply to dinkypen:

Guess the formula begins to break down for smaller (and maybe taller?) people then!

In reply to davidwright:

We established that there is a different formula for women which puts me at the right weight. I do not diet and am not trying to lose weight, I carry more upper body muscle than most female distance runners (thanks to climbing) and regularly monitor my body fat/lean ration which I am lucky to be able to do due to having a good support team at uni.

In reply to jeni222uk:

If your carrying more upper body musculature than the ideal then your best racing weight will be above the ideal as well. Also for a distance runner fat is a fuel reserve not wasted weight. Distance and middle distance runners don't have the muscle definition of sprinters mainly because they have larger reserves of both muscle glycogen and fat.

In reply to DougG:

Basically, the formula only applies to 6 foot 3 ginger weld monkeys, with freckley heads

In reply to Nevis-the-cat:

We have a good correlation there then.

PS - the freckles have all joined up, I look tanned now.

In reply to davidwright:

I am quite aware of all of this. I enjoy climbing so it is my decision to do it at the potential cost to my "ideal" racing weight. Even very lean runners carry enough fat to fuel them for far longer than they would be able to continue running for - any excess weight carried as fat simply increases the amount of calories required per mile.

In reply to jeni222uk:

To get your best target weight for racing add the "excess" upper body mass and then about 10% to the target weight. Just because the east africans are stick thin doesn't mean you have to be. Look at the finishing photos of Steve Cram vs Saidi Awheta (sp?) in Nice ~1985 Cram is a good deal the heavier bulit runner but he won that race despite the Moroccan going under the previous world record.

Body fat is not just fuel. It is the "excess" body fat that is fuel. The rest can't be touched without damaging the body long term. Also very lean physiques tends these days to be correlated with very low glycogen reserves, which is a much much more serious issue for runners. A lot depends on your natural build and some people will have a higher racing weight than others. My racing weight went up by about 5kg from 17 to 21 it didn't hurt my running rather the opposite as I gained my adult strength.

In reply to davidwright:

Cram didn't run marathons/ultras though. Most 1500m runners are more heavily built than marathoners because the demands are different.

In reply to DougG:
Hmm this makes me look a bit lardy
6'8" and 230lb
I'm meant to be 170lb! 40lb overweight, I'm off to the gym.

In reply to Reach>Talent: Oh god, fat and stupid! 60lb!

In reply to davidwright:
Good luck whats your target time BTW 2:05-2:10 seems like your style from the 1/2 marathon times.

Not sure, it's Rhayader 20, used to be a classic Pre-London marathon warm up race, not sure it is anymore, but has at least one significant hill so not sure. Would aim to sub 7 minute mile, so 2:20, but was thinking sub 2:10 if I was running OK. Never ran this far on roads. Thought it would be a good training session, but also give me an idea if I could do a marathon later in the year.

In reply to IainRUK: Cool thread: I was surprised to log on to the coaching pages at the British milers club(or some such?) written by a very respected coach whose name I forget. One of the very first pages was all about crash dieting, working on the "skinny runner is a fast runner" theory. I guess he's never been hill running....

In reply to DougG:

I'm the perfect weight for my height- 7' 2"

Davie

In reply to Wee Davie:

Hmmm. Time to get that tape measure checked Davie, I think

In reply to DougG:

I would have to go out on a limb and say that the calculation is off, my running books say that for my height, a distance runner should weigh between 117 and 125. this calculation says my ideal running weight is 136?? thats what i weigh now and i do NOT look like a distance runner