Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Racing weight

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    68 lost souls
    Registered Users Posts: 3,982 ✭✭✭68 lost souls


    This thread is just reinforcing me in thinking is to drop about 8kg. Going to have to get tougher on myself.


  • Options
    #33
    zico10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,839 ✭✭✭zico10


    For anybody who is interested, here are my experiences with weight loss and some efforts I have made to get lighter.

    When I started triathlon, I would have been about 80kg. At the time I thought it was a healthy weight and perhaps it was for what I was doing in life back then. But it certainly wasn't anywhere near my 'racing weight'.

    After a few years in tri, I was down to 75kg, but I still subscribed to the belief that I was doing so much training, that I could eat whatever I liked and I'd be able to burn it off. I could always that see the top guys at races were leaner than me, but it was only really after my first long distance race in 2010, that I started to suspect that I might do better if I weighed less than 75kg.

    I took a break from tri after this though and never acted upon this suspicion until I was doing an Ironman 70.3 in December 2012. I became obsessed about doing well in this race like I had never done before, nor since. Part of this obsession had me worrying about my weight. I was now of the belief that lighter, lighter, lighter was the way to go. I was determined to get my body weight down to below 70kg, for the simple reason that it was significantly lighter than I was at the time.

    When I took the start line I hadn't quiet made it to <70kg, but I was as light as I had ever been at between 70.5-71.0kg. Looking back, I think my body was doing the best it could to stay close to my optimal weight on significantly reduced calories.

    I was absolutely F*CKED after finished that race, and my body started going into shutdown. I was put on a drip and needed two full bags of fluids before the nurses would let me leave the medical tent. I'd managed to get through the race, without my dangerously low weight having an impact on my performance, but I don't think there is any way I would have got through an ironman at 70.5kg.

    The next time I started an attempt to get below 70 kilos was for the Connemarathon last year. Being a running race, weight was going to have a huge bearing on my performance and I was once more thinking along the lines of 'lighter, lighter, lighter'.

    A few months into my attempt to trim down, I started going to swimming lessons with Peter Kern. The first thing he said to me, before even asking anything about my swimming, was that I was 'too skinny'.

    Despite him often saying the same thing for the next few weeks, I didn't pay him any heed. But I was shivering in the water and I finally conceded that if nothing else, I was trying to get too skinny too soon, for a race that wasn't happening for a few months.

    I read 'Racing Weight' and after doing so, I stopped starving myself and gained a small bit of weight. It was enough to stop me shivering in the NAC, but not so much that it would be a hard job to loose it when the Connemarathon came round.

    I abandoned sub 70 as a target, stopped obsessing about weight, and just concentrated on running. I enjoyed training more because of this decision. When I took to the start line, I was between 71-71.5kg, which is probably a small bit heavy for a marathon runner, but it suited me. Looking back on my race, I'm pretty confident in saying that I was in peak condition and this was probably the first time I had ever started a race at my ideal 'racing weight'.

    For the ironman I did last September, I didn't obsess about weight either, but I didn't think I needed to be as light as I was for Connemara. It was from actually looking at Slowtwitch's top 15 Kona 2013 bike times, that I took the decision not to worry about getting any lighter. I'm 182cm tall and during race season float between 72-73kg. When all is said and done, the only distance I'm truly interested in is ironman. My physical stats wouldn't have looked out of place if thrown in among the list of pros on Slowtwitch. This really did give me great comfort, and the necessary confidence to just get on with the training and let my weight take care of itself.


  • Options
    #34
    68 lost souls
    Registered Users Posts: 3,982 ✭✭✭68 lost souls


    Appreciate the detailed post. In probably similar in weight and height to you at the start 182cm and a little heavier at aroubd 82kg. Went up to 85 or so at christmas but bak down again. I always said I'd wanted to keep below 80 in general forgetting about Tri so I am determined to drop down that. I'm concentrating on NS at the moment so sprint and Olympic distance. Reckon 75kg would be ideal for it.


  • Options
    #35
    shansey
    Registered Users Posts: 382 ✭✭shansey


    zico10 wrote: »
    I'm 182cm tall and during race season float between 72-73kg.

    I'm pretty much exact same height as you and i seem to hover around the 73-75 mark no matter what I eat now or how much i train.

    I tried to drop below 70 for a race last summer and after 3-4 weeks i was around 71.. raced well but ended up sick for few weeks after.


  • Options
    #36
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    shansey wrote: »
    I'm pretty much exact same height as you and i seem to hover around the 73-75 mark no matter what I eat now or how much i train.

    I tried to drop below 70 for a race last summer and after 3-4 weeks i was around 71.. raced well but ended up sick for few weeks after.

    Thats only roughly 9% bodyfat. I'd suspect the problem was how you were trying to lose weight rather than the weight itself.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    pgibbo
    Registered Users Posts: 4,377 Mod ✭✭✭✭pgibbo


    That was a very detailed post zico and a good read.

    The one thing I think that's important is how you make up that 72-73kg for your IM, i.e., body composition. Have you ever measured or tracked body fat? Also, the how and the duration of the weight loss are key factors.

    @tunney - what's your recommended approach to dropping weight?


  • Options
    #38
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    pgibbo wrote: »
    That was a very detailed post zico and a good read.

    The one thing I think that's important is how you make up that 72-73kg for your IM, i.e., body composition. Have you ever measured or tracked body fat? Also, the how and the duration of the weight loss are key factors.

    @tunney - what's your recommended approach to dropping weight?

    Slow and steady multi annual affair. Obviously my present state is not ideal but I got to 65kg (at 5 foot 10) twice. Once focusing on calorie defect and that resulted in illness and injury and was sustainable. Weight went back up. A few years later focused on calorie quality (and portion size) and I got to and maintained weight.

    Slowly slowly catchy monkey.


  • Options
    #39
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    Your "base" is built over years, not one winter.
    Being robust happens over years.
    Attaining race weight happens over years.

    Everything really takes years. Thats the hardest thing I find is helping people to understand that. Look at some that have come here, burnt brightly and faded away quickly, those that are going on and on and improving are those that take small steps forward but regularly and year on year - like bambatta, yourself, the ginger lad.

    Saying "I'm going to drop 15kg and get to race weight this year while getting fit and strong and also learning to swim" isn't going to happen.

    An ironman takes a five year plan, part of that plan is slowly chaning body composition.

    Again all my personal opinion and my 2c


  • Options
    #40
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    ...


  • Options
    #41
    sconhome
    Registered Users Posts: 5,468 ✭✭✭sconhome


    ^ I blame the remote control


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    zico10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,839 ✭✭✭zico10


    pgibbo wrote: »
    That was a very detailed post zico and a good read.

    The one thing I think that's important is how you make up that 72-73kg for your IM, i.e., body composition. Have you ever measured or tracked body fat? Also, the how and the duration of the weight loss are key factors.

    I keep an eye on weight, but I don't and never have measured body fat. I accept this could be a misguided approach, but I don't aim for any specific number. The way I see it is I'll have a low body fat percentage, or I won't. Measuring my body fat won't change it.

    I think it's pretty obvious from looking in the mirror whether I need to get leaner or not. Right now. I certainly do, but my goal race isn't for a long time. The following isn't meant as advice, but in a few months I'll spend more time cycling and running, and less time swimming and eating. My weight and along with it body fat levels will take care of themselves. Eat less, train more usually works.


  • Options
    #43
    zico10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,839 ✭✭✭zico10


    @tunney

    Much like good climbers don't make good time trialists, I have a suspicion some people might be too small to make good full distance triathletes. Have you any thoughts on that?


  • Options
    #44
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    zico10 wrote: »
    @tunney

    Much like good climbers don't make good time trialists, I have a suspicion some people might be too small to make good full distance triathletes. Have you any thoughts on that?

    Long distance is all about the bike really. Largely the run too but its absolute power on the bike and do be a good full distance (ie sub nine) you'd need a 4:40 bike and thats 260 watts AP for the bike. Not going to do that when 55kg.

    Again though if you are 80kg you'll pay a price on the run and particularly in the heat.


  • Options
    #45
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    zico10 wrote: »
    @tunney

    Much like good climbers don't make good time trialists, I have a suspicion some people might be too small to make good full distance triathletes. Have you any thoughts on that?

    you mean miranda carfree,badman ,luc van lierde peter reed greg welsh et all ?
    weiss rappstar aernouts andreas ralert are incredible lean athletes

    there is many people than can race very well being very light.
    so one should not generalize this. despite 70 .3 is about speed and ironman more strength..
    after all a good triathlete kind of wants to sit between a tter and a a good climber. (and then one has to work out whats best for him herself )

    its true when hellrigel went form 6% bodyfat ( i think had him 68-9 kg at 178 and he was one of the very top cyclists) to 4% bodyfat he crashed and lost strenght. rana also did 4.19 in austria this year .
    I would say
    stadler kienle zack aere more outliers than very small athletes.


    weight is only one part of performance and an average cyclist can still go sub 9 martin maldoon would come to mind who i think has run 2.58 in kona.
    and i dodnt think badmam with her 52 kg has ever been outcycled by an irish male.
    smaller skinier atheltes can compneste with lower cda and can go fast at 220 watts at the end you have to find out what gets you fastest to the finish line. and one would often agree that for an ironman thats pob 2 kg over oly distance ideal weight but it doenst have to like this.
    biomenchanics strenght ,mental strenght, training , nutrition, peaking at the right time etc would be part of the full picture rather than just focusing on one apspect. and as i said badman could go low for 4.30s in an ironman at 52 kg.


  • Options
    #46
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    peter kern wrote: »
    you mean miranda carfree,badman ,luc van lierde peter reed greg welsh et all ?
    weiss rappstar aernouts andreas ralert are incredible lean athletes

    there is many people than can race very well being very light.
    so one should not generalize this. despite 70 .3 is about speed and ironman more strength..
    after all a good triathlete kind of wants to sit between a tter and a a good climber. (and then one has to work out whats best for him herself )

    its true when hellrigel went form 6% bodyfat ( i think had him 68-9 kg at 178 and he was one of the very top cyclists) to 4% bodyfat he crashed and lost strenght. rana also did 4.19 in austria this year .
    I would say
    stadler kienle zack aere more outliers than very small athletes.


    weight is only one part of performance and an average cyclist can still go sub 9 martin maldoon would come to mind who i think has run 2.58 in kona.
    and i dodnt think badmam with her 52 kg has ever been outcycled by an irish male.
    smaller skinier atheltes can compneste with lower cda and can go fast at 220 watts at the end you have to find out what gets you fastest to the finish line. and one would often agree that for an ironman thats pob 2 kg over oly distance ideal weight but it doenst have to like this.
    biomenchanics strenght ,mental strenght, training , nutrition, peaking at the right time etc would be part of the full picture rather than just focusing on one apspect. and as i said badman could go low for 4.30s in an ironman at 52 kg.

    He said small.

    Also Badman got pinged for EPO so lets discount her. Actually remove her (as she is a doper) and your argument disappears.


  • Options
    #47
    catweazle
    Registered Users Posts: 3,830 ✭✭✭catweazle


    tunney wrote: »
    Also Badman got pinged for EPO so lets discount her. Actually remove her (as she is a doper) and your argument disappears.

    :confused: I had never heard of her being busted, are you sure you are not mixing her up with Nina Kraft who beat her but was subsequently caught


  • Options
    #48
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    catweazle wrote: »
    :confused: I had never heard of her being busted, are you sure you are not mixing her up with Nina Kraft who beat her but was subsequently caught

    I take it bad. I apologise. I was infact thinking of Nina Kraft.


  • Options
    #49
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    peter kern wrote: »
    you mean miranda carfree,badman ,luc van lierde peter reed greg welsh et all ?
    weiss rappstar aernouts andreas ralert are incredible lean athletes

    there is many people than can race very well being very light.
    so one should not generalize this. despite 70 .3 is about speed and ironman more strength..
    after all a good triathlete kind of wants to sit between a tter and a a good climber. (and then one has to work out whats best for him herself )

    its true when hellrigel went form 6% bodyfat ( i think had him 68-9 kg at 178 and he was one of the very top cyclists) to 4% bodyfat he crashed and lost strenght. rana also did 4.19 in austria this year .
    I would say
    stadler kienle zack aere more outliers than very small athletes.


    weight is only one part of performance and an average cyclist can still go sub 9 martin maldoon would come to mind who i think has run 2.58 in kona.
    and i dodnt think badmam with her 52 kg has ever been outcycled by an irish male.
    smaller skinier atheltes can compneste with lower cda and can go fast at 220 watts at the end you have to find out what gets you fastest to the finish line. and one would often agree that for an ironman thats pob 2 kg over oly distance ideal weight but it doenst have to like this.
    biomenchanics strenght ,mental strenght, training , nutrition, peaking at the right time etc would be part of the full picture rather than just focusing on one apspect. and as i said badman could go low for 4.30s in an ironman at 52 kg.

    FYI Liam Dolan out biked Badman in 2009 and 2012.............


  • Options
    #50
    Abhainn
    Registered Users Posts: 2,236 ✭✭✭Abhainn


    Good thread.
    I echo a lot here. For most it will take time to achieve your ideal racing weight.
    I am 173cms and back in 2007 I was 85.6kg when I was a young 35 lad. Both of my 2 IM’s (2012 & 2013) I was mid 72kg. Because of the higher volume training I had expected to be lower each time. Never measured body fat
    I managed to achieve the magic 10st xx (69.9kg) week leading up to VLM ’12 when I managed 2:36. I found though I lacked some strength last 10k. I looked a bit gaunt.
    Fast forward to VLM ’14, 2yrs older I was 73.6kg on the start line. Close to same preparation (though had a few 80 mile + week versus a couple of 75 mile in ‘12).
    Managed 2:37 and found last 10k well within comfort zone. I felt stronger and wished I pushed harder in the last section of the race but feared I implode. I was surprised then at ½ stone heavier the race was easier.
    Saying that my target for VLM ’15 & 71kg & 72kg for IM Copenhagen. In the end it’s all about trial and error and finding out what weight works best for you.


  • Options
    #51
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    tunney wrote: »
    He said small.

    Also Badman got pinged for EPO so lets discount her. Actually remove her (as she is a doper) and your argument disappears.

    where did she get pinged.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    rooneyjm
    Registered Users Posts: 595 ✭✭✭rooneyjm


    With all peoples experience of cutting weigh, does anyone have a meal plan, link to a good website or recommend a descent book for doing this. With lent coming up its a good opportunity to cut out the crap and turn over a new leaf.


    Currently 78kgs and looking to get to 75kg. I'll re asses if i get that far. 5ft 8 and 20% body fat.


  • Options
    #53
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    peter kern wrote: »
    where did she get pinged.

    As I said I was mistaken it was Kraft I was thinking of.

    I've admitted my mistake. You've not admitted yours. Badman was out biked twice by an Irish man twice by Dolan.


  • Options
    #54
    trinewbie
    Registered Users Posts: 481 ✭✭trinewbie


    tunney wrote: »

    An ironman takes a five year plan, part of that plan is slowly chaning body composition.

    Why does it take a 5 year plan?


  • Options
    #55
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    trinewbie wrote: »
    Why does it take a 5 year plan?


    Depends on where you are coming from.
    And depends on you define "doing".


  • Options
    #56
    trinewbie
    Registered Users Posts: 481 ✭✭trinewbie


    tunney wrote: »
    Depends on where you are coming from.
    And depends on you define "doing".


    IMO 5 years is over the top,a decent effort, lets say sub 11 hours is doable in 2 years for an average person (No kids, 9-5 Job) who can run 10k, swim 50 meters and ride a bike, assuming they do their reading/get a coach/sort out diet.

    You would want to be seriously out of shape/severely unmotivated for it to take 5 years to get into shape to finish Ironman I would have thought.


  • Options
    #57
    peter kern
    Registered Users Posts: 3,359 ✭✭✭peter kern


    trinewbie wrote: »
    IMO 5 years is over the top,a decent effort, lets say sub 11 hours is doable in 2 years for an average person (No kids, 9-5 Job) who can run 10k, swim 50 meters and ride a bike, assuming they do their reading/get a coach/sort out diet.

    You would want to be seriously out of shape/severely unmotivated for it to take 5 years to get into shape to finish Ironman I would have thought.

    i mean finishing an ironman means what... its like runing 100 m in 25 seconds... ( not bad but its not something they hand out medals ( yet)

    took mark alan 6 years to figure it out in hawaii and win it ( and he was an oly distance world champ ;-)

    you are of course right some get there faster than others.
    i think what you need to ask is it that smart to go almost from couch potato to 11 hours in in 2 years ( and i think its not, and usually causes more damage than good but it keeps the pyhsios in business. what i notice those people 2 years after tri are as fat as when they started ...
    also defo not good for the long term development of an athelte ( ie much better to get fast over oly faster first )


  • Options
    #58
    tunney
    Registered Users Posts: 12,583 ✭✭✭✭tunney


    peter kern wrote: »
    i mean finishing an ironman means what... its like runing 100 m in 25 seconds... ( not bad but its not something they hand out medals ( yet)

    took mark alan 6 years to figure it out in hawaii and win it ( and he was an oly distance world champ ;-)

    you are of course right some get there faster than others.
    i think what you need to ask is it that smart to go almost from couch potato to 11 hours in in 2 years ( and i think its not, and usually causes more damage than good but it keeps the pyhsios in business. what i notice those people 2 years after tri are as fat as when they started ...
    also defo not good for the long term development of an athelte ( ie much better to get fast over oly faster first )

    I was going to reply but then I thought "peter will be along soon and say what you mean"


  • Options
    #59
    Enduro
    Registered Users Posts: 3,620 ✭✭✭Enduro


    Serious question from an interested outsider looking in...

    Why is it that in LD tri you consider that the lightest possible weight is probably not optimal? From what I can understand in this thread it seem to be somthing to do with power output on the bike. But from what I've seen pro cyclists generally seem to obsess about losing weight. I would have thought that power to weight ratios would be the key variable on the bike leg, not pure power output.


  • Options
    #60
    mossym
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,766 Mod ✭✭✭✭mossym


    Enduro wrote: »
    Serious question from an interested outsider looking in...

    Why is it that in LD tri you consider that the lightest possible weight is probably not optimal? From what I can understand in this thread it seem to be somthing to do with power output on the bike. But from what I've seen pro cyclists generally seem to obsess about losing weight. I would have thought that power to weight ratios would be the key variable on the bike leg, not pure power output.
    one big difference
    pro cyclists have to go alp d'huez and the like

    aprt from the alp d'huez triathlon most triathlons don't have anything of the sort, so Power/weight not quiet as important

    flatter the course the less power to weight comes into it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    sconhome
    Registered Users Posts: 5,468 ✭✭✭sconhome


    Enduro wrote: »
    Serious question from an interested outsider looking in...

    Why is it that in LD tri you consider that the lightest possible weight is probably not optimal? From what I can understand in this thread it seem to be somthing to do with power output on the bike. But from what I've seen pro cyclists generally seem to obsess about losing weight. I would have thought that power to weight ratios would be the key variable on the bike leg, not pure power output.

    Personally and open to correction triathlon is more to do with TT performance and sustained power than overall power to weight. Balance between the need for a swimmer build, cyclists power and runners physique.


Advertisement