MFP vs IPOARM vs Level Obstacles
Options
Energizer06
Posts: 311 Member
Wanted to get a consensus on what method the general population prefers and why.
I looked at several aspects of each and determined that I personally perfer level obstacles which is basically TDEE less a percentage(usally 10,15,or 20) My reasoning was such that its easy to use, easy to understand, and it works.
Now we all know that we must eat less than we burn (calorie wise) in order to lose weight/body fat. So, why do some methods state they are better or easier to use. I have also realized that MFP plus eating back calories is just about the same as TDEE-20
What's your opinion and why?
I looked at several aspects of each and determined that I personally perfer level obstacles which is basically TDEE less a percentage(usally 10,15,or 20) My reasoning was such that its easy to use, easy to understand, and it works.
Now we all know that we must eat less than we burn (calorie wise) in order to lose weight/body fat. So, why do some methods state they are better or easier to use. I have also realized that MFP plus eating back calories is just about the same as TDEE-20
What's your opinion and why?
0
Replies
-
Level obstacles seems to be the easiest to follow IMO. Personally, I did it drastically different than all of them. I would point people towards level obstacles now though.0
-
I have lost the bulk of my weight following MFP, its easy and works.0
-
I have lost the bulk of my weight following MFP, its easy and works.
Same here. I tried all of the different methods for calculating different ways to lose, but the big hangup is finding the correct numbers, your ACTUAL BMR, as measured in real life (or finding your TDEE through what calorie count keeps your weight steady)
I'm just doing it MFP style, using a general outline of what my BMR *should* be, and then setting it to 2 pounds a week. Because If I go over or if there are any calculation errors, my bases should be covered in any circumstance, it gives me a little wiggle room to enjoy a nightcap if I want.0 -
IPOARM for me, works and I keep loosing and have not plateaued in a while
0 -
I prefer level because it allows me to eat more daily, and one number makes meal planning much easier.
But frankly my enjoyable cardio season of biking is about to make that impossible again, so I'll go back to a sedentary TDEE minus about 15% right now, and log and eat back exercise calories minus same 15%.
Real bummer, means so much less on rest days or lifting days that don't burn much.
In the past I actually tried, and may go back to it, a level method for only 1 hr of that cardio factored in, and lifting, and eat-back the extra I actually do. Hmmmmm, I think I will.0 -
IPOARM helped me, but it is very confusing. It took me a few reads and talking with others to really get it. Now, because of the revisions, slopes, notes, whatever...it's become way too complicated for a newcomer in my opinion.
The Level Obstacles write out is straightforward and simple. It's easy to understand and something I've begun recommending to newbies and those struggling to get the hang of things instead of IPOARM. Level Obstacles also includes some common sense items about weight loss, not just TDEE info.
ETA to add the link for Level Obstacles in case anyone new is curious about it
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/952996-level-obstacles-lose-weight-target-fat-easy0 -
anyone have a link for the level obstacles...so I can understand what is being compared xD lol0
-
anyone have a link for the level obstacles...so I can understand what is being compared xD lol
lol. I just edited to add the link, but here it is just in case
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/952996-level-obstacles-lose-weight-target-fat-easy0 -
Both IPOARM and MFP have similar methods if you use a scheduled routine.
IPOARM using my info:
Male
38
5'6"
133lbs
11%BF
TDEE 2400
20% cut appx 2k
Sun rest 2000
Monday lift 2000-200=1800
Tuesday rest 2000
Weds lift 2000-200=1800
Thursday rest 2000
Friday lift 2000-200=1800
Saturday rest 2000
Weekly TDEE= 16800
Weekly calories consumed= 13400
MFP method
Sunday rest 1800
Monday lift 1800+200=2000
Tuesday rest 1800
Weds lift 1800=200=2000
Thursday rest 1800
Friday lift 1800=200=2000
Saturday rest 1800
Weekly TDEE= 16800
Weekly calories consumed= 13200
So between IPOARM and MFP its a difference of only 200cals per week.
Now the reason the Road Map was created was because so many people were confused about the methodology of MFP given cals+ eating back calories earned through activity.
I simply took out the guess work and gave a static number thats easy to follow.
either way if you follow the programs and are consistent, you will succeed.
;D0 -
anyone have a link for the level obstacles...so I can understand what is being compared xD lol
lol. I just edited to add the link, but here it is just in case
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/952996-level-obstacles-lose-weight-target-fat-easy
awesome ty!!0 -
i thought ipoarm and level obstacles were the same thing?0
-
Real talk, I lost my weight the MFP way, but the MFP way works well right out of the box for men while giving women a much too low calorie allowance (IMO). From what I've seen in my year on the boards, it's primarily women that have something to gain by following either IPOARM or Level Obstacles. Either method gives an alternative to weight loss that gives women a more realistic calorie goal while still letting them lose weight on a steady basis that avoids plateaus.0
-
Pros and Cons of each.
Level Obstacles
Pros: Easy to follow, good for people just starting out.
Cons: Lacks flexibility for people of different body fat levels. Doesn't get in to macro nutrients.
MFP Method
Pros: Probably easiest to follow out of the 3(no calculations needed)
Cons: Can cause really big deficit for people with lower TDEE's, this can lead to stall outs and other hormonal related issues.
IPOARM ver 3
Pros: Very flexible addresses people of all shapes and sizes and gives them a realistic number, also address the psychological hurdles and addresses macro nutrient intake.
Cons: The information can be over whelming for beginners, there is 3 version, and multiple spreadsheets, can be confusing for a lot of people. I think we might come up with a version 4.(to add to the confusion).
In the end what matters is you have a calorie deficit that isn't too restrictive for you and one that makes you feel comfortable, that's what really matters in the end.
Just wanted to point out that it is noted in Levels why macros aren't focused on. Levels is for people just trying to get started in the right direction. Later, obviously, when they are ready, then macros is something else they can look up.0 -
Real talk, I lost my weight the MFP way, but the MFP way works well right out of the box for men while giving women a much too low calorie allowance (IMO). From what I've seen in my year on the boards, it's primarily women that have something to gain by following either IPOARM or Level Obstacles. Either method gives an alternative to weight loss that gives women a more realistic calorie goal while still letting them lose weight on a steady basis that avoids plateaus.
Are you suggesting women may be a bit too impatient when they select 2lb weekly and sedentary no matter what?
Or men just aren't affected as negatively by the big surplus? Well, that true.
Or men are wimps, and change that 2 lb to 1 lb after about a week, women fight through it until not hungry, wondering how they could possibly manager to eat 1000 calories?0 -
I would think most of the problems for women following MFP is they select 2 lb per week and then dont eat exercise cals back.0
-
i thought ipoarm and level obstacles were the same thing?
In a sense they both address TDEE less (X) amount. Level I believe was created as a write up to simplify IPOARM. However with the various versions of IPOARM it has taken on new meaning and methodology. So, Levels is basically, TDEE less 20% where as IPOARM appears to be focused more at utilizing a persons body fat % as a means of determining the deduction amount to take off of TDEE. Wow, I may have confused myself trying to paraphrase that one.0 -
umm alright I did Level obstacles information just for some giggles. off the bat I know it wouldn't work for me
I weight 302lbs and am 5'3 26yr old female it said my TDEE was 3315 - I work out 5 to 6 times a week. it said for 20% off that I would be 2,652 that I would need to eat....umm that doesn't even go close to what IPOARM has me at.
IPOARM lists me off as
Sedentary: 2299 (little or none)
Light Activity: 2635(3 days)
Moderately Active: 2970 (5 days)- would be what I am at
TDEE x .80= BMR (20%)
Sedentary: 1839-
Light: 2108-
Moderately: 2376
sooooo were did the Level Obstacles decide on such a HUGE number of 3,315. I would be gaining weight if I followed what they would have me at. thats close to like 400 calories more than what IPOARM is listing for me.. I am lucky if I can reach some of these numbers in a day and normally stay close to my Sedentary amount0 -
MFP would have me trying to survive on 200 calories below my BMR, just to try to lose 1/2 lb per week0
-
Real talk, I lost my weight the MFP way, but the MFP way works well right out of the box for men while giving women a much too low calorie allowance (IMO). From what I've seen in my year on the boards, it's primarily women that have something to gain by following either IPOARM or Level Obstacles. Either method gives an alternative to weight loss that gives women a more realistic calorie goal while still letting them lose weight on a steady basis that avoids plateaus.
Yes, true.
While I lost the majority of my weight the "MFP way," I do wonder if I would've benefited from taking it slower. I used to net under 1200 calories a day nearly every day. Then after doing research and struggling with binge eating, I am figuring out better ways to manage this whole thing. I have read IPOARM (too complicated) and Level Obstacles (more user friendly), but I still follow basic TDEE guidelines, macros 40/30/30, and try not to make things so ridiculously overworked...like IPOARM has become.0 -
umm alright I did Level obstacles information just for some giggles. off the bat I know it wouldn't work for me
I weight 302lbs and am 5'3 26yr old female it said my TDEE was 3315 - I work out 5 to 6 times a week. it said for 20% off that I would be 2,652 that I would need to eat....umm that doesn't even go close to what IPOARM has me at.
IPOARM lists me off as
Sedentary: 2299 (little or none)
Light Activity: 2635(3 days)
Moderately Active: 2970 (5 days)- would be what I am at
TDEE x .80= BMR (20%)
Sedentary: 1839-
Light: 2108-
Moderately: 2376
sooooo were did the Level Obstacles decide on such a HUGE number of 3,315. I would be gaining weight if I followed what they would have me at. thats close to like 400 calories more than what IPOARM is listing for me.. I am lucky if I can reach some of these numbers in a day and normally stay close to my Sedentary amount
Not sure, but what did you put as your goal weight for IPOARM? I used their calculator and I had to put 220 as your goal because any lower kept giving me a red flag. This is what I got for you
Activity Level Daily Calories
Sedentary (little or no exercise, desk job) 2143
Lightly Active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/wk) 2456
Moderately Active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/wk) 2768
Very Active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days/wk) 3081
Extremely Active (hard daily exercise/sports & physical job or 2X day training, i.e marathon, contest etc.) 33930
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions