MFP vs IPOARM vs Level Obstacles
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 -
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.) 3393
I did the site : http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/tdee-calculator.html
put in my info like it said too and got 3,315 just going off the moderately active and did the calculations for 20% (x .80) off and got the 2652.
I didn't do all the others as I am mainly staying to the moderately active now.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?
Good question and I should clarify my statement.
What I've noticed is that the MFP algorithm skews markedly lower when estimating the female metabolism compared to males. If a 200 pound male says he wants to lose 2 pounds per week, he gets 1800. If a 200 pound female asks to lose the same, she gets 1350 or something. (note-I'm pulling these numbers out of my *kitten* since I'm not going to reset my goals to get actuals). What I'm saying is that women get assigned 1200 calories at an alarmingly high rate by MFP, but the men get a much more reasonable number.
Using IPOARM or Level Obstacles gives women the opportunity to eat real meals while losing weight instead of trying to get full on half cucumber and lemon-water lunches. I'm sure there are other reasons to choose between the three methods, but if I'm giving someone one of these links, it's always because I'm trying to get them to eat more.
Re: the aggression factor. Haven't done any real studying of this but I think both males and females are equally aggressive when it comes to using the 2 lbs per week target as a goal. Seems like it would be basic human nature to want to get to goal sooner. It's not until much later, after reading tons of info that one realizes that 1 lb or less will work much better. Speaking for myself, I was trying to rig the system for a 3 lb loss, and MFP could have had fireworks and magic fairies fly off the screen for the recommended 1 lb per week setting and I still would have ignored the holy hell out of it.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
I don't think you would gain weight if your TDEE was 3315 and ate 2600. At 302 female 26 I would guess your BMR to be between 1800-2000 with at TDEE of around 3000-3300. So I don't think Levels is that far off. However, being at that current weight you are allotted a larger deficit so...use it to your advantage while you can.
All of the methods work (if used correctly), I just thought it would be nice to get some input back as to what people use and why they chose that specific method.0 -
I did a 2lb loss because I am 302lbs, so I know my body can loose a ton of weight fast even if I did the 1lb a week thing. So I am just right now not even worrying about what I would have it listed as, as I am loosing weight so I am just going to say what I am doing is right for me. I mean maybe later on down the road, who knows. can't tell the future only the present time. 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
I don't think you would gain weight if your TDEE was 3315 and ate 2600. At 302 female 26 I would guess your BMR to be between 1800-2000 with at TDEE of around 3000-3300. So I don't think Levels is that far off. However, being at that current weight you are allotted a larger deficit so...use it to your advantage while you can.
All of the methods work (if used correctly), I just thought it would be nice to get some input back as to what people use and why they chose that specific method.
fair enough, I could do a larger deficit. but I want to loose my weight slowly so I can tone up all the flabby crap that will come with loosing. 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
I'm going to start with saying that a 2300 TDEE for a 300 pound human being sounds a bit suspect. But I'm a broscience guy and not a run numbers and post links guy so take anything I say with a grain of salt.
But assuming your numbers are correct, it seems to me both methods would work perfectly fine. You'd lose a bit faster with the IPOARM way, but with the Level Obstacles way you wouldn't have to adjust your daily calories when you hit goal. Essentially you would have spent about two years training yourself to eat the way you would need to eat for the rest of your life. Either way is fine, just a matter of personal choice, IMO.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
I don't think you would gain weight if your TDEE was 3315 and ate 2600. At 302 female 26 I would guess your BMR to be between 1800-2000 with at TDEE of around 3000-3300. So I don't think Levels is that far off. However, being at that current weight you are allotted a larger deficit so...use it to your advantage while you can.
All of the methods work (if used correctly), I just thought it would be nice to get some input back as to what people use and why they chose that specific method.
fair enough, I could do a larger deficit. but I want to loose my weight slowly so I can tone up all the flabby crap that will come with loosing.
Hey if its working...Rock on! Do what works for you...That's my philosophy...Keep it up! Thanks for posting0 -
Honestly I use a mix... I used IPOARM to figure out my TDEE and BMR... there was no way I could survive on 1200 cals...
My daily goal is set to my TDEE- 15% for days I do nothing (ie sit on my butt watching netflixs, knitting, or sewing all day) Since my activity levels vary greatly from day to day due my health/pain issues I log my exercise and eat most of my exercise cals back, up to about 2100 cals- any more and I am forcing myself to eat.
I slack with my macros... I watch to make sure my carbs are not more than 50% of my intake, nor have copious amounts of sugar, or sodium- again because of my health issues.... I try to get at least 80 grams of protein- but with my allergies/sensitivities it can be difficult, and fat I gave up worrying about...
So far I have lost 10 lbs in 7 weeks, and about 16 inches and my body fat has gone from 35-37% to 30-32%!
I never heard of level Obstacles before, but it is a lot less confusing than IPOARM but they both seem to work on the same TDEE- give or take 20% idea.
I am coping the website just so I can find it again...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/952996-level-obstacles-lose-weight-target-fat-easy0 -
to be honest I don't change much. Even on huge workout days I keep it at 1839. I eat what my body needs and make it work for the amount of calories and other things provided. I am trying to keep this food thing as simple as possible. IPOARM just made sense to me. Before reading anything I was a MFP slave to their ways and didn't even know I need to eat my exercise calories back so I was plateaued after loosing some weight and then I found out about about IPOARM and have been loosing ever sense. I mean I should probably change it from 1839 but the absolute highest I ever got to was 1660 in calories and half the time I don't feel hungry and just need to insert food in mouth to keep my calories up.. so yeah...I am still learning as I go lol0
-
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 it's usually lower for women. It's because women have a lower TDEE than men usually.
For example a woman with about 1,800 calorie TDEE and a man with 2,500 calories. Both want to lose 1lbs.
Women
1,800 - 500lbs = 1300 calories(28% deficit)
Man
2,500 - 500 = 2,000 calories(20% deficit)
This is only a 1lbs loss, most people shoot for more and the deficit will be greater. The bigger your deficit the more likely you will stall out with your weight loss.
We're in agreement on principle, it's just that I always look at how things are applied in actual use. And nobody comes on here and sets themselves on 1 lb per week loss. They may only have 4 total pounds to lose, but they will still set their initial goals at 2 lbs per week and the female will get 1200 as a goal every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
We get sarcastic and snippy with them in the forums (and by we, I mean ME) for having only a few pounds to lose but setting their loss rate at 2 lbs, but they had no way of knowing that 1 lb or less would be so much more effective. No one arrives on this site with an advanced degree in nutrition and fitness. I'm sarcastic because it amuses me (and I'm an ahole) but the reason I keep answering the same questions over and over and over is because I understand where those folks are coming from and realize they had no way to know better until someone directly told them.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions