Avoiding "Cheaters" in Office Weight Loss Competition

Options
13

Replies

  • shawnamay590
    shawnamay590 Posts: 12 Member
    Options
    It's a competition, so some of that is tough to avoid. Percentages help some to level the playing field. We did one at work and made the winners weigh in again a month after the competition to get their money. They didn't weigh in weekly anymore, but that last weigh in prevented the crash dieters since they had to maintain their weight to get their money.
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,952 Member
    Options
    The problem with saying 1200 calorie daily minimum food intake is that some people might be choosing to do something like the 5:2 since many people will have different things going on in their lives outside work. Perhaps use the words "minimum 1200 calorie daily average over the week".

    And be specific when you say no supplements. For example, I take a multi-vitamin everyday. Some would call that a supplement because it supplements my vitamin amounts. Or protein shakes could also be called supplements. I would word it as weight loss pills or other formulas.

    I also agree that people should have to weigh in a month or two after the competition and have maintained their weight lost status - especially tricky over the Christmas holidays but if the goal is to actually help workplace productivity and health, then I still think that's the way to go. Have 90% of the pool distributed at the Dec. 18 end date and keep 10% back for the top winner 2 months after that.
  • tinklemar
    tinklemar Posts: 71 Member
    Options
    We did one of these competitions at work, and if you lost 7% weight loss, you got your pay-in money back, which dropped the overall pool for the winner.

    This at least gave people the motivation to get their money back, so even if they didn't 'win', they didn't lose their money either.
  • T1DCarnivoreRunner
    T1DCarnivoreRunner Posts: 11,502 Member
    Options
    If you want to concentrate on sustainable weight loss, then make it part of the competition.

    ex 1:
    after ten weeks (using your timeline, it can be modified) everyone is weighed. The "winner" is the person that has lost the greatest percentage of body weight. However, in order to collect the person must stay within X% of their final contest weight for Y number of weeks, with weekly weigh ins as an optional condition. maybe X=10 or 20 and Y=8 or 13. If the "winner" does not sustain the weight loss for the additional Y weeks then everyone that does sustain the wight loss moves up a place.

    ex 2:
    similar to ex 1, but instead of determining the winner after ten weeks, everyone is weighed after ten weeks and then the winner is determined by the combination of the person with greatest percent loss and the smallest deviation from contest weight.

    Just some ideas that could help incorporate sustainability into and office pool.

    "Stay within X%" is harmful because it will discourage someone who has made progress from continuing that progress after the contest is over. It could, of course, be reworded to say that one does not "weight x% more."

    The problem with that idea, though, is that it extends the contest. If it is a 10 week contest, it is a 10 week contest, not 20 weeks. If one wants to make it a 20 week contest, then do that. If one wants to make it a 20 week contest where those who lose weight in the beginning win, and those who lose more weight in the last 10 weeks don't win... then do that (most people would not like it).

    I agree with the sentiment that the whole source of the problem is that it is a weight loss contest. It doesn't matter what type of weight is lost (water, fat, muscle), and it doesn't matter how that weight is lost. The solution is not to do a weight loss contest at all. Instead, do an exercise contest - have people track how much and what type of exercise they are doing and the most time exercised is a winner. Or a food contest... more complicated, of course.

    Ultimately, though, a simple weight loss challenge is a terrible idea and this is what you will get. For example, I have type 1 diabetes. There was once that I lost about 50 lbs. in a weekend... something that very few people are even capable of doing. The intent was not to lose weight (I was a teenager and just got fed up with the disease, so I stopped taking insulin). I went into DKA and was in the ICU with a BG of 938. In laymen's terms, I nearly died. But after rehydrating and everything else, I was able to keep 40% of that weight that was lost. Is that safe? Of course not! If I did that, and lived, could I win? YES!! So of course this is flawed.
  • SOutdoors
    Options
    Although the action of your co-worker wasn't at all healthy, it wasn't cheating if the rules did not exclude supplements. Unfortunately, you will not be able to control the actions of other people. Despite all rules, you will not have any way of knowing the methods those people will use to lose weight.

    Which is exactly the reason you institute a max credit system. It forces consistent habits and in turn weight loss in order to win. Done over a long period of time there will be a separation of the field and if there are multiple "winners" they split the winnings.
  • michaeljacksonfan333
    Options
    You should say no supplements, and nobody can restrict their calories to less than 1200 per day
  • castlerobber
    castlerobber Posts: 528 Member
    Options
    My office tried a weight loss competition once. The guy who won it did so in part by sabotaging the other contestants. He found out their favorite/trigger foods, and not only brought those foods to work, but left them in the coworkers' offices instead of the break room. He talked about food constantly in front of the other contestants. He ate a somewhat healthy diet during that time and dropped weight, then pulled the starve/dehydrate trick right before the final weigh-in. He earned several hundred dollars, and a lot of animosity.

    We aren't allowed any more competitions of that sort. Instead, we got two summers of "log your veggies and fruits, log your exercise, wear a [company-purchased] pedometer and log your steps." Everyone who ate and exercised the required amounts during the challenge got some amount of money from the company, I think $100 or $150. After the second summer, we were all sick of logging.
  • Alidecker
    Alidecker Posts: 1,262 Member
    Options
    My work did a fitness challenge instead of a weight loss challenge. It was based on how much time you spent doing activities for fitness, with a daily limit of 2 hours. We were on teams (our choice), as them you could encourage others on your team. My team ended up winning, with no cheating, but we were a group of people that worked out a lot anyway. We discouraged a lot of people in the challenge. They ended up coming up with additional incentives to keep people going. They gave gift cards to those who did the least conventional exercises, or most increase in time exercising from one week to the next. We didn't know ahead of time what those would be given for. We were neck and neck with another team, which kept us motivated, but third place was well behind. Teams was good, but they decided if we did it again, teams would be assigned to break up the active ones and possible make us team leaders instead.
  • ItsJordanNicole
    ItsJordanNicole Posts: 110 Member
    Options
    Even if you state no supplements, how would you actually regulate that? You wouldn't have known what she did if she didn't actually tell you right?
  • evileen99
    evileen99 Posts: 1,564 Member
    Options
    I think these contests need to be a minimum of 16 weeks. This way it's harder for fad dieters and those doing extreme calorie cutting to win, and it's more likely to promote a sensible weight loss. Your contest should run past New Year's to keep everyone mindful of eating over the holidays.
  • kbeloved
    kbeloved Posts: 67 Member
    Options
    I wouldn't do pounds. I'd do percentage of body weight lost.
  • levitateme
    levitateme Posts: 999 Member
    Options
    I won my work competition and lots of people made jokes that I "cheated" but I was just the only person trying.
  • redwoodkestrel
    redwoodkestrel Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    Zombie thread...

    but if I was in charge of the rules I'd make the winners all weight in again 6 months after the competition, and if they'd gained a certain percentage of the weight back, they have to pay back the money... maybe give it to the folks who weigh even LESS 6 months later. :drinker:

    That way, if they want to keep the money, they would need to make sure the lost in a sustainable way in the first place.
  • leadslinger17
    leadslinger17 Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    There is no way to avoid "cheating"... having a weigh in spaced out over months would make it harder. And when it's an office thing, there is an honor system to it... it's not like a Biggest Loser thing where you can do blood tests and watch them round the clock etc.

    All I can think to do is come up with a metric that rewards doing it the right way. Like lets say, you get 1 point for percentage weight loss, but 2 points for ____. Where blank is some positive gain that you can't "cheat" at. Like percentage of body weight benchpressed, or number of situps in a minute, or speed running a mile, etc. That ensures that if all you do is take laxitives and drink lemon water for a month, sure you'll lose some weight but probably won't get any other points.

    In short make it a fitness challenge, not just a weight loss challenge.
  • TiffieLand
    TiffieLand Posts: 159
    Options
    Do as long one loses 5% of body weight in 1 month then Whoever complete that would win. The money price would be less but still better way to do it.
  • tiptoethruthetulips
    tiptoethruthetulips Posts: 3,365 Member
    Options
    12 week comp = max 15% weight loss (of beginning weight), and to discourage last few weeks frantic weight loss x % max in four weeks.
  • slomo22
    slomo22 Posts: 125 Member
    Options
    Don't have a pot of money, the reward should be a ridiculously big trophy. And honestly the girl wasn't cheating.
  • cass_wilson
    cass_wilson Posts: 31 Member
    Options
    The Dietbet 6 month competitions have a limit of the amount of weight you can lose to avoid being taking things to the extreme. Maybe a policy like that would work. http://support.dietbet.com/forums/217936-dietbet-10-feedback/suggestions/4347389-what-are-the-disqualification-rules-for-dietbet-10
  • maizerage66
    maizerage66 Posts: 367 Member
    Options
    Your contest was to lose weight and who could lose the most, it was never stated they could not just starve it off or use supplements. It sounds like she was willing to do what was needed to WIN, not necessarily the healthiest or best way to lose weight, but just to WIN, and under your rules she did just fine. None of you should be angry at her at all.

    Now what you do on the next one is to define some rules for this. You have to maintain at least a 1200 calorie a day diet, you can't do meth, etcetc. Supplements are usually GOOD, so don't say they can't use them, but you CAN say it has to be HEALTHY loss.

    This. Supplements are not bad but 500 calories a day is. Make a rule of a 1200 calorie minimum but don't hate on supplements. They have their place in weightloss...
  • markpmc
    markpmc Posts: 240 Member
    Options
    Wow. Who woke this one up?

    The girl didn't cheat. She successfully executed a fad diet to extremes. There's no magic supplement, her weight loss was eating 500 cals/day.

    Just accept that the 'favorite' didn't win and move on.