Matt Fitzgerald - Ideal race weight

2»

Replies

  • MinimalistShoeAddict
    MinimalistShoeAddict Posts: 1,946 Member
    edited April 2015
    I was just wondering how much stock to put into the Matt Fitzgerald Ideal Race Weight calculator. I checked it out and it's saying that my ideal race weight is 123lbs and 13.6% BF. Right now I'm maintaining around 133lbs (5'4") and I can't really imagine myself 10lbs lighter. The last time I was 123lbs, I was a sophomore in high school and at the time I felt fine but looking back at pictures, I looked a bit gangly.

    I would like my pace to be faster overall but I guess I'm wondering how much of a difference those 10lbs could make. I'm deciding between just continuing to maintain and train as planned or go back to aiming to lose weight for another 5lbs or so and see if that along with my continued training will help me get faster.

    So does anyone aim for the "Ideal Race Weight," consider it a guideline within a range or is it just completely ignored and focused solely on training and nutrition?

    I'm just looking for other opinions on this, I plan to think about it more before making any decisions on my personal goals.

    I am near "ideal" race weight and my performance improved drastically as I was moving closer to my current weight. However its hard to evaluate how much of that was because of weight and how much because my increasing mileage. I have a feeling most of my progress was a result of increasing mileage, not decreasing weight, since I was never overweight to begin with.

    My guess is that the more weight you have to lose, the more it matters.
  • christyprunner
    christyprunner Posts: 70 Member
    I have the book. He recommends using a body composition scale. Anyone one they recommend?.
  • karenfaber
    karenfaber Posts: 13 Member
    Right now I'm at 122. It said my ideal race weight was 116. I set pretty much every PR in 2013 when I weighed 115. So I'd say spot on for me, and I need to get on losing a few pounds before fall marathon time!
  • _Waffle_
    _Waffle_ Posts: 13,049 Member
    glevinso wrote: »
    I am not entirely convinced the calculator really tells you anything. It seems to give me what I think is my ideal race weight, but I am *really* lean already.

    I'll paraphrase the slowtwitch.com "mantra" on race weight: The idea is to keep losing weight until you start hearing your coworkers whispering about your weight. Then you know you are within 10lbs. Once your family starts asking if you have a cancer-like disease you are within 5lbs. And when they finally stage an intervention, you are there.

    That is a bit tongue-in-cheek but really you find your race weight by continuing to lose weight until you start getting sick too often, and you actually notice your run times are getting worse, then gain a bit, and that is your ideal race weight. For most, that is going to be downright gaunt.

    I was at 205 a couple summer's ago. That was partly helped by training for a half and getting sick for an entire week. (Also less beer because sick) People were asking questions and everybody was making comments. My girlfriend made a reference to a WWII camp. I was never so fast as I was then. I'll have to work on that.
  • Carrieendar
    Carrieendar Posts: 493 Member
    The formula in the book is more useful because it takes into account the idea that you are trying to move down 10% according to the chart, which takes into account where you are now.

    I got down to 115/15% and have set my PRs there. I'm toying with the idea of trying out 112 for Chicago. If I go sub-3 (the goal!), I think I would use that as my new race weight...performance based. Maybe try it out for the warm up half 5 weeks out...

    Definitely keep track over the training cycles and races. The calculator and formula are only guides, it is performance that really matters.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    I'm 6ft1, and it's recommending 143lbs.

    Probably need to read the book to get the context, but that sounds unrealistic in the real world for me.
  • alikonda
    alikonda Posts: 2,358 Member
    How are people determining their starting BF%? I have done the hydrostatic bodyfat testing and find the Racing Weight recommendations to track pretty well with what I'm currently seeing for me. If people are trying to use a measuring tape, electrical impedence scale, or (God forbid) BMI for their estimate, that could be part of why some recommendations seem unreasonable.
  • glevinso
    glevinso Posts: 1,895 Member
    alikonda wrote: »
    How are people determining their starting BF%? I have done the hydrostatic bodyfat testing and find the Racing Weight recommendations to track pretty well with what I'm currently seeing for me. If people are trying to use a measuring tape, electrical impedence scale, or (God forbid) BMI for their estimate, that could be part of why some recommendations seem unreasonable.

    I am going simply by visual guess. I show a 6-pack but not a perfectly sculpted or defined one, and I have just the littlest bit of pinchable fat at my belly button. Therefore I said 12%. Even if I bump it to 14 or 15 it only changes the answer by 1lb though. This calculator really is just trying to determine how much weight you could stand to lose and still be at a good body fat % to still run strong. That doesn't mean the weight it spits out actually is an ideal race weight. As I mentioned above the only real way to determine that is to lose so much weight your performance suffers, then put a little back on.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    I was expecting this to give me a totally crazy low number. I tend to be at the higher end of the scale for my height, even when lean. I'm only estimating BF% but if I change it from a lower end estimate to higher end estimate I get between 133 (if my BF is higher now) and 143 (if my BF is lower now). I usually maintain at 150lbs which is fairly lean for me. I competed in Figure at about 140 lbs, so 133-143 isn't crazy. I doubt I'll ever get to 133lbs, I don't want to be that size but I could definitely be around 140.
This discussion has been closed.