What body fat am I?

mparry79
mparry79 Posts: 7 Member
edited November 13 in Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
Trying to work out my approx body fat and see if I should bulk or cut. Any feesk1nd2ab8uda.jpg
dback welcome
«1

Replies

  • bioklutz
    bioklutz Posts: 1,365 Member
    Somewhere around 14-16%?
  • JoshD8705
    JoshD8705 Posts: 390 Member
    bioklutz wrote: »
    Somewhere around 14-16%?

    Yea I was gonna guess 15%.
  • mparry79
    mparry79 Posts: 7 Member
    Thank you, a bulk or cut then?
  • Springfield1970
    Springfield1970 Posts: 1,945 Member
    What do you want? more definition, then a slow cut. Get bigger, then a bulk and a cut (much more work). Personally I would just stay the same, you look great, eat the same and keep lifting heavier.
  • mparry79
    mparry79 Posts: 7 Member
    Thanks seem to have hit a bit of a wall and struggling to eat more and lift heavier. Just looking for a new goal to work towards.
  • bioklutz
    bioklutz Posts: 1,365 Member
    What lifting program are you currently following? Maybe you would enjoy switching programs and lifting at maintenance calories for a bit. There might be something you would like to try from this thread: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10332083/which-lifting-program-is-the-best-for-you/p1
  • mparry79
    mparry79 Posts: 7 Member
    Thanks I'll have a look, currently doing a 3 day split push, pull then legs and abs
  • JoshD8705
    JoshD8705 Posts: 390 Member
    Never go on a cut during the holidays unless you're in my shape lol. Do a slow lean bulk, and then around Feb. start slimming down for the summer.
  • se015
    se015 Posts: 583 Member
    Alright look, I'm a pure numbers guy. I've tried the whole let's go by look and feel? I've realized with experience, that pure numbers coupled with look and feel is the way to go my friend, and it's easy! What's the point of just guessing. I'm not sure what your goals are? If you want to be bigger than you will have to bulk and when you bulk you will put on some fat so you have to deal with that. If you're not willing to deal with getting some fat on than you'll pretty much stay where you're at. Once you've reached your limit of how big you got, then you can slowly start to cut, but you don't want to bulk and cut and be right where you started so you have to do this all methodically. But get yourself a handheld body fat analyzer. I got mine from amazon. Is it the gold standard of body fat % measurement? NO. But it's convenient and with every method of measurement, if you use the same tool and measure the same time of day your pattern of numbers are the same. For example, if you see on the body fat analyzer that you're 12% and you then try it a week later and see you're 13%, it's still a 1% increase no matter what tool you use. And I'm sure people on here will disagree with me but to me it makes sense. Anyways to get the best results you MUST measure yourself and that means, waiste, arms, chest, stomach, body fat %, and weight. You do what you want to do obviously but this is from experience of trial and error and I've gone the "look" approach and it did not work...numbers usually match the look, but it's more definitive, and will help you figure out how to adjust your plan.
  • se015
    se015 Posts: 583 Member
    But back to answering your original question, to me it looks like you should bulk. You look very lean and while you have plenty of muscle I think you can build more muscle and have more size. Just MY opinion, but I and trying to be bigger, it depends on YOUR goals and what YOU want, but if that were me, I'd want to be bigger, but some people like being lean. Up to you.
  • se015
    se015 Posts: 583 Member
    So what do you use to measure your bf %? Do you do the calipers? I have a hard time using those and you have to pinch all different areas and do some type of math formula, takes too long for me so that's why I like the handheld device. The gold standard is to really do the under water test from my understanding, but who has the time or money to do that every month, week or whatever?
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    Dexa Scan is the gold standard, otherwise I just go by look and feel.
  • se015
    se015 Posts: 583 Member
    Idk how you can say that look and feel is more accurate than any measurement tool, but okay it obviously has worked for you so I can't say you're wrong lol, but I just honestly don't see how that method would be better than using any type of measurement tool for that matter. OP, different people have different ways of measuring, whatever helps you succeed the most is the answer here, but for me numbers help me figure out my plan and how to execute it, before I didn't measure anything and saw little to no results, since using numbers, I"ve been able to get closer to my goals.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    edited November 2016
    Because if I am using a tool that is just spitting out numbers with no real accuracy, what is the point? There are just too many variables for BIA. Hell, Dexa has issues as well. The fact is, without an autopsy, no one will know with 100% accuracy. I just happen to think that most trained people can look at someone and guess with more accuracy than a BIA scale.

    And yes, I can say the same for you as whatever you are doing is working as well. Just a discussion :) and if you like you BIA device, carry on. It's just not my thing.

    I mean, I'm a recomper and everyone tells me it's sooooo slow, and all that jazz, but I just keep on pressing away. Lol. Recomp isn't everyone's thing.
  • mparry79
    mparry79 Posts: 7 Member
    I use a Fitbit aria scale and the results vary so much dependent on various factors like hydration it's mad. One day it can say 10% 2 hours later that has become 14.8%!
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    edited November 2016
    No offense OP but it looks closer 20% to me because that's the way I looked at that level.

    I'm now at 16-16.9% (depending on which testing method you believe) and I've got more visible abs and more muscular dfn generally than you do in the photo.

    As another member suggested, if you want to know for "sure" (w/in a reasonable degree of error -- around 5%) get a DXA scan or get weighed hydrostatically.

    That's what I've been doing every month for the past 3 months and plan to do that for at least the next 3.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    No chance the OP is 25%
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    No offense OP but it looks closer 20-25% to me. I'm at 16-16.9% (depending on which testing method you believe) and I've got more visible abs and more muscular dfn generally than you do.

    As another member suggested, if you want to know for "sure" (w/in a reasonable degree of error -- around 5%) get a DXA scan or get weighed hydrostatically.


    Not even close to 20%. About 15% is almost certainly where he is.


    As such, a cut would probably be a good idea at this point. Get down to 10-12% - or wherever you want, really - and then start bulking again. That, or maintain for a while.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    No offense OP but it looks closer 20% to me because that's the way I looked at that level.

    I'm now at 16-16.9% (depending on which testing method you believe) and I've got more visible abs and more muscular dfn generally than you do in the photo.

    As another member suggested, if you want to know for "sure" (w/in a reasonable degree of error -- around 5%) get a DXA scan or get weighed hydrostatically.

    That's what I've been doing every month for the past 3 months and plan to do that for at leadt the next 3.

    No way...at 20-25% you're going to have a visible belly and love handles...love handles start to disappear around 15-16%...I'd say 15% is probably about right.
  • Sabine_Stroehm
    Sabine_Stroehm Posts: 19,263 Member
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    No offense OP but it looks closer 20% to me because that's the way I looked at that level.

    No way. I'd say 15% max.
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    edited November 2016
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »

    No way. I'd say 15% max.

    I respectfully disagree. If the OP is at 15%, then I would be (based on appearance alone) bet 12-15%. I've been bet 12-15% before and I still don't look as lean yet at the 16-16.9% I am now (based on my last tests done w/in the past 6 weeks) as I did then.

    Of course, it's really pointless to argue about it based on our individual opinions.

    As I've already suggested, the only way to know for sure "who's right" (w/in a reasonable degree of error - around 5%) is to get a DXA scan or get weighed hydrostatically, which I hope the OP will do.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    Post a pic for comparison then?

    To the OP, disregard the outlier "guess". There is no chance you are 20-25%.
  • WayTooHonest
    WayTooHonest Posts: 144 Member
    I'd would say you look like...who the crap cares. You look GOOD.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    I'd estimate the neighborhood of 15% as well. 20-25%? Not a chance.
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    Hornsby wrote: »
    Post a pic for comparison then?

    Not interested in getting into a pissing match about this but, here you go:

    body-fat-percentage-men.jpg

    I still think the OP "looks" closer to 20% than 15%. Those of you who think he's 15% will obviously conclude otherwise, but I definitely think he's somewhere in between.

    FWIW, I look like I'm between 10-12% and 15% (currently closer to the former) but I just got weighed/scanned (respectively) at 16 and 16.9% w/in the past 6 weeks. So, pics are not necessarily reliable in gauging BF%.

    To repeat myself again (for the final time), no way to really know unless he gets a DXA scan or gets weighed hydrostatically. Anything else is just a guess despite what you may insist.

    EOM. Ciao!
  • bioklutz
    bioklutz Posts: 1,365 Member
    I don't see it @sgt1372. The OP looks much closer to the 15% picture to me. He has some definition in his abs. Good shoulder definition (that area looks in between 12-15 to me). I can even see some obliques.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    It's not a pissing match. You are just wrong.

    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Hornsby wrote: »
    Post a pic for comparison then?

    Not interested in getting into a pissing match about this but, here you go:

    body-fat-percentage-men.jpg

    I still think the OP "looks" closer to 20% than 15%. Those of you who think he's 15% will obviously conclude otherwise, but I definitely think he's somewhere in between.

    FWIW, I look like I'm between 10-12% and 15% (currently closer to the former) but I just got weighed/scanned (respectively) at 16 and 16.9% w/in the past 6 weeks. So, pics are not necessarily reliable in gauging BF%.

    To repeat myself again (for the final time), no way to really know unless he gets a DXA scan or gets weighed hydrostatically. Anything else is just a guess despite what you may insist.

    EOM. Ciao!

  • pbryd
    pbryd Posts: 364 Member
    I'm around the same bf% and I've decide to cut down to 10% ish before restarting a bulk.

    My opinion is that bulking at 15% will only eventually lead to a bf% of 20% later and a much longer cut will be needed.

    So a smaller cut now, leads to a longer bulk and you still won't pass the 15% mark later.
  • mparry79
    mparry79 Posts: 7 Member
    Thanks for comments, I think I'll do a 6 week cut pre xmas then bulk from there. Nice to see some debate!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories