According to the Competitive Runner's Handbook, the men's weight should be "twice your height in inches (the average weight of elites) plus 10%. The target for women is based on this formula: Start with 5'6", 120 lbs. Add 3 lbs. for each above this height; subtract 3 lbs. for each inch below it. For most runners, their best performance weight will be at the target weight or slightly under it."
The woman's "formula" isn't a formula at all. It is given with no discernible reasoning at all. It merely tells you how to adjust for your particular height. So now I'm even more confused than before as to where they really came up with the numbers.
Competitive Runner's Handbook, Bob Glover and Shelly-lynn Florence Glover.
Is this just an arbitrary number? Do you have any experience with running at your "performance weight"? Or is all this a non-issue for those of us that aren't racing at our peak anyways?I weigh about 5 lbs. above mine and have been as much as 10 lbs. under mine. I seem to stay uninjured and run better when I'm a few pounds over the racing weight.
12 comments:
Since I'm not an elite runner, and that's not even my only activity, I don't worry about my optimal racing weight. I would be lying if I said I don't worry about my weight, but according to that "formula" I'm close to 15 pounds over my "race weight." When I get to my "goal weight" I'll be at the far upper end of the "range" the page in that book supplies. I don't really care about that. I've raced my fastest when I was at the weight I am at today. It was because I trained hard. I'm sure I would have been faster if I weighed 15 pounds less and trained as hard but when I weighed close to 15 pounds less I got really super injured and had to take time off. This is all anecdotal but for me it's a pure vanity/life enjoyment balance that actually has little to do with athletic performance. Just being honest.
I'm not competetive with anyone other than me, so that said, I haven't been anywhere NEAR the weight they suggest since I was 23. And I doubt I'm be there ever again.
And I am 100% ok with that.
That said, I am faster as I get lighter....but then again, I am stronger too, so I'm not sure how much of that is directly corelated to weight alone.
i am certainly not a competitive runner by any means, but i can not fathom weighing my target weight. right now i am about 18 pounds above that and while i could stand to loose a few, but there is no way i could maintain my muscle tone (which i have worked hard for, am proud of, and feel helps me ski and hike harder) and come anywhere close to that weight. i've been 15 pounds lighter than i am right now and it was because i was injured (lack of activity thus lack of eating led to loss of weight, weight did not lead to injury), depressed and stressed. there was no way i could be at peak performance level at that weight.
Oh wow! I think (hope!) this has got to be way off! I'm 6' tall, and my ideal race weight according to this "formula" is 138. I don't EVER remember weighing that little at this height, and I've always been an athlete (i.e., not big). I've never run competitively, but I swam competitively and my fastest weight was about 150. True, I don't remember ever being less than that, so maybe I could've been faster? But more than likely I would've been weak b/c it would've meant cutting out about 1,000 calories a day while I was training at a Division I level...that SO wasn't gonna happen. Also, this "formula" seems to do the same thing that the BMI equation does - if you have muscle, then you're screwed. I happen to like my muscle.
Holy cow! I'm almost 20 lbs above my racing weight according to that chart! I'm sure if I lost 5-10 lbs I would be faster but I can't imagine myself getting as low as 108. I don't think I've been that small since junior high! It would take some extreme dieting for me to get that low and when I'm marathon training all I want to do is eat! So yeah, don't think my "ideal racing weight" is ever going to happen for me in this life. I love running but not enough to go that extreme!
Um, sorry that last comment was me, not my husband, haha! Guess he was still signed into this computer!
Well, I'm three lbs over. I do agree that when I was anorexic I ran a lot faster. But I wasn't healthy at all. Definitely when I am heavier than this it feels like pushing a sofa uphill.
I totally agree with you all. :)
Danni and Bobbi, I think you said it perfectly!! For most of us, our performance is more about training levels, not weight.
Since I'm relatively close to my "racing weight", it's not a goal of mine to lose anything. But every time I go hiking without a pack vs. with one, I can tell there is a HUGE difference in speed and effort based on load; so lightening my own load a bit could help speed (provided I'm not underweight).
Mary, you are totally right. I think competitive runners are often on the unhealthy side with weight. It is almost encouraged. Does it make you faster? Probably. But healthy? Not necessarily.
I'm 5'7". The only time in my adult life that I weighed the posted "target weight" was in 2009 right after I finished the Tour Divide. I was down to 118 directly after the event, but even a few weeks later, after I had rested and put five pounds back on, I was still sickly and weak and really not fit at all. I realize I lost the weight in about the most unhealthy way possible, but that experience has made me forever wary of trying to lose that much weight again, at least intentionally. Eventually I hope to fastpack the Pacific Crest Trail or perhaps even plan a cross-Alaska expedition. If I follow through with these goals, I'm guessing I'll see that unhealthy-feeling "race weight" again.
I also wanted to say that this is another advantage cyclists have. It's often easier to buy lighter bike parts than it is to shed pounds. :-)
I read that book and couldn't take it to heart because, even at my leanest best-performing BQ weight, I was still waaay heavier than the 'ideal' racing weight. I'd either fly at racing weight, or pass out from emaciation.
Love your comment on my post today.
Just my own experience - I'm 5'6" and I'd say my best racing weight is 108-110lbs, right at the lower end of what they recommend. I think this weight is different for everyone, though. But the key is, if you weigh X and train hard and then lose 5 lbs, you will get faster. For 5-10k races a lower weight is better and for ultra marathons it's mostly about training and genetics and less about weight. It's a complicated topic that can't be easily summarzied in a table - but certainly a topic everyone has an opinion on :). The most important is to find out what your goal race distance is and then what works best for you. Also, if you can lose some weight say a month before a target race, you will make yourself faster for that race.
@SLG: Losing weight before a race won't necessarily make one faster and, if one's weight is already low, might slow one down.
Post a Comment