Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm 5'10.5" Currently about 184. Goal weight is 175.
My weight has rarely deviated from 175, though my fitness level has varied widely. I've been pretty doughy at that weight and pretty fit. Recently mountains of stress and a complete lack of free time (legit in my case) caused me to gain a bit of body fat but only lose a portion of muscle so I feel pretty "big" right now in a bad way. I've resumed consistent workouts so I'm shooting to get down to 175 but be pretty strong.
No idea what my bf percentage is, all I know is that the guy staring at me in the mirror is a little flabbier than he has been.
I'm 5'10" to 5' 11" and 185 pounds. My goal is 179. Not because I look best at that weight and not because I'm in my best shape at that weight. It's because that's where the BMI chart says I'm supposed to be and because life insurance companies say that BMI matters.
It's frustrating when you're wearing pants with a 32 inch waist with room to spare, needing a belt, and have very visible abominal muscles and are considered overweight.
The BMI estimation is simply given far too much import given the number of people's weight in misrepresents. It also seems to give an unfair portrayal of men, in particular, who are penalized for carrying more muscle mass.
You better have Hugh Jackman or Gerard Butler's build or I'm gonna conclude you're just a fattie whose only comfort to a sagging belly and man boobie mass is height.
You better have Hugh Jackman or Gerard Butler's build or I'm gonna conclude you're just a fattie whose only comfort to a sagging belly and man boobie mass is height.
Ha ha! No way to prove it for you, but I am not Hugh Jackman or Gerard Butler, but I don't have man boobs or a sagging belly either. It is not uncommon to see 200lb+ guys in the gym working out who are not fat. And, I don't have the height as I am only 5'10.
Again, sorry if I offended anyone. That was never the intention. I was just making an observation.
Again, sorry if I offended anyone. That was never the intention. I was just making an observation.
No problem dude. Thread like these usually only have responses from those who are either already in shape, or, not in shape but have some caveat or excuse why they are not (i.e., "Im big boned" or "Im on meds...", etc.). Those who ARE big usually refuse to post because they are ashamed of where they are in terms of height/weight.
Yeah, I have ZERO idea what my body fat is. The only real way for folks to know their body fat is to go through that entire body fat caliper routine by someone trained on how to do it properly, OR the water displacement test.
Other than that, I think people are just pulling random % out of their you-know-whats because there really is no way to tell or even get ballpark close without either of those two methods.
I'm ball-parking my bodyfat off of one of those hand held scanner/calculators. Not ideal, but quick and easy. Calipers are better, and the water immersion or "BodPod" methods are the best and most accurate.
I agree that you can look weak and skinny at 200 lbs. If you are over 6' tall and 200 or under, you are going to look week and skinny. I would say that the body builders under 190 are not huge. They may have a lot of muscle mass for their frame, but they are still small guys. A guy that is 5'5 tall and a lean 170 lbs is still not huge. He may have a lot of muscle mass for his frame, but is still what I would consider a smaller guy.
Again, I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers or offend anyone. I was just stating my opinion. You just have to find what works for you and keeps you happy. For me, it is being on the larger side of 200 lbs with a fair bit of muscle mass. I just don't want to be under 200 any longer. I used to compete in grappling at the 170 weight range (I don't remember the exact weight). I would have to lose significant muscle mass or cut off a limb to get to that point again.
There are 6'0" under 200lbs in the NFL and they look big. So you are telling me that body builders under 200lbs who is like 5'10" and has a 7% body fat is not huge?
Just because you are tall does not mean you are huge. So what would you consider a 5'5" guy that is huge?
I'm 5'10" to 5' 11" and 185 pounds. My goal is 179. Not because I look best at that weight and not because I'm in my best shape at that weight. It's because that's where the BMI chart says I'm supposed to be and because life insurance companies say that BMI matters.
It's frustrating when you're wearing pants with a 32 inch waist with room to spare, needing a belt, and have very visible abominal muscles and are considered overweight.
The BMI estimation is simply given far too much import given the number of people's weight in misrepresents. It also seems to give an unfair portrayal of men, in particular, who are penalized for carrying more muscle mass.
BMI is for average folks. It does not consider your BF%.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
