Hi guys-

I want to run something by you all.
I am 6'1" - 6'2" Depending on how tall the person measuring me is. I weigh in right at 200 pounds. I am approx 7% Body Fat. See, I am a personal Trainer at a local Gym. I am a Triathlon & Cycling Coach. I work out sometimes three to six hours a day. I carry my weight very well, and most people guess my weight anywhere from 170-185 pounds

When I compete in a Triathlon, I get all the strange looks from the other Clydesdales in transition and one or two that I know actually give me a jab or two about it!

Look, the number is 200! If I weigh that much, do I not have a right to be there? Why the dirty looks?

I actually like competing in events where we HAVE to weigh in so that everyone knows I'm allowed to be there and not a sand bagger!

my 2 cents: 200 lbs, whether it's fat or muscle is harder on your knees when running, and creates more air/water resistance.

That said, if you're super-fit, wouldn't it be more satisfying to compete against other super-fit people?

Clyde refers to a size not a fitness level no? I thought it was created as a designation for competition purposes.

I have a goal set for myself to finish and olympic distance triathlon in 2008. But, I really wouldn't care if everyone was in the over 200 class or not. I am not there to beat someone that is very low body fat, but over 200 pounds. I am there to meet or exceed one of my goals. If you are there to be competitive, then be competitive in the class you best fit. Age-weight-pro whatever. I honestly don't know how they are all broken down.

From what I understand a clyde is anyone over 200 pounds. It doesn't say anyone over 200 pounds with a body fat % of 15 or higher. I will be very happy when my body fat % reaches 15%. But, since I don't have the money or anywhere to actually test true body fat %, I will have to guess at that figure.

If you feel comfortable running in a class where you are the best fit (by body fat %), then run in that class. If you are questioning that to a web forum, you must already have some doubt. If I ever get under 200 pounds, which is my goal, I will not gain weight to compete as a clyde.

I'd say that the argument is as old as the Clydesdale division, itself... but it's not. I used to race tri's back in the late 80s and early 90s, when the Clydesdale division first started showing up at events. (First one I remember being in was the Columbus, OH Tri at Mosquito Lake in '88) There were no arguments of sandbagging, because the only people racing in the Clyde div. were all tall, lower bodyfat percentage people who happened to weigh over 200 pounds. It was also a rare day when the Clyde start wave was more than 5 or 6 people, even at a big race. It wasn't until the division became more widely known that you started to see the division really fill up, because competitors that wouldn't typically race in an age division now had a more reasonable bracket to race in.
No matter how you look at it, 200 pounds is 200 pounds (unless you're racing on the moon :p) Even if you're 6'2" and 225 pounds of gym-tuned muscle, it's still more effort to move that mass over a race course than if you're 6'2" and 165 pounds, more like an ultradistance runner.
There's one distinct disadvantage to being super-gym hardbody with low bodyfat for racing tri's: You sink like a rock. If it's a "no wetsuits" race, then the muscle monsters are in for some hurt because they have to expend extra energy just to stay afloat. I used to notice a big floatation difference from 11% down to 8% when I raced, and tried to keep myself to the higher end of that range.

I will be very happy when my body fat % reaches 15%. But, since I don't have the money or anywhere to actually test true body fat %, I will have to guess at that figure.

Here's a site where you can calculate your bodyfat percentage with moderate accuracy. They use a 4 point tape-measure calculation for men, I can't remember if it was 3 or 4 points for women. A friend of mine had both a caliper and an impedence test done at her nutritionist's office, and this tape-measure test was within 0.5% of the results she got at the doctor... so I trust it to be close enough. (They claim +/- 2% accuracy on the site.)

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholesterol/home-body-fat-test-2774-143.html

Here is the definition of a Clyde

Over 200 pounds.
http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/cms/article-detail.asp?articleid=270

Here's a site where you can calculate your bodyfat percentage with moderate accuracy. They use a 4 point tape-measure calculation for men, I can't remember if it was 3 or 4 points for women. A friend of mine had both a caliper and an impedence test done at her nutritionist's office, and this tape-measure test was within 0.5% of the results she got at the doctor... so I trust it to be close enough. (They claim +/- 2% accuracy on the site.)

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholesterol/home-body-fat-test-2774-143.html

Interesting site. Mine checked out at 17.9% BF. I'm 210, but only 5'6". I commute 28 miles a day and spend an additional 3 hours/week in the gym doing upper body strength training.

The site asked you to check your waist and hips, which I can understand, but also your forearm and wrist. I would have expected bicep and neck instead.

I did the site, and it has me at 12.8%, which seems a lot low considering my body. I will do it again in a while and see what I come up with.

Thanks for the link.

If you have to be 200 pounds and 200 pounds is what it takes to compete as a Clyde then I say go for it.

I hate that people treat Clyde as Fat.... :( It is so often not the case...

Interesting site. Mine checked out at 17.9% BF. I'm 210, but only 5'6". I commute 28 miles a day and spend an additional 3 hours/week in the gym doing upper body strength training.

The site asked you to check your waist and hips, which I can understand, but also your forearm and wrist. I would have expected bicep and neck instead.

The drop ratio from forearm to wrist, along with some mathemagick involving your height and weight, are a good indicator of body fat percentage because for most cases, there's not a lot of fat at the wrist.

The drop ratio from forearm to wrist, along with some mathemagick involving your height and weight, are a good indicator of body fat percentage because for most cases, there's not a lot of fat at the wrist.

Um...OK, but there's also no fat to speak of on my forearm. I can easily trace the veins on both sides.

The Wikipedia has an interesting article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage) on body fat percentage, including calculations based on height and circumference methods. I particularly liked the last line of that section: Due to different body compositions, those with larger necks have an advantage over those with smaller necks.

Go Neanderthals! :D

Um...OK, but there's also no fat to speak of on my forearm. I can easily trace the veins on both sides.

Right. So the measured drop, no matter how large, will likely be accounted for in muscle mass. The mathemagickal calculations are likely designed to utilize height/weight ratios and general measurements of muscle vs adipose tissue weight per unit volume when calculating body fat based on circumference.

The Wikipedia has an interesting article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage) on body fat percentage, including calculations based on height and circumference methods. I particularly liked the last line of that section:
Due to different body compositions, those with larger necks have an advantage over those with smaller necks.
Go Neanderthals! :D

Maybe the site I listed uses the wrist instead of the neck because it's a measurement which is difficult to cheat? (I can't think of how to flex or suck-in the measurement at my wrist.)

That was very informative. Thank you.

my body fat % = bacon grease.

200 pounds is 200 pounds.

200 pounds is my goal so i can stay in the clyde category in tri's. 25 pounds to go. :)

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholesterol/home-body-fat-test-2774-143.html


Hmmm... I'm 6'1", 225 lbs, and that site says my BF% is 14.5.

I was sort of working towards getting into the "healthy" BMI range which starts at about 185 for my height. According to the above, that might be a little hard.

Maybe I'll be joining the OP in the perma-clyde status. :D

I hate to go against the norm here, but 7% body fat and a Personal trainer and a Triathlon & Cycling Coach. Your a pro. Wouldn't it help you compete better of you went to a different class??

btw.. I bet a few days your under 200... 199,198 and somedays your over 201 or 202... it's just what the body does.

Askel - I am also shooting for the top of the BMI chart for the normal range. I went from the obese range to overweight and still have 40 pounds to go to get my goal.

I talked to a few doctors about the BMI chart and they say it is a good range for most people as most people are not lifting weights 3 days a week and trying to get into a better weight range. Two of them said I should get to the body that I feel comfortable with and maintain the weight/size at that point. I have a friend who is 6'0" and is right around 195-200. He is probably in the less than 10% body fat range most of the year, and no he is not a body builder. He lifts weights, runs, swims, etc.......

Do what your body tells you to do. I saw your pictures on the other forum and it shows you have accomplished a lot. Keep up the good work.

Hmmm... I'm 6'1", 225 lbs, and that site says my BF% is 14.5.

I was sort of working towards getting into the "healthy" BMI range which starts at about 185 for my height. According to the above, that might be a little hard.

Maybe I'll be joining the OP in the perma-clyde status. :D

i wouldnt worry about the BMI too much if you have a large frame.

it sounds like we have very similar demensions. 6'1" - 225lbs. the calculator on that site says 14%, my body fat calipers say 16% for me.

for me to get to 185 i would need to have 0% body fat or lose some of my muscle mass (which i like and dont want to lose). ive always taken the BMI with a large helping of salt for this reason. its just unrealistic for some people.

I'm 6'1 and 245 'ish. Says I', 23%, 187 of lean muscle and 57 pounds of fat!:D

I did one of those hand held devices when I was 220. Said I was 30% and to seek medical help!:D

The problem with being right at 200lbs is that many clydes are in the 240-250 range so you probably look like a lightweight to them.. If you are over 200+, don't sweat it because you ae within your right to be in that category..

I have been dropping weight fairly consistently since being back on the bike since July, I have gone from 267 to 245 and seem to be on a 2lb weight loss each week.. My body fat is also dropping which is a nice plus..

A Couple of things.
This is a great thread. Lots of fantastic responses! It's really nice to see.
Love the article on Clydes description.

I did the body fat site... 17.3% It's a little off. I have been body scanned on a Dexiscan GE machine. In June after a few months off I was an accurate 8.8% up from 7.7% 3 months prior. This is probably THE most reliable way to test Body Fat in the Industry today. There is also a machine called the POD, but I don't know of one in Las Vegas as of yet. The water dunk test is old school and not as reliable.

I have the professional calipers. They are pretty accurate. They rely on the accuracy of human preforming the test. (+/- 1% variance)
I have access to a very good body fat scale in the gym. Close- (+/-1%) depending on persons knowledge of the unit applying the test. There are two variables- one for normal, one for athletic which can only be applied to persons working out 10+ hours per week.

If I race in my 35-39 age group. I will get top 20%. This is competing against guys 40-70 pounds lighter and with the weight difference, can out-swim, out-bike, and out-run me. Usually. They can spin away on the uphill, but I will of course do a little better downhill. It's usually not enough to catch them by this point. Then on the run, I lose them. They just take off like deer!

So, in the couple races I have done in the last year and a half as a clyde, I find that I place top 10% usually, but it is up against the more fit guys. Not the larger gentleman. They love to race, and I understand that their reasons for doing the tri differ from mine.
It's not a question of competition to win any "thing", but more of a fair competition in regards to what is fun and challenging to participate in.

Technically, by our government's BMI chart. I am overweight. Ridiculous.

Pros are scary fast. And at 36, I'm kinda past that calling.
I also smoked for 10 years. Although I make no excuses.

Sure, some days I am under-some days over, but not many. It would be fair to say 200 +/- 3 Pounds
Pro level. I do about a 2:45 Olympic on average. Pros get through in 1:56-1:58
20 minutes out of my run would be a miracle. The swim they finish around :20 minutes. I'm happy with :30. The bike is a around :50 depending on course. I ride 1:05-1:10.

If you're carrying it during the race, then I'm OK with you being there.

Of course, I'm sitting just under 180 now, so... :)

I will chime in here as well.

I used to race XC and DH n the Clydes class against a lot of guys that "technically" were considered Clydes at 6' 3"+ and 200/205 lbs. I and all the other Clydes never had any problems as long as the lean Clydes could handle a bit of heckling. We gave them hell but they handled it well.

The problem I would have has nothing to do with yer weight but your skill and performance. If all the Clydes are finishing a race in say 1h 32m to 1hr 40m and you come in and finish in an hour flat then ya better get yer sand baggin' butt into a different category. ;)

That about raps it up for me.

Hazz

Your well within the rights of the weight class.

If I race in my 35-39 age group. I will get top 20%. This is competing against guys 40-70 pounds lighter and with the weight difference, can out-swim, out-bike, and out-run me.

Sounds like this is where your best competition is, being the personal trainer do you not crave the challenge?

So, in the couple races I have done in the last year and a half as a clyde, I find that I place top 10% usually, but it is up against the more fit guys

Well yes you would do better, what did you expect? For the exact same reason the smaller guys in your age group do better than you. They are sleeker just like you at 200lbs even are sleeker than the clydes in the 300lb range.

It's not a question of competition to win any "thing", but more of a fair competition in regards to what is fun and challenging to participate in.

Yes, winning is exactly what it is about for you. The better competition is in your age group where it would be more challenging (thus fun) to participate in.

I really hate to draw this conclusion, but tell me what is more honorable. Say you got two people in the special Olympics, one with severe scoliosis and one with ADD. Both are handicapped and hence qualify to be in the race. Would you celebrate the victor when he outclasses the fellow with scoliosis? (For the record I don't know is ADD qualifies for the special Olympics, I have the utmost respect for the SO athletes and mean no disrespect by this post.)

Work your priorities out, if you want to race clyde then race clyde.

bau

The guys should not be breaking your stones. We've got folks of all sizes. It hurts when we get bad vibes from those who should only project good ones. Ride on bro!
Try being 300+ or 400+ pounds. You get the picture. All the best

You know what. If I can take this thread away from "me" for one second. I have to give it to all you "big guys & girls" out there for actually getting your butt off the couch and going out and doing something about it!
Good for you!

I think it takes a lot of self-respect and gumption to do any sport under this umbrella of individual competition. Whether that be swimming, biking and/or running-even hiking, walking, and kayaking!

It is you out there against yourself really. And for the big guys and girls to go out there and race is spectacular! Cheers to all of you! I have several clients and friends in this category and I encourage everyone to be the very best they can be! Not some potato chip eating beer drinking slob on a couch! Get out there and live life. You only get one shot at it! Make the most of it!

There, That's it.
Woo-hoo!
Marc

Your last post sounds sane, balanced, and pretty much right on.

The first post sounds paranoid, guilty, in need of affirmation. It honestly sounded like you weren't comfortable racing in the clyde division. Which is why the choice is up to you, nobody else at the end of the day really gives a cra$p which division you raced in.

...nobody else at the end of the day really gives a cra$p which division you raced in.

Well, if you notice how there were a few people making the standard "sandbagger" comments, apparently there are plenty of people with nothing better to do at the end of their day than gripe about who raced in what division. ;)



/retired "sandbagger" :)

I wouldn't complain at all if I could ride well at a high weight and hear comments that suggested I looked lighter. Best of both worlds if you ask me.

Well, if you notice how there were a few people making the standard "sandbagger" comments, apparently there are plenty of people with nothing better to do at the end of their day than gripe about who raced in what division. ;)



/retired "sandbagger" :)

Not sure what context the others used the term "sand bagger" but I used in reference to skill/ability and not weight. If you are a competitive person then why not race against other riders who will give you some competition? Someone who has the skill and ability to compete in an expert, semi-pro or pro class should not be in the Sport or Clyde category.

What fun would someone get, other then stroking their own ego, by competing in a race they know they will win?

Thats my little rant for today. :D

DBD :beer:

Your well within the rights of the weight class.



Sounds like this is where your best competition is, being the personal trainer do you not crave the challenge?



Well yes you would do better, what did you expect? For the exact same reason the smaller guys in your age group do better than you. They are sleeker just like you at 200lbs even are sleeker than the clydes in the 300lb range.



Yes, winning is exactly what it is about for you. The better competition is in your age group where it would be more challenging (thus fun) to participate in.

I really hate to draw this conclusion, but tell me what is more honorable. Say you got two people in the special Olympics, one with severe scoliosis and one with ADD. Both are handicapped and hence qualify to be in the race. Would you celebrate the victor when he outclasses the fellow with scoliosis? (For the record I don't know is ADD qualifies for the special Olympics, I have the utmost respect for the SO athletes and mean no disrespect by this post.)

Work your priorities out, if you want to race clyde then race clyde.

bau


Bad analogy, I don't think ADD qualifies you for the Special Olympics.

As for the question at hand, who was the clyde division created for? Was the intention to watch fat guys run/ride/swim or was it to allow a fair set of competitions for fit athletes who happen to be larger than your avg. hill climbing whippet?

Bad analogy, I don't think ADD qualifies you for the Special Olympics.

No, it's quite a suitable analogy. I did throw my disclaimer about ADD though. If it makes you feel better, sub ADD with some mild form of handicap vrs. severe form of handicap.

As for the question at hand, who was the clyde division created for? Was the intention to watch fat guys run/ride/swim or was it to allow a fair set of competitions for fit athletes who happen to be larger than your avg. hill climbing whippet?

Reread the OP's postings. He's upset because he can't compete against guys in his age group which are "40 to 70lbs lighter" than him. He goes to clyde's and places in the top 10%, most likely against guys who are 40 to 70lbs heavier than him if not more. Then can't figure out why he gets the look. He blatantly ran (no pun intended) to a division where he could put the competition at exactly the same disadvantage he faced in his age group. Only the clydes have no other division to go to. Maybe there should be a tiered clyde division where people like Marc can race and not feel bad about it. Semi Pro Clyde might be a perfect way to address this if it hasn't been done already.

I personally have no issue with him (or you if your in the same boat) competing in the clyde category. I will concede that 200lbs is 200lbs. However, I feel that the OP needs to decide why exactly he is competing. If he is competing for the thrill of competition then he needs to race where the best competition is, his age group. If he is competing to win and stroke his ego as DBD put it, then he needs to race clyde. So basically its all down to personal ethics which I have no desire to debate.

Marc- In all seriousness, congratulations with your triathlon accomplishments. That's something to be quite proud of, keep up the good work :).

No, it's quite a suitable analogy. I did throw my disclaimer about ADD though. If it makes you feel better, sub ADD with some mild form of handicap vrs. severe form of handicap.



Reread the OP's postings. He's upset because he can't compete against guys in his age group which are "40 to 70lbs lighter" than him. He goes to clyde's and places in the top 10%, most likely against guys who are 40 to 70lbs heavier than him if not more. Then can't figure out why he gets the look. He blatantly ran (no pun intended) to a division where he could put the competition at exactly the same disadvantage he faced in his age group. Only the clydes have no other division to go to. Maybe there should be a tiered clyde division where people like Marc can race and not feel bad about it. Semi Pro Clyde might be a perfect way to address this if it hasn't been done already.

I personally have no issue with him (or you if your in the same boat) competing in the clyde category. I will concede that 200lbs is 200lbs. However, I feel that the OP needs to decide why exactly he is competing. If he is competing for the thrill of competition then he needs to race where the best competition is, his age group. If he is competing to win and stroke his ego as DBD put it, then he needs to race clyde. So basically its all down to personal ethics which I have no desire to debate.

Marc- In all seriousness, congratulations with your triathlon accomplishments. That's something to be quite proud of, keep up the good work :).

Great idea, bau! (See bolded)

Good thread. A few comments:
* For the people who question the OP's "morals" or desire to compete, he says that he finishes in the Top 10% in the Clyde division, this isn't a guy winning every race going away. Just a guy wondering why everyone's hating on him for being fit and 200 lbs.
* Where does this stop? Does the 300 lb rider complain about the 250 lb rider? Any time you get to near a limit, there are going to be rubs.
* For those who cry "sandbagger", understand the term. It's someone who willfully misrepresents their abilities (e.g. a scratch golfer claiming he has a 12 Handicap). The OP is within the definition of a Clyde, so he's not misrepresenting anything to anyone.
* I also agree that the Special Olympics analogy isn't a good one, in that they can't control their disability, while a Clyde can control their weight (short of physical issues). Every Clyde (except me :D) has the opportunity to be 200 lbs, and therefore have an advantage over heavier riders.
* Good post somewhere in this thread about how there were 5-6 Clydes entering Tri's when the Clyde division started, now there are a lot. That's the bottom line.

No, it's quite a suitable analogy. I did throw my disclaimer about ADD though. If it makes you feel better, sub ADD with some mild form of handicap vrs. severe form of handicap.



Reread the OP's postings. He's upset because he can't compete against guys in his age group which are "40 to 70lbs lighter" than him. He goes to clyde's and places in the top 10%, most likely against guys who are 40 to 70lbs heavier than him if not more. Then can't figure out why he gets the look. He blatantly ran (no pun intended) to a division where he could put the competition at exactly the same disadvantage he faced in his age group. Only the clydes have no other division to go to. Maybe there should be a tiered clyde division where people like Marc can race and not feel bad about it. Semi Pro Clyde might be a perfect way to address this if it hasn't been done already.

I personally have no issue with him (or you if your in the same boat) competing in the clyde category. I will concede that 200lbs is 200lbs. However, I feel that the OP needs to decide why exactly he is competing. If he is competing for the thrill of competition then he needs to race where the best competition is, his age group. If he is competing to win and stroke his ego as DBD put it, then he needs to race clyde. So basically its all down to personal ethics which I have no desire to debate.

Marc- In all seriousness, congratulations with your triathlon accomplishments. That's something to be quite proud of, keep up the good work :).

I wonder though, is the Clyde class in racing designed for guys who are 6'3 and 200lbs, or guys who are 5'3 and 200lbs?

I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but when doing any kind of human racing, one needs some level of conditioning, and the better your condition, the better you race. However there are some people who wish to race, where they are 6' or taller, whom even in the best condition they can ever be in, will tip the scales at 200lbs. The OP may very well be one of these people, yet, shorter and fatter folks wish to berate him, for racing in a class, that was designed for folks like him, in the first place. If you were designing a racing class, for over weight, out of shape folks, then you would probably have another class at 250l, and another at 300.

Really folks, if you want to do triathlons and win, you need to be in the best possible shape you can be in, end of story.

I wonder though, is the Clyde class in racing designed for guys who are 6'3 and 200lbs, or guys who are 5'3 and 200lbs?


The Clyde class was set up to allow us larger riders a place to compete against other riders of the same. When it was first set up most of the riders (at least in the races I was in) were 200+ but in shape. 12% or less body fat, great endurance and very skilled at riding but because of our weight we struggled against the 135lb guys when we hit the hills so unless you could make up serious time in the flats and descents you would always place poorly once you moved out of the beginner category.

Since then I have seen a lot more racers who are not in racing form enter the races which is great and all but I believe if they enter the race and are not in race shape then they need to work at getting into racing form so they can compete. That is why there (at least there was in my day) a "beginners clyde" class and then a "clyde" class. If you jumped in to the Clyde class and got schooled then do not complain and work harder. It is just like if you entered either the Sport or Expert class but you are new to riding and not in the best of shape. One of my pet peeves are people who enter races just to be in a race but do not care how they place.

Wow, that was a rant. Oh well. http://bestsmileys.com/tongs/3.gif

DBD

[COLOR=Olive]
The Clyde class was set up to allow us larger riders a place to compete against other riders of the same. When it was first set up most of the riders (at least in the races I was in) were 200+ but in shape. 12% or less body fat, great endurance and very skilled at riding but because of our weight we struggled against the 135lb guys when we hit the hills so unless you could make up serious time in the flats and descents you would always place poorly once you moved out of the beginner category.

Since then I have seen a lot more racers who are not in racing form enter the races which is great and all but I believe if they enter the race and are not in race shape then they need to work at getting into racing form so they can compete. That is why there (at least there was in my day) a "beginners clyde" class and then a "clyde" class. If you jumped in to the Clyde class and got schooled then do not complain and work harder. It is just like if you entered either the Sport or Expert class but you are new to riding and not in the best of shape. One of my pet peeves are people who enter races just to be in a race but do not care how they place.

Wow, that was a rant. Oh well. http://bestsmileys.com/tongs/3.gif

DBD

Exactly, so the guy who is like me, 5'9½ and 210lbs shouldn't complain if I get smoked by a guy who is 6'3 and 215lbs, who is in much better shape them I am. :D

Exactly, so the guy who is like me, 5'9½ and 210lbs shouldn't complain if I get smoked by a guy who is 6'3 and 215lbs, who is in much better shape them I am. :D

Or when the guy like me 6'2" and 265lbs smokes ya as well. :p

5'9 1/2" and 210 ain't so bad. I used to train a guy who did triathlons and he had the same numbers as you.

DBD :beer: