Training & Nutrition - Height : weight ratio

I've read before about ideal height : weight ratios, especially for climbing. I'm dubious since power isn't taken into account, but I'm wondering if there is a height : weight ratio that is more prevalent amongst healthy cyclists. I'm 6'0 and in the low 160s, but I'm climbing and feeling slower and slower on the bike. A few years ago, I weighed in the 130s and was alot faster (and climbed alot easier). Is there a rule of thumb for finding a good middle ground?

I guess the key is to find the power to weight ratio that best suits you. That is likely to be as low a body weight as you can go without loosing power. I think a slow, steady weight loss would be best for this, as you would focus on loosing the minimum amount of muscle and maximum fat (which is easier said than done!)

you put on 30 lbs. what else changed to your physique? I'm not saying you are overweight, I'm just noting a significant increase in weight. maybe in addition to gaining weight something else happened to your body that is affecting your performance

Is there a rule of thumb for finding a good middle ground?Generally, world class climbers are around 2lb/inch. So if you're 6' tall that would be around 144lbs. That's not to say you will be a world class climber at 144 lbs :)

wonder if there is an ideal height / weight ratio for a man / woman partnership. I always seem to go for short brunettes who wear glasses.

Generally, world class climbers are around 2lb/inch. So if you're 6' tall that would be around 144lbs.

Which doesn't mean anything. Lance Armstrong (5 ft 9 1⁄2 inches) climbed at 160lbs -165lbs, proving being stick thin or the leanest, doesn't necessarily mean you will be the better climber.

well, he's old. meaning he's had more years to build muscle mass. plus he is a freak of nature. a good freak, but a freak just the same.