Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Are you a Clyde/Athena because of a large build and muscle, or because of fat.

Just curious how many here qualify as Clydesdales and Athenas because of say a lot of muscle and a large/tall build, as opposed to how many are here because they could stand to lose weight? I would like to make a poll but I am not entirely sure I can do so on this forum.

As for me I am not particularly tall at only 6ft, however I do have a very large frame. I will say though that I qualify as a Clyde because I crash diet and haven't been active nor eat well causing my weight to fluctuate terribly. I am currently rather chubby at 230-240. I will say though I have been under 200 before, actually 190 after being my largest at 270 and I will say at that weight I looked great however any lighter and I wouldn't look right. That being said, no matter what I do, I will because of my build be a Clyde or darn near it, but how big I get after 200-210 is simply my fault by making bad choices.

Yes

both

I'd like to say both, since I do have a broad-ish build. But at only 5'-10" that build would still have my ideal weight around 165 to 170, and only heavier than that if I had some serious muscle on top of it all, which I don't and probably never will. So that leaves fat. Which my mirror confirms every day. ;)

Both, I am a clyde since I am taller than 6 feet and weigh over 200 lbs but I have too much body fat also.

Def. carry too much fat. But, that said, if I had 0% body fat, I'd be right about 200 lbs.

I'm a clyde who is / has always been a big guy. I graduated highschool @ 6 '4 218lbs.and lean, muscular build. I have always had a large frame who worked a physical job and stayed fairly active. However, over time I'd put on some weight. I was 240 when I started riding 3 years ago. I raced my last adventure race back in November @ 217 lbs. So the muscle has always been there, I just try to maintain it while keeping down on the rest.

The 200 lb criteria isn't that significant, really. But it seems to me that the "large build", "big bones", "carries it well", etc., are all just kind of justifications for not losing weight. (I don't recall ever seeing a skeleton that had "big bones"!)

One thing to think about- if you are reasonably active, but overweight, you will have extra muscle just to tote all that weight around. That doesn't mean you SHOULD have that extra muscle, or that your ideal build would be the same muscle with zero fat. I got into cycling, and it wasn't that hard in a way because I had good strong legs. But my legs got good and strong from toting all my fat around.

both

Both, I am a clyde since I am taller than 6 feet and weigh over 200 lbs but I have too much body fat also.

Me too. My best lean weight after a lifetime of weight training and cycling is around 215#. Right now I am wrestling with 25# of fat I gained in the past year.

Fat

Fat.

Height, weight, and muscle.....all three.

Height and weight.

It seems to me that the "correct" answer is a self-selected one.

The 200 lb criteria isn't that significant, really. But it seems to me that the "large build", "big bones", "carries it well", etc., are all just kind of justifications for not losing weight. (I don't recall ever seeing a skeleton that had "big bones"!)

One thing to think about- if you are reasonably active, but overweight, you will have extra muscle just to tote all that weight around. That doesn't mean you SHOULD have that extra muscle, or that your ideal build would be the same muscle with zero fat. I got into cycling, and it wasn't that hard in a way because I had good strong legs. But my legs got good and strong from toting all my fat around.

+1 on that. I have a weird physique now from oting all my fat around over recent years. I'm very strong, but I still have flubber around the mid section despite being over 6' tall.

+1 on that. I have a weird physique now from oting all my fat around over recent years. I'm very strong, but I still have flubber around the mid section despite being over 6' tall.

Have we had the discussion about loose skin yet, Sayre? Think of Tom and the shaved flying squirrel. That's happening with you too.

I'm both depending on the time of year. Like most people, this is my heaviest time of the year. Too much fixin's and pumpkin pie! Even when I'm in prime shape though I'm still considered "obese" on a BMI scale (for what that's worth). I'm 6'3" and range between 210 and 240...

Just curious how many here qualify as Clydesdales and Athenas because of say a lot of muscle and a large/tall build, as opposed to how many are here because they could stand to lose weight? I would like to make a poll but I am not entirely sure I can do so on this forum.

As for me I am not particularly tall at only 6ft, however I do have a very large frame. I will say though that I qualify as a Clyde because I crash diet and haven't been active nor eat well causing my weight to fluctuate terribly. I am currently rather chubby at 230-240. I will say though I have been under 200 before, actually 190 after being my largest at 270 and I will say at that weight I looked great however any lighter and I wouldn't look right. That being said, no matter what I do, I will because of my build be a Clyde or darn near it, but how big I get after 200-210 is simply my fault by making bad choices.

I'm a clyde for one reason and one reason only, too many years of eating too much crap and not exercising enough. Maximum weight was 260 in 2000, lowest weight was 175 in 1993, current weight somewhere between 200 and 210. Don't own a scale...

Both, now; though 10 years ago at 7-8% bodyfat, I still weighed about 210 (6'3" tall). 34 inch waist, XXL t-shirt, 20" arms back then. I was yoooge.

Both. I'm 5'9", and when I was in the military I wore a 30 inch waist and weighed 210. Not 250 with a larger waist size.

Both. I'm 210 lbs and about 35 lbs above my lean weight, less than 175 lbs and I would be less strong that ideal.

If I lost the weight, I would no longer be a Clyde, but a Clyde I am!

Fat

I'm pretty stocky, but at 5'9 I'd need to be carrying a lot of muscle. In college I was 190 with a 32" waste and 48" chest, but I haven't lifted in six years. At 215 with a 39" waist and 44" chest I've exceeded my capacity to carry it well. Mostly its the moobs. Moobs just aint attractive; although a hell of a lot better now than at 230.

Mostly fat, at 6", my ideal weight would put me just under the clyde rating.

I'm big and fat.

I'm 6'6", and right now I'm 248 pounds. This is up from a low of 232 over the summer when I was riding a 200k or 300k event every few weekends and putting in a lot of 250km weeks in-between events. This is down from the 262 I topped at after 9 weeks of inactivity after surgery, narcotics and steroids for recovery. No matter how little I ate, I gained mad pounds.
Story of my life, though. I can count the calories in/out and my body finds a way to put on the pounds; there are some endocrine issues related to a genetic anomaly I possess.

So right now it's a bit of both. I'm Sasquatch; but I'm a tubby Sasquatch right now. When I'm back down to race weight for next summer, I'll be cut & trim Sasquatch, but still tipping the scales at 207 - 210 pounds.

Both. 6'2" 240 currently. At my best I'm 215 but haven't seen that since 2000 in the Navy. I'm the thinnest one in my extended family at 240 and it's a struggle to curb my appetite so I compensate by training very hard to justify the caloric intake.

both

both for me too. I'm 6'5" tall and at my thinnest for that height, as a small college basketball recruit/player I still weighed 220 and looked too skinny (for basketball anyway, probably too muscular for "serious" cycling). I let my weight balloon up to over 400 and now I'm down to 350ish and looking to get back down to around 220 or wherever my weight settles when I feel I've lost enough.

A bit of both. My "ideal weight" ranges from 169-183 depending on the formula. I haven't been either of those for about 30 years or so. I think 200 would be fine. We'll see next fall at this rate.

I am officially 'heavy framed' and have the bone density scans to prove it.

However, this is only a about 1-2 extra kg compared to a person with a fine frame, so the bigger cause is something else! I'm about 20-21% body fat, so I'm guessing that there is about 5kg of 'easy' fat there to lose.

According to the clever scales I have a very high muscle mass. It is scary to think that I train with guys who weigh less overall than the amount of muscle that I am carrying. When you have about 68-70 kg of muscle, the guy your height who weighs 63kg total starts to look like an entree.

This Whole Govt "BMI" Index is a Joke....

I just had this debate with my Grandfathers Dr's last week before he passed..

he was 5' 11 1/2" same as myself..

and they said he's supposed to weigh approx 170#

I'm 5' 11 1/2" too.. and weight approx 240#

I could stand to lose between 20-30# before I would look unhealthy... and emaciated..

I'm a Big Boned, linebacker body type of person Muscular.. who for the last 20yrs years stayed at around 217-227.. with No Gut..

and as Grandpa was laying in his Hosp Bed and the Dr came in and was discussing BMI.. I looked at him and said...

how do you still Believe these charts hold true... I said Don't lie to me... Look at Both of us.... Same Height..... and Tell me Honestly.. how do you as a Dr. Believe that Crap....

and he was silent.... I rest my case..

We're Meat & potato luvin Carnivores.... Feed us the COW people... Not the Sickly Veggie fair skinned folk... "Whoopsies" But it is what it is.....

This Whole Govt "BMI" Index is a Joke....

I just had this debate with my Grandfathers Dr's last week before he passed..

he was 5' 11 1/2" same as myself..

and they said he's supposed to weigh approx 170#

I'm 5' 11 1/2" too.. and weight approx 240#

I could stand to lose between 20-30# before I would look unhealthy... and emaciated..

I'm a Big Boned, linebacker body type of person Muscular.. who for the last 20yrs years stayed at around 217-227.. with No Gut..

and as Grandpa was laying in his Hosp Bed and the Dr came in and was discussing BMI.. I looked at him and said...

how do you still Believe these charts hold true... I said Don't lie to me... Look at Both of us.... Same Height..... and Tell me Honestly.. how do you as a Dr. Believe that Crap....

and he was silent.... I rest my case..

We're Meat & potato luvin Carnivores.... Feed us the COW people... Not the Sickly Veggie fair skinned folk... "Whoopsies" But it is what it is.....

We are in the same boat here then! My lowest at 190-193 and I looked good, as I got to that weight with just diet and little exercise so at that weight I was as skinny as my frame would allow me and from there the only way to improve myself would to have pumped up my arms and abs. As far as going from 190 to 170 though....I would look like a skeleton, my build just doesn't jive with 170.

Well, 20 years ago at age 28, I did not eat butter, salad dressing, mayo, fastfood, candy or any junkfood for 2 years. Best I could do at 6'1 was 215 lbs and not an ounce under. So eventhough I carry more weight today, I would still be a clyde no matter what I do. Yes, even back then the world was filled with ignorant people that thought a 5'5 140 lb runt could outsprint a big guy in a 40 yard dash, 100 yard dash or even a one mile footrace. I was constanly challenged by little guys that were threatend by actual athletes because I was big. I was challenged by a couple of vegetarians with 5% bodyfat the first time I raced a skinny on the bike. It was fun watching one of them puke then calling it a day. Believe me, I won a "boatload" of money racing skinny guys with big mouths, on the bike and on foot. The stupid award has to go to the 150 lb dude that thought he could outspeed a big guy in boxing. He had formal training at the gym and I didn't. I had a heavy bag I hit for fun. Fool learned that day that big guy does not mean slow. That was first one punch knock out!:D Square in the forehead, 20 second fight!:p FTR, I declined his challenge three items but he insisted as his brohters were watching and he was supposed to be some sort of hotshot.

Sad thing is that we post in a cycling forum where the anorexic guys excel. The good thing is that a 215 lb athlete would knock the hell out of a 140 anorexic dude in just about any sport. I've never had a 140 runt overpower me in any sport other than anorexic sports like cycling and long distance running.:thumb: Sheesh, if and when I do train, I kick more than my share of skinny arse on the bike! I proved that a few years back when I dropped down to 218 for cycling purposes.:roflmao2:

When I get ignorant comments on the boards, I keep this in mind! Go ahead, beat me on a bike, it's the only chance they'll ever get ot beat me in anything! "If" they beat me!;)

But like I said, we are in a cycling forum so we have to pretend that the mid aged 45 yo cat3 racer boys are heroes and great athletes!:rolleyes:

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/gulpxtreme/backthen.jpg

This Whole Govt "BMI" Index is a Joke....

I just had this debate with my Grandfathers Dr's last week before he passed..

he was 5' 11 1/2" same as myself..

and they said he's supposed to weigh approx 170#

I'm 5' 11 1/2" too.. and weight approx 240#

I could stand to lose between 20-30# before I would look unhealthy... and emaciated..

I'm a Big Boned, linebacker body type of person Muscular.. who for the last 20yrs years stayed at around 217-227.. with No Gut..

and as Grandpa was laying in his Hosp Bed and the Dr came in and was discussing BMI.. I looked at him and said...

how do you still Believe these charts hold true... I said Don't lie to me... Look at Both of us.... Same Height..... and Tell me Honestly.. how do you as a Dr. Believe that Crap....

and he was silent.... I rest my case..

We're Meat & potato luvin Carnivores.... Feed us the COW people... Not the Sickly Veggie fair skinned folk... "Whoopsies" But it is what it is.....

BMI is intended a statisticians tool, not a personal goal, if you take the population of say Bruce County, which is around 65,000 people and you compute the average BMI it will tell you that the average person is in a certain category. It is meaningless for an individual because it doesn't take into account for outliers. Outlier is a statistics term that means one that appears to deviate markedly from other members of the sample in which it occurs (Grubbs, F. E.: 1969, Procedures for detecting outlying observations in samples. Technometrics 11, 1–21.). So the person who is a big boned, body builder is an outlier.

You THINK that at 170lbs you would look unhealthy and emaciated, but if you actually pushed yourself to that level, you might like the result.

Athena for both reasons.

Once I was 155lbs at my adult height of 5' 11" and I looked like I was starving. I don't think seeing forearm bones and counting ribs is very attractive!

A good weight for me when I'm reasonably fit is 175.

(Right now I'm far more than 175.)

Athena here for both reasons.
I'm about 20-25 pounds overweight right now. My lowest adult weight was 148 and I was a size 4. I'm only 5'2", but I've always weighed a lot more than it looks. I don't think it is realistic for me to be below 150 and be fit enough to cycle and do triathlons. 160 is a very reasonable weight for me.

I'm 5'9 and the heaviest I have been is 240ish. Right now I am around 215. My body type is that of a linebacker or running back. So more muscle than fat, although I could still lose a few pounds of fat.

I'm 6'-2". If I were 193 lb., I would be considered "normal" according to BMI. So it doesn't take a whole lot to put into Clyde territory. However, when the BMI tells me I'm overweight, I'm overweight. When it says I'm obese, I'm obese. I had a slim build growing up and never got deep into athletics, so I can't rationalize by claiming I have a muscular build.

Both for me, I am 6'5'' tall and just over 300 pounds right now, was at 534 pounds at my highest weight but I do have a large frame to go with my 6'5'' height, but I do still have a ways to go with my weight loss so fat too. I think that I would be considered a Clyde as long as I am on a bike no matter what because under 200 pounds ain't gonna happen (and I don't think I would want it to) it is what it is :)

As Ever
Me

I am 6'1" and have a bodybuilders frame so i have always ben big but now i just have a bunch of fat hiding the muscle mass. I went to a middle school concert tonite and thought about this when i was there and there were so many people who could use a walk and a bike it was really depressing how many kids there was that needed to loose a LOT of weight or better yet put down the video games and play outside......

Underneath this fat, I have an athletic build. It's unbelievable how I just let myself go over the last 25 years. The heaviest I have been is 244. I'm at 229 now trying to work myself back down to respectability (under 200.) No, I should not be a Clyde. The fittest that I have ever been was in college. 5'10" 163 lbs, 4.8% body fat (hydrostatic weighing), and very strong. I was competing as a powerlifter and regularly won competitions in my weight class. To be that fit was a lot of work... but I didn't know it, I was having fun lifting 2 hours a day in the gym, running 5-10 miles a day, playing basketball for 1-2 hours a day... and I'm sure I didn't even know what "diet" meant back then.

I don't have that kind of time to devote to fitness these days. However, I'm sure that with some concentrated effort (especially on the diet side) I can get back to a weight of 180-185. No excuses... I'm a Clyde, but I don't belong here - there are very few of us that do (especially if you are under 6'0" and not a body builder or power athlete.)

I would like to argue I'm big boned but sadly I'm not. I do have a muscular build... I'm tallish (5'8") and when younger was into many sports (volleyball, swimming, tennis, racquetball, running etc). My legs will always be heavily muscled and even when I was fairly skinny I weighed more than most women (a good weight for me is around 155) ... that said... I'm fat because of well, fat. Thankfully because of the muscles, I carry it well...evenly distributed, shoulder's broad, not just in my hips or stomach or thighs etc but I'm fat. I've fallen into indulging my palate with all those things I should not eat - like sugar... and fats. I love veggies and salads and eat those as well which is probably why at 60, and overweight, I still have normal BP, cholesterol and no diabetes.

6'3" @ ~245 and in pretty good shape, but I would have to say both. I'm about 20 pounds over my target weight right now.

Hmm...interesting thread here. I just bought a bike to lose some weight and offset the running that I've been doing. I kept reading "clydes" all over the place and I did a google search and it brought me here. I'm 29 and currently 6'1" 230 pounds. I just finished my first half martathon with a 9'03" pace and hope to enter a few local tri's next year. I've always been big and athletic but don't have any scans to prove it. The biggest proof I have is when someone guesses my weight they are usually 25 pounds off. I know I eat too much but that's why I excersice. My current goal is 215 but to me the number doesn't mean as much as what the mirror says.

Hmm...interesting thread here. I just bought a bike to lose some weight and offset the running that I've been doing. I kept reading "clydes" all over the place and I did a google search and it brought me here. I'm 29 and currently 6'1" 230 pounds. I just finished my first half martathon with a 9'03" pace and hope to enter a few local tri's next year. I've always been big and athletic but don't have any scans to prove it. The biggest proof I have is when someone guesses my weight they are usually 25 pounds off. I know I eat too much but that's why I excersice. My current goal is 215 but to me the number doesn't mean as much as what the mirror says.

For me, the final number doesn't matter as much as what my body says. I already feel better and I've still got 100 plus pounds to lose. Can't imagine how good I'll feel once I'm down in the 200s, let alone 220 or so.

I have some before & after experience so I can definitely say that I'm a clyde all due to fat. I raced cat-1/2/pro 15-years ago when I weighed 155-lbs and had 5% body-fat. This was measured the only accurately way, with the dunk-test. The electrical-impedance and skin-fold tests were off by a significant margin.

Then I got out of school, settled down, got a job, usual blah-blah-blah and before I knew it, I had gained 90-lbs to 245lbs !!!! OMG!! :eek: During one of the usual doctor visits, he told me not to bother with heath-insurance, I'd better buy some life-insurance! I had high blood-pressure, high cholesterol and got hit with 2 gout attacks a year that left me bed-ridden for 2-weeks at a time.

So at that point, I was 40% body-fat, definitely from too much fat as I doubt my muscle-mass changed by much, if anything, it may have gone down due to lack of exercise, so I was over 40% body-fat. After 4-years of steady diet-watching, exercise and a significant amount of BF procrastination, I'm down to 180-lbs (I did write quite a few good training articles in that time though). So assuming I lost some muscle-mass, I'm around 22-23% body-fat, still quite a way from my target of 5% again. Got a couple months left before the racing season begins though... heh, heh... ;)

I'm in my mid-30s, 6'1", with the ex-fooball player build (linebacker type).

I graduated high school as an athlete (baseball, tennis) at 195lbs. I was 210-220 throughout college (played a lot of intramural and rec sports). Then I graduated, got behind a desk, ate at casual dining restaurants for lunch and dinner several nights a week. Beer. Booze. By the time I was 25 I was 275+ lbs.

Something had to change.

Now I Eat reasonably well. I race on the track (velodrome) and train for it during the off season. I workout and/or train 6 days a week. I get 2-4 weeks "off" from training all year and I still fluctuate between a fit 235-250 throughout the year. When I peak in training I can squat a smidge under 1.5x my body weight 3 sets of 5 (I haven't tried a 1 rep max). I effectively traded fat for muscle.

I'm just gonna be a "big guy" no matter what.

I'd say I'm a bit of both. Sure, I've got some weight to loose. I'm 5'8'' on a good day and my weight bobs between 210-215 which is up from a low of 198lbs. I'm barrel chested, have a 36'' waist, can see my top four rectus abdominus, and am quite into power lifting. I maxed my flat bench in competition form last Friday at 340lbs raw (no blast shirt, elbow supports, wrist supports, or supplements of any kind), I was heavy that day at 215lbs so...125lbs over body weight. Not impressive in the power lifting scene but not shabby for an amateur.

I watch what I eat but don't hold myself to any strict diet. I think I could stand to loose 20 or so pounds but that would be strictly for vanity purposes. I'm happy with who I am and how I look.

I'm a Clyde, but I don't belong here - there are very few of us that do (especially if you are under 6'0" and not a body builder or power athlete.) fat

I am 5'10" and have been battling flab for more years then I can remember. I am not an athlete but have always thought of myself as athletic. In the Navy (20yrs) and around it of another 16, I played every intramural sport I could, water skied, jogged, whatever was physical I enjoyed it. I was still always fighting to stay within standards. I could say I was big boned but bones don't jiggle as they say. For those of us that have struggled with our weight because of extra fat, I would say that we do BELONG here. Whether we are 10lbs or 300lbs overweight we gravitate toward folks that have the same struggle and understand the demons within ourselves that tell us we are going to fail because we are fat. I am new to cycling again and if I have a question this is the first forum I bring it too. It is nice to hear the input of people who can relate without being judgmental. I am a clyde and will be internally even once I reach my goal weight.

Both for me. I'm 6'2" and broad. Once upon a time I was around 210, I got sick in those days and got down to 200 and looked very unhealthy. I didn't exercise other than much urban walking. A few years passed and I got up to 293 and unfit. I've been working out and eating better since May and I'm down to 272 & change but am much more fit. I figure when I'm done and look slender I'll probably still be somewhere between 235 and 250 and still a clyde.