General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Never been to a gym

Reply

Old 01-11-19, 09:35 PM
  #151  
Doge 
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 8,998

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2699 Post(s)
Originally Posted by slowrevs View Post
... as alcohol adds calories at the rate of 9 per gram...
6-7Kcal/g Fat is 9Kcal/g
Doge is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-19, 10:00 PM
  #152  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
My first sentence was More muscle is not always good [for every sport]. A good half my examples were cycling related. There is a reason world tour cyclists look like they do. Even for one-day events, the extra weight is a liability once getting beyond a couple hours with any longer. If you are in a sport that works against gravity, or involves a couple hour event, the extra mass will generally not help. Even 100% lean muscle mass. If your sport is on the same horizontal plane, likely the extra mass will help.

That picture posted early (or search) was Kalman Szkalak who was about 240# and lean when he started riding. He got to be a faster more competitive cyclist by losing weight. My kid became less competitive as a cyclist as he could do more pull-up and push-ups (and gained weight).
You're second sentence was
I tend to think in young males often it is less good having more muscle than not having it.
Endurance athletes aside, this simply isn't true. Certainly not when comparing someone who is 140 vs 170 at 5'10".
Had you restricted your statement to endurance athletes, it would have made sense (and yes, I agree cyclists and joggers have little use for excess muscle, particularly in the upper body). You didn't. You also specifically used feats of strength in your comparisons.
As you no doubt know, elite cyclists are extremely specialized. If your goal is general fitness, they aren't a great model to follow.

Last edited by OBoile; 01-11-19 at 10:12 PM.
OBoile is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-19, 10:01 PM
  #153  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
6-7Kcal/g Fat is 9Kcal/g
One of the many things he got wrong in that post.
OBoile is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-19, 10:05 PM
  #154  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
No not really, I've been there myself and it was neither marathon runner nor "really scrawny" when it's 7-8% body fat. In fact it's not far from the middle of ideal weight range for 5'10".
Do keep in mind that the views of the endurance community are not necessarily those of the average person. When I was doing powerlifting, I was considered skinny at 5'8" and 185. While that's also a skewed view, I'm fairly sure most people would consider 140 to be really skinny for a 5'10" guy. I'm now 155 and my wife gets on me for being too skinny.
OBoile is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-19, 10:09 PM
  #155  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Originally Posted by wolfchild View Post
185 lbs to 211 lbs in one year while loosing fat at the same time by doing only cardio ??... It's very hard to believe that you gained 26 pounds of solid muscle and 4 inches on your biceps while loosing fat at the same time from only doing AirDyne bike and no other forms of resistance training. Cardio just doesn't produce those kinds of gains...I can only think of three possibilities here: You must be a genetic anomaly or you're exaggerating or maybe taking steroids... or you're just full of crap
It reminds me of the time I dropped Pantani on Alpe d'Huez back in the late 90s. I was doing a zone 2 training ride and he was struggling to keep up. I finally kicked it up to zone three for a couple of minutes to put him out of his misery and waited for him at the top.

If people are going to make stuff up, they should at least keep it within the realm of possibility.
OBoile is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-19, 10:48 PM
  #156  
Doge 
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 8,998

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2699 Post(s)
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
...
Endurance athletes aside, this simply isn't true.
This is a cycling site. I said twice - sometimes (cyclists are endurance athletes).

Extra mass not associated with the event and also moving that mass when power is not needed can be a liability.
Did you see the dad-brag gym video from 4 years ago? I/we are not anti gym at all, but added mass the last couple years has made junior noncompetitive in national road races (was a top 5-10).

It depends what you want, but sometimes, some gym work does not make you more competitive in the sport.
Doge is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-19, 12:09 AM
  #157  
Doug64
Senior Member
 
Doug64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,350
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
You're second sentence was


Endurance athletes aside, this simply isn't true. Certainly not when comparing someone who is 140 vs 170 at 5'10".
Had you restricted your statement to endurance athletes, it would have made sense (and yes, I agree cyclists and joggers have little use for excess muscle, particularly in the upper body). You didn't. You also specifically used feats of strength in your comparisons.
As you no doubt know, elite cyclists are extremely specialized. If your goal is general fitness, they aren't a great model to follow.
There is new study out that challenges some older beliefs about weight training and strength. I will try to find the study and post a link to it.

My summary: A group of ninety young men of about equal fitness was divided into three groups. The the fist group worked out using a regime of one set of 5-12 repetitions using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The second group did 3 sets using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The third group did five sets using the same criteria: enough weight to reach total muscle fatigue. The researchers found the five-set group had the largest muscle mass gain while, the single-set group had the least amount of gain. The three-set group's muscle mass gain was in between the other groups. The strength gain differences between of the 3 groups is what surprised the researchers; there was no significant difference.

I disagree about upper body strength not being significant in endurance sports. The first thing my daughter's track coach did when she entered college was to put her on a weight training program - she was (still is) a distance runner. Core strength is important in any sport.

I have used weight training since high school, and still hit the weights 5 days a week at 75 years old. I was an endurance athlete into my mid forties. My best events were the 50 k and marathon. I did run one 50 mile race to qualify for the Western States 100, but did not compete in that event. I could bench press 185 lbs, and the weights used in the other exercises were proportionate. I could never build any muscle mass that amounted to anything, but I thought I was pretty strong for my weight. I use a regime that has been modified over the years, but it is essentially a cross between the between the first and second groups' regimes discussed above. I also cycle or spin daily, and ride about 4,000 miles a year. My wife and I have toured over 20,000 miles, totaling 20 months, through 11 countries since 2007. I do agree that going to the gym may not always be beneficial. On the way to the gym last Monday morning, I dumped my bike on the ice and have a sore shoulder, forearm, hip and knee to show for it. Going skiing yesterday didn't help either

At 6' I weighed between 150 lbs. and 160 lbs. most of life, but have dipped to 145 lbs when training hard (running 60-70 miles/week+ weights 3 days/week), or riding multi-month bike tours. I have always felt that my height /weight ratio was an advantage not a handicap. I've also participated in other sports including : judo, bike racing (mediocre), rock climbing, mountaineering, and telemark and xc skiing where being tall and skinny didn't seem to matter.

Last edited by Doug64; 01-12-19 at 12:39 AM.
Doug64 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-19, 02:39 AM
  #158  
KraneXL
🎊🎆🍾
 
KraneXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: La-la Land, CA
Posts: 2,450

Bikes: Cannondale Quick SL1 Bike - 2014

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1979 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doug64 View Post
There is new study out that challenges some older beliefs about weight training and strength. I will try to find the study and post a link to it.

My summary: A group of ninety young men of about equal fitness was divided into three groups. The the fist group worked out using a regime of one set of 5-12 repetitions using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The second group did 3 sets using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The third group did five sets using the same criteria: enough weight to reach total muscle fatigue. The researchers found the five-set group had the largest muscle mass gain while, the single-set group had the least amount of gain. The three-set group's muscle mass gain was in between the other groups. The strength gain differences between of the 3 groups is what surprised the researchers; there was no significant difference.

I disagree about upper body strength not being significant in endurance sports. The first thing my daughter's track coach did when she entered college was to put her on a weight training program - she was (still is) a distance runner. Core strength is important in any sport.

I have used weight training since high school, and still hit the weights 5 days a week at 75 years old. I was an endurance athlete into my mid forties. My best events were the 50 k and marathon. I did run one 50 mile race to qualify for the Western States 100, but did not compete in that event. I could bench press 185 lbs, and the weights used in the other exercises were proportionate. I could never build any muscle mass that amounted to anything, but I thought I was pretty strong for my weight. I use a regime that has been modified over the years, but it is essentially a cross between the between the first and second groups' regimes discussed above. I also cycle or spin daily, and ride about 4,000 miles a year. My wife and I have toured over 20,000 miles, totaling 20 months, through 11 countries since 2007. I do agree that going to the gym may not always be beneficial. On the way to the gym last Monday morning, I dumped my bike on the ice and have a sore shoulder, forearm, hip and knee to show for it. Going skiing yesterday didn't help either

At 6' I weighed between 150 lbs. and 160 lbs. most of life, but have dipped to 145 lbs when training hard (running 60-70 miles/week+ weights 3 days/week), or riding multi-month bike tours. I have always felt that my height /weight ratio was an advantage not a handicap. I've also participated in other sports including : judo, bike racing (mediocre), rock climbing, mountaineering, and telemark and xc skiing where being tall and skinny didn't seem to matter.
On the contrary, I'd argue that being tall and skinny always matters. Although for sports like volleyball, basketball, track, and swimming its a good thing. For all the rest you're most likely at a handicap behind the normal...ahem, average players.

Last edited by KraneXL; 01-12-19 at 08:08 AM.
KraneXL is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-19, 05:39 AM
  #159  
slowrevs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
I stand corrected. Thank you!

Originally Posted by Doge View Post
6-7Kcal/g Fat is 9Kcal/g
You are right. Have to check the source on my number.
slowrevs is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-19, 06:32 AM
  #160  
slowrevs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Is it your dogma or just dog poop?

Originally Posted by wolfchild View Post
185 lbs to 211 lbs in one year while loosing fat at the same time by doing only cardio ??... It's very hard to believe that you gained 26 pounds of solid muscle and 4 inches on your biceps while loosing fat at the same time from only doing AirDyne bike and no other forms of resistance training. Cardio just doesn't produce those kinds of gains...I can only think of three possibilities here: You must be a genetic anomaly or you're exaggerating or maybe taking steroids... or you're just full of crap
Muscles don't know whether they are pedaling a bike and turning wheels, pedaling and stroking the arm levers on a stationary AirDyne, pulling the oars in a floating boat or stationary rowing machine.

What muscles know is how much work they are being asked to perform and whether or not they are up to the task.

Whether or not you believe I gained those pounds of muscle from exclusively using an AirDyne is of no concern to me. I simply posted a true story. If you have access to an AirDyne, I suggest you mount up, pedal and pull until you reach 10 kiloponds (98 Newtons at a crank cadence of 75 rpm), sustain that level for fifteen minutes, then tell me you have only engaged in a cardio workout.

Just like lifting weights, you can't sustain a high level of workout on an AirDyne until you have the muscle strength and mass to do it.

As I explained before, this is Physics - - in action.
slowrevs is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-19, 02:34 PM
  #161  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 14,117

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2297 Post(s)
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Do keep in mind that the views of the endurance community are not necessarily those of the average person. When I was doing powerlifting, I was considered skinny at 5'8" and 185. While that's also a skewed view, I'm fairly sure most people would consider 140 to be really skinny for a 5'10" guy. I'm now 155 and my wife gets on me for being too skinny.
Views on that do depend on what people see in their peer group. I'm pushing back against the stereotyping, and the broad generalizations.

Differences in physical conditioning, in native ability, and plain old work far outweigh the impressions of "skinny" or "mass" in physical competitions for any level at least up to several sigmas. The natural athlete with the right attributes wins at the highest levels, but that means nothing for the vast majority of everyone who aren't them.
wphamilton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-19, 11:09 PM
  #162  
woodcraft
Senior Member
 
woodcraft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 3,902
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 904 Post(s)
Originally Posted by slowrevs View Post
Sculpting is a metaphor. If you don't understand metaphors, I can't do anything about that.

As for fat burning occurring "constantly," this is a denial of the nature of fat within the body. Fat is a reserve energy resource that doubles as a reserve water "sponge" (another metaphor).

Constant fat burning ONLY occurs in people experiencing a calorie intake deficit in comparison to the caloric expenditure of energy and body maintenance functions, plus any exercise induced calorie consumption added on top of that by either aerobic or anaerobic workouts.

People who are generally overweight and out of shape may not burn any fat at all as part of their normal metabolism. That is why they have such trouble losing weight. As long as calories in exceeds or equals calories out, the fat burning engine has no need to turn on and the body preserves the fat. The body then stores any newly eaten fat, and converts proteins eaten in excess of need to additional fat. This process arose over the eons as evolving Nature decided what processes worked best for living organisms. The process is known as "homeostasis."

Eating a lot of carbs or drinking alcohol can easily tip the scales from burn to save mode, as alcohol adds calories at the rate of 9 per gram, twice that of carbs, with zero nutritional benefits.

As for an AirDyne not providing a resistance workout, physics is physics whether you are pushing air or iron around. Over the course of one year, I went from 185 lbs. to 211 lbs., while losing two inches from my waist and adding three inches to my chest, four inches to my biceps and three inches to my thighs. During that same period of time, I spent no energy pumping iron, or sitting in a Universal Weight Machine seat.

Muscle is added when the body sees a need and sufficient protein is available in the diet to allow it. It's that simple.


LOL. My mother has a rig like that. She only added 2" to her biceps, but then she does maybe 1/2 hr/week is almost 90.
woodcraft is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-19, 01:53 PM
  #163  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doug64 View Post
There is new study out that challenges some older beliefs about weight training and strength. I will try to find the study and post a link to it.

My summary: A group of ninety young men of about equal fitness was divided into three groups. The the fist group worked out using a regime of one set of 5-12 repetitions using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The second group did 3 sets using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The third group did five sets using the same criteria: enough weight to reach total muscle fatigue. The researchers found the five-set group had the largest muscle mass gain while, the single-set group had the least amount of gain. The three-set group's muscle mass gain was in between the other groups. The strength gain differences between of the 3 groups is what surprised the researchers; there was no significant difference.

I disagree about upper body strength not being significant in endurance sports. The first thing my daughter's track coach did when she entered college was to put her on a weight training program - she was (still is) a distance runner. Core strength is important in any sport.

I have used weight training since high school, and still hit the weights 5 days a week at 75 years old. I was an endurance athlete into my mid forties. My best events were the 50 k and marathon. I did run one 50 mile race to qualify for the Western States 100, but did not compete in that event. I could bench press 185 lbs, and the weights used in the other exercises were proportionate. I could never build any muscle mass that amounted to anything, but I thought I was pretty strong for my weight. I use a regime that has been modified over the years, but it is essentially a cross between the between the first and second groups' regimes discussed above. I also cycle or spin daily, and ride about 4,000 miles a year. My wife and I have toured over 20,000 miles, totaling 20 months, through 11 countries since 2007. I do agree that going to the gym may not always be beneficial. On the way to the gym last Monday morning, I dumped my bike on the ice and have a sore shoulder, forearm, hip and knee to show for it. Going skiing yesterday didn't help either

At 6' I weighed between 150 lbs. and 160 lbs. most of life, but have dipped to 145 lbs when training hard (running 60-70 miles/week+ weights 3 days/week), or riding multi-month bike tours. I have always felt that my height /weight ratio was an advantage not a handicap. I've also participated in other sports including : judo, bike racing (mediocre), rock climbing, mountaineering, and telemark and xc skiing where being tall and skinny didn't seem to matter.
While certainly correlated, strength and mass are not the same. Extra strength is, as you say, beneficial. Extra mass often isn't as it has to be moved.
OBoile is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-19, 01:54 PM
  #164  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doug64 View Post
There is new study out that challenges some older beliefs about weight training and strength. I will try to find the study and post a link to it.

My summary: A group of ninety young men of about equal fitness was divided into three groups. The the fist group worked out using a regime of one set of 5-12 repetitions using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The second group did 3 sets using enough weight to achieve total muscle fatigue. The third group did five sets using the same criteria: enough weight to reach total muscle fatigue. The researchers found the five-set group had the largest muscle mass gain while, the single-set group had the least amount of gain. The three-set group's muscle mass gain was in between the other groups. The strength gain differences between of the 3 groups is what surprised the researchers; there was no significant difference.

I disagree about upper body strength not being significant in endurance sports. The first thing my daughter's track coach did when she entered college was to put her on a weight training program - she was (still is) a distance runner. Core strength is important in any sport.

I have used weight training since high school, and still hit the weights 5 days a week at 75 years old. I was an endurance athlete into my mid forties. My best events were the 50 k and marathon. I did run one 50 mile race to qualify for the Western States 100, but did not compete in that event. I could bench press 185 lbs, and the weights used in the other exercises were proportionate. I could never build any muscle mass that amounted to anything, but I thought I was pretty strong for my weight. I use a regime that has been modified over the years, but it is essentially a cross between the between the first and second groups' regimes discussed above. I also cycle or spin daily, and ride about 4,000 miles a year. My wife and I have toured over 20,000 miles, totaling 20 months, through 11 countries since 2007. I do agree that going to the gym may not always be beneficial. On the way to the gym last Monday morning, I dumped my bike on the ice and have a sore shoulder, forearm, hip and knee to show for it. Going skiing yesterday didn't help either

At 6' I weighed between 150 lbs. and 160 lbs. most of life, but have dipped to 145 lbs when training hard (running 60-70 miles/week+ weights 3 days/week), or riding multi-month bike tours. I have always felt that my height /weight ratio was an advantage not a handicap. I've also participated in other sports including : judo, bike racing (mediocre), rock climbing, mountaineering, and telemark and xc skiing where being tall and skinny didn't seem to matter.
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
This is a cycling site. I said twice - sometimes (cyclists are endurance athletes).

Extra mass not associated with the event and also moving that mass when power is not needed can be a liability.
Did you see the dad-brag gym video from 4 years ago? I/we are not anti gym at all, but added mass the last couple years has made junior noncompetitive in national road races (was a top 5-10).

It depends what you want, but sometimes, some gym work does not make you more competitive in the sport.
Given that you mentioned running, push ups and pull ups, and I was not the only one to assume you were speaking in a general sense, you may want to be more clear in the future.
OBoile is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-19, 05:44 PM
  #165  
Doge 
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 8,998

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2699 Post(s)
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Given that you mentioned running, push ups and pull ups, and I was not the only one to assume you were speaking in a general sense, you may want to be more clear in the future.
I think most will understand when I post under Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Some won't.
Doge is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-19, 06:54 AM
  #166  
livedarklions
Michegas Cup Winner
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 1,972

Bikes: Trek FX 3; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 968 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
I think most will understand when I post under Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Some won't.
Well, since this is a General Cycling forum and there is a training forum, I don't really think that clarifies things as much as you assume.

I bike and go to the gym for general fitness purposes, and am not "training," other people posting here are training for multiple sports.

i have no dog in this argument, but I am a little bit tired of General Cycling threads getting hijacked into arguments that are better suited for the training forum.
livedarklions is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-19, 02:57 PM
  #167  
Doug64
Senior Member
 
Doug64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,350
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Originally Posted by KraneXL View Post
On the contrary, I'd argue that being tall and skinny always matters. Although for sports like volleyball, basketball, track, and swimming its a good thing. For all the rest you're most likely at a handicap behind the normal...ahem, average players.
Just curious; what are examples of sports covered in "all the rest of them"?
Doug64 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-19, 03:29 PM
  #168  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 946
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 534 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doug64 View Post
Just curious; what are examples of sports covered in "all the rest of them"?
Basketball (I know he mentioned it, but being skinny isn't an advantage)
Football
Hockey
Rugby
Baseball
Strongman
Powerlifting
Weightlifting
Combat Sports
Many track and field events
Gymnastics
OBoile is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-19, 03:29 PM
  #169  
livedarklions
Michegas Cup Winner
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 1,972

Bikes: Trek FX 3; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 968 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Doug64 View Post
Just curious; what are examples of sports covered in "all the rest of them"?

Rollerball.
livedarklions is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-19, 02:22 AM
  #170  
KraneXL
🎊🎆🍾
 
KraneXL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: La-la Land, CA
Posts: 2,450

Bikes: Cannondale Quick SL1 Bike - 2014

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1979 Post(s)
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Basketball (I know he mentioned it, but being skinny isn't an advantage)
Football
Hockey
Rugby
Baseball
Strongman
Powerlifting
Weightlifting
Combat Sports
Many track and field events
Gymnastics
Yep, and although most of these will improve or even reverse as you gain weight, weightlifting, and most certainly gymnastics will always be out of reach.
KraneXL is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-19, 07:24 PM
  #171  
Doge 
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 8,998

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2699 Post(s)
Some sports - and activities have weight (and height) as requirements. Certainly the boxing, wrestling sports (I had to do weird things to make weight).
Lightweight rowing the team average with a max and min for each rower.


Want to be a fire fighter, fighter pilot, military academy - they measure that stuff too. The activity may not require it, but the barrier to entrance often requires some metric that the gym can help.
Doge is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service