Paul Ryan Says He’s Run Sub-3:00 Marathon (Read 1921 times)

    In an infinite universe, the one thing sentient life cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion

    http://htwins.net/scale2/scale2.swf?bordercolor=white&fb_source=message

     

     

     


    Feeling the growl again

      I don't know what his BF is, but the article is BS.  It totally exaggerates how hard it is to maintain that BF% and its effects on performance.  Most high level competitive runners I have seen measures are in that range, and the only noticeable effect on their performance is that they kick ass.

       

       

      "In their book, "Better Training for Distance Runners," Peter Coe and David Martin, PhD, address body fat levels for competitive runners. They find healthy trained male distance runners have a body fat between 5 and 8 percent. This places them on the low end of the athlete category used by the ACE. Runners train for many different length events, which usually correlates to their training volume; the longer the race, the more most distance runners run. Coe and Martin found that competitive marathoners had 5 to 7 percent body fat on average, while shorter distance competitors had 6 to 8 percent body fat."

      Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/91462-body-fat-percentage-runners/#ixzz26rJA5TTR

       

      I would have no trouble staying in that range if I cut out the beer a little more.  Far from a "terrible full time job" as the article describes.

      "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

       


      A Dance with Monkeys

        fat levels for competitive runners.

         

        A 4:01 marathon for a 20 year old male is not very competitive.

          A 4:01 marathon for a 20 year old male is not very competitive.

           

          I think he meant 47% BF.

          All about that bass


          HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

            A 4:01 marathon for a 20 year old male is not very competitive.

             

            Well now, that would depend how long a marathon it was, wouldn't it?

            It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.


            Ostrich runner

              I don't know what his BF is, but the article is BS.  It totally exaggerates how hard it is to maintain that BF% and its effects on performance.  Most high level competitive runners I have seen measures are in that range, and the only noticeable effect on their performance is that they kick ass.

               

               

              "In their book, "Better Training for Distance Runners," Peter Coe and David Martin, PhD, address body fat levels for competitive runners. They find healthy trained male distance runners have a body fat between 5 and 8 percent. This places them on the low end of the athlete category used by the ACE. Runners train for many different length events, which usually correlates to their training volume; the longer the race, the more most distance runners run. Coe and Martin found that competitive marathoners had 5 to 7 percent body fat on average, while shorter distance competitors had 6 to 8 percent body fat."

              Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/91462-body-fat-percentage-runners/#ixzz26rJA5TTR

               

              I would have no trouble staying in that range if I cut out the beer a little more.  Far from a "terrible full time job" as the article describes.

               

              I have one of those scales that purports to measure bf%. It puts me around 11, and I have nothing short of a gut right now. 

              http://www.runningahead.com/groups/Indy/forum


              Feeling the growl again

                A 4:01 marathon for a 20 year old male is not very competitive.

                 

                Dude, I thought you read papers for a living?  I was critiquing their argument for why 6-8% BF is nearly impossible to do and leave you weak and broken....as I said, I have no idea what Ryan's BF really is.  I also know plenty of people with lower BF than me that do not have competitive speed.

                "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                 


                Feeling the growl again

                  I have one of those scales that purports to measure bf%. It puts me around 11, and I have nothing short of a gut right now. 

                   

                  I've had mine more accurately tested and, at least for me, it's ballpark close (you have to have the "athlete" setting or it's way off).  I'm bumping 10% now but was always 5-7% during competition.  I spent >10 years never leaving that range.

                  "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                   


                  Ostrich runner

                    I've had mine more accurately tested and, at least for me, it's ballpark close.  I'm bumping 10% now but was always 5-7% during competition.  I spent >10 years never leaving that range.

                     

                    I think mine is off a % or two. My lack of tone right now, I think, makes me appear fatter than I probably actually am. But that's still to your point, I don't think bf means that much. I was around 7 in college I think (we did the accurate tests back then), but I was also in the same range several years later when I was completely out of shape and smoking a pack a day. I think I could go to 8 now and not look like I was built all that differently than Ryan.

                    http://www.runningahead.com/groups/Indy/forum

                      Willing to give Ryan the benefit of the doubt, but ... He's not a highly trained distance runner;he's a 40-something working a long-hours, high-stress job. Maintaining 6-8%BF is a hell of an achievement in that context.

                      “Everything you need is already inside.” -- Bill Bowerman

                        I don't know what his BF is, but the article is BS.  It totally exaggerates how hard it is to maintain that BF% and its effects on performance.  Most high level competitive runners I have seen measures are in that range, and the only noticeable effect on their performance is that they kick ass.

                         

                         

                        "In their book, "Better Training for Distance Runners," Peter Coe and David Martin, PhD, address body fat levels for competitive runners. They find healthy trained male distance runners have a body fat between 5 and 8 percent. This places them on the low end of the athlete category used by the ACE. Runners train for many different length events, which usually correlates to their training volume; the longer the race, the more most distance runners run. Coe and Martin found that competitive marathoners had 5 to 7 percent body fat on average, while shorter distance competitors had 6 to 8 percent body fat."

                        Read more: http://www.livestrong.com/article/91462-body-fat-percentage-runners/#ixzz26rJA5TTR

                         

                        I would have no trouble staying in that range if I cut out the beer a little more.  Far from a "terrible full time job" as the article describes.

                         

                        Yep. True. That article is stupid.

                          I guess I've gotten a bit behind on my reading, but I could swear that I've read that highly competitive and elite distance runners measure sub 5% body fat, as in like 3%-ish.  5-7% actually sounds high (for elite -- not for mortals). 

                          - Joe

                          We are fragile creatures on collision with our judgment day.

                            I guess I've gotten a bit behind on my reading, but I could swear that I've read that highly competitive and elite distance runners measure sub 5% body fat, as in like 3%-ish.  5-7% actually sounds high (for elite -- not for mortals). 

                             

                            Isnt visceral fat .. or whatever fat cover we have around our vital organs to protect them supposed to already give us 3% body fat?

                            I dont sweat. I ooze liquid awesome.

                              I was measured at 4% in college, and I am still as skinny as I was then, so I think my body fat is 4-6%. It stays in that range when I am exercising for an hour or more a day. I eat whatever I want.

                              xor


                                I don't know what has and hasn't been said above.  I know two things.

                                 

                                1. Bodyfat is one of those fun measures that ranges, in a not small way, based on the tool(s) utilized.  I was once measured at 7% with the little caliper dealios.  That same night, my crappy circa 1990s scale showed I was 12%.  I suspect that if I'd been dunked, the number would have been different.

                                 

                                2. As a completely unscientific observation, and noting specifically that I have not seen the cat naked, I'm still not buying that Paul Ryan has 6% bodyfat (of course, that claim is ancient and he probably doesn't say that now).  I'd buy that a couple of you stringy fellows are down in that range.  Now stand next to Paul Ryan.

                                 

                                (is P90x about skinny-ing you down?)

                                 

                                And that's all I will say about that.  Honestly I don't care about how much bodyfat the dude has.  He has enough headfat to annoy the crap out of me.