[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Fyi, you’re supposed to take your shoe off and hold it up. How else are we supposed to know the %?? Class of 2014, smh…[/quote]
Man, I have super small feet, I don’t want to hold up a shoe. [/quote]
Dude sick for climbing though.[/quote]
That’s my passion. Size 39 la sportive miura vs. I actually wish my legs were smaller, as it is just extra weight on the rock.
[quote]roybot
Haven’t you heard? Your BF % is directly proportional to the size of your feet.
[/quote]
Coincidentally my shoe size is a 7. That’s kind of funny. That was my mistake all along.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
Also, 10% bodyfat will cause a person to be bouyant in water, and I sink like a rock. [/quote]
This is untrue. The lighter you are in body weight, the more bouyant you are all by itself.
One sinks until the density of the surrounding water equals one’s density,
The volume of air in your lungs changes with the surrounding pressure too.
[/quote]
How does this make sense? Being lighter in body weight will have no DIRECT affect on buoyancy “all by itself”. Buoyant force itself is determined by the weight of the VOLUME of the fluid displaced i.e. the VOLUME of the object (here a person) and NOT THE WEIGHT OF THE OBJECT.
Whether or not the object sinks is determined by the net force on the object, here the sum of the buoyant force and the force of gravity on the object. The object will sink if:
mg>pV*g
where:
m=mass of object
g=acceleration due to gravity
p=density of fluid displaced
V=volume of fluid displaced (also same as the volume of the object)
Dividing each side by g and V gives:
m/V>p
or, in other words, the object will sink if the DENSITY of the object is greater than the DENSITY of the fluid displaced (density is defined as mass divided by volume). Again, this is determined by the intensive property of density, and not the extensive property of weight.
Furthermore, the statement “One sinks until the density of the surrounding water equals one’s density” is incorrect. As an object sinks, the density of the water around it WILL NOT CHANGE in any appreciable way. If an object that is compressible sinks, the increasing pressure surrounding it will compress (decrease the volume) the object, and thus increase its density, as its mass will remain the same. This will cause the object to sink faster, rather than reach some sort of magical equilibrium point as your statement implies
LOL @ BTTF Gif and I love Bauber’s dog
Ecchastang, I’m a little leaner now than I am in my current avi photo, veins through shoulders and chest, etc. and I assume I’m much closer to 12 than 7. Just saying. I don’t think you’re much leaner than me. Echoing what everyone else has said, 10-12 is pretty good.
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
[quote]roybot
Haven’t you heard? Your BF % is directly proportional to the size of your feet.
[/quote]
Coincidentally my shoe size is a 7. That’s kind of funny. That was my mistake all along. [/quote]
In medieval times, hydrostatic testing was using to find witches.
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Fyi, you’re supposed to take your shoe off and hold it up. How else are we supposed to know the %?? Class of 2014, smh…[/quote]
Man, I have super small feet, I don’t want to hold up a shoe. [/quote]
Dude sick for climbing though.[/quote]
That’s my passion. Size 39 la sportive miura vs. I actually wish my legs were smaller, as it is just extra weight on the rock.[/quote]
I used to do some climbing back when I was like 40lbs lighter. Best climber buddy I knew actually had one prosthetic lower leg.
[quote]Spock81 wrote:
LOL @ BTTF Gif and I love Bauber’s dog [/quote]
Why thank you =D. He is a 16 month old Razor’s Edge/ Gotti mix. Expensive ass dog. I go through 40 lbs of dog food every 6 days.
[quote]Bauber wrote:
[quote]Spock81 wrote:
LOL @ BTTF Gif and I love Bauber’s dog [/quote]
Why thank you =D. He is a 16 month old Razor’s Edge/ Gotti mix. Expensive ass dog. I go through 40 lbs of dog food every 6 days.[/quote]
Gotta eat to grow bro
Are DEXA scans still valid? I remember that being a thing a while back but haven’t been paying attention for a few years.
Even if it is, I still don’t care.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Bauber wrote:
Guis my doge wants to know his bf %. What do you think it is?[/quote]
11% bf which is 6% in doge bodyfat of course[/quote]
Wow. Such cut. So shred.
[quote]csulli wrote:
Wtf is even the point of the number? You need to go by the results in the mirror anyway; your actual bodyfat percentage is completely arbitrary. There’s no need to even bother trying to pin down your bf%. Just go by “Now I’m getting pec striations. Now I’m getting side veins in the biceps. Now I’m getting quad vascularity. Etc.”[/quote]
Actually, I find it quite helpful in assessing where I am, where I would like to be, and how long to get there based on the aggressiveness of the cut. As in, I’m at 25, would like to be at 15, so I need to cut to around X lbs. At 1.5 lbs/week, my cut will last Y months. Though, I agree that’s it’s probably less useful the leaner you get.
I can’t seem to find a hydrostatic body fat testing site in the Denver/Boulder area. If anyone knows of one, let me know.
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
I can’t seem to find a hydrostatic body fat testing site in the Denver/Boulder area. If anyone knows of one, let me know. [/quote]
Dude, don’t worry about it. You’re very lean, you look good. You’ve made it clear all over the board that your Bench is strong lift for you. You seem nice, so don’t get caught up in all this. You’re not 7% BF, but you are what the general population would say is 7%, so it’s not like anyone can fault you on it. You’re lean, strong, and a good rock climber. Just move on man.
[quote]Spidey22 wrote:
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
I can’t seem to find a hydrostatic body fat testing site in the Denver/Boulder area. If anyone knows of one, let me know. [/quote]
Dude, don’t worry about it. You’re very lean, you look good. You’ve made it clear all over the board that your Bench is strong lift for you. You seem nice, so don’t get caught up in all this. You’re not 7% BF, but you are what the general population would say is 7%, so it’s not like anyone can fault you on it. You’re lean, strong, and a good rock climber. Just move on man. [/quote]
Please take Spidey’s advise. If you competed in BB I can see caring, but you don’t right? For what it’s worth I think you are right around the ideal body fat level for a gym rat that doesn’t compete.
jesus christ what a sad little man. youre probably 10-12% if you look like the first pic in your rate my physique thread all the time.
BTW, for reference, I took a skinfold caliper test immediately after the hydrostatic test just to compare results. Also I have put on about 3 lbs since the end of January as I am trying to bulk up to a new weight category for the USAPL bench press nationals in August.
Hydrostatic 7.7% Calipers 7.8%
My point to this is that pics, lighting and posing can play with what people think is bodyfat percentage. My avatar pic, that day I measured 7.2% skinfold test.
I’ll be damned … You Win!
Congratulations!!
Looks photoshopped to me.
