But there is a big difference in an AG'er trying to lose a few pounds(perhaps 10 to 20 overweight) and a pro trying to find the fine edge of weight and performance. I have witnessed a few pros cross that line, mostly women, but some men too. But that is the rub, there are performance gains to be made up to a point, a fine line so to speak.

So many will bump up against it, maybe cross it, and then come back over hopefully..But nothing like losing some weight when you are not 4to 6% to begin with..

I'm not a Pro, never was or will be, but - I personally have encountered that line myself while IM training.
Since run and bike speed are very much weight dependent (lighter = faster, to a point), it's usually beneficial to be lighter.
But I know from my own experience, once my weight got down below 150lbs (I'm 5'10"), my energy levels dropped, recovery was worse, and I remained in a rut until it popped back north of 150 again.

Could certainly see how Pros who are looking to maximize everything about their abilities, would be prone to overdoing this aspect.

---

float , hammer , and jog

I have been experimenting with w/kg and weight gain and loss now for over 3 years. I basically weigh / measure everything I eat all the time. As in maybe 29 out of every 30 days. Everything. 3 years of data.

I can gain weight in the blink or lose weight in a blink. As the saying goes calories in vs. calories out.

When I started this journey I was a FOP triathlete. About 153#. I've dabbled and raced very well as a cyclist down to 141#. That's exposed veins in the ab muscles galore so probably hovering around 3% bf. No loss in power. I have not attempted to go further than that "look" as at that point with basically no fat left to lose I know it's the danger zone.

Yes when cutting weight I have less energy. No I've NEVER experienced power loss. I chalk that up to proper fueling even when cutting. I am very very strict about my timing of eating and what I eat. Never ever skimp on protein. I never fast, but I do have times where I try to reduce the duration of my eating window a bit. Many days I'm up at 3:20 to ride so I have a ton of "awake time" to eat.

At 42 years old I'm more fit, stronger, and faster than ever. And feel more healthy and less niggles than ever. Oh....and I'm rather high volume at 17,000 miles year to date :) So I get to eat a lot....eat a ton rather.

In the last 3 years I've never had a "bad day" at a race. I've raced a ton including some of the bigger races around and done very well. I can ride with just about anyone in a Cat 1 road race and just about anyone off-road. So.....the plan has worked very well.

Restricting eating can be done very well, but it needs to be done with lots of research and personal reflection. What has worked for me might not work for you :)

---

24 Hour World TT Champs-American record holder
Fat Bike Worlds - Race Director
Insta: chris.s.apex

This is pretty much my story. Suffering 2+ years now. I am a volume nazi when it comes to tri.. but it's too easy to miss calories . Making some progress, ever slowly by dropping volume to key workouts only. Avoiding junk miles

confirm - at 6'2" if below 160lbs for any length of time, I get sick. Tried it several times while racing marathon, results consistent..
Currently 178, so quite safe, fat and happy ;-)

---

"It is a good feeling for old men who have begun to fear failure, any sort of failure, to set a schedule for exercise and stick to it. If an aging man can run a distance of three miles, for instance, he knows that whatever his other failures may be, he is not completely wasted away." Romain Gary, SI interview

Also 6’2”. For me 165 is the lower limit and when I’m below 170 I seem to get sick at a noticeably higher rate. Haven’t raced or trained consistently in over a year and am also fat and happy at 185 lol.

For reference, this is what 4% body fat looks like:

At this stage organs fail etc.. this is what bodybuilders do for one show, rest of the year they look bloated

I love it, just like the 10ft wave thread where I actually posted real 5 to 8 ft waves! Ya, 3% is really low, not that it is not possible for a healthy and good volume training triathlete, but maybe just a tad bit higher...(-;





For reference, this is what 4% body fat looks like:

I think it's hilarious that photo comes from: https://aretheyonsteroids.com

you seem to pretty experienced with the table nutrition. so calories in vs calories out. Maintenance calories or maintenance + training calories? I understand a calorie deficit is what's needed to drop weight but what's to large of a deficit? My maintenance calories are around 2700. I'm 6'1 195 12-14%bf. its not uncommon to burn 1500 - 2000 calories a day from training. so what's the rule for endurance athletes? Coming from a gym rat background prior to triathlon I always used 500 under to total caloric needs for the day. now I understand its apples to oranges. its insane to think you can eat 4000 calories per day and still drop weight. my main concern is making sure I am getting enough in to recover properly.

Very good question yes. I have had success with a 500 calorie deficit. I first tried it with moderate volume, then heavy volume, then heavy volume + intensity. No problems for me. I have never even experimented beyond -500.

And yes -500 with a 4000-5000 calorie diet is different than a 2000 calorie diet.

For what its worth I just came off a very heavy and intense period while cutting. About 5# lost running a ctl in the 160-175 range. That is very hard balance in all things life! Time to taper!

---

24 Hour World TT Champs-American record holder
Fat Bike Worlds - Race Director
Insta: chris.s.apex

I've been asking this or similar type questions for a while and no one really has any info as this relates to endurance sports. realistically, with training loads pushing caloric needs up over 4500 to break even no one is going to eat that much real food and not be to full and bloated to train like we do. my training volume is on the way back up. between strength work and triathlon training I avg 100-150 tss daily currently. if I'm not using the terminology right, forgive me. My prepped food and snacks gets me to about 3k on a 50/30/20 macro split. This seems to fit the bill currently. I'm recovering well and still loosing bf%. No noted drop in strength in the gym or power in the bike. I'm curious if I up the calories ass the training load increases would I perform/recover better than if I stayed at my current caloric intake. Still pretty new to triathlon and endurance sports. Last time I train up for a full my diet went to absolute crap so I have to personal data to compare it against

From my experience you are dead on. I'm generally a bloated / inflamed mess when training at my usual volumes. I probably average 10-12 cups fruits / veggies per day. I actually tend to feel best in that 50/30/20 split. And yep....that gives me sky high "raw numbers" for fat and protein so I tend to find myself gravitating to more in the 55% carbs range. Sometimes.

I'm no Dr. and have no formal training in nutrition. I am 42 and have been doing endurance sport all my life and have always been a student of the sport while constantly doing research to find that next little nugget. All this has worked for me.

One thing I have gotten wrong is ELIMINATING foods. Eliminating things like gluten sounds great but for me about the only thing I've completely eliminate is milk. I still do plenty of dairy (greek yogurt and some cheese), but my wife and I just chose to eliminate milk. Everything else I try to do at least in small amounts. Ice cream and candy for example. Yes I can perform at what I feel is my highest level with a little cheating. For me that little bit of cheating reduces the tendency to binge or feel terrible when I do dabble back into anything I chose to eliminate for a period of time.

Both my wife and I definitely notice more sensitivity in our diets as we have "cleaned up." If we eat certain foods it hurts. When I was in college and had a terrible diet I don't remember feeling like crap eating crap....but maybe I just felt like crap all the time without realizing it. I feel better now than ever so.....will keep going!

---

24 Hour World TT Champs-American record holder
Fat Bike Worlds - Race Director
Insta: chris.s.apex

At 3% body fat a person can no longer float on the surface of a pool; the float level is about 6" to 12" below the surface. I found that out when I went to basic training and was required to float for X amount of time. I was a varsity level cross country/track runner and my body fat was 4% when I entered basic. When they found out through testing that I truly could not float, I was given a double ration card and expected to fatten up. I have succeeded at that goal long ago, and float just fine now.

That's very interesting stuff. A 500 calorie deficit is ~1 pound per week. After a few weeks do you keep track of the muscle/fat ratio of the weight lost? How do you keep track of the bodyfat percentage? Do you have reasons to doubt your measuring methods?

My experiment:

I recently did a 1000 calorie deficit per day for ~5 weeks. I had some lifting and aerobic high intensity, but most exercise was very low intensity -- like walking 100 minutes per day. I made sure not to overtrain during the experiment. My weight loss, if I'm to believe the body fat scale, broke down to 2:3 muscle to fat ratio. So, all in all, I lost a lot of weight but my bodyfat % lowered only modestly -- if I trust my gym's body fat measurement device. I don't measure my food. I just use rules of thumb for what I'm eating and I try to weigh myself under the same circumstances each day. When I lose 2 pounds over a week (on average) I know how my deficit is adding up.

My tentative conclusions (after doing what I did and reading what you did):

1.) I'm not happy with the 2:3 loss ratio, but don't know what to really expect. I feel like people often lie about their muscle loss during cuts. "I lost 15 pounds of fat and only one pound of muscle!".
2.) Maybe 1000 calories deficit is too aggressive and 500 calories would give me a better muscle to fat ratio for lost weight.
3.) With my way of doing things a 500 calorie deficit is harder to measure/manage.
4.) Maybe my gym device isn't good for checking bodyfat%. It's one of those impedance scales with handles. It tends to want to give me a similar bodyfat% no matter what I weigh.

I feel like bone broth is a great tool to keep the muscle intact during cutting.

---

https://www.strava.com/...tes/zachary_mckinney

Err...that's just collagen---and not very much of it. You'd be better off just eating protein.

I meant in a fast or at the end of a fast.

---

https://www.strava.com/...tes/zachary_mckinney

Impedence BF% is not very accurate. And it gets less so, the leaner you get. And it gets less so, the more of an athlete you are. Its very sensitive to hydration status, prior exercise, alcohol consumption, digestive system content, etc. Lots and lots of things affect it. Skinfold has about the same population accuracy as BF%, but it is much more repeatable for the same person with the same examiner. So, the absolute bf% might be wrong, but the trend (skinfold thickness) represents actual loss.

All that said, a few years ago, I did a "1000 cal/day" exercise for 9 months, and lost 62 lbs. I used a bioimpedence scale every day for 3 years (I still use the scale and log my bf%, but it mostly indicates hydration status today). I went from 210 / 30% to 148 / 11%. So, I lost 62 lbs total and 16 lbs of muscle mass according to the Tanita. Skinfold puts me more in the 8.5% range---which would be more like 12 lbs of muscle lost.

Interestingly, looking back at my data...I lost most of the muscle mass in the first 20 lbs (from 210 -> 190). Nine of those pounds were muscle (according to Tanita), for a muscle loss ratio of 1:2.5. I went from 148 lbs of muscle to 139 lbs during that time. At that point, I added strength training to my regimen, and increased my protein intake (from 0.7 g/kg to 1.2 g/kg). After adding strength training, my muscle loss ratio slowed to 1:6.

1000 cal deficit made intensive training difficult for me. I basically couldn't do it. So, I just did long endurance stuff, prioritizing getting my weight down over hard training.

Ok. But, there's still nothing in it to "do" anything. Fasting or not.