What is an accurate/smart way to determine an optimal race weight? Personally, I always end up thinking it is 5-10 lighter than I already am, which is, admittedly, not the most scientific way of finding race weight. Is there any sort of formula based on height and race distance or somthing to determine race weight? Or is it just trail and error and over the years I’ll just figure it out?
Thanks
i personally feel that each person is different, and trial and error plays a part in finding what works for you!
5lbs less that whatever you are now.
When you do this one time too many and have a shitty race, then you’ll know you went too far.
Within reason, less is more in terms of weight. Faster on the bike, faster on the run.
I went from 170lbs and 10% BF (and thinking, hey, I don’t really have much weight I can possibly lose without an amputation or something 
to 155 and 6% over 2 seasons.
Much less than this, and I start to feel negative side effects, so I think I’m done in that regard.
Since most of my cosmetic bulk is now gone, I’d probably get sand kicked at me on the beach by some bully, but at least I can now bike or run away from him pretty fast, and for a very long time
Here is the Dr Stillman’s formula.
He fixes the non-active man’s average weight for height with a simple formula. He allocates 110lbs (56.2kg) for the first five feet (1.524m) in height and 5 1/2lbs (2.49475kg) for every inch (0.025m) thereafter. He is harsher with women, giving them 100lbs (45.3kg) for the first five feet and 5lbs (2.268kg) for every inch above this.
Having established the average, he then speculates on the ideal weight for athletic performance, as follows:
Sprinters (100-400m): 21/2 per cent lighter than average (6ft/176lbs - 21/2% = 4lbs)
Hurdlers (100-400m): 6 per cent lighter (or 9lbs)
Middle-distance runners (800m - 10K): 12 per cent lighter (or 19lbs)
Long-distance runners (10 miles onwards): 15 per cent lighter (or 251/2lbs)
I am personally running at about 12% below start average which is also a BMI of 22. Do with these figure what you will.
very funny-and so true!
That forumula is ridiculous. Especially the ‘long distance runner’ one - at “15% lighter,” you’d be at 85% of an ideal healthy body weight, which is part of the diagnostic criteria for anorexia.
Hopefully you meant lbs otherwise that’s a lot of kilos to lose!
I’m not sure on the formula accuracy, but one thing I’m sure.
I’m at 78% according to the formula and no way I’m don’t suffer from anorexia nor even close.
My BMI is slightly lower than 20, which is well within the normal range.
Thats a very intersting formula, because it puts me currently about ten pounds heavier than race weight, and I’ve been thinking I should loose ten pounds to get to an ideal race weight. Hmmm. Time to cut back on the empty calories!
that’s a very interesting formula indeed…i am a woman w/ 137 lbs of lean muscle mass (determined by a hydrostatic bf test) and according to this formula i should weigh 135 (fat included). that’s b.s.
For me (male, 6"1’) that works out to 154 lbs for a LD runner. That seems pretty close. I was a few pounds under that when I set my marathon PR.
Victor
I’ve seen this before and I think it really depends on what you mean by “optimal race weight”. Personally I always took this too mean “In order to be world class”. IOW those of us that are a bit “Beefier” would never be world class UNLESS we lost some of the beef.
At 5’ 7 1/2" I was 10.25% at 153lbs. leaving me with roughly 137 lbs of lean mass. If I did my math right this formula has me at 128 lbs. ((110 +(5.5 * 7.5))*.85 = 128. So if I were say 4% BF at race weight I’d be at 123 lbs lean mass. IOW if REALLY wanted to be a world class distance runner, not only would I have to train alot more, I’d have to lose around 14 lbs of lean mass, as well as a WHOLE bunch of fat at this point.
~Matt
in the cycling world we non-sprinters shot for 2lbs/inch, however, i’ve always found this to be an incredibly personal thing. for example, according to this, my ideal weight, at 6’2" would be 148lbs, however, I feel much stronger/longer at 153lbs.
That would be pretty sweet! 64 inches- 128 pounds. I’m underweight!
wooohooo!
Although, I have a feeling the equation is different for women. 118 is much closer to where I should be.
Jodi
That would be around 135 for me. Although probably “attainable” I’d really have to work on getting that concentration camp biker upper body look.
~Matt
I’ve seen this before and I think it really depends on what you mean by “optimal race weight”. Personally I always took this too mean “In order to be world class”.
that is also for running, not triathlon. Skinny-runt runners don’t have any swim muscle 
Yeh I think it may apply to cycling as well. Not likely I could ever get to 135’ish and still have any muscle left up top. But if I were a world class runner I likely wouldn’t be worrying about upper body much.
Right now I have so much fat to loose looking like a Kenyan is the least of my worries.
~Matt
Exactly what I was going to say!! Glad I saw your post before repeating it.
When it comes to ideal race weight its going to vary depending on your goals.
If you’re just out there to finish and have a good time: do your training, eat sensibly and you will be at ‘your’ ideal race weight
If you’re looking to race at the pointy end of the field and shooting for AG and local Overall wins: have to be much more conscious of your nutrition and be aware of where you are starting from. If you’re a guy who weighs 185lbs, but are at 6% BF than its going to take a while to shed some of that lean muscle mass and you’ll likely hurt yourself more by trying to drop those '5-10’lbs in a short time period rather than taking a longer term approach to shedding the weight.
If you’re a world class athlete shooting for World Championships and Olympic medals: you are going to be way out there on the razor for your key races and trying to drop as much weight as possible without affecting performance…very small margins for error here and something that AG athletes shouldn’t be messing with as most of us don’t have time for the recovery necessary when on a training/nutrition protocol like this.
For what its worth, I’m 5’11 and do most of my racing (short course - half IM) around 160 - 163lbs and 8-10% BF. For IM last year I tightened up my nutrition quite a bit and raced at 152lbs which was pretty close to the edge for me…people were telling my mother I had an eating disorder. I didn’t have a weight I was shooting for though. I simply did my training and ate very well. I approached food as fuel for my training to make sure none of my workouts were compromised from a lack of calories.
Gordo has a couple comments in one of his recent blog entries about the ‘starvation’ training some athletes do in an effort to lose weight and the long-term detrimental effects it can have.
Here is the Dr Stillman’s formula.
He fixes the non-active man’s average weight for height with a simple formula. He allocates 110lbs (56.2kg) for the first five feet (1.524m) in height and 5 1/2lbs (2.49475kg) for every inch (0.025m) thereafter. He is harsher with women, giving them 100lbs (45.3kg) for the first five feet and 5lbs (2.268kg) for every inch above this.
Long-distance runners (10 miles onwards): 15 per cent lighter (or 251/2lbs)
I think I finally won something - I’m within 0.1 pound!!
(For bicyclists at 2lbs/in. I’m within 1.5 lbs.
That formula equals exactly what I consider my optimal race weight, although my wife thinks I look sick when I weigh that little.