I would have thought that too. Also even the Kgs for the 5 foot may be different (wrong?). I did not check that conversion.Originally Posted by Mike T
I would have thought that too. Also even the Kgs for the 5 foot may be different (wrong?). I did not check that conversion.
Last edited by DrPatrickBarry; 28-03-2012 at 05:39 PM.
in the table, my 80kg target was for end of Feb (which I woefully missed)
I've actually got a 78kg target for mid-May...
according to that calculation I should be aiming at 73kg
I got down to about 76kg when I was at my fittest ever last summer
I'd be pretty skinny at 73kg, but not completely out of the question I don't think...
Sorry I missed the weigh-in. I got back very tired from running in the heat yesterday & forgot. I've decided to retire from the table, for 2 reasons. First, I think my weight fluctuates a lot due to changes in fluid retention, so it doesn't say much about fat gained or lost. Second, I just can't be bothered to work out yet again what half a lb is in metric. Thanks Dr Pat for your efforts, please delete me. I shall continue to follow the thread with interest.
May I join? I am 63.5 kg, target 60.5. It would be interesting - but time consuming - to add height - 170 cm for me - and BMI - 21.9.
Added you Mike.
I think I'm out too. Like Alexandra the metricness of it all means a) the weight loss/gain is always a small decimal of a kilo b) my weighing machine is ancient and the kilo scale is barely legible so c) I always have to weigh in lbs and convert and d) I think in stones and pounds anyway and when I look at a kilo figure I really have no idea what it means and have to convert to stones and pounds for any chance of comprehending it
No offence taken silentrunner. It's a good article, I was merely adding a personal observation.
I'm 5' 10". When I was doing alot of marathon running my race weight was 67.5kg (I prefer to say 10st 9lbs), that's a tad heavy by his figures, but I rarely ventured above 50 or 60 miles a week.
Switching to the hills my weight has gone up to 70.5kg (also to do with age, beer and fewer miles), but my body has also changed shape. Thighs got bigger and I developed additional muscle at the top of the quads from climbing.
I'm certainly not saying elite fell runners are less fit than road athletes (I'd say they are fitter in a more 'rounded' way,), rather that there is a requirement for additional strength as well as speed endurance, which means you can get chunkier body types at the front as well as the classic lean and wiry mould
DrPat - you haven't updated my "Remaining"
I also think in stones/lbs, but I really don't find it a prob to convert to kg
eg: 9 stone 11 pounds
= 9x14 + 11 = 137lbs,
then divide by 2.2 = 62.27kg,
then round to nearest half kg = 62.5kg
Last edited by DazTheSlug; 29-03-2012 at 11:43 AM.
Missed that Daz.
My old scales favors lbs/stones they are the bigger black numbers on the outside of the dial with smaller/red numbers on the inside for Kg, but I manage.
Dr Pat, my latest weight is 83.0, 5.0 above my target. Slowly, steadily coming down.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote