We all wish weight loss was easy enough to summarize in one formula.
The video that accompanies Lyle’s book was taken at a workshop we held at my university for the student athletes last summer. Lyle presented some very practical information for the athletes that appealed to all who attended.
We all know that the information (sport nutrition) is out there in various forms, but very few have presented this information in a concise and easy to understand manner. Lyle’s presentation was top notch and generated some good discussion amongst coaches and athletes who attended.
Until you see the information, I suggest you refrain from passing judgement on it. Nutrition advice can easily be overcomplicated, but this resource does not fall into that characterization.
Get the book, read it first. If losing weight is so simple (actually it is simple, but is hard) there would be lean people all around. On the side note, your mom is not a pro/college athlete…
The book is awesome. NumberTwo organized great seminar.
Well said. As someone who competed in bodybuilding after college football, I can attest to the fact that fat loss is much more complex in sport than it is for general public. Bodybuilders are likely the leanest (I don’t like to call them athletes, they aren’t) bodies around. I can tell you through experience that having skinfold analysis under 5% makes one pretty ineffective from a performance standpoint. For example, my bench reps off season would be 405x10, precontest I would be lucky to eke out 3-4. I hate when my football players try to be “pretty”. I told them walking around at 10-12% is pretty normal. Trying to etch you 6 pack like TO is not. Still got to go out and play the game. Need energy for that. Bodybuilding is simple, lift, do cardio, and eat super clean, suffer some and guess what, 16 weeks later you are pretty lean.
Race radio, my reply wasn’t meant as some sort of disrespect towards your thoughts. What I am saying is that I competed in multiple sports over my lifetime. Probably my two most successful were boxing and football. I used to keep my weight down in high school so I could box in the 156 lb class. I was around 180 lbs @ 8% bodyfat during football, then would drop to 156 lbs. it was pure starvation and water cut. Not too healthy. I would never have been able to compete in football as drained as it made me. I could go hard 3 rounds, but a game would have killed me. As for fat loss being more complex, I study nutrition in university and it is very complex. Leptin, Neuro peptide Y and a host of other hormones and processes are in place to ensure we propogate the species and don’t starve to death. Maximizing performance and finding OPTIMUM LEANESS are difficult to figure out. I think there are people like Lyle who know much more than me who would probably agree that each sport and each body has a optimal eating plan. For instance, you would never put an endurance athlete on a keto diet even though you can strip fat bare staying in ketosis. I have trained hundreds if not thousands of athletes and unless they are way over or underweight, I let their bodies find the zone they operate best in. It’s not always ripped to shreds, more often 10-12% for collision sports. I just don’t think it’s a simple process at any level. And from personal experience, I have been pinched sub 4% and can tell you I looked amazing but felt like a pile of shit. Couldn’t sleep, could barely stand up and I was eating north of 3000 calories per day.
It seems you self inflicted your weight problems on yourself, playing two drastically different sports requiring different body masses. At the end of the day, choosing one over the other will see far better adaptation.
Of course your finding it more complex, you are your own worst enemy & surprise, surprise its ones own doing.
I’m a boxing fan myself & all too often I have heard the phrase, ‘drained at the weight’ resulting in that particular boxer getting beat. It was one of Oscar’s downfalls against Manny Pacquiao.
Maybe the sub 4%, the weight-loss came far too quick for the body to adjust & adapt.
maybe not. If you look at most athletes in most sports, 10-12% is the norm. Very few of the super low bodyfat numbers are remotely accurate. My opinion isn’t just from personal experience with myself, it’s with thousands of training hours over 20+ years. I just think it is an over simplification to say that eating for performance is easy. It’s anything but. Why elso do guys like Berardi, Mackey Shilstone, Johnny Bowden, and Lyle have job’s. If it were simple, we wouldn’t have a billion dollar industry supporting supplements and fat loss. I just look around and am reminded daily that my suspicions are justified. That includes athletes. I have helped clients gain 20+ lbs and lose 20 + lbs. Some over 100 lbs. It is never simple.
Because performance for the general public is not going to be at the same limits of human output as it will for athletes-especially top athletes.
Because the general public is not typically looking to lean down to sub double digits for bodyfat while many athletes do just that or at nearly that level. The general public individual might consider 15-20% as very lean whereas athletes in many sports, with some exceptions would not.
Well they do say nutrition can be an addiction. I think its more mental, or the lack of it, than physical.
Why is it a billion dollar industry supporting fat loss supplements exists?. Is it because people are there own worst enemies?.
I’m not talking about how fat loss relates to performance gains or human output via training, I’m just simply referring to lowering bodyfat %'s.
It goes hand in hand. A lot of women look upto the likes Victoria Beckham, Sienna Miller, Nicole Richie etc & there figures. And look at the boom in a place such as LA of celebrities.
Are there more leaner athletes on the planet than lean people with average jobs?. I wouldn’t have thought so.
I’m not talking about how fat loss relates to performance gains or human output via training, I’m just simply referring to lowering bodyfat %'s.
[b]The point is it’s going to be a lot more difficult to get the type of bodyfat percentages numbers that many elite athletes will get to than it will be for the average person to get to simply because the numbers are going to be much lower. Since the athlete is focused on performance the leanness sought will be more extreme whereas the average person will think he’s lean with much higher numbers-there have been texts with this information showing the differences in body composition averages between non-athletes and athletes-it’s significant.
It’s easy to see the norms for even college age populations are always higher than for athletes-the exceptions would be the football linemen, throwers but the averages are still different. It’s going to be more difficult to get down to the lower numbers that many elite athletes are at because small improvements are tougher to come by when you begin to come closer to limits. [/b]
It goes hand in hand. A lot of women look upto the likes Victoria Beckham, Sienna Miller, Nicole Richie etc & there figures. And look at the boom in a place such as LA of celebrities.
Are there more leaner athletes on the planet than lean people with average jobs?. I wouldn’t have thought so.
[b]You are talking about some random celebrities and I’m discussing athletes, elite athletes. Just because people look up to some celebrities says nothing about being how well or successful they are in their attempt to be able to acquire that look or level of leanness.
Do you really think the non-athlete is going to be on average leaner than athletes, especially elite athletes? There is material available that says otherwise. I had a number of textbooks in college which indicated that what you contend is clearly not the case. [/b]
Yeah! But there are millions of average people walking the streets with far lower bodyfat %'s than 10-12% (of an athlete). I reckon there are leaner people (mainly women) just in Hollywood & there fascination with weight, than in the Tour De France. You can bet your bottom $, you will find well over 180 people in LA leaner than a professional peleton.
Any Tom, Dick & Harry can get lean & have low body fat, its all on them. Over a lengthier time, you can just walk the dog & cut calories. If you want to become lean, you don’t need to an athlete.
Obviously its easier to lose weight with higher activity levels, but there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Walk into a big city & you will find many more leaner people than a lot of elite athletes at a combine. Walk through Beijing, there is more meat on a butchers pencil than literally 50% of the female population.
For one, LA is fairly large city and the number of riders in a peloton I would think to be a much smaller number than the total inhabitants of a very large city. I believe finding leaner people among nearly 4 million people than a pack of cyclists should not be that difficult. I’m not sure what your point is?
With regards to cyclists, strength power athletes in particular, horizontal jumpers, 400m, 400 hurdlers, and even 800m runners are going to be on average leaner than even elite endurance athletes. I’m not sure where your 180 number comes from though as it sounds like random speculation as is the Millions of average people with bf% less than 10-12. Among what base of population? The world’s, in NYC, where?
How many of these everyday people get down to the same degree of leanness as the elite athletes? Again, as I mentioned earlier, the average person is not as lean as the average athlete-all your reckoning aside there is actual evidence particularly among college age individuals that athletes are leaner than the non-athletes. That is a fact.
Many average people are categorized of late as “skinny fat”, small people, though not necessarily short, that people assume are lean but they simply carry very little muscle and are not lean. They don’t necessarily weigh much but would not, by most standards, be considered lean. I.E. just because someone is not large and might even be considered small or petite does not mean they are lean. I’ve seen this time and again with people’s bf% being checked.
Now back to original point, though, and that is that it’s more difficult to achieve the sort of leanness where the numbers might be as low as 4-6% than it is to get to 15-16% since it’s more difficult to lose bodyfat once one approaches the human limits of leanness. Top level bodybuilders speak of this often as it’s easier to lose early on but the last few percentage points are much more difficult to lose. Someone like speedcoach could speak to this with some experience which I don’t have.
Who said a non-athlete could not be lean? I certainly did not.
[b]
Now it is possible that the total number of people you might find in a large city might be leaner than the total number of participants in a combine but then we might be talking about finding leaner people in a city with a population in the millions vs. 200-300 in a combine so that would not be hard to believe. I’m really not sure what your point is with this?
Naturally, that point you made is completely off topic as I have been speaking of averages. The average person in a big city or out in the country for that matter will not be as lean as elite athletes at a combine. The statistics available on college age individuals dispute that. [/b]
The average person can certainly be as lean as an athlete.
When we look at the whole scheme of things, your going to find leaner people in the general public (lower than 10-12%) than in the athletic world & at much higher rates. Thats my point. You don’t need to be an athlete. The goal of looking good in your clothes, losing weight etc among the general public can provide higher motivation than running fast/jumping higher.
If the average person wants to be as lean as an athlete, they will be as lean. Its not 1 rule for the general public, 1 rule for athletes. Fat loss runs the same across the board for everybody.
The number is dependent on the person. If an average person wants to go lower than an athlete, then they will go lower.
There are around 180-200 starters in the Tour De France. These guys are lean but your sure to find a higher number of leaner people, just among the female contingent just in LA.
This female contingent certainly know the formula for going low.
Again, your going to find leaner people in the general public (lower than 10-12%) than in the athletic world & at much higher rates.
There is my brother & father who are leaner than 10% (particularly my brother), there not athletes.
What I’m saying is, if an average person wanted to be as low as sub 10% or go as low as an athlete, then they will achieve there goal through a basic routine. Its on the average person to comply.
With a population of average people in the billions vs. 200-300 in a combine, that would not be hard to believe.
You are talking about genetics for some people. Africans are leaner than Europeans, who are leaner than Inuit. First, your assertion that fat loss is made easy is presumptious at best. To the contrary, bodies are extremely efficient at storing fat, not giving it up. That is not a refutable fact. It’s called survival. Goes back to our hunter and gatherer days of feast and famine. There are plenty of lean people in the world who are not athletes. If they took up atjhletics, would that be an advantage. Not neccesarily. It’s okay to have your belief system, bobody is taking that away from you. Many of us who have years of experience at this think otherwise. As for commenting that people sabotage themselves; if fat loss was easy, wouldn’t we all be walking around ripped. It’s certainly harder to get to sub 5% than it is to get to sub 10%. When I campeted in bodybuilding, I was considered fat at 10%. It’s all relative, but not easy.
This has gone way off topic with discussion of big city leanness vs. combines and celebrities-none of this has anything to do with the original topic. Back to the original point, to get down to very low body fat numbers much like athletic performances it’s going to be more difficult than to obtain average numbers. It’s much easier for a guy to go from 10.50 to 10.30 than it will be for the 10.00 guy to get to 9.80. It’s really that simple and the experience of many athletes and coaches will tell you that. Once you approach the limits of human performance, the improvements are smaller but you appreciate any improvements. If Bolt or Gay or Powell knock off just a few more hundredths of their pr’s that represents a fantastic increase in output. In the same vein, it’s more difficult to obtain improvements in body comp. once you have obtained lower numbers-to go from 14-12 % relatively speaking will be easier than going from 6-4% or if even using something completely proportional. The experience of many coaches and athletes here and elsewhere will confirm this.
[b]Race Radio, If you simply want to argue, debate over nonsense then I’m done arguing with you since the arguement keeps moving off topic. If you’d like to get back to the topic then fine. All of us come here to learn but if you feel you know everything and that others do not have valid opinions then you are not open to learning and you are only here to argue and show us all what you know-or don’t. I’m not sure what your experience is but I seriously doubt by your commentary you have enough valuable experience to tell people what they are doing is right or wrong. You have disputed and dismissed the words and experience of a number of accomplished coaches(I’m not referring to myself) and athletes since you’ve been on site-sometimes it’s better to listen than to always be talking(posting).
The way most of us have evolved as coaches and athletes is that we are willing to learn and listen and not always talk (in this case posting about the inane). For the inexperienced, talking and asking questions is a great way to arrive at a better understanding of subject matter and clarification on all topics. Charlie learned from Gerard Mach, Percy Duncan, Harry Jerome, Horst Hille and many others so I think you can learn from others as well. If not, why are you here?
Please read the thread posted by no23 as I feel you can derive much benefit from this. In honor of the great Charlie Francis, I ask that you do not use this site to advance your own ego and tell the people on this site about how wrong all of their ideas are but rather learn from those who have much experience that you could benefit from if you are willing to learn.[/b]
