Bodyfat confusion

xcendo

Member
I went in to the gym today and got skinfold measurements done with calipers, before working out and after breakfast. The average skinfold was 22 mm, and the personal trainer did rough math in his head and came out with 9.5% bf.

I'd be happy with this, but my abdominal muscles are barely visible and my waist (measured about half an inch above the umbilicus) is 33". Measured at the umbilicus, 33.5".

A lot of people found the estimation on Invalid Link Removed to be pretty consistent with their caliper readings, but that calculator puts me at 14.5%, which sounds more reasonable considering my abdominal fat.

Is it just that I'm more genetically prone to store the majority of my fat around the waist? What's the deal?
 
I would say 14.5% is more accurate. He must of just got the math wrong. My caliper measurements go from 12-20mm and I am at 12.5-13% currently. My abs show but they can be a lot better. anything under 10% and you are pretty shredded and most likely have a 6 pack. Oh, and the 20mm is my stomach. the rest are much lower.
 
I think the trainer doing the test is fvcked. At how many points did he take skinfolds? Then doing this in his head isn't probably the most accurate method. Hell, he's working in a gym, not NASA. I doubt doing math in his head is his strong point.
From what you've described, the 14.5% sounds more accurate. jmho

dd
 
He took it at three points: tricep, subscapula, and suprailiac. On the sheet he just wrote two of the skinfold measurements - 20 mm and 25 mm. I gotta assume the 25 mm is suprailiac.

Granted, he told me that my waist width can be explained by squatting and deadlifting, so he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer. He did use the calipers right, though...

Invalid Link Removed puts this skinfold estimation at 8.1% bf. What the fck.

My weight is 187 lbs, height 5'10, age 18 if it helps.
 
xcendo said:
He took it at three points: tricep, subscapula, and suprailiac. On the sheet he just wrote two of the skinfold measurements - 20 mm and 25 mm. I gotta assume the 25 mm is suprailiac.

Granted, he told me that my waist width can be explained by squatting and deadlifting, so he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer. He did use the calipers right, though...

Invalid Link Removed puts this skinfold estimation at 8.1% bf. What the fck.

My weight is 187 lbs, height 5'10, age 18 if it helps.
Click to expand...
Sounds like he doesn't have a clue what he is doing. Just for sake of argument, if your average for THREE sites is around 22mm per site, then your BF is above 9% and probably closer to around 15% give or take.
 
xcendo said:
Invalid Link Removed puts this skinfold estimation at 8.1% bf. What the fck.

My weight is 187 lbs, height 5'10, age 18 if it helps.
Click to expand...


I think that calculation would be the sum of the four points measured. Not average.
Just guessing though.

dd
 
Sorry for linking to a different forum, but you might find this helpful:
Invalid Link Removed
From those pics you can see the difference between 12% and 10%.
It may help you to guage where you are.
KG
 
karategirl said:
Sorry for linking to a different forum, but you might find this helpful:
LINKY LINK LINK
From those pics you can see the difference between 12% and 10%.
It may help you to guage where you are.
KG
Click to expand...
None of the links to pics on that page seem to work for me...

I'd say you're probably around 15%, that trainer obviously isn't good at doing skinfolds.
 
Ziricote said:
None of the links to pics on that page seem to work for me...

I'd say you're probably around 15%, that trainer obviously isn't good at doing skinfolds.
Click to expand...

If you scroll down, the pictures are posted further down the page.
KG
 
Calipers put me at 17%. My electric scale puts me at 15%. The "extremely accurate BF formula" puts me at 16%.

Not too different.

I'd say he did the math wrong. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top