Bodyfat effect on athletic performance?

[Abe Lincoln]

Curious on your opinions on this topic.
I'd believe being in 6-8% range would be best, especially in sports where there are weight groups.

Example: Fighting sports, would you rather have 150lb fighter at 6%bf go against another 150lb fighter at 15%bf, if skill and technique are at same value.

 

[TrenQuagmire]

Interesting

 

[MMKELS]

I think there's a lot of variables to this depending on what type of sport and what exactly the goal is.

Depends a lot on natural athletic ability, and you also have to figure in if strength is a factor or not. Just my opinion.

 

[Martyfnemec]

It is especially interesting in the fighting sports example because in MMA, the unbelievably muscular and ripped guys tend to get tired quickly. I always want the monster to rip the other guy's head off with a high kick, but it never seems to happen and the other guy has him on the ground, completely controlling him by the 3rd round.

 

[MMKELS]

I would have to think that with not trying to get as low in BF that you are able to eat more and maintain a bit more strength vs the guys that cut down super lean in the process.

 

[bruno.camilo]

That depends, both are really light weight there, so i think it is better having low bf. Also, if u are a wrestler or a Jiu-Jitsu expert a little higher bf may help u mainly on have weights category 220lbs and up.

 

[fitfreak_CP]

For those have truly cut hard for a show and put themselves in a caloric deficit will tell you that strength, performance, and endurance go down. I believe that depending on an individuals genetics that dropping below 6% will effect your athletic performance. Being between 6-10% (once again depending on genetics) would be optimal for athletic performance and to also reduce the chance of injury.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Curious on your opinions on this topic.
I'd believe being in 6-8% range would be best, especially in sports where there are weight groups.

Example: Fighting sports, would you rather have 150lb fighter at 6%bf go against another 150lb fighter at 15%bf, if skill and technique are at same value.

The fighter at 6% seems like he'd have a good bit more muscle than the guy at 15%, considering they're at the same weight. That extra strength could really help. As long as he's not any less agile or flexible than the other guy (more muscular doesn't inherently mean less flexible or agile), all other things equal, of course I'd take the more muscular, and likely stronger, fighter.

 

[f4iguy]

I've been down to 170 at 6% bodyfat. I'm currently 205 around 16% bodyfat. I felt faster at the lower bodyfat but my 205 pound self would kick the crap out of my 170 pound self. Way more strength. As a wrestler I've seen doughy looking kids destroy muscular opponents because the muscular guy gassed out. The doughy kid had tons of endurance.

 

[IFBBBradRowe]

There are so many variables. If you look at a fighters, both being same weight and one being more muscular and lean while the other is a little softer they both have a bit of an advantage. The leaner fighter (if he didnt have to deplete hard to make weight) would probably have more power/strength. The softer guy could probably have more endurance. Muscle chews up oxygen and energy sources quickly so the more muscular guy could become fatigued quicker.

Anaerobic athletes like sprinters would benefit from being leaner to be at a lighter weight BUT as some of you know being too lean can destroy performance levels.

I would say for typical basketball soccer type guy 7-9% is good to keep weight down but also allow for endurance levels to not be compromised.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

There are so many variables. If you look at a fighters, both being same weight and one being more muscular and lean while the other is a little softer they both have a bit of an advantage. The leaner fighter (if he didnt have to deplete hard to make weight) would probably have more power/strength. The softer guy could probably have more endurance. Muscle chews up oxygen and energy sources quickly so the more muscular guy could become fatigued quicker.

Anaerobic athletes like sprinters would benefit from being leaner to be at a lighter weight BUT as some of you know being too lean can destroy performance levels.

I would say for typical basketball soccer type guy 7-9% is good to keep weight down but also allow for endurance levels to not be compromised.

That's good feedback. I'd also think from my somewhat limited experience wrestling in school, that being stronger than your opponent often times helps you not get tired so quickly, at least when you're having to directly wrestle/struggle with an opponent, as if you're significantly stronger than them, it's easier to resist them and/or overpower them, even sometimes allowing you to catch your breath a bit better for a little while if your weaker opponent can't move or overpower you and you don't have to strongly resist them to do so. I know I didn't have the best cardio among people I wrestled, but being stronger than most people in my weight class allowed me to not have to physically exert and tire myself out quite as much, and I seemed to notice the same thing with a heavier wrestler than me who was very competitive and successful. I do agree that it depends on the sport too, as literal strength probably doesn't play as much of a role in something like soccer or basketball as it would in wrestling.

 

[f4iguy]

There are always genetic outliers. I recall one of the guys on my wrestling team had an average build, not too muscular maybe around 12% bodyfat. and weighed 130 pounds senior year in high school. He rarely showed up for practice, drank like a fish, and smoked a pack or two of Marlboro Reds every day. He could run a 5:30 mile and had endurance for days. I was way stronger than him but he never gassed out or went to his back. I watched him go iron man (one person comes in fresh after a couple minutes to build up the original guys endurance) with 5 opponents in a row, all bigger, and he wasn't even breathing heavy! Insane. It's a shame he turned to drugs later on because he had the talent and genetics to be a top athlete.