A little background, I’m from an Asian background and was not particularly blessed with the height genetic. I’m 5’6 and 18 years old. I want to know what a certain amount of weight to aim for for a good proportion with my height.
In my opinion, shorter people don’t carry weight as well as taller people, thus I see a lot of people at the gym who resemble a ball (short and pudgy). Just because I’ve basically stopped growing, I don’t feel like compensating for that by growing sideways.
Any estimates (in pounds) of a good weight for my height? I’m assuming with less than 10% body fat, too.
[quote]ezero2 wrote:
A little background, I’m from an Asian background and was not particularly blessed with the height genetic. I’m 5’6 and 18 years old. I want to know what a certain amount of weight to aim for for a good proportion with my height.
In my opinion, shorter people don’t carry weight as well as taller people, thus I see a lot of people at the gym who resemble a ball (short and pudgy). Just because I’ve basically stopped growing, I don’t feel like compensating for that by growing sideways.
Any estimates (in pounds) of a good weight for my height? I’m assuming with less than 10% body fat, too. [/quote]
a ripped 160 would seem to be the type of physique you are aiming for. youll have to go well past that and then cut back
[quote]ezero2 wrote:
A little background, I’m from an Asian background and was not particularly blessed with the height genetic. I’m 5’6 and 18 years old. I want to know what a certain amount of weight to aim for for a good proportion with my height.
In my opinion, shorter people don’t carry weight as well as taller people, thus I see a lot of people at the gym who resemble a ball (short and pudgy). Just because I’ve basically stopped growing, I don’t feel like compensating for that by growing sideways.
Any estimates (in pounds) of a good weight for my height? I’m assuming with less than 10% body fat, too. [/quote]
Thats a very general question. I would say it depends on your body type. (ie. how large your ribcage and skeletal structure is). It also depends on the type of body you want. If you want a lean somewhat slim look you are going to shoot for a different weight than if you want a short but built/stocky look. I have a friend who is about 5’4" weighs around 180lbs and people call him the tank because he’s not too fat but has a very muscular physique.
I don’t know what you consider “Ideal”. But, I have some numbers I got somewhere, I can’t remember where though.
These are for normal people though. I don’t know how you would calculate muscle weight or bodybuilders numbers… because frankly we are much heavier and some of us would qualify as obese even with less than 10% bodyfat.
Anyway… here they are
For men… 100lbs for the first 5 feet, then 7 lbs for every inch after. Women are 5 lbs for every inch after. Over age 40 add 10 lbs.
I guess they are the healthy weights for the height specified. I would say that when it comes to bodybuilding… weight don’t matter much, work on your symmetry and proportion.
Just be the best YOU that you can be. Pursue a lifestyle, not a number or goal. With work, you will look great and be strong, healthy and athletic. Numbers don’t go as far as most make them out to be.
Weight means nothing if your not single-digit body fat. Sure, you’re X number of pounds, but anyone can gain fat.
I’m 180 pounds. I’m ripped.
Some other dude is 200 pounds. He not cut at all. We are the exact same body, he just has a layer of fat. Is he ‘bigger’?
[quote]Go heavy fool wrote:
I don’t know what you consider “Ideal”. But, I have some numbers I got somewhere, I can’t remember where though.
These are for normal people though. I don’t know how you would calculate muscle weight or bodybuilders numbers… because frankly we are much heavier and some of us would qualify as obese even with less than 10% bodyfat.
Anyway… here they are
For men… 100lbs for the first 5 feet, then 7 lbs for every inch after. Women are 5 lbs for every inch after. Over age 40 add 10 lbs.
I guess they are the healthy weights for the height specified. I would say that when it comes to bodybuilding… weight don’t matter much, work on your symmetry and proportion.
[/quote]
I’d say those are pretty low. I’m 190 at 6’2" with approximately 12% bodyfat, and I need to gain way more than 8 pounds to reach the physique I’m after.
I can relate dude, I’m 5’6" and asian too (indian) and while I want to to be really muscular I realise that I also don’t want to look too stumpy, even though some would say I already am. On the other side of the spectrum some would say I hardly look like I train at all. Everyone has their own idea of what’s proportional, so please yourself first and go for the look that you want.
You’re not gonna just get too big by accident. Keep building muscle and taking pictures of yourself. When you’re satisfied just maintain or shed some bodyfat to get the look you want. Muscle atrophies, so you won’t get stuck short and pudgy for too long if you overdo it.
Don’t obsess about your weight, it can be deceiving that’s why I mentioned taking pictures of your body periodically to gauge your progress.
Dont worry about what other people will think just do what the hell you want…
Im 5’6 (almost 5’7 haha)
girls told me to not get any bigger at 170 you look good like that you will be “to big” if you weigh more, well they say the same thing at 190 so wtf?
do it for yourself
[quote]Robert P. wrote:
Go heavy fool wrote:
I don’t know what you consider “Ideal”. But, I have some numbers I got somewhere, I can’t remember where though.
These are for normal people though. I don’t know how you would calculate muscle weight or bodybuilders numbers… because frankly we are much heavier and some of us would qualify as obese even with less than 10% bodyfat.
Anyway… here they are
For men… 100lbs for the first 5 feet, then 7 lbs for every inch after. Women are 5 lbs for every inch after. Over age 40 add 10 lbs.
I guess they are the healthy weights for the height specified. I would say that when it comes to bodybuilding… weight don’t matter much, work on your symmetry and proportion.
I’d say those are pretty low. I’m 190 at 6’2" with approximately 12% bodyfat, and I need to gain way more than 8 pounds to reach the physique I’m after.
[/quote]
I’m 6’ 225lbs… I’m going for 250lbs. That’s the physique I’m after. I’ll be obese and less than 10% bodyfat… but oh well. I don’t go but #'s, I go by appearance. I can judge with my own eyes… but the OP wanted a number chart so I gave him one.
I’ve found that if you use the BMI for a particular level of body fat, you’ll get a pretty good indication of what you’ll look like. You’ll of course get a better indication if you have the same height/weight/bodyfat, but that’s more difficult to find.
For example, I have a BMI of 26.6 at 5’8" with a pretty low body fat. So I’ll probably have a similar level of musculature as a person who is 6’0" and 195 lbs (BMI 26.4) and a similar body fat percentage. This is, of course, imperfect (different body types, muscle distributions, bone structures, blah blah), but it will get you in the right ballpark.
I’ve thought about this a little. I remember Steve Reeves “ideal” that a 6-0 bodybuilder should weight 200, and then subtract 10 pounds per inch below 6-0 and add 15 pounds per inch above 6-0. This always seemed a little small, though Arnold was 6-2 and around 230 in top shape-but looked bigger.
I would say 6-0 200 would be OK for a very small build individual (or 5-10 180) reaching their ULTIMATE potential.
6-0 220, or 5-10 200 would be a good medium build goal and
6-0 240 or 5-10 220 would be large “natural” build
All at about 10% BF.
People are going to think that that’s way to big, but I’ve seen one guy on this site who is still “intermediate” and is 6-0 235 and 10-12% BF and certainly doesn’t look huge. I am 5-8 218 at 18% BF and I don’t think I’m that big. If I could get down to 10% BF without losing much, I’d still be around 200, and I’m sure my arms would shrink down to about 16 on the nose and thighs at 24 on the nose with the fat loss. I don’t think that is big.
[quote]ezero2 wrote:
A little background, I’m from an Asian background and was not particularly blessed with the height genetic. I’m 5’6 and 18 years old. I want to know what a certain amount of weight to aim for for a good proportion with my height.
In my opinion, shorter people don’t carry weight as well as taller people, thus I see a lot of people at the gym who resemble a ball (short and pudgy). Just because I’ve basically stopped growing, I don’t feel like compensating for that by growing sideways.
Any estimates (in pounds) of a good weight for my height? I’m assuming with less than 10% body fat, too. [/quote]
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
I’ve thought about this a little. I remember Steve Reeves “ideal” that a 6-0 bodybuilder should weight 200, and then subtract 10 pounds per inch below 6-0 and add 15 pounds per inch above 6-0. This always seemed a little small, though Arnold was 6-2 and around 230 in top shape-but looked bigger.
[/quote]
That would put me at an ideal weight of 130lbs.
I know I’m fat at 185, but I didn’t think I had another 55lbs of fat to lose, and still have enough fat to be 8-10%bf.
I was at 195 in my pictures, and I’m still nervous about losing fat now because I’m afraid there won’t be enough muscle underneath when I’m done.
[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
mertdawg wrote:
I’ve thought about this a little. I remember Steve Reeves “ideal” that a 6-0 bodybuilder should weight 200, and then subtract 10 pounds per inch below 6-0 and add 15 pounds per inch above 6-0. This always seemed a little small, though Arnold was 6-2 and around 230 in top shape-but looked bigger.
That would put me at an ideal weight of 130lbs.
I know I’m fat at 185, but I didn’t think I had another 55lbs of fat to lose, and still have enough fat to be 8-10%bf.
I was at 195 in my pictures, and I’m still nervous about losing fat now because I’m afraid there won’t be enough muscle underneath when I’m done.[/quote]
i think his numbers might be off just a little, but im not sure. ive read 5ft =100 lbs
then add 10 lbs per inch up to 5’9" and then 5lbs per inch after that
so at 6’ you get 205. at your height, 5’5" you get 150
5’5 ripped at 150 is not a bad build, imo. some guys will act like that is tiny, but i think it is pretty good. the key word is ripped
[quote]elliot007 wrote:
SWR-1240 wrote:
mertdawg wrote:
I’ve thought about this a little. I remember Steve Reeves “ideal” that a 6-0 bodybuilder should weight 200, and then subtract 10 pounds per inch below 6-0 and add 15 pounds per inch above 6-0. This always seemed a little small, though Arnold was 6-2 and around 230 in top shape-but looked bigger.
That would put me at an ideal weight of 130lbs.
I know I’m fat at 185, but I didn’t think I had another 55lbs of fat to lose, and still have enough fat to be 8-10%bf.
I was at 195 in my pictures, and I’m still nervous about losing fat now because I’m afraid there won’t be enough muscle underneath when I’m done.
i think his numbers might be off just a little, but im not sure. ive read 5ft =100 lbs
then add 10 lbs per inch up to 5’9" and then 5lbs per inch after that
so at 6’ you get 205. at your height, 5’5" you get 150
5’5 ripped at 150 is not a bad build, imo. some guys will act like that is tiny, but i think it is pretty good. the key word is ripped
[/quote]
Yea, I agree. If I was 25% fat at 195lbs, then I’d have almost 49lbs of fat on me. If my math is right, I’d be 158lbs with 8%bf ((195-49)*.8)).
Ultimately I’d like to be 181lbs with around 10%bf.
[quote]Go heavy fool wrote:
Here’s an ideal height/weight scale I made up myself. nothing scientific here… tell me what ya think?
[/quote]
I think you all need to stop pulling numbers out of your asses and realize none of that means much. While some basic info can be gathered by someone’s weight compared to height (such as a 6’2" person being really damned skinny under 190lbs), the rest is variable based on muscle shape or genetic bone structure.
Why would someone set a limit before they ever reach it? Unless you are already at a certain weight and are wondering how you look NOW, wasting all of the time setting up some limit you may never even reach is pretty stupid.
Lift weights and build muscle. Should the day come (which is pretty damn doubtful if you are the type who sets limits like this before you work hard to reach it) that you actually become “too big” for your height, then you can start cutting back on the weight lifted.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Go heavy fool wrote:
Here’s an ideal height/weight scale I made up myself. nothing scientific here… tell me what ya think?
I think you all need to stop pulling numbers out of your asses and realize none of that means much. While some basic info can be gathered by someone’s weight compared to height (such as a 6’2" person being really damned skinny under 190lbs), the rest is variable based on muscle shape or genetic bone structure.
Why would someone set a limit before they ever reach it? Unless you are already at a certain weight and are wondering how you look NOW, wasting all of the time setting up some limit you may never even reach is pretty stupid.
Lift weights and build muscle. Should the day come (which is pretty damn doubtful if you are the type who sets limits like this before you work hard to reach it) that you actually become “too big” for your height, then you can start cutting back on the weight lifted.
These charts you all are making mean shit.[/quote]
I don’t get it either Prof X. I said in a previous post that when it comes to muscle building… any chart can just be thrown out the window. I think you could probably make a bunch of differnt charts and base if off of that… but you would need so many charts. a specific one for your body type, bone structure, muscle mass… etc etc.
I think the OP is trying to get an average.
I don’t know. The health charts have me as obese for my height/weight. you’re probably morbidly obese X. lol
I wish there was a bodybuilders chart.
I do lnow that Arnold was Arond 6’2" 240 lbs ripped… and Serge Nubret 6’ 200lbs ripped… you can possibly base it on guys who are known for having very proportionate and symmrtrical muscular bodies.
I really don’t see the point either. I could make up 50 charts… the best one would be to just look in the mirror, thats what I do.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Go heavy fool wrote:
Here’s an ideal height/weight scale I made up myself. nothing scientific here… tell me what ya think?
I think you all need to stop pulling numbers out of your asses and realize none of that means much. While some basic info can be gathered by someone’s weight compared to height (such as a 6’2" person being really damned skinny under 190lbs), the rest is variable based on muscle shape or genetic bone structure.
Why would someone set a limit before they ever reach it? Unless you are already at a certain weight and are wondering how you look NOW, wasting all of the time setting up some limit you may never even reach is pretty stupid.
Lift weights and build muscle. Should the day come (which is pretty damn doubtful if you are the type who sets limits like this before you work hard to reach it) that you actually become “too big” for your height, then you can start cutting back on the weight lifted.
These charts you all are making mean shit.[/quote]
I agree.
Some guys look great at a certain weight, and they just have damn good genes. Some, like GottaTrain, look better at 147 then I do at 172, even though we’re the same height.
The fact is the amount of work put into it will determine how you look. Weight itself doesn’t have too much to do with it.
[quote]ezero2 wrote:
A little background, I’m from an Asian background and was not particularly blessed with the height genetic. I’m 5’6 and 18 years old. I want to know what a certain amount of weight to aim for for a good proportion with my height.
In my opinion, shorter people don’t carry weight as well as taller people, thus I see a lot of people at the gym who resemble a ball (short and pudgy). Just because I’ve basically stopped growing, I don’t feel like compensating for that by growing sideways.
Any estimates (in pounds) of a good weight for my height? I’m assuming with less than 10% body fat, too. [/quote]
Well, I guess I would be one to fit into your category of “short and pudgy”. : )
Everyone has different ideals concerning the “perfect” look. I like that “pudgy” look actually!