Maximum Bodyweight for Parkour?

OP: JUST DO IT

Get out there join a parkour group. You’ll find out very quickly what is and isn’t an issue about your body.

Stop planning and thinking and crap. Just get out there and DO IT.

If you do it enough your body will probably starting changing and adapting to what it needs (either that or get injured).

People who do Parkour learn how to jump and roll and land properly but I’m pretty sure if they were concerned about LONG TERM damages to joints they wouldn’t be doing sport that involves JUMPING OFF OF ROOFs.

If you really are that concerned then parkour probably isn’t the thing for you.

======================

Oh yeah and post some vids of you fallin on your ass. That’d be GREAT!

http://www.break.com/index/another-parkour-wannabe-faceplant.html

He seems to be “adapted perfectly,” but surely lacks the natural ability to execute Parkour.

I certainly agree though, with a steady determination, some good advice from his fellow Parkour(ers?), and assuming no one moves that pile of dirt, he will eventually land on his feet.

[quote]AHA wrote:
I’ve been watching a lot of parkour vids lately and I’m really impressed. Only problem is that the guys seem to be mostly skinny teenagers, which is fine (they’re adapted perfectly to their chosen sport). I, however, am not a skinny teenager. Even if I got myself super ripped I would still weigh north of 200 pounds.

So, do I have to give up my parkour dreams? I’m thinking I might have a shot if I take perfect care of my soft tissue and joints, eat a lot of supplements like chondroitin and MSM, train a lot of plyometrics to learn how to absorb shock, and get my bodyweight down as far as I can (which is around 215 realistically speaking).

Your thoughts on this?[/quote]

I used to do Parkour, and I loved it. But I had to quit because I am too old and too damn heavy.

I can answer your question, but it has to be in several parts.

Taking care of your soft tissue is agreat idea for any athlete. But no matter how much of that you do, wrecking your knees is still a distinct possibility.
You can train and train and train and attempt to attenuate your body to PK based movements, but the age and weight factor can still mess it all up.

The younger guys can do this because time and activity have not worn down their cartilage etc and also because they are not that heavy.

Body type DOES play a role in whether or not this is safe to do. But on the other hand David Belle is not exactly a short guy but like the other guys said, in his case it’s probably in his genes somehow.

So the answer to your question is maybe you would be able to pull it off if you worked incredibly hard at it for a long time, but your still taking a big chance.

I would recomend putting yourself on a serious fitness plan and train like crazy before even attempting any PK. Do extreme stretching/ flexibility training and check with your doctor to make sure your body mechanics are in top working order before you even go there.

[quote]AHA wrote:
Doug Adams wrote:
Maximum weight depends on your height. Focus more on lowering your bodyfat% while getting stronger.

Yeah, totally agree that the weight is relative for strength and body leverages. But is the same true for damage risk to joints? I would think that weight is somewhat absolute there. Ie above a certain cut-off, the risks of degenerative long term damage starts increasing a lot. But this is just my ad hoc theory, I am probably wrong :slight_smile:
[/quote]

Skill and muscle determines how much the force transfers to your joints. Just like coming down from landing after you jump. Being 215 and doing parkour for yeeearrrs is different then being 215 and starting off on parkour. After years of landing and jumping you will have the muscle to handle the force plus the skill.

I’m not some kind of parkour guru but i’m comparing it to running. When someone who is 160 runs all their life and grows to 215 over a steady rate their body is more adapted to the stresses of running, however you get some couch potato or even a regular bodybuilder who hasn’t ran in 5 years tell him to run a mile 3 days a week, by the end of the month he will be bitching about knee tendonitis, shin splints, and feet issues.

So back to your answer 215 is definitely at the upper limit of an activity like parkour if you haven’t been running, jumping, balancing and landing for the last few years.

[quote]JLu wrote:
Professor X wrote:
This post makes no sense. If you could do “parkour” (I had to look this shit up), then you would know whether your weight was an issue.

Further, if you have not done “parkour” what the hell makes you think you have the genetics and coordination to do it?

There is such a thing as innate ability. Everyone may practice at basketball, but not everyone can be Michael Jordan.

I don’t believe in “innate ability”, aside from genetic limitations (height, tendon/ligament strength etc etc) skill in ANYTHING is a direct result of ones environment and how much they practice at it. I hold this belief after reading “Outliers” in which the reason Asians are good at math is explained, along with how people like Bill Gates were able to achieve their success. Nurture, whether intended or not >>>>>>>>> nature.[/quote]

I’m sorry, but what do you think innate ability refers to? If you don’t have the right physical shape to be a world class gymnast, the chances of you getting into the Olympics are slim to none. There ARE people who react faster to visual cues and simply have faster reaction time. This is again “innate ability”. To say this matters little is just naive.

Everyone the same height as a pro basketball player will not have the ability to “train” their way into being a Kobe Bryant. They may not have the hand eye coordination, the balance or the reaction time.

You can continue to believe we are all the same if you wish…it just isn’t true.

Teaching someone math is not the same as teaching someone to be a world class athlete. The talent has to be there to start with.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
JLu wrote:
Professor X wrote:
This post makes no sense. If you could do “parkour” (I had to look this shit up), then you would know whether your weight was an issue.

Further, if you have not done “parkour” what the hell makes you think you have the genetics and coordination to do it?

There is such a thing as innate ability. Everyone may practice at basketball, but not everyone can be Michael Jordan.

I don’t believe in “innate ability”, aside from genetic limitations (height, tendon/ligament strength etc etc) skill in ANYTHING is a direct result of ones environment and how much they practice at it. I hold this belief after reading “Outliers” in which the reason Asians are good at math is explained, along with how people like Bill Gates were able to achieve their success. Nurture, whether intended or not >>>>>>>>> nature.

I’m sorry, but what do you think innate ability refers to? If you don’t have the right physical shape to be a world class gymnast, the chances of you getting into the Olympics are slim to none. There ARE people who react faster to visual cues and simply have faster reaction time. This is again “innate ability”. To say this matters little is just naive.

Everyone the same height as a pro basketball player will not have the ability to “train” their way into being a Kobe Bryant. They may not have the hand eye coordination, the balance or the reaction time.

You can continue to believe we are all the same if you wish…it just isn’t true.

Teaching someone math is not the same as teaching someone to be a world class athlete. The talent has to be there to start with.[/quote]

Also with regard to the Asians being good at maths thing, there is a BIG difference between being GOOD at something than being WORLD CLASS at something. If you actually look at the world class people they are those with innate ability. Anyone can be GOOD at something.


do what you like man.
and I hate to point out the obvious, but people on a bodybuilding site are probably not the people to talk to about parkour.
X had to look it up for fuck’s sake.
I don’t pretend to know anything about it other than it’s cool to watch.

and there are a lot of people that still enjoy playing basketball even though they aren’t in the NBA.

shit I’ll probably never be an elite lifter, but I like it - so I do it.

[quote]miroku333 wrote:
do what you like man.
and I hate to point out the obvious, but people on a bodybuilding site are probably not the people to talk to about parkour.
X had to look it up for fuck’s sake.
I don’t pretend to know anything about it other than it’s cool to watch.[/quote]

I had to look up THE WORD. I have never heard anyone call it that here. They call it urban free running or something to that effect, even when it has been featured on commercials (there was a car commercial a few years back that used these guys in the ad).

Either way, what does that have to do with what has been stated?

This thread is like someone logging on writing, “Hi guys, am I too heavy for cross country skiing?” Gee, unless you have TRIED cross country skiing and found you were “too heavy” for it, what is the point of asking? It isn’t like no one could ever possible exist who can do this activity at a heavier body weight.

Many people here seem to like to TALK about what they want to do, but when it comes to actually doing it…

Technically, there is a slight difference in parkour vs free running.

[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Technically, there is a slight difference in parkour vs free running.[/quote]

Urban free running referred to running through cities using stereotypical urban structures as obstacles to scale, climb or jump over.

To answer your question, 143.5 lbs.

Kind of off topic but… I only ever met one kid who did ‘parkour’ and he was a total dickwad. One arrogant son of a bitch, I’ll tell you that much.

[quote]altimus wrote:
To answer your question, 143.5 lbs.[/quote]

Finally, someone that isn’t an asshole and doesn’t reply with a sarcastic answer.

I didn’t read all of the posts, but I can tell you that the lighter you are whilst doing parkour, the better you will feel in the long run. Parkour was the thing that originally got me into losing weight (fat) and getting in shape. I was down around 175 pre-weight training and it was definitely easier to take all the drops and jumps compared to now, being 200lbs. 25lbs isn’t much, but it is very noticeable after falling several feet.

From the posts that I did read, it seems like people here don’t know what parkour and free running are really about. They are disciplines just like martial arts in which there are codes of conduct and form training instead of just “running around and jumping off shit”. Honestly, if you are going to definitely wanting to start doing parkour, you’re going to have to make it part of your lifestyle if you want to get any good at it. It takes up a lot of your time. So, I’d say pick between lifting heavy/for hypertrophy and parkour+high rep/endurance work and really stick with one of them.

It’s just like any other challenge though…if you want to be good at it, work for it.

I personally dislike urbanfreeflow based on their lack of respect for the creators and history of parkour. So, I’d head over to 3run.co.uk for some class.

That’s about it. Goodluck!

Prof. X: I have to disagree with your claim that parkour ability has a lot to do with genetics. My reason being that parkour is based on natural human movement through evolution (escape tactics), unlike throwing a ball filled with air X amount of feet into a hole that is slightly wider than the ball. Sure, if you were raised to do gymnastics and climb all over shit, you’ll be great at parkour, but it’s not genetics because the same things could be said about all sports. Who said something like, “Elite athletes are created during infancy”?

But there’s a line somewhere between parkour and lifting heavy shit which is perfect for human beings. It certainly can depend on genetics of height and muscle fiber type though I think. Just not abilities, IMHO.

[quote]TylerPK4L wrote:
Prof. X: I have to disagree with your claim that parkour ability has a lot to do with genetics. My reason being that parkour is based on natural human movement through evolution (escape tactics), unlike throwing a ball filled with air X amount of feet into a hole that is slightly wider than the ball. Sure, if you were raised to do gymnastics and climb all over shit, you’ll be great at parkour, but it’s not genetics because the same things could be said about all sports. Who said something like, “Elite athletes are created during infancy”?

But there’s a line somewhere between parkour and lifting heavy shit which is perfect for human beings. It certainly can depend on genetics of height and muscle fiber type though I think. Just not abilities, IMHO.

[/quote]

It is doubtful that someone extremely tall and lanky will be good at smoothly hurling themselves over objects while doing back flips or other feats of agility even if they practice all day everyday.

No matter how much he practices, Manute Bol will not be a premier “parkour” athlete.

I am not sure how some of you are denying that or how you don’t see this as a genetic determinate.

You have to be shaped right to do gymnastics with the grace that someone with a more balanced center with shorter limbs can accomplish. That is what “parkour” is even if you call it an art-form or a discipline like martial arts.

Simply doing something is not the same as doing something WELL.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
JLu wrote:
Professor X wrote:
This post makes no sense. If you could do “parkour” (I had to look this shit up), then you would know whether your weight was an issue.

Further, if you have not done “parkour” what the hell makes you think you have the genetics and coordination to do it?

There is such a thing as innate ability. Everyone may practice at basketball, but not everyone can be Michael Jordan.

I don’t believe in “innate ability”, aside from genetic limitations (height, tendon/ligament strength etc etc) skill in ANYTHING is a direct result of ones environment and how much they practice at it. I hold this belief after reading “Outliers” in which the reason Asians are good at math is explained, along with how people like Bill Gates were able to achieve their success. Nurture, whether intended or not >>>>>>>>> nature.

I’m sorry, but what do you think innate ability refers to? If you don’t have the right physical shape to be a world class gymnast, the chances of you getting into the Olympics are slim to none. There ARE people who react faster to visual cues and simply have faster reaction time. This is again “innate ability”. To say this matters little is just naive.

Everyone the same height as a pro basketball player will not have the ability to “train” their way into being a Kobe Bryant. They may not have the hand eye coordination, the balance or the reaction time.

You can continue to believe we are all the same if you wish…it just isn’t true.

Teaching someone math is not the same as teaching someone to be a world class athlete. The talent has to be there to start with.[/quote]

When you say “innate ability” it makes me think you’re implying that some people either “have it” or don’t, and this is what I’m disagreeing with. Physical shape is genetic, and obviously can’t be helped as we have no control over that, but besides that yes, everything can be taught.

You said “Everyone the same height as a basketball player will not have the ability to train their way into being a Kobe Bryant”, I disagree, hand eye coordination, balance, and reaction time are things you can train and get better at, the more you train, the better you get. Yes, anyone can train to any level they wish, it’s just that it takes SO much training, most people give up under the clause that “Oh I’m just not made for this” or some crap, not realizing that there’s nothing “innate” about trained skills (yes, I believe learning math is very much like learning a sport, all it takes is practice and consistency to “grease the groove” and create the correct neural pathways).

I doubt either of us is going to change the others opinion so I’ll just agree to disagree.

[quote]elusive wrote:
altimus wrote:
To answer your question, 143.5 lbs.

Finally, someone that isn’t an asshole and doesn’t reply with a sarcastic answer. [/quote]

I’m a straight shooter, man. My friend here just wanted a simple answer, to a simple question. Anything over 143.5 and you can kiss functional muscle goodbye.

[quote]JLu wrote:

When you say “innate ability” it makes me think you’re implying that some people either “have it” or don’t, and this is what I’m disagreeing with. Physical shape is genetic, and obviously can’t be helped as we have no control over that, but besides that yes, everything can be taught.

You said “Everyone the same height as a basketball player will not have the ability to train their way into being a Kobe Bryant”, I disagree, hand eye coordination, balance, and reaction time are things you can train and get better at, the more you train, the better you get. Yes, anyone can train to any level they wish, it’s just that it takes SO much training, most people give up under the clause that “Oh I’m just not made for this” or some crap, not realizing that there’s nothing “innate” about trained skills (yes, I believe learning math is very much like learning a sport, all it takes is practice and consistency to “grease the groove” and create the correct neural pathways).

I doubt either of us is going to change the others opinion so I’ll just agree to disagree.[/quote]

Wait, so you honestly believe EVERYONE has it in them to be an elite athlete if they only trained hard enough? What flavor is the Koolaid?

Some people have better “mind muscle connections” and as such will adapt much quicker to certain movements or exercises. There are people on this very board who after YEARS still claim they can’t feel their chest working when they bench press yet feel it more in their shoulders. Again this is genetic and the guy who can control certain muscles groups with ease will make faster progress in the weight room. How do you arrive at the conclusion that this isn’t a genetic advantage?

Sure, everyone can PLAY football. That doesn’t mean everyone can become a Terrell Owens.

Do you actually think everyone could get as big as Ronnie Coleman? You must if you believe the crap you just wrote.

It may help you sleep better at night, but no, we are not all made the same and simply training harder is not the only obstacle between someone average rating as elite.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Wait, so you honestly believe EVERYONE has it in them to be an elite athlete if they only trained hard enough? What flavor is the Koolaid?

Some people have better “mind muscle connections” and as such will adapt much quicker to certain movements or exercises. There are people on this very board who after YEARS still claim they can’t feel their chest working when they bench press yet feel it more in their shoulders. Again this is genetic and the guy who can control certain muscles groups with ease will make faster progress in the weight room. How do you arrive at the conclusion that this isn’t a genetic advantage?

Sure, everyone can PLAY football. That doesn’t mean everyone can become a Terrell Owens.

Do you actually think everyone could get as big as Ronnie Coleman? You must if you believe the crap you just wrote.

It may help you sleep better at night, but no, we are not all made the same and simply training harder is not the only obstacle between someone average rating as elite.[/quote]

I’m not saying training and practice can overcome genetic limitations, I’m saying assuming you possess the required genetic traits required to excel at a given sport, you would be able to achieve world class/elite status through training and practice (10 000 hours according to Malcolm Gladwell). Let me ask you this since you’re a doctor; can anyone become a doctor assuming they have a healthy, working brain and weren’t born with any mental retardations through hard work, or were you just one of the lucky ones born with a brain labelled “doctor”?

Buy some Nikes and just do it.