Can you be fat & fit?

[272BHP]

Fitness implies a level of efficiency, a 17 stone footballer is just not efficient. For example, there has never been a top level footballer who has been anywhere near that weight.

[anonymous-user]

272BHP said:

Fitness implies a level of efficiency, a 17 stone footballer is just not efficient. For example, there has never been a top level footballer who has been anywhere near that weight.

You're still missing the point of the thread but ...... I give you Jan Molby

[FredClogs]

garyhun said:

You're still missing the point of the thread but ...... I give you Jan Molby

He's fat he's round he bounces on the ground... Etc...

My hero growing up was Simon garner (Blackburn rovers) he wasn't that fat but he wasn't slim and he wasn't particularly fit either, but he could strike a football like very few others. there's been others, gazza, Paul Scholes, Paul merson, none of them chiselled from marble.

Edited by FredClogs on Wednesday 19th August 22:16

[okgo]

Bear in mind that most peoples definition of fit is a FAR cry from what is actually fit.

[Asterix]

There's a lot of fit people in the Army and quite a few fatties as well - the fatties could never keep up with the others and were often failing BFTs, CFTs etc... and even the big 'fit' lads had issues with endurance.

[Halb]

DukeDickson said:

Interested to hear the opinions of the knowledgeable people here.

Not me, but curious as to whether it is possible to be genuinely large (as in 300lbs+ large) and be capable of any reasonable endurance? Not thinking of big blokes moving heavy weights, more around day in, day out, more like a half marathon+ a day or 50 mile bike ride (as examples). Day in, day out, without showing the obvious effects .

I don't believe so, but happy to be educated otherwise.

Doable. Though the endurance won't be as good as the skinny runts. Heaviest I ran the Manchester 10k at was 20 and a half stone, 287lbs. I ran it in 61 mins. I reckon I'd be in the top ten finishers of people over 20 stone.
Ran it this year in 51 at 17stone. A lot faster obviously, but 60 mins isn't bad for close to 300.

[Tiggsy]

FredClogs said:

garyhun said:

You're still missing the point of the thread but ...... I give you Jan Molby

He's fat he's round he bounces on the ground... Etc...

My hero growing up was Simon garner (Blackburn rovers) he wasn't that fat but he wasn't slim and he wasn't particularly fit either, but he could strike a football like very few others. there's been others, gazza, Paul Scholes, Paul merson, none of them chiselled from marble.

Edited by FredClogs on Wednesday 19th August 22:16

I know nothing about football but a quick google search shows gazza in 1990 had a pretty flat stomach. Maybe not ripped to the bone but I'd doubt he was much over 15% BF.

A million miles from "fat" - and yet he's a perfect example of what fatties use as an example!

All this thread shows is a) fat people love to talk about "big" sports people (like gazza, rugby players, etc) as an example of "fat and fit" - and its nonsense. b) a fat person doing the same thing over and over will get better at doing it - thus some fat arse can ride a bike for 30 miles without needing CPR and c) Any fatty, no matter how good they are at what they do....would be fitter if they dropped the weight!

[okgo]

Heaviest cyclists in pro peloton will be 85kg or so and generally in amateur sport I've never seen more than a handful of big blokes (over 85kg) that are any good.

[MC Bodge]

Tiggsy said:

I know nothing about football but a quick google search shows gazza in 1990 had a pretty flat stomach. Maybe not ripped to the bone but I'd doubt he was much over 15% BF.

A million miles from "fat" - and yet he's a perfect example of what fatties use as an example!

All this thread shows is a) fat people love to talk about "big" sports people (like gazza, rugby players, etc) as an example of "fat and fit" - and its nonsense. b) a fat person doing the same thing over and over will get better at doing it - thus some fat arse can ride a bike for 30 miles without needing CPR and c) Any fatty, no matter how good they are at what they do....would be fitter if they dropped the weight!

There's a social acceptability in being fat in the UK nowadays. I still find it awful that most people my age (late 30s) and older are quite significantly overweight and many are obese.

[Tiggsy]

indeed - and fatties using people like 1990's Gazza and rugby players as examples of why its ok to be heavy are as warped in their body perception as 6st women that vomit after every meal!

If everyone had 1990's Gazza BF levels the NHS wouldnt know what to do with the left over cash!!!

[DukeDickson]

Halb said:

DukeDickson said:

Interested to hear the opinions of the knowledgeable people here.

Not me, but curious as to whether it is possible to be genuinely large (as in 300lbs+ large) and be capable of any reasonable endurance? Not thinking of big blokes moving heavy weights, more around day in, day out, more like a half marathon+ a day or 50 mile bike ride (as examples). Day in, day out, without showing the obvious effects .

I don't believe so, but happy to be educated otherwise.

Doable. Though the endurance won't be as good as the skinny runts. Heaviest I ran the Manchester 10k at was 20 and a half stone, 287lbs. I ran it in 61 mins. I reckon I'd be in the top ten finishers of people over 20 stone.
Ran it this year in 51 at 17stone. A lot faster obviously, but 60 mins isn't bad for close to 300.

Did you look something ike this though?




Plus, could you do it every day for several months without issue or weight loss? No rest day, in 80 degree heat or lashing down?


I know there are portly people who can run, bike etc good distances, but the every day thing, with no changes to physical condition, is the key to me.


I wasn't and even now am not a shining example of fitness, but being a lardy 280lbs played merry hell with my body and I would have been in a box had I attempted it. Or, seriously skinnier.

[Tiggsy]

For everyone happy their the only 17st + runner/biker/whatever.....go find some old people, see how many of them are 17 stone + !!!

And the height thing is missleading too - I'm 6ft6 and have been 22stone.....and can assure you, although I could run a 5k at that weight - it was grim and tore my body up. Now under 16 stone and still a bit more to go to get BF/abbs I'm happy to put on a beach!

You can hide weight over height easily - but it's still there.

[Halb]

DukeDickson said:

Did you look something ike this though?

Plus, could you do it every day for several months without issue or weight loss? No rest day, in 80 degree heat or lashing down?
I know there are portly people who can run, bike etc good distances, but the every day thing, with no changes to physical condition, is the key to me.
I wasn't and even now am not a shining example of fitness, but being a lardy 280lbs played merry hell with my body and I would have been in a box had I attempted it. Or, seriously skinnier.

I did not, is that you? I wish you well on your regime, whatever it is. I believe NatAsp has the best post somewhere above on adaptation. That first proposition is the same for anyone, regardless of weight/size.
I could have stayed that size with diet. I was also combining heavy weights with running with food, so mass was big, even with running training.
Adaptation, if you had out the hours in to train for a large event, then adaptation would take place, the mass thing would also be related to diet.

Tiggsy said:

For everyone happy their the only 17st + runner/biker/whatever.....go find some old people, see how many of them are 17 stone + !!!
And the height thing is missleading too - I'm 6ft6 and have been 22stone.....and can assure you, although I could run a 5k at that weight - it was grim and tore my body up. Now under 16 stone and still a bit more to go to get BF/abbs I'm happy to put on a beach!

Indeed, it was hard, very hard...but then if you run an event to try and be competitive, it always shall be. When I run the Manchester 10k it is always difficult, likewise the parkrun, because I'm competitive and like to beat times. I'm just not am born runner, not light on my feet, but I like to run, so I always end up with a face like a beetroot losing gallons of liquid. But I wanted the beach bod, so I sorted it.
I have to say though, I never wanna run over 17ish again though, it is just so hard... D:

[chris watton]

MC Bodge said:

There's a social acceptability in being fat in the UK nowadays. I still find it awful that most people my age (late 30s) and older are quite significantly overweight and many are obese.

This was made apparent to me when we came back to the UK in 2010, after living and working in Italy for three years. It seemed half the population was very overweight, whereas in Italy, it was very rare to see obese people. Indeed, even the very old would get around on pushbikes - here, there are people halt their age (and then some) getting around on mobility scooters!

So many use these, and walking sticks, although I do wonder if some are merely props for extra benefits. I guess being obese helps their cause...

[MC Bodge]

chris watton said:

MC Bodge said:

There's a social acceptability in being fat in the UK nowadays. I still find it awful that most people my age (late 30s) and older are quite significantly overweight and many are obese.

This was made apparent to me when we came back to the UK in 2010, after living and working in Italy for three years. It seemed half the population was very overweight, whereas in Italy, it was very rare to see obese people. Indeed, even the very old would get around on pushbikes - here, there are people halt their age (and then some) getting around on mobility scooters!

So many use these, and walking sticks, although I do wonder if some are merely props for extra benefits. I guess being obese helps their cause...

The UK is full of fat people. As you say, it is very noticeable when you visit/return from other countries. Ireland and the U.S. appear similarly large. Interestingly, big cities appear (anecdotally) to have fewer very fat people -I suspect this is due to more people walking (briskly)to get to their destinations.

Diet (and boozing) is often poor, but no matter what people like to think about it all being about diet, if the population cycled and walked everywhere rather than drove by default, I'm almost certain that there would be less of a fat problem.

[MC Bodge]

chris watton said:

MC Bodge said:

There's a social acceptability in being fat in the UK nowadays. I still find it awful that most people my age (late 30s) and older are quite significantly overweight and many are obese.

This was made apparent to me when we came back to the UK in 2010, after living and working in Italy for three years. It seemed half the population was very overweight, whereas in Italy, it was very rare to see obese people. Indeed, even the very old would get around on pushbikes - here, there are people halt their age (and then some) getting around on mobility scooters!

So many use these, and walking sticks, although I do wonder if some are merely props for extra benefits. I guess being obese helps their cause...

The UK is full of fat people. As you say, it is very noticeable when you visit/return from other countries. Ireland and the U.S. appear similarly large. Interestingly, big cities appear (anecdotally) to have fewer very fat people -I suspect this is due to more people walking (briskly)to get to their destinations.

Diet (and boozing) is often poor, but no matter what people like to think about it all being about diet, if the population cycled and walked everywhere rather than drove by default, I'm almost certain that there would be less of a fat problem.

[DukeDickson]

Halb said:

DukeDickson said:

Did you look something ike this though?

Plus, could you do it every day for several months without issue or weight loss? No rest day, in 80 degree heat or lashing down?
I know there are portly people who can run, bike etc good distances, but the every day thing, with no changes to physical condition, is the key to me.
I wasn't and even now am not a shining example of fitness, but being a lardy 280lbs played merry hell with my body and I would have been in a box had I attempted it. Or, seriously skinnier.

I did not, is that you? I wish you well on your regime, whatever it is. I believe NatAsp has the best post somewhere above on adaptation. That first proposition is the same for anyone, regardless of weight/size.
I could have stayed that size with diet. I was also combining heavy weights with running with food, so mass was big, even with running training.
Adaptation, if you had out the hours in to train for a large event, then adaptation would take place, the mass thing would also be related to diet.

Tiggsy said:

For everyone happy their the only 17st + runner/biker/whatever.....go find some old people, see how many of them are 17 stone + !!!
And the height thing is missleading too - I'm 6ft6 and have been 22stone.....and can assure you, although I could run a 5k at that weight - it was grim and tore my body up. Now under 16 stone and still a bit more to go to get BF/abbs I'm happy to put on a beach!

Indeed, it was hard, very hard...but then if you run an event to try and be competitive, it always shall be. When I run the Manchester 10k it is always difficult, likewise the parkrun, because I'm competitive and like to beat times. I'm just not am born runner, not light on my feet, but I like to run, so I always end up with a face like a beetroot losing gallons of liquid. But I wanted the beach bod, so I sorted it.
I have to say though, I never wanna run over 17ish again though, it is just so hard... D:

No, that's not me & although I used to be that kind of physical specimen , albeit 280lbs rather than more than that, I'm now @ 100 less. Still far too flabby, but understand why, even if I don't like it.


I used that to make the point that I'm not talking about big, reasonably healthy people with a bit of insulation, but people carrying something like 40-50 kg of extra. Can someone like that do some reasonably serious levels of movement (calorific equivalent of a marathon) day after day after day, without any ill effects, body change or weight loss? Doubt it somehow.

It is the whole thing - the physical impact, the effort required not to change shape, the time involved and so on. On the fuel front, what I have in mind is somewhere around 2/3rds of that renound lard arse Michael Phelps but still making the effort to be well over 30% bf, rather than single figures.

[DukeDickson]

okgo said:

Bear in mind that most peoples definition of fit is a FAR cry from what is actually fit.

Or, flipping it a bit, how quick would Chris Froome be if he was a 20+ a day man, Usain if he had a love of pie and a pint or several, or Mo Farah if he had to run in a 50kg fat suit?


You're absolutely right, but there are a lot of factors that contribute to being 'actually fit'.

[okgo]

I don't mean world class.

I mean the gulf between people that do park runs is huge yet there are people that go every week who would likely be described as for by their friends yet they barely break 30 mins for 5km.

[Halb]

I know that 'fit' really mean suitable for the job, but I'd consider people running a parkrun at 30mins fit, that's decent.