What is the recommended bodyfat level for male gymnasts?

In bodybuilding people do this thing they call "bulking and cutting" where they allow for a lot of fat gain during "off-season" because they think it will allow them to build more muscle. Then they plan their cutting phase such that they will be as lean as possible and often also dehydrated for their show.

In gymnastics there would be a few problems associated with doing bulking and cutting. Firstly being too fat makes gymnastics even harder than it already is. Secondly, gymnastics is about performance rather than looks, and being absolutely bone dry will negatively affect performance. Carrying no fat and being dehydrated will drop your body's weight, but that is not an advantage if it means you're feeling weak and can faint any moment.

So the question is what do gymnasts do with their diets and body-fat levels in respectively off season and when close to competition?
If you don't have an exact answer, at the very least note a range of body-fat percentages.

Many of the currents bodybuilders actually eat quite healthy and try to stay in a great shape all year around. It's less drastic work to get ready for the show (aka less muscles loss during the dieting phase). I do see many of the IFBB pros at my gym (Gold's gym in Venice) and they look solid and lean all year around. 

For the gymnasts, the strength to weight ratio is the most important. And because carrying fat doesn't really help with that, it's good to be as lean as the body naturally wants to be. Once you start pushing the body fat levels lower with dieting and other drastic methods, you can't train as efficiently and the risk for injury is really high. I suspect they don't have a goal to reach a certain number (body fat level). Every body is different and finds its comfortable range. But they all seem very lean to me… if they wanted to compete in the bodybuilding show, they would just do a little water and carb manipulation and they would be ready.

Offseason bodybuilding is totally different to an off season competitive gymnast. Especially at the elite level that you are talking about. 

Gymnastics is a sport that is purely based on performance and their diets would be geared around providing them with enough energy to train and sufficient nutrients to recover. Any excess weight gained for purely aesthetic reasons would be highly counter productive. 

The amazing physiques that you see in the world of gymanstics are almost a by product of the way they train rather than a sepcific goal of their training.

2 hours ago, Darin Phoenix said:

Offseason bodybuilding is totally different to an off season competitive gymnast. Especially at the elite level that you are talking about. 

Gymnastics is a sport that is purely based on performance and their diets would be geared around providing them with enough energy to train and sufficient nutrients to recover. Any excess weight gained for purely aesthetic reasons would be highly counter productive. 

The amazing physiques that you see in the world of gymanstics are almost a by product of the way they train rather than a sepcific goal of their training.

I already stated in my first post that bodybuilding is for the looks and gymnastics is for the performance. I also already stated that too much fat obviously makes gymnastics even harder to practice during off-season training, and an extremely low body-fat in competition would make you feel weak and tired and thus negatively impact performance

You're essentially just repeating me and you did not answer the question.

The question was what body-fat percentages male gymnasts shoot for in respectively off-season and for competition.

28 minutes ago, Michel Hendrickson said:

I already stated in my first post that bodybuilding is for the looks and gymnastics is for the performance. I also already stated that too much fat obviously makes gymnastics even harder to practice during off-season training, and an extremely low body-fat in competition would make you feel weak and tired and thus negatively impact performance

You're essentially just repeating me and you did not answer the question.

The question was what body-fat percentages male gymnasts shoot for in respectively off-season and for competition.

I believe what he was suggesting was that  there wouldn't be a specific target. The training that results in the gymnasts strength and ability to deliver the routine on the various apparatus is what every gymnast strives for. You just have to look at he difference between Olympic level gymnast physiques to see there is no target. The gymnasts form is a direct result of their skill specific training.

it doesn't matter if your body fat is 5% or 18%, if you can deliver the routine to the best of your ability. 

Michael, I believe Darin was answering your question and was re-iterated by Paul above. There are very few "fat" elite gymnasts. Their body fat percentage is secondary to their performance and as such is not the focus of their training. Lower relative body fat will increase power to weight ratio, however most gymnasts do not focus on body fat percentage (the difference in performance at 3% vs. 9% for example), or nutrition as one of their main markers or factors in training or performance (however interesting and very possibly overlooked this may be).

The superior gymnastics physique is a pleasant side effect of gymnastics for performance (function follows form). 

24 minutes ago, Luke Searra said:

Michael, I believe Darin was answering your question and was re-iterated by Paul above. There are very few "fat" elite gymnasts. Their body fat percentage is secondary to their performance and as such is not the focus of their training. Lower relative body fat will increase power to weight ratio, however most gymnasts do not focus on body fat percentage (the difference in performance at 3% vs. 9% for example), or nutrition as one of their main markers or factors in training or performance (however interesting and very possibly overlooked this may be).

The superior gymnastics physique is a pleasant side effect of gymnastics for performance (function follows form). 

No matter how you look at it, that is simply not true. It is always possible to out-eat your training, no matter how much or how hard you train. Look at strongmen. They train like beasts and eat like beasts and the result is a strong and muscular, but also fat person.

Gymnastics exercises do not magically bring you to the ideal body-fat levels. And no, Darin did not answer the question.

Thank you for your opinion Michael, it is appreciated.

Michael,

If you are looking for a number or numerical range that might be difficult to provide because I don't know if elite gymnasts even know their body fat percentage. Measuring body fat is not as easy as stepping on a scale because those devices are grossly inaccurate. That being said my guess would be that elite level male gymnasts fall in a range of 5 to 10 percent. I would think much higher than that level would be problematic for skills requiring superior strength to weight ratio.

6 hours ago, Michel Hendrickson said:

No matter how you look at it, that is simply not true. It is always possible to out-eat your training, no matter how much or how hard you train. Look at strongmen. They train like beasts and eat like beasts and the result is a strong and muscular, but also fat person.

Gymnastics exercises do not magically bring you to the ideal body-fat levels. And no, Darin did not answer the question.

He did answer your question, the gymnasts don't shoot for any body fat percent range. They shoot for performance. 

If you have to move your bodyweight up and down and around, trust me, you won't out-eat yourself. You are very careful about not getting any deadweight on yourself because it is counter productive to your goal, which is performance. Even one pig-out dinner could mean extra 4 lbs on you the day after and you will feel it negatively. 

I found this interesting picture on the www, compare yourself:

and... for anybody interested in this matter, a calculator to determine your own body fat, might also just be a gimmick...

http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy

11 minutes ago, Petra Dvorak said:

and... for anybody interested in this matter, a calculator to determine your own body fat, might also just be a gimmick...

http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy

It's a gimmick… horrible gimmick. It gave me about 10% units more than I am  :-) 

I'm usually very suspicious of formulas like this, but this put me within 2% of my actual body fat percent as measured by DEXA scan. The pictures fit my appearance rather well, too. Thanks for the contribution.

Not adding much to the topic here, but just clarifying that the pictures and transformations posted above are from the Leangain protocol by Martin Berkhan (Intermittent fasting).

12 hours ago, Petra Dvorak said:

I found this interesting picture on the www, compare yourself:

Thank you for your contribution. Now we can compare with one of my favorite gymnasts: Yuri van Gelder. It looks different because he has more muscle than the people in the example above, but I would estimate him at 8-10%

On 7/18/2017 at 3:10 PM, Suzanna McGee said:

It's a gimmick… horrible gimmick. It gave me about 10% units more than I am  :-) 

I will second the above. Even the website claims it just used the formula developed by the U.S. Navy and mentions the most accurate tests.

Granted I have never had a hydrostatic/underwater or any other body fat percentage test done.
With my current data (Weight: 61kg, Height: 168cm, Waist: 71cm, Neck: 38cm) put into the calculator... I some how have 6% body fat.

As for the original question... do not worry about it. Work with what you currently deal with and let your body build what it needs. For gymnasts tendon development is more important than body fat percentage. Just look at all of the athletes in the course material. However looking at the picture previously posted. if there were a range of recommend body fat percentage, I would guess 5-13%.

5 hours ago, Rayne-William Fitzgerald said:

I will second the above. Even the website claims it just used the formula developed by the U.S. Navy and mentions the most accurate tests.

It was funny, I was playing with the numbers, and the thicker neck I got, the leaner it said I was… maybe the numbers are better for men, but definitely not right for the females.  

I dont particularly enjoy this guys youtube persona, but watch this video for a comparison of measured bodyfat% and how they look different on people. (Hint: 'one persons 6% and another's 6% can look vastly different).

Edit: Here's another great one

4 hours ago, Suzanna McGee said:

It was funny, I was playing with the numbers, and the thicker neck I got, the leaner it said I was… maybe the numbers are better for men, but definitely not right for the females.  

With that particular calculator, there is the option to input some of the common female specific measurements. The option should be to the right of where the measuring standard (Metric or U.S.) option is.

On 7/18/2017 at 6:10 AM, Michel Hendrickson said:

No matter how you look at it, that is simply not true. It is always possible to out-eat your training, no matter how much or how hard you train. Look at strongmen. They train like beasts and eat like beasts and the result is a strong and muscular, but also fat person.

Gymnastics exercises do not magically bring you to the ideal body-fat levels. And no, Darin did not answer the question.

Hello Michael,

Yes, Darin did indeed answer your question.

You just didn't like the answer.

Gymnasts' bodyfat measurements and their accompanying appearance never come out matching those of bodybuilders.  Years ago one of Charles Poliquin's top students measured the bodyfat of some of my guys; Allan and my other senior athletes measured in the 4-5% range.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

@Julian Aldag, great videos… thank you for posting them. They really show how unimportant the body fat % number is. 

8 hours ago, Rayne-William Fitzgerald said:

With that particular calculator, there is the option to input some of the common female specific measurements. The option should be to the right of where the measuring standard (Metric or U.S.) option is.

That's what I did…  I went to play with it again, for my entertainment only… It classifies me as "Acceptable" (which is worse than "fit", which is worse than "athletic", which is after "essential fat" which is after "dangerously low"). But if I got a nice thick neck of 18–19 inches, I would be "fit" or "athletic", ha ha…   Well, at least I am happy that I am still "acceptable"    as long as I can touch my feet to the top bar in the leg raises  

(here I just took a pic of "acceptable")

@Suzanna McGee those legs AND the fluffy boots just made my eyes pop Definitely "acceptable" You even have sartorius definition!

10 hours ago, Nicholas Murray said:

those legs AND the fluffy boots just made my eyes pop

Thank you, @Nicholas Murray!  hee hee, I know, the boots… and it's 24 Celsius here in Venice Beach