making bf% charts in general is a dumb idea because bf% is relative to the rest of the shit in your body.
Two guys at 10% body fat will look wildly different based on how much muscle they're carrying.
For example the 16-17% pic in that chart has basically zero muscle compared to 18%
Also some guys store fat differently. Showing only images of the torso is dumb. Some dudes will store a shit ton of fat in their hips and ass.
Worrying about shit like this is retarded anyway. If you think you look too fat just keep cutting.
Neither of these charts are accurate because:
1. they use different people for different bf%. People don't always store fat the same way due to genetics and will look different at the same bf%.
2. None of the people in those charts actually got their bf% measured. It's pure guesstimation.
>can see the striations on my chest and occasionally even shoulders if I flex really hard >can only see the outline of my abs
Is it just meh fat distribution?
>Fitness guys and bodybuilders in photo condition are an accurate metric to judge your bodyfat levels
The person who made this image should kill himself
Also >these numbers I pulled out of my ass are correct
Probably around 15% right now, maybe a little higher idk. My abs are still relatively visible but not chiseled, but still noticeable. My gym has one of those scanners, I should use it and see what it says. Anyone know if they're even somewhat accurate?
Anyways, ever since bulking up a little bit more I've gotten more compliments on my size, which is nice.
That's not accurate at all.
This chart is wrong picrel is a more accurate chart
nope
What's wrong with my chart
making bf% charts in general is a dumb idea because bf% is relative to the rest of the shit in your body.
Two guys at 10% body fat will look wildly different based on how much muscle they're carrying.
For example the 16-17% pic in that chart has basically zero muscle compared to 18%
Also some guys store fat differently. Showing only images of the torso is dumb. Some dudes will store a shit ton of fat in their hips and ass.
Worrying about shit like this is retarded anyway. If you think you look too fat just keep cutting.
By that chart 16% but irl more like 18%
Can you post body
That's so retarded I'm ~20% and look like 12 on that chart
You are actually retarded. If you have visible abs you are 15% max.
You can have visible abs at 20% easily, but what do I expect from dyel.
flexed?that’s clearly posed I doubt that’s full relaxed
You're coping I'm sorry anon
Neither of these charts are accurate because:
1. they use different people for different bf%. People don't always store fat the same way due to genetics and will look different at the same bf%.
2. None of the people in those charts actually got their bf% measured. It's pure guesstimation.
too much
Probably 18-20 but I still look very aesthetic because of good fat distribution
Around 14rn want to bulk up to 20. But it's hard for me. Naturally lean/high coloric burning
>can see the striations on my chest and occasionally even shoulders if I flex really hard
>can only see the outline of my abs
Is it just meh fat distribution?
>overestimate how little
40
> 6 and 7%
really? doesn't look that impressive
because they are small
you need big muscles for low bodyfat to define the separation between them
higher peaks -> lower valleys
Absolutely retarded the premise is correct but his 17% example is leaner than the 8% example
Currently at 15-16% i think. but I am bulking. May reach 18% before I cut.
What bodyfat percentage do I look like ?
>Fitness guys and bodybuilders in photo condition are an accurate metric to judge your bodyfat levels
The person who made this image should kill himself
Also
>these numbers I pulled out of my ass are correct
I’m at least 20. Feel fat as fuck.
if 17% is true I must be at least 30%bf
Why would it be true?
What does this say it is: https://www.omnicalculator.com/health/navy-body-fat?
Navy method tells me 14
Put some effort into life, anon.
At least compare that with what the picture says.
Doesn’t Jeff Nippard say that a BF percentage below 15% is unsustainable and unhealthy or is that another guy
Probably around 15% right now, maybe a little higher idk. My abs are still relatively visible but not chiseled, but still noticeable. My gym has one of those scanners, I should use it and see what it says. Anyone know if they're even somewhat accurate?
Anyways, ever since bulking up a little bit more I've gotten more compliments on my size, which is nice.
Can I get an estimate? 6’4 currently cutting down from 230 around 215 now
what's your waist measurement
I'd guess 15%ish
Sitting at 33”
How big was it at 230? Just curious cause I'm the same height bulking up now
If that's unflexed probably like 12% if not like 15
17