Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 9, 2026
09:36
Assessment of Child Anthropometry in a Large Epidemiologic Study
Published on: February 2, 2017
Differences in skinfold thicknesses and fat distribution among top-class runners
A Legaz Arrese1, J J González Badillo, E Serrano Ostáriz
1Faculty of Sciences of Physical Activity and Sport, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. alegaz@unizar.es
The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness
|February 1, 2006
Summary
Elite runners have very low skinfold values, with marathon runners showing the lowest fatness. Excess body fat is not beneficial for performance across running distances, with fatness specifically linked to marathon events.
Area of Science:
- Sports Science
- Human Physiology
- Exercise Physiology
Background:
- Elite runners exhibit distinct physiological adaptations.
- Understanding body composition in athletes is crucial for performance optimization.
- Subcutaneous fat distribution may vary based on athletic discipline.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess skinfold values in elite male and female runners across different distances.
- To investigate the relationship between sex, running event, and body fatness.
- To determine how subcutaneous fat distribution correlates with running performance.
Main Methods:
- Measured eight skinfolds in 130 male and 56 female elite runners.
- Calculated the sum of six skinfolds and the extremity/trunk fat ratio.
- Grouped runners based on their best performance event.
Main Results:
- Athletes displayed very low skinfold values.
- Female runners had higher extremity skinfolds than males; differences in chest, biceps, and abdominal skinfolds were event-specific.
- Marathon runners had significantly lower skinfold values compared to other distance groups.
Conclusions:
- Low skinfold values are associated with high athletic performance.
- Excess fat is detrimental to performance in all running distances.
- Fatness is linked to marathon running, likely due to training volume and fat metabolism prevalence.
- Subcutaneous fat distribution appears influenced by factors beyond training type.
