Abstract Jagim, AR, Horswill, CA, Dobbs, WC, Twohey, EE, Tinsley, GM, Fields, JB, and Jones, MT. Minimum wrestling weight for high school girls wrestling: Time to revisit minimal body fat percent. J Strength Cond Res 39(3): 332–339, 2025—The purpose of this study was to determine whether an alternative body fat percentage (BF%) could be established as a safer margin for minimal wrestling weight (MWW) determination by evaluating the distribution of BF% and MWW values naturally occurring for high school girls wrestling. Data from the 2022–2023 high school season were retrospectively analyzed. In total, 33,321 female wrestlers completed skinfold (SKF) assessments or bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) in accordance with sport governing body mandates for weight certification. Frequency statistics and descriptive analysis were performed to compute normative MWW and BF% profiles. Body fat percentage thresholds of 12% (12MWW) and the BF% value defining the lowest fifth percentile were used to determine the resulting MWW and minimum weight class for each method. The median ± interquartile range for BF% was 28.3 ± 9.2%. There was a difference ( p < 0.001) in BF% values between BIA (28.4 ± 6.8%) and SKF (29.4 ± 7.6%), but a trivial effect size (ES = 0.14). The fifth percentile for BF% was 19%, which was used for alternative MWW determination (19MWW). 12MWW and 19MWW were 11.2 ± 6.4 kg ( p < 0.001; ES = 1.8) and 8.6 ± 7.7 kg ( p < 0.001; ES = 1.1) lower than the body mass of the wrestlers at the time of weight certification. Nearly all BF% values were above the 12% threshold currently used to determine MWW. Current body weights were more than 9.1 kg above MWW values for both 12MWW and 19MWW. Increasing the minimum BF% threshold from 12 to 19% would affect a small percentage of wrestlers and improve the margin of safety for those intent on achieving a lower weight class.
Differences In Body Fat Percentage And Minimum Wrestling Weight Values Between Ncaa And Naia Women’S Wrestlers
Abstract Objective . Bioimpedance devices are commonly used to assess health parameters and track changes in body composition. However, the cross-sectional agreement between different devices has not been conclusively established. Thus, the objective of this investigation was to examine the agreement between raw bioelectrical variables (resistance, reactance, and phase angle at the 50 kHz frequency) obtained from three bioimpedance analyzers. Approach . Healthy male ( n = 76, mean ± SD; 33.8 ± 14.5 years; 83.9 ± 15.1 kg; 179.4 ± 6.9 cm) and female ( n = 103, mean ± SD; 33.4 ± 15.9 years; 65.6 ± 12.1 kg; 164.9 ± 6.4 cm) participants completed assessments using three bioimpedance devices: supine bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS), supine single-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (SFBIA), and standing multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA). Differences in raw bioelectrical variables between the devices were quantified via one-way analysis of variance for the total sample and for each sex. Equivalence testing was used to determine equivalence between methods. Main results . Significant differences in all bioelectrical variables were observed between the three devices when examining the total sample and males only. The devices appeared to exhibit slightly better agreement when analyzing female participants only. Equivalence testing using the total sample as well as males and females separately revealed that resistance and phase angle were equivalent between the supine devices (BIS, SFBIA), but not with the standing analyzer (MFBIA). Significance . The present study demonstrated disagreement between different bioimpedance analyzers for quantifying raw bioelectrical variables, with the poorest agreement between devices that employed different body positions during testing. These results suggest that researchers and clinicians should employ device-specific reference values to classify participants based on raw bioelectrical variables, such as phase angle. If reference values are needed but are unavailable for a particular bioimpedance analyzer, the set of reference values produced using the most similar analyzer and reference population should be selected.
Explaining Segmental Lean Soft Tissue Discrepancies Between Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis And Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry