BF% thread
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /fit/ - Fitness
You are currently reading a thread in /fit/ - Fitness
Whats my bodyfat% /fit/ ?
>>37382843
where are your legs bruh?
>>37382988
angle/lightning/dyel
>>37382843
Around 15% maybe
>>37382988
his legs are fine for his proportions you fat SS fag
>>37383008
this is more flexed if that helps.
>>37383056
>>37382843
the thing i like about your body OP is that it is attractive but not so attractive that it would be impossible for me to ask you out
pretty cute bulge as well bby
>>37383024
they really arent
>>37383024
no they arent, theyre small
i dont think its that big a deal, but it is wrong to say that they're "fine" - they are 100% a weak point
>>37382843
Can I ask how you took this picture?
>>37383296
This
We need answers OP
>>37383523
Probably a tripod with a self timer.
OP looks about 10-12% body fat
>>37382843
Check your posture, your right shoulder is higher than your left by a significant margin. Was it injured?
>>37383056
12-13% could be as low as 10%. You are in the ideal area to start bulking.
>>37382988
nothing wrong with them looks proportionate. it's his bf% that makes them look lacking. now, back to the topic.
>>37383283
Nope 14% at best
BF?
also can i just state for the record that its not fair OP has cute lil hips and im stuck with the pelvis of a brontosaurus
I would guess 11% ish.
What about my bf%? 180 cm at 70 kg atm aiming for 8-10%
Unflexed on pic, would really like an estimation
>>37383753
considering that you're unflexed + that hint of vascularity, probably around 11% as well.
>>37383641
16-18%
>>37383641
around 14%
>>37383762
11% my ass dude he is like 14-15%
>>37385439
hes unflexed though, with visible abs (even though theyre weak as shit) and shoulder vascularity
>>37385462
those abs in anything but 100% perfect ideal lighting would be anything but visible. i'm leaner than he is and there is no way i am under 14%
