I don't know precisely -- someone probably does -- but I suspect it happens at about Tanner Stage IV. Maybe TS III for girls. But I don't know for sure.
✓ Member
Does anthropometry changes with age?
Hello Rip,
I strength coach primarily swimmers for already 3 years, using the SS method with great success.
Since I came from the sport of swimming, coaching swimming has always attracted me.
So I got into swimming coaching also as a swimming coach. All ages. Some are on the competition route, some are not.
As a competitive person, my main target is getting someone to be the best in the world. So, I need to have talented kids. Actually, that's not up to me if they are talented or not. But I need to pick the talented ones to be in my team and not in other teams. So, obviously, I look for parameters which will get my average potential up. This is hard to predict when they are only 6 years old, sometimes even 5.
And there's something I'm puzzled about which you may have some knowledge on. When I coach a 6 years old kid, it's probably impossible to say if he is the next Michael Phelps. Can't know how well his VO2max / explosiveness / strength while swimming will all be. But I can know one thing for sure after 1-3 sessions - his coordination. Maybe even anthropometry, which is what I'm going to ask about, but it will be really difficult to tell his final height which is important.
My observation, which include only ~50 kids (and countless adults to compare to), say that kids tend to have shorter legs relative to their height. Or maybe it's just a longer neck relative to their height. Without actual measurements it will be really difficult to tell.
So my question is,
When I want to know the final anthropometry (proportions relative to total height) of a kid - is it possible?
Total height - probably no, but if he has short tibias / long forearms / wide feet etc, can I tell from his anthropometry at 6 years of age, or is it going to change drastically?
I know you can't KNOW, but you may have some observations yourself from your experience, which may or may not be useful.
Out of me and my family pictures from when we were younger - it does not look like any major changes have occured except everything got longer while the proportions kept quite the same. But too difficult to tell since the pictures are in differrent positions, clothing, angles, zooms, etc.
But I do see shorter legs on kids at the pool, relative to their height, than in adults. So maybe it's just a coincidence and by the time I'll see 500 kids it will even out? I have no idea.
Do you have any observations about this topic?
Will be happy to know if you do.
Thank you very much in advance (-:
TMPHBITEU
I don't know precisely -- someone probably does -- but I suspect it happens at about Tanner Stage IV. Maybe TS III for girls. But I don't know for sure.
✓ Member
Thank for the answer (-:Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Member
Interesting question. I have no expertise, but I have over a decade of observations. I have worked in child care for a local community center for ten years. I have cared for hundreds of of children during that time -- from as early as 6 weeks old up to age 12. I still get to run into most of them when they are older and no longer under my care.
What I can't help noticing is this: almost all babies and most toddlers (up to about age 2 1/2) have long torsos, short legs and average length arms (long compared to legs, short compared to torso). I have noticed a lanky baby is a very rare thing (~1%). But by the time they are 3 or 4 years old most kids have the proportions that they have in adolescence, certainly by age 5.
As you know, one thing that can't be predicted is height. I have the advantage of seeing the parents height, but this is a far from full proof indicator.
I have always been interested in body proportions since I grew up with a big sister who constantly teased me about my short waistedness. Because of this, I can't help but pay attention to others' proportions. By the way, I was not a lanky baby, but I was clearly lanky by age 4. I am also a terrible lap swimmer (so is my long waisted, short armed sister).
TMPHBITEU
Define "lanky." By this do you mean long limbs relative to torso?
Member
Exactly. I realize one can have long arms and short legs and vice versa, but this I wouldn't consider lanky, unless the torso is small relative to both.
TMPHBITEU
Member
Thanks for posting the interesting article. It seems pretty consistent with my observations. The average child's sitting height changes from 70% of total height to 57% in a mere 3 years. Yet it takes 10 years (12 for boys) for the average sitting height to move from 57% to 50%. It looks like after age 3, the proportional changes become rather subtle.
It seems to me that by age 5 or 6 you would have a pretty good inkling of what a child's final proportions would be.
Fascinating stuff.
Posting Permissions