Posted on Feb 25, 2014
Do you think the Army height and weight standards are too strict, too lenient or not accurate?
35.8K
109
76
6
6
0
I have heard of Soldiers who always have to be taped, even though they are fit. Many say that they don't think the standards are very accurate. Do you think the standards are too strict, too leniant or not accurate?
Posted in these groups: 
AR 600-9
AR 600-9
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 36
13
13
0
They are bull shit and not based on medical or physiological standards of any kind. Not one Sports Medicine doctor of any team in any professional sport uses the Tape test the way the Army does. Its ridicules cookie cutter and lazy. The Army need to take a look at itself and ask is this being honest? Does using something that based on shoddy science reflect the integrity we expect from out troops.
(13)
(0)
SFC Ian Lumgair
Here is a completely out of the box response. Get rid of any and all height weight standards all together. Make the Army a true meritocracy stickily base the troops fitness, event based with real rewards for those who excel. real rewards for belonging to intramural teams, participation in events real consequences for those who do not find a manner to stay fit. This would require commanders to give up on "Commanders must evaluate the effectiveness of physical fitness training and ensure that it is focused on the unit’s missions. " and adopt Commanders must enhance the combat readiness of there troops and improve there fitness. commander are responsible to provide the training time necessary to accomplish improve to combat capabilities of there soldiers ". there are lots of great options out there for troop to develop a idea of readiness through fitness. when was the last time you saw a command team support the sports that invoke mental and physical toughness, power lifting, boxing, rugby, tackle football, wrestling, hockey, MMA, karate, contact fencing, believe it or not all of these sports where at one time or another played and hugely supported. where there injuries you bet. where they in much much better shape than the current army absolutely.
(2)
(0)
7
7
0
These are standards...Soldiers can either conform to the standards or leave the service.
Soldiers (even society in general) will say everything is not fair if it's hard or they cannot achieve a certain standard...Soldiers need to grow up, realize military service is BIGGER than the individual or take their self-serving attitudes away from the military.
Soldiers (even society in general) will say everything is not fair if it's hard or they cannot achieve a certain standard...Soldiers need to grow up, realize military service is BIGGER than the individual or take their self-serving attitudes away from the military.
(7)
(0)
SFC Ian Lumgair
I have not head one person say that. its not based on any known science in fact its own data accumulated say that its grossly inaccurate. that lack courage that lacks effort. That is the height of "Every time something is difficult we just want to change it to suit our needs (or laziness)." again this just show we are willing to let troops get screwed because we are not doing our due diligence. How does that make sense
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Yeah, duh, someone made it a standard so it must be good!! The correct answer is, if something is wrong, you work to make it right, not run away, or hide your head in the sand. Positive and effective changes in our military have been made based on suggestions made and promoted by low ranking individuals that saw a shortfall and were not afraid to say something. The weight standards were originally intended to ensure Soldiers presented a professional appearance in uniform. Look at how poorly these standards accomplish that. I have seen fat, out of shape slobs with fat necks, manage to pass tape, while Soldiers in excellent physical condition failed. If appearance is important, than we have plenty of just plain “uglies” that need to be put out, and plenty of others that just seem to always have a dumb look on their face.
What we need are physical standards directly related to the mission that Soldier is expected to perform and tests that actually demonstrate those abilities. These standards should not be modified due to age, sex or size. If you need to be able to carry a certain amount, certain distance, in a certain time, in a certain range of conditions, and be able to perform certain tasks within determined parameters after you have done that, how old, or what sex you are is not a factor (did I say “certain” enough times). Army leadership needs to get their head out of this fantasy world they seem to be living in, and face reality. The point of physical conditioning and physical standards is to effectively accomplish the mission, not putting on a show, lives are at risk. [The Army leaders still won’t give up formation runs even though these are well documented to have no value to physical conditioning or unit moral except for the arrogant ass that is setting the pace. For anyone who does not naturally run at that pace, it is damaging to bones, knees, muscle tone, and spines; anything else I am forgetting? The medical core has long fought to eliminate these events.]
What we need are physical standards directly related to the mission that Soldier is expected to perform and tests that actually demonstrate those abilities. These standards should not be modified due to age, sex or size. If you need to be able to carry a certain amount, certain distance, in a certain time, in a certain range of conditions, and be able to perform certain tasks within determined parameters after you have done that, how old, or what sex you are is not a factor (did I say “certain” enough times). Army leadership needs to get their head out of this fantasy world they seem to be living in, and face reality. The point of physical conditioning and physical standards is to effectively accomplish the mission, not putting on a show, lives are at risk. [The Army leaders still won’t give up formation runs even though these are well documented to have no value to physical conditioning or unit moral except for the arrogant ass that is setting the pace. For anyone who does not naturally run at that pace, it is damaging to bones, knees, muscle tone, and spines; anything else I am forgetting? The medical core has long fought to eliminate these events.]
(0)
(0)
Sgt Luke Charles
Body Mass Index certainly has some scientific validity although not everyone who is fit will meet it. Waist size and health have a very strong correlation, if you have a waist size over 40 for a man and 35 for a woman its is HIGHLY likely that you are in poor health. Using steroid abusing bodybuilders and NFL players as examples of health is ridiculous and those of them that are healthy would still pass the tape measure.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
i just listened to a pod cast that stated BMI is based on research funded by big phrama.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I think the tape is a one size fits all approach, however, different body types are going to be taped differently. If someone has a tiny neck their % will go up as opposed to a larger person with a larger neck. The tape needs an overhaul to something more accurate. If we are going to start throwing people out we better do it with something on point.
(6)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
Exactly some people pass the pt test by a few seconds and pass height and weight. Women who are busy can score in the 80% and fail height and weight because of there hips and small neck
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I think the standards are a little too unrealistic. Many individuals who are fit and can pass the fitness test are done in by the tape test. I do agree with having high standards, but if you do a tape test against any lineman from any professional football team, almost all of them would pass the fitness part but fail the tape measure miserably.
(6)
(0)
SFC Anabel Cepero
MSgt Reilly,
I definitely agree, do you think we will ever get a more realistic standard?
(0)
(0)
1stSgt (Join to see)
I am not sure if we will ever get a realistic standard, but one can hope! My feeling is that with the way the current downsizing of the force is looking, the powers that be will not be in any great need to change any standards such as the fit testing standards. That is a shame and harder on the new recruits. What will end up happening (in my humble opinion) is that we will enter another war and have to relax any standards in order to expand the force once again. This happened right after 9/11. How soon we forget the Lessons Learned!
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SGT Cepero,
More realistic probably not. However, I do see them lowering the allowed percentage to "trim the fat" (pun intended, lol) and reduce the number of bodies in boots.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
I Have 100s of pictures of Soldiers considered overweight kicking ass down range. I've seen a PT stud succumb to the pressure and break down. Physical standards are important. But If I were king, I wouldn't kick a stud out because they missed tape by a bit. Some people have skinny necks. If I could change the reg, it would exempt Soldiers that scored a 250+ in the APFT from 600-9. But I'm not king, so I enforce what is regulation, as it is my duty. Back in 1998, there was talk about exempting Soldiers that score a 270+. But that quickly went away. Remember trying to chapter a Soldier for weight in 2002? You couldn't, coz we needed fighters. Why is a soldier good enough to go to war heavy, but not good enough in garrison? My 2 cents.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I have two opinions on this. I, myself, have always been "lean" and haven't had an issue with height and weight standards. However, I have bulked up at some points and have been 2-3 pounds away from being "overweight". While I know passing the tape standards would be no issue, it's still funny that the standard would say i'm almost overweight. Now, on the flip side, I've seen Joes who are 300+, but they have a fat neck and pass tape. We really have to change this.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I believe that if you want to enforce the standard you should teach NCOs how to tape to standard. I can't believe how many people feel they are capable, but can screw a Soldier within a matter of an inch. Too high, too low, too loose. Where are all these Master Fitness Trainers? I get taped and that's ok, but to get taped by different people and feel like I can do a better job, or show them how to do it is wrong. Also, to have someone tape me and not know what they are doing, but tell me I can't help them, when I have been doing this way longer, also wrong. Finally, if you have to be taped, it isn't necessarily a bad thing, we are all born differently, it is those that don't pass that need to be brought to standard. I have been there and I brought myself out.
(3)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
SGT Mouser, I make my NCOs have AR 600-9 out while they are taping individuals, even if they have done it for years. If all NCOs would do this, it would keep anyone from taping incorrectly.
(2)
(0)
3
3
0
I think the Marine Corps has the most strict standards for height/weight and body fat standards. Somebody post yours and correct me if I am wrong. As I've grown through the Corps, I went from a lean Marine to a bulk Marine. With this change I went from making weight to being over weight and making body fat percentage. I use to be embarrassed to have to tape and would cut weight like professional athletes do for weigh ins but having to do that 2-4 times a year, I finally gave up trying to make weight and focus on body fat percentage. I don't weigh myself anymore, I measure myself. Here is the standards for males. I try to aim at least 1-2% below my max because you don't want to be borderline, doesn't look good for promotion not to mention the margin for errors. So at first I was trying to shoot for 16% but now I shoot for 17%.
AGE 17-26: 18%
AGE 27-39: 19%
AGE 40-45: 20%
AGE 46+ :21%
AGE 27-39: 19%
AGE 40-45: 20%
AGE 46+ :21%
Having to be tapped for about 3 years now, I know how inaccurate our measuring system is. I don't disagree with it for its one of the most cost effective ways to gauge your body fat but you have to know your stuff and ensure you do not bloat yourself before and that the measurements are done accurately.
Dont eat a massive meal before hand, consume a ridiculous amount of fluids, or workout before a measurement, you can bloat a lot. With measurements, always have a spotter who knows the regulations and ensure the tape is not pulled too tight or loose and is parallel with the deck for the waist and perpendicular to the axis of the neck. Doing either of these two things wrong can severely alter your measurement. Depending on your height/weight, a half inch can mean 1% body fat difference.
For a bigger Marine like myself, it is not easy, but it's the standard and you must meet it!
(3)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
I have never completely agreed with our way of factoring body fat however in today's highly competitive Corps it definitely allows the cuts to be made easier.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
The tape test is out dated and flawed. I mean, how much would it cost just to give units a set of calipers instead?
(2)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
There waa an article in the Army Times that graded all of the HGT and WGT tests available for use. I beleive the ARMY tape test received a D or C- if I recall.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google