Should Height/Weight be Disregarded if the PT Score is High Enough?

I have always been 200lbs or more, at my peak I could run the 2 mile in 13 flat without even pushing myself, maxed the pushups and scored pretty well on situps as well, and even though I could outperform many of the smaller guys, I was barred and flagged because my neck was one inch too small for my waist size. In my unit it seemed like appearance was way more important than performance. I was always around 1 or 2 percent over on BMI. after years of being told that you are fat and useless you begin to believe it yourself and once that happens its all down hill from there.(speaking from experience) my unit took things to the extreme though. I was forced to take a PT test every week by one of my 1SGs.

I've been in this position. It's not my weight that is the problem, it's my height. I typically pass a PT Test with 255 to 270, max pushups, almost max situps and roughly 16 min 2 mile at the age of 30. I am 66" tall and normally weigh in around 195-200pnds. Average neck size is 17" and 37" waist. I am right on the line. The army wants me at 168, i haven't weighed that since I was 16 years old. There have been a few times where I am physically training for mass gains and strength during the winter and then work on weight control and endurance and speed during the spring, summer and fall months (MN winters are cold and treadmill running sucks). Every six months between ht/wt checks and PT tests are always a game of cat and mouse; training like a wrestler to cut weight and after weigh-in make the gains that I want. I have even heard of Soldiers that are trained professional lifters and body builders that have been kicked out of military schools because they passed the PT test but failed the tape. I think the Army needs to realize that this is no longer the 60's and the new American body type is bigger, faster and stronger. There is a difference between mean and strong and fat and weak. Current Army Body comp doesn't measure the mean and strong correctly.

This is a huge issue in MN where a majority of people are Norwegian/German decent and have a bigger build than the average person... I have unfortunately had the task of taping my female Soldiers that consistently run 270+ PT only to have them fail ht/wt and then fail taping under the standards... These are great Soldiers that look good in the uniform, but because the standards for calculating for females is made for a Barbie doll that has more difference between hips to waist for females, they are considered fat... The unfortunate fact of genetics being the factor and that people of the German or Norwegian decent do not have much difference between waist and hips has caused us to lose some outstanding soldiers and has cost them their careers... I believe that if they make well with appearance and they can pass PT, ht/wt should not matter or commanders need to have a waiver program or something...

This comment is marine-specific, so I have tried to elaborate for those unfamiliar with certain acronyms:

This is actually a hot button issue, especially among the rank and file, at least at my unit.

10 years ago, unless they didn't like you, you could be overweight and have BCP (Body Composition Program) paperwork swept under the rug if you ran a 1st class PFT (Physical Fitness Test; the CFT [Combat Fitness Test] did not exist). Of course, it was a different time- the United States was in the middle of fighting two major wars in the middle east and needed to retain and promote, especially since this was when the OIF surge was just kicking off; I can recall several NCOs (E-4/E-5) in their late 30's(+) who had been out since the 90's coming back in during this time, bringing an 'old corps' mentality which, to be sure, was introduction of a system that was known to "bend" some rules for the greater good of everyone- some of these rules include "losing" bad paperwork to keep marines in the fight, or "correcting" the problem in lieu of paperwork, known as the option of "pen or pain" (which today we call hazing and/or assault).

Since then, with the draw-downs and a return to peacetime activities, standards have tightened down significantly with policies unheard of in 2005: MAP (Marine Appearance Program) dictates that you don't even need to be overweight to be assigned to BCP- if you look like a 'bag of ass' in your uniform, you can be assigned to the program. You could be running 300 PFT/ CFTs but if you are overweight, and fail to tape in regulations on your Body Fat Percentage, then you are not even given the option to get promoted, and you will receive a permanent entry in your SRB of the incident, a negative counseling, and the highest markings you can receive on your proficiency and conduct is a 3.8/3.8 (average, as in, doing the absolute bare minimum, is a 4.2/4.2). The best that I have ever heard it put was from a Staff Sergeant who was living proof of his quote: "You can recover your career easier from getting a DUI than you can from being assigned to BCP".

It is a sad reality, and I am by know means knocking command decision, as I do see the method behind the madness. However, I do believe that the overall performance of the marine in question should be taken into consideration before being assigned to such programs; I believe the program should not be 'issued out', because it should not be a punishment- it should be the commander's attempt at correcting a deficiency in order to get that individual back into the fight. Even just getting a 1st Class PFT (226 at 26 yrs or below, 200 at 27+ yrs) should, in my opinion, warrant at least one exclusion of being overweight. After all, that's why it is a 1st Class PFT, because a score that meets or exceeds those scores are exceptional, not the expectation.

*I know many of you probably feel the same way, but I must play devil's advocate to myself: being WAY overweight is inexcusable, because neither you or I want to have to fireman carry someone twice our weight to a corpsman/medic while under fire. After all, they do pay us to conduct PT and stay in shape.*

I'm all for either revising or eliminating the current HT/WT standard. The current system just does not accomplish what it is supposed to. I've personally seen a lot more in-shape people screwed over by failing tape than I have fat bodies.

I haven't had an APFT score below 270 since I was a PVT in 2007. Since hitting the gym harder in 2010 I've averaged in the 290's but I now require to be taped. There's been a few times I've been within 1%. On one occasion my wife barely failed tape right after scoring a 320 on the APFT. Furthermore, we had a Soldier in one of my past units failing tape as a collegiate wrestler. He has an absolute animal on the APFT and had a doctor's note stating he was 5% body fat, but he still ended up flagged over failing tape. While this is going on we have fat bodies with huge necks sliding by.

We either need to go to a more accurate system or change the requirement to being at the commander's discretion.

I don't see an issue with changing it. Your height and weight is meaningless. The entire point of a fitness test is to see if you are up to fitness standards. If you can pass the test then where's the issue?

The current system needs to be changed, because it is an inaccurate scale to begin with. According to my height it says I should be a 135lbs, which the last time I weighted that amount I looked sick. My present weight does not make me look unprofessional, but I always run about 5 pounds over my max. Being on a permanent profile does make it harder to keep my weight in check, but I deal with it the best I can. As long as a soldier is professional in appearance than I do not see the issue.

I do think the cut offs for height/weight and taping need to be re-looked. These numbers, I assume, come from averages from a range of people. Some people are naturally larger than average due to their ethnic background, but it does not mean their physical strength, endurance, or appearance are affected. I've seen many physically fit Soldiers get flagged because they did not meet the tape. Other resources should be made available to measure body fat, because taping is not the 100% solution.

I feel that should someone request a waiver for BCA and then achieve a PT Score or >270 then their should be no issue when it comes to fitness evaluation. To play devil's advocate here as well, some may say that Height/Weight should also be evaluated for asthetic purposes. Any member of the military should look smart in their uniform and when they are disproportionate due to an inflated waistline it gives the appearance of laziness and a lack of concern for the member's health. Just my thoughts.

Here is my thought, if you can ace a PFT then enough be said on the subject. I spent my whole USMC enlistment as a "fatbody" yet I could run rings around the perfect idea of what a Marine should look like. I had the Command Sargent Major tell me "you are the biggest Marine I have ever seen" to which I responded, and the best as well. The point is if you can hustle with the best of them then carry on