Big Calves

Mark Alexander

Can I just say that I find it just a little desturbing that some of us are measuring our calves, then on to thighs. Where next I wonder.......

MyDad played rugby for years and has large calves, I didn't and just cycle. I don't. I know where you're comming from but large calves may lead to less flexibility. I thinl it may be a double edged sword

I'm off home to get the measure out lol

hammerite

Mark Alexander wrote:

Can I just say that I find it just a little desturbing that some of us are measuring our calves, then on to thighs. Where next I wonder.......

MyDad played rugby for years and has large calves, I didn't and just cycle. I don't. I know where you're comming from but large calves may lead to less flexibility. I thinl it may be a double edged sword

I'm off home to get the measure out lol

definitely agree there mark. I've ended up with no end of problems with shin splints, tendonitis etc...... My physio has said that I have quite a poor range of movement so should do more stretching than your average small calved person.

Someone also mentioned earlier about having skinny ankles....... that's another problem I have had, broke my ankle twice (my first break was in 4 places) and torn ankle ligaments recently.

simon johnson

Couldn't resist:

5,8; 70kg

Calves 14.5

Thighs 23.5

Mythic

im 6 foot 2 and have 22 " calves it really makes no difference they were skinny bt i played rugby aswel,l it helps there but not in cycling if anything they're worse. And with ankles mine are 15" andf i keep on having injurys

spasypaddy

ok so since i measured my calves, ive now measured my thighs...

I'm 5 foot 7/8 (not too sure)
weight 79kg
calves: 16inches
Quads/hamstrings: 25inches

i hasten to add i can deadlift over 150kg and squat a similar amount.

Clever Pun

6'5 tall
98.5kg's / 15 1/2 stone

Calves 16.5
thighs 24

millar time

Calves 16
Thighs 22

Height 6 ft
Weight 71 kg

frenchfighter

A few points:

Fat ppl, or those with a lot of muscle mass have large calves even if they don't walk on them, simply because your calves support your WHOLE body weight, and thus the heavier you are the harder they have to work.

Small calves do not mean slow riders - David Millar and Bradley Wiggins (http://tinyurl.com/2voult) have tiny claves and yet are two of the fastest guys for TTs...

After riding many many miles, you calves actually get smaller as they are not really needed too much, dependent on your pedal technique...

Anyone else know of any pro guys with huge calves? Jimmy Caspers comes to mind...

Jan Ullrich also is nuts: http://www.cyclingfans.com/jan_ullrich_legs.jpg
http://tinyurl.com/22ksqr

Unknown: http://tinyurl.com/yqbgjx

SteveR_100Milers

frenchfighter wrote:

A few points:

Fat ppl, or those with a lot of muscle mass have large calves even if they don't walk on them, simply because your calves support your WHOLE body weight, and thus the heavier you are the harder they have to work.

Small calves do not mean slow riders - David Millar and Bradley Wiggins (http://tinyurl.com/2voult) have tiny claves and yet are two of the fastest guys for TTs...

After riding many many miles, you calves actually get smaller as they are not really needed too much, dependent on your pedal technique...

Anyone else know of any pro guys with huge calves? Jimmy Caspers comes to mind...

Jan Ullrich also is nuts: http://www.cyclingfans.com/jan_ullrich_legs.jpg
http://tinyurl.com/22ksqr

Unknown: http://tinyurl.com/yqbgjx

read the rest of the therad then you'll understand the reason why everyone is measuring their legs. So far, few in anyone has met the aesthetic ideal of a 3:1 diamtr ratio.....
For some of us, our calves have got relatively bigger then our quads through cycling so I dont actually agree with your observation.

popette

pneumatic wrote:

popette wrote:

Turnbull2000 wrote:

5' 10' with 16' calves. Women love them 8)

I must say, big calves with a kilt and the socks rolled down a bit with some boots - I like.

Funny you should say that. Since I took up cycling again, I have felt much more confident in full highland dress. Especially since these days, on seeing a man in a kilt, women seem to think it OK to have a good hands-on inspection. Makes you feel like a sideboard on the Antiques Roadshow. When approached in this way, the trick is to do an imaginary track stand, rendering the legs mahogany-like and the ladies speechless with admiration. 17.5 inches, by the way.

I was looking over to fife from Edinburgh just the other day (visiting relatives there - husband is scottish so has a kilt ) - I thought about you cycling over there.

Bugger! I've got the biggest thighs so far.

frenchfighter

SteveR_100Milers wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

A few points:

Fat ppl, or those with a lot of muscle mass have large calves even if they don't walk on them, simply because your calves support your WHOLE body weight, and thus the heavier you are the harder they have to work.

Small calves do not mean slow riders - David Millar and Bradley Wiggins (http://tinyurl.com/2voult) have tiny claves and yet are two of the fastest guys for TTs...

After riding many many miles, you calves actually get smaller as they are not really needed too much, dependent on your pedal technique...

Anyone else know of any pro guys with huge calves? Jimmy Caspers comes to mind...

Jan Ullrich also is nuts: http://www.cyclingfans.com/jan_ullrich_legs.jpg
http://tinyurl.com/22ksqr

Unknown: http://tinyurl.com/yqbgjx

read the rest of the therad then you'll understand the reason why everyone is measuring their legs. So far, few in anyone has met the aesthetic ideal of a 3:1 diamtr ratio.....
For some of us, our calves have got relatively bigger then our quads through cycling so I dont actually agree with your observation.

I didn't say anything about ppl measring their legs, and have nothing against it.

I appreciate that some ppls claves have got bigger, although for the majority, it would probably be the other way round given that your quads are the key muscles used whereas the calves contribute little in comparison. Also, if you had tiny calves to begin with then it goes without saying that your calves are bound to increase in size as do all muscles that haven't really been called into play previously.

frenchfighter

SteveR_100Milers wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

A few points:

Fat ppl, or those with a lot of muscle mass have large calves even if they don't walk on them, simply because your calves support your WHOLE body weight, and thus the heavier you are the harder they have to work.

Small calves do not mean slow riders - David Millar and Bradley Wiggins (http://tinyurl.com/2voult) have tiny claves and yet are two of the fastest guys for TTs...

After riding many many miles, you calves actually get smaller as they are not really needed too much, dependent on your pedal technique...

Anyone else know of any pro guys with huge calves? Jimmy Caspers comes to mind...

Jan Ullrich also is nuts: http://www.cyclingfans.com/jan_ullrich_legs.jpg
http://tinyurl.com/22ksqr

Unknown: http://tinyurl.com/yqbgjx

read the rest of the therad then you'll understand the reason why everyone is measuring their legs. So far, few in anyone has met the aesthetic ideal of a 3:1 diamtr ratio.....
For some of us, our calves have got relatively bigger then our quads through cycling so I dont actually agree with your observation.

I didn't say anything about ppl measring their legs, and have nothing against it.

I appreciate that some ppls claves have got bigger, although for the majority, it would probably be the other way round given that your quads are the key muscles used whereas the calves contribute little in comparison. Also, if you had tiny calves to begin with then it goes without saying that your calves are bound to increase in size as do all muscles that haven't really been called into play previously.

on the road

If you apply the 3:1 ratio, then my thighs are 20.5 inches which means my calves should be 6.8 inches :shock:, the only time my calves were that small was as a very lickle baby, or, my calves are 13 inches which means my thighs should be 39 inches :shock:, even my waist is nowhere near that big :shock:

Something's wromg somewhere, either SteveR_100Milers has got it wrong or I've read his original post wrong :?

SteveR_100Milers

on the road wrote:

If you apply the 3:1 ratio, then my thighs are 20.5 inches which means my calves should be 6.8 inches :shock:, the only time my calves were that small was as a very lickle baby, or, my calves are 13 inches which means my thighs should be 39 inches :shock:, even my waist is nowhere near that big :shock:

Something's wromg somewhere, either SteveR_100Milers has got it wrong or I've read his original post wrong :?

It's based upon a purely theoretical aesthetic ratio. I'll bet there are pro's that have thighs >30", mind you 10" calves is small so maybe this ratio is somewhat ludicrous!

itsallinthelegs

frenchfighter wrote:

After riding many many miles, you calves actually get smaller as they are not really needed too much, dependent on your pedal technique...

I agree with the above - my calves have got smaller and more defined. Thighs have changed drastically, namely narrower looking from the front, and wider looking from the side. I have read in various places that your calf muscles don't actually contribute much to the pedal stroke, and are mainly used as a transfer for the power from the quads.

Must admit, I've come to love the look of my legs since starting cycling!

Massimo

Calves 16"
Thighs 24"

Five foot 8 inches tall
160 lbs

Is someone logging all this info to come up with an average bike radar user body index?