Height to weight ratio

>>41079669
You weigh 80 kg, that's why

File: 1403444676430.jpg (44KB, 569x506px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 569x506px

>tfw 6'2 195 cutting down to 180-185

i seriously hope i dont look that dyel in my 180s

>>41079679
But guys who are 10 cm shorter than me but also weigh 5 kg less basically have my goal body.
I'm not gonna complain about being tall cause being tall is awesome but I thought maybe I'm just doing something wrong or maybe it's just genetics?

>>41079712
As the guy above said, you're not heavy enough.
Go with the rule of 10: for every 10 cm above the 1m mark, you should add 10kg to your weight.
If you keep training consistently and reach that weight in, say, a year, you might actually look like your goal body.

Bone structure
Muscle insertions
Head size

>>41079669
I used to be 70kg 1.90 and look'd like your pic related bout a year ago lol
I think you're way above 15%bf & you have big legs because that's the weight gain for most newbies.

>>41079989
OP here
I am 15% bodyfat as I know (got tested).
I do have grasshopper legs though :(

yeah 80kg at 6'2 aint much soz

>>41079669
I gained about 9 kilos of muscle and look almost the same. Muscle is pretty fucking dense, and those guys probably have way less than 15% bf.

>>41079669
Yes. Yes it does.

Short guys can look ripped effortlessly because they don't need to spread their muscle over a very large/long frame.

Wanna look big (fit/strong) at 180cm? You need to shoot for 100kg (15% body fat is fine). 100kg.

AT LEAST 90kg, but that's just a start.

>>41080135
>I am 15% bodyfat as I know (got tested)

Tested with what? If it's underwater weighing or a DXA scan, that number is probably correct within 2%. If anything else, it's only as good as eyeballing.

>>41079669
probably cause the 180cm 75 kg guy has more muscle and is leaner than you

You need to be at least 90 kg at 10-12.5 % bodyfat to look somewhat non-DYEL