OPPLIGER, R. A., D. H. NIELSEN, and C. G. VANCE Wrestlers' minimal weight: anthropometry, bioimpedance, and hydrostatic weighing compared, Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 247-253, 1991. The need for accurate assessment of minimal wrestling weight among interscholastic wrestlers has been well documented, Previous research has demonstrated the validity of anthropometric methods for this purpose, but little research has examined the validity of bioelectrical impedance (BIA) measurements. Comparison between BIA systems has received limited attention. With these two objectives, we compared the prediction of minimal weight (MW) among 57 interscholastic wrestlers using three anthropometric methods (skinfolds (SF) and two skeletal dimensions equations) and three BIA systems (Berkeley Medical Research (BMR), RJL, and Valhalla (VAL)). All methods showed high correlations (r values > 0.92) with hydrostatic weighting (HW) and between methods (r values > 0.90). The standard errors of estimate (SEE) were relatively small for all methods, especially for SF and the three BIA systems (SEE < 0.70 kg). The total errors of prediction (E) for RJL and VAL (E = 4.4 and 3.9 kg) were significantly larger than observed nonsignificant BMR and SF values (E = 2.3 and 1.8 kg, respectively). Significant mean differences were observed between HW, RJL, VAL, and the two skeletal dimensions equations, but nonsignificant differences were observed between HW, BMR, and SF. BMR differed significantly from the RJL and VAL systems. The results suggest that RJL and VAL have potential application for this subpopulation. Prediction equation refinement with the addition of selected anthropometric measurement or moderating variables may enhance their utility. However, within the scope of our study, SF and BMR BIA appear to be the most valid methods for determining MW in interscholastic wrestlers.
(C)1991The American College of Sports Medicine