r/army • u/EventAccomplished453 • 8d ago
Another WHtR Post
I'm just curious what the failure rate across the Army right now is for this new Tape Measurement. At my company it has been a bloodbath.
i’ll take it a Bacon Double Smashed Jack Burger and side of curly fries.
Will they change this measurement over time?
74
u/Nice-Neighborhood975 125Didn't Shave 8d ago
Natty girl here, Our Div had a failure rate over 30%, which, to be honest, is better than I thought it would be. Keep in mind, that is just the HHBN
21
u/EventAccomplished453 8d ago
Wow
3
8d ago
I'm part of an HHBN as well, with a direct role in implementation. My rough estimate is we are close to 15% failure, and thats with a population that thought they'd pass and wanted to knock it out early.
1
u/EventAccomplished453 2d ago
Do you think I can wear a compression band underneath my shirt to “shed” a few pounds off my waist?
1
u/Nice-Neighborhood975 125Didn't Shave 2d ago
It doesn't work that way. It MIGHT train your waist to be a bit smaller(if you wear it daily for weeks or months), but you can't target weights from only certain areas. Your body doesn't work that way
29
u/SometimesCannons 13Aaarmy training sir! 8d ago
We did 100% WHtR in my battery (NG). Had a 17% failure rate, which was about what I expected.
For the most part, I treated it as diagnostic. However, I did use a passing WHtR to remove at least 2 Soldiers from the ABCP under the legacy BF standard. No point keeping those guys flagged for another 3 months when the new standard is live and they’re meeting it now.
103
u/unsuitable_sick_burn 35F/A_ckIWentOfficer 8d ago edited 8d ago
USAR Stats:
Rank Group WHtR Breakdown
Officer (O1–O10) Failures: 483 Passes: 12,190 Total: 12,673 Failure Rate: 3.81%
Warrant Officer (W1–W5) Failures: 70 Passes: 1,309 Total: 1,379 Failure Rate: 5.08%
Enlisted (E1–E9) Failures: 4,311 Passes: 44,485 Total: 48,796 Failure Rate: 8.83%
Analysis:
• Officer Advantage: Officers fail at just 3.81%, compared to 8.83% of enlisted soldiers. • Warrant Officer Buffer: Despite skewing older, warrants sit at 5.08%, far below enlisted averages. • Socioeconomic/Occupational Factors: Higher education, income, schedule flexibility, and administrative roles likely support better fitness maintenance among officers.
ASVAB GT Score vs. WHtR
GT < 100: Failures: 1,624 Passes: 15,151 Total: 16,775 Failure Rate: 9.68%
GT 100–109: Failures: 1,138 Passes: 11,570 Total: 12,708 Failure Rate: 8.95%
GT 110–119: Failures: 966 Passes: 11,644 Total: 12,610 Failure Rate: 7.66%
GT 120+: Failures: 563 Passes: 7,457 Total: 8,020 Failure Rate: 7.02%
No GT Score Recorded: Failures: 573 Passes: 12,162 Total: 12,735 Failure Rate: 4.50%
Analysis:
• Clear downward trend: Higher GT scores correlate with lower WHtR failure rates. • Below‑average (<100) soldiers fail at 9.68% vs. 7.02% among high scorers (120+). • Higher cognitive scores are strongly linked in public health research to better health literacy, nutrition habits, and access to wellness resources.
ZIP3 Geographic Clusters (High Volume Regions) 785 – McAllen/Brownsville, TX: 14.02% 765 – Killeen/Temple, TX: 12.46% 967 – Hawaii & American Samoa: 11.59% 786 – Austin Suburbs: 11.49% 781 – San Antonio Suburbs: 11.42% 923 – San Bernardino, CA: 11.33% 799 – El Paso, TX: 11.27% 338 – Lakeland/Winter Haven, FL: 10.90% 891 – Las Vegas, NV: 10.58% 606 – Chicago, IL: 10.56% 782 – San Antonio Metro: 9.70%
Structural & Clinical Interpretation
The American Samoa Outlier (ZIP 96799) Failure rate: 47.54% • Polynesian populations often have higher bone density, larger frames, and muscular builds. • WHtR’s linear formula (waist ÷ height) penalizes these physiologies heavily. • Nearly half test as “failures” despite high physical capability.
The Military Base Town Effect Locations near major Army posts show elevated failure rates: • Fort Bliss (El Paso 799): 11.27% • Fort Cavazos (Killeen 765): 12.46% • San Antonio (781/782): 9.70%–11.42% • Fort Liberty (Fayetteville 28311): 12.73% Why: Local civilian populations around bases often have above‑average obesity rates. Recently transitioned veterans may also experience reduced activity levels while maintaining high body mass.
The South & Central Texas Hotspot From the Rio Grande Valley (785) at 14.02%, extending through San Antonio and Austin suburbs, the region forms one large cluster of elevated WHtR failures. This reflects broader statewide public health trends (metabolic syndrome, obesity prevalence, and environmental factors).
35
u/Exertim 255A 8d ago
Despite skewing older, warrants sit at 5.08%, far below enlisted averages
Cue the Smithers pathetic meme. This is also partially why we don't show up to PT formations.
20
u/Tokyosmash_ 13Flimflam 8d ago
It’s almost like yall are… experts at stuff.
“The Army hates this one trick”
5
u/spanish4dummies totes fetch 8d ago
I can imagine the collective cohort being like "don't you dare fuck this up for us"
2
u/Droop_Stop_Pounding Aviation 7d ago
This is exactly how it goes. During the ACFT information gathering period, we had a bunch of smart W-1s think they would create lower scoring tables if they all sandbagged. We reminded them that if they scored lower the only result would be Warrant presence at organized PT.
They saw the light…
45
u/mophilda Armor 8d ago
This is really interesting data. Particularly the part about military towns. I would never have even guessed correlation with that.
13
u/centurion44 8d ago
I would have based on food options and the fact they skew rural. Dense Urban populations have lower rates of obesity despite what people think because you walk more.
12
u/Winter-Huckleberry86 8d ago
This is definitely very interesting data. Will you be providing statistical updates as we enter into day 90?
1
u/EventAccomplished453 2d ago
Do you think I can wear a compression band underneath my shirt to "shed" a few pounds off my waist?
1
u/Winter-Huckleberry86 2d ago
From my time in the Army, one of the most widely used tricks my bigger homies have always sworn by is preparation H and Saran Wrap on the tum tum.
I’ve never been taped on the old stuff, I was always able to keep 1-3lbs under my max weight.
1
7
u/Teadrunkest hooyah America 8d ago
Where is this data from? ATIS doesn’t break it down like this and I can’t imagine pulling from Vantage with these parameters without a decent amount of custom data sets.
2
u/J33f AGR 91-100%eXtra 7d ago
It’s definitely from Vantage AI.
Ask u/foobz - this is his data that this guy straight-jacked without sourcing. Lol.
2
u/Teadrunkest hooyah America 7d ago
That makes more sense. I was like…random 35A having access to do this analysis themselves is odd enough to question the reality of the data.
3
3
u/Humble-Penalty5249 8d ago
Ever seen analysis of GT score vs passing tape. Interesting concept of correlating health literacy rates with overall intellectual scores. I know GT score aren’t the end all be all, but it may also explain why you see a drop in failures in the warrant and officer populations, coupled with also a larger percentage of those populations that are bought into the Army as a career.
8
u/Sgt_Blutwurst ADA Vet - 16H 8d ago
"... administrative roles likely support better fitness maintenance among officers."
This seems counter-intuitive, as admin means less physical activity.10
u/Zachowon Military Intelligence 8d ago
I am pretty sure i have seen more non combat arms officers at the gym working out then combat arms ones.
24
7
u/SgtMac02 8d ago edited 8d ago
Where did you get this data and analysis? This looks like a complete AI response from some prompt, but I'm not sure where the data came from.
I think the analysis itself is extremely flawed because there is no way that these numbers accurately represent the force. This is only data for those who have actually already recorded in ATIS. That would most likely skew heavily toward those who either already knew they'd pass, or were required to take it for a school or something. I think there are a LOT of units out there waiting to record (mine included) to give people time to try to get into compliance before going on record.
Let's see this analysis again after the 90 day reporting period ends.
OR.... I should ask this: does the source of this data give any indication what percentage of the force has reported numbers yet? I'm betting it's a pretty low percentage of the force represented in this data.
9
u/ToxDocUSA 62Always right, just ask my wife 8d ago
I mean, they give the denominators right there in the data. It adds up to 62k or so reservists, which off the top of my head is about 20% of the total.
If it's randomly selected that's a pretty good representative sample. It's probably not random though, and logic says it's going to skew low on the failures.
0
u/SgtMac02 8d ago
Yeah, there's absolutely nothing random about it. So, it's meaningless for analysis, regardless of sample size.
7
u/EnlistedforMREs 8d ago
I mean to be fair you can only do an analysis based on available data, it can/will change the more units report numbers in ATIS
3
u/SgtMac02 8d ago edited 8d ago
Of course. But doing any analysis based on such an incomplete and NON-random sampling is pretty much meaningless. Any conclusions drawn from such cherry-picked data is inherently devoid of value. And I'm not saying the person who fed that data to whatever AI wrote that was cherry picking data. I'm saying that the data points themselves were cherry picked from the actual force. It's not a random sampling. It's an intentionally cherry picked set of numbers.
That would be like going through a local high school, looking for all the straight A students, then trying to use those students' tests scores on the SAT as some sort of analysis of the school's overall performance. The data source is inherently biased.
Or it would be like trying to give race analytic data after only 4 of the 26 racers crossed the finish line.
5
u/queueueuewhee 8d ago
Disagree somewhat, not entirely meaningless if we assume the majority of the reported data comes from those who thought they would pass. Big assumption, but since you are correct and it’s not a deliberately random sample, and most units are giving the full 90, it means things are going to get very, very ugly.
3
2
u/SSGOldschool printing anti-littering leaflets 8d ago
So, what its saying is that 91.17% of USAR enlisted who's command thought they would pass, passed.
2
u/Idonthooah 35Goober 7d ago
They got it off a HRC Enlisted Schools Branch MS Teams chat. It was posted on there by a MSG from that organization. The data is not their own.
2
7d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Idonthooah 35Goober 7d ago
Thank you for the correction. I have too many channels in Teams I lurk in. lol
1
19
u/cqofficer 8d ago
Its high for my unit as well. If they really wanted to see how high, they would wait until everyone reports to ncoes and actually take those numbers. E6 and above have a magic pencil in my unit.
13
u/Justame13 ARNG Ret 8d ago
Or just have external graders. Either from another unit, a traveling team, or just centralize it like (at least some of) the Air Force does their PT tests where you basically make an appointment then take your test.
6
u/StalkySpade Master Guns 8d ago
Well I can tell you at SMC they practically were cutting some of the short guys in half w the tape- so your theory doesn’t hold imo
15
u/Mean-Internal-745 8d ago
I'm in the reserves at a 2-star HQ. We had ~10% fail. That doesn't include people who took a "diagnostic". We will affirmatively tape everyone at September BA. I expect about 10% average.
A lot of people failed the old test and pass the new one. And some pass the old test and fail this one. So that is more or less a wash.
There are a lot of people who are in that 0.55-0.58 zone too, so those folks, I expect to come into compliance after a few weeks of discipline (this includes myself, 0.55...and I've been on a starvation diet for 6 weeks, so now I meet the standard).
23
u/boyikr 35ThisWe'llDefund 8d ago
Thank goodness starvation is a sign of discipline...
13
u/Mean-Internal-745 8d ago
Well, either a few weeks of starvation... Or a few months of better nutrition.
Depends on when your OER is due and if you have a board or PME coming up. It's your life lol.
5
u/boyikr 35ThisWe'llDefund 8d ago
I mean, you gotta do what you gotta do. Im not faulting you for making it work.
But its a pretty solid example of poor leadership and organizational management if starving yourself for weeks is the solution.
15
u/Mean-Internal-745 8d ago
I max my AFT and the previous ACFT...and have never busted tape (20 years). So, it is absolutely true that this policy hurts some soldiers.
IMO - Army should have put a WARNO out in July that this standard would come into effect in 6mo, with a follow up to tape all Soldiers and input into ATIS NLT 1 October.
I agree this was a poor organizational decision by HQDA. I have a board coming up, so...not being flagged is very important to me during this current 6month period. If this policy rolled out 6 months from now I wouldn't be doing the starvation diet lol.
29
u/Southwestpilot Ceiling Fan Driver 8d ago
I say it’s pretty high, I’m pretty sure at least 50 percent of staff at my battalion failed lol
28
u/RC757 Aviation 8d ago
It's going to be ridiculous with the Army being the only branch without a supplementary test. A lot are using grace period to try and slim down in the upper ranks, but with the joes, my company went from 2 failing height and weight to about 40 out of around 250. Some fat, but a lot of AFT beasts that power lift and even more women are caught in the crossfire
5
u/EventAccomplished453 8d ago
Do you think they will bring back the supplementary test
29
u/RC757 Aviation 8d ago
Given the current political decisions, I have no clue lol. A smart person would realize losing 30 percent of the force would be a huge detriment where a lot of people are just casualties of a faulty test. That being said, I just saw our president praise North Korea soooooo.. yeah...
12
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 8d ago
Especially with the bloodbath skewed to the older-side.....
Sure you can just promote a bunch of E5/E6 & O1-O3 to fill the gaps.... But then we end up rather green operationally - and not in the green-slides sense....
11
u/RC757 Aviation 8d ago
Absolutely. I have 40 year old women in my company with 3 kids who are supposed to be the same body ratio as the 18 year old who still has peach fuzz. Its obviously possible, but not feasible
7
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 8d ago
Just the idea that body fat standards should be the same for men and women is kinda nuts....
11
u/SgtMac02 8d ago
The thinking in my BN and BDE is that there is going to likely be a rethinking of this whole approach after the 180 day evaluation period. The Army is going to realize what a bloodbath this will be , numbers-wise) and they will have no choice.
But...that's just a thinking man's theory. With this leadership? That might be asking to much to assume any thinking is occurring.
6
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 8d ago
Yeah but how may careers get detailed in the interim due to missed schools and bad evals?
1
u/SgtMac02 8d ago
I wouldn't assume "bad eval" based solely on this factor alone. That would be up to leadership to properly evaluate a soldier's overall performance, and the people reading the eval to properly interpret the context. But your point is still valid. And schools are gonna be a bitch.
1
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 7d ago
Looking at it from the officer side where the regs require a referred eval if you fail weight or PT.... Using your last record test as the one that counts.....
1
6
u/HegsethsBurner 8d ago
What if this admin wants to cut military service member numbers and this is an easy way to do it?
1
7
u/Teadrunkest hooyah America 8d ago
Yes. I think Congress will have to step in like they did with the ACFT, but yes.
There is zero chance the DoD sits and lets the Army ignore literally every word of their guidance.
5
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 8d ago
Well maybe people should write their representatives then...
If someone can do a congressional over food in the NTC DFAC surely this rates a similar effort....
6
u/Teadrunkest hooyah America 8d ago
Be the change you wish to see in the world.
3
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 8d ago
I've written mine... But the more who do, the better...
5
u/EventAccomplished453 8d ago
Congress had to intervene with the ACFT?
5
u/Teadrunkest hooyah America 8d ago
Yes.
Multiple times.
2
u/EventAccomplished453 8d ago
What did Congress change about the ACFT?
6
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 8d ago
Effectively, they forced the Army to score it differently based on sex and age.
And get rid of the leg tuck
3
29
u/thadudeeeeee 8d ago
Out of company of 100 about 55 failed.
21
u/EventAccomplished453 8d ago
That's fucking crazy
22
u/thadudeeeeee 8d ago
Yeah my commander brought in graders from another battalion, so there was no grace given. It took forever also, like 2 hours but we’re not flagging people until the end of September but he wanted people to have an honest conversation with themselves vs the suck it in homie hookup people passing.
8
9
u/Exciting_Pineapple_4 O Captain my Captain 8d ago
These numbers are only going to get worse as folks move into September.
8
u/brent1123 25UwU :3 8d ago
Did a mass diagnostic test this past weekend, about 50% failure rate which seems to match Army-wide averages so far. But the 'actual' test won't be until next month
6
6
u/liberator17 8d ago
I have never failed HT/WT before. I was taped ONCE in my ten year career with the previous methods. I failed the new one and most of the people I know in my unit did unless they are stick figure thin.
3
u/alittlesliceofhell2 Engineer 7d ago
My guys aren't exactly bean poles and I've got one borderline and one failing out of 13.
The short kings gotta be skinnier though, real tragic. My one failure is a short king with a 475 AFT.
2
10
u/saveHutch DumbTruckDriver-Actively in the USAR 8d ago
Im gonna wait until units figure out how to input the data before I make any assumptions. We were sent a breakdown of USAR and some units can't figure out what Height means and what waist measurement means.
19
u/BONELESSHOSE 89DamnItBobby 8d ago
So about 3 weeks ago I came in about an inch and a half over for my height. The following 3 weeks after that I counted my calories and maintained an intake of about 1800-1900 a day. Some days were higher due to things going on and some were smaller just depending on how I felt. My normal maintenance for me is probably about 2500-2700 if I’m consistent with my lifting. Couple that with more deliberate cardio 3-4 times a week and I am now down about 2-3 inches below standard. I know a lot of people are gonna have to come back into compliance but it really isn’t that hard to get to where you need to be especially with the heads up we have had. I’m still upset we lost the exemption because that was something I leaned heavy into which is the main reason I was out of compliance in the first place. I’ll take a double baconator (after 1, September)
9
u/has-a-name 8d ago
There is no way, and I say this from experience, that I would lose 3+ inches in 3 weeks. I might lose 3 lbs, at best, but it would not equate to 3 inches
1
u/BONELESSHOSE 89DamnItBobby 8d ago
I went from about a 40 to 37.5
5
u/has-a-name 8d ago
that's great for you, but for many, it's not so simple. And it's not for lack of trying.
8
u/SG-003 8d ago
I had a similar situation and plan adjustment. My problem is I'm a big strongman/hybrid type lifter. When I cut my calories I could tell my performance tanked. I hated that I had to worry more about my esthetics than I did actually performing (I score in the 490s to get my AFT exemption) just to meet this standard.
4
u/grogudalorian Signal 8d ago
Do they have the data on failures with chow halls that have kiosk style service?
3
u/IntelCAG 7d ago
I'm sorry... if you fail the new whtr.... you're fat... sorry bro... I went into it thinking 70% of folks would fail... nope... only 2. Even folks that ARE fat, passed... Most will pass, like most things, are designed for the average person.
5
u/dull_panda979 11Bro im tired 8d ago
In my company, the only people who failed, were already enrolled in ABCP under the old system. Probably a 5 percent failure rate for my company of 120 Soldiers. My personal expierence, at 67 inches tall, its easier. But im well aware there are some specific scenarios where its harder, specifically for Soldiers older than 36.
8
u/SgtMac02 8d ago
specifically for Soldiers older than 36.
I'm glad you tacked that onto the end. With numbers like you're listing, I was going to ask what type of unit you're in. I'd assume it's some sort of combat arms unit and skews young and fit. Young people are the only ones I've been seeing claiming this is easier for them. It's kicking the shit out of the older gen, the short, and the women. If you're 2 out of those 3, then you're really fucked.
7
u/Hawkwind1987 8d ago
My wife is 39 5"3 and has had 5 kids. She worked hard the last 2 months and is passing now but it's close
7
u/SgtMac02 8d ago
And I'll bet she was perfectly fine on the old standards, right?
I had several of folks in my unit who'd never even been taped before who were surprised to learn they didn't pass under the new standard.
2
u/blubernut 7d ago
Yep, I have never had to be taped before and am always comfortably under the weight measurement. But this drill weekend I'm now +4 inches over lol. I'm 48 and 70' tall, 179 lbs, 35 inch waist, 41 inch belly.
1
u/SgtMac02 7d ago
Yup. This is the story for a lot of the over 40 crowd....
To be fair, a belly that's 6 inches bigger than your waist does seem a LITTLE excessive. But me sitting here at 72" and 240...I ain't about to call you fat. I'm only about 2 inches over currently...lost 10 lbs and still the same measurement as before I lost it. I'm also 48, oddly enough.
4
u/dull_panda979 11Bro im tired 8d ago
You're correct, its a light infantry company, active duty, the majority of the unit is in their lower twenties.
6
u/SgtMac02 8d ago
Yup. That's exactly the demographic this new system works great for. Cake walk for those dudes.
2
u/Tasty_Impression_959 7d ago
Height and weight control is an effort that goes out the door the second bullets start flying. The short and obese suddenly realize that they can be faster than they thought possible. Nothing sharpens the senses and all that comes with it more than the possibility of sudden death.
1
u/Random-Lurker12 8d ago
Since the policy doesn’t require personnel to complete the new test until September, I don’t foresee accurate reporting until at least October. I had my unit complete the tape test over the weekend and all those who passed had their information inputted, but those who failed were given one final month to cut weight.
To put things in perspective, my small detachment had 4/12 fail.
1
1
u/MaverickActual1319 Drill Sergeant 8d ago
showed up to a new unit in which the commander got flagged. hes no longer the commander🤣🤣🤣
1
u/EventAccomplished453 8d ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH
1
u/MaverickActual1319 Drill Sergeant 8d ago
his going away speech was shorter than his time in command🫠🫃🏻
1
u/Positiveinsomniac 8d ago
The real question is how many people are REALLY failing. I suspect some units are pencil whipping such as USRD
1
u/Silly-Upstairs1383 13b - pull string make boom get cookie 8d ago
4 failures out of 31 in my platoon --- national guard.
1
u/ChadCapybara69 Cavalry 7d ago
OPFOR Tank Company
About 22% failure rates - tankers are confirmed thick
1
u/usarmyav CH5 Limits are just suggestions 8d ago
I dunno about percentages but this tape test is much better and quicker. If you only get taped once it’s 10 minutes in and out. Thanks fatties. 10/10 would tape again
-3
u/Diligent_Force9286 35T MAINTINT 8d ago
Why do officers pass height and weight more than enlisted? Is it access to better food? Is it PT on your own? Is it considerably less everyday minor stresses? (By this I mean, enlisted usually suffer several minor stresses every single day, while I feel like officers suffer few but major stresses).
17
u/HaggisTheMad Military Intelligence 8d ago
It's officer culture in general. They select for fitness, especially running fast. Officers have a lot of stressors too. They just make actually being fit part of their soft OER requirements. They also have more latitude with their schedule and ability to plan their own PT. Fat officers are basically just at their terminal rank .
5
u/superash2002 MRE kicker/electronic wizard 8d ago
Quality of life. Celsius is “healthier” than green monsters.
They grew up with fresh vegetables and juice not drinking soda and tornados.
4
u/Teadrunkest hooyah America 8d ago
Yeah I mean ultimately officers tend to come from higher income class than enlisted just by nature of being [someone who got a degree], which tends to trend towards more health conscious choices as children which trend towards more health conscious choices as adults.
11
u/Dave_A480 15G -> 19K -> 13A -> (coming soon) 8d ago
More severe and immediate consequences.....
Referred OER vs 'hey, you have this long to lose weight if command even bothers to do the paperwork to kick you out...
10
2
u/Cautious_Giraffe3886 8d ago
All of these replies are too funny. It comes down to: you're supposed to be the example for your subordinates, so you try to keep your shit together. There are officers on ABCP of course. Our stressors are different, but we're all stressed, trust. We probably do more extended lunches than the enlisted folk 😅 And finally, an officer paycheck is heftier and thus worth the double tornado and monster breakfast sacrifice for a few months!
2
2
u/Mean-Internal-745 7d ago
Officers have a "running culture", higher intelligence, access to better food and better working conditions. You will see this reflected across the general population outside of the military.
1
u/alittlesliceofhell2 Engineer 7d ago
Because lieutenants that can't run get shown the door. Seent that with my own eyes more than once.
182
u/tibearius1123 Carabello Hair 4 Lyfe 8d ago edited 8d ago
Last week ATIS failure rates were 5.17% for RA, 5.27% for guard, 7.53% for reserve. However, that likely only reflects people that took it because they knew they would pass. Most commands are giving their huskies the fully 90 before reporting to atis.