That's a great approach. I should add that having only one measure is discouraging: in fitness or anything else. So your approach broadens beyond weight and gi

That's a great approach. I should add that having only one measure is discouraging: in fitness or anything else. So your approach broadens beyond weight and gives a win, even in the event weight temporarily increased. Also per my previous comment, I suspect that if you got stronger, then you probably lowered your weight circumference too. At least if your weight was stable. Muscle mass and bone density take the place of fat as strength increases, at equal weights. Hard to go wrong with functional measures. The types of fat may change in a good way too as function increases. I looked into the health of sumo wrestlers. Turns out that at an equivalent fat percentage of a non-athlete, they will have much less visceral fat. This is fat around the organs, and is the type of fat most linked to bad health effects.