Nobody said there would be math.
Neanderthals didn’t vanish. They just quit.
I have an idea. How about we all stop talking endlessly about women’s bodily appearance? It is demeaning, none of your business and incredibly bigoted. What anyone looks like, male or female, is irrelevant to their human worth. I am not here to provide your eyes with what they presume to enjoy (or not) looking at. This whole topic is based on MISOGYNY. Misogyny is no less pernicious or toxic than racism. Think about it: all of you are doing something as vile as racism. Stop. End this thread. Evolve as humans.
I’m not sure exactly where you’re getting this- most look perfectly ok, not ‘stout’.
Photos from ESPYS 2018 Red Carpet Fashion - E! Online (both Aly Raisman and Jordyn Wieber)
I’m of the suspicion that most of them are just naturally short, and likely end up somewhat more muscular than the average woman as a result of their gymnastics training. Then once they retire, they likely end up a more normal and healthy weight for a woman, which makes them not as entirely slender as they once were.
As for the “lithe, girl-like bodies”, I think I’d take the -like out of it- most of them ARE girls when they compete- the age limit was 15 after 1981, and 16 after 1998. 16 year olds (of either gender) have fundamentally different bodies than say… 22 year olds.
That’s what I’d figure as well. Male gymnasts also bulk up similarly as they get to be college age, but they obviously carry it differently. It also has to do with how the focus of competition changes when you get into higher age ranges, and even at high level competitions today compared to previous decades. Male gymnasts in their late teens and early 20s build up huge biceps and pecks mainly because of the still rings and parallel bars where strength moves get you more points. Kids can’t bulk up like adults, and in the past the strength moves weren’t scored as favorably, so fairly subtle changes in the nature of the sport can cause a shift in body types.
I think it’s worth noting that this thread was started nearly 20 years ago - although I’m sure work remains to be done, the community has evolved quite a bit since then and there have been particular efforts recently to reduce - hopefully, ultimately eradicate - misogyny from the board.
Having said that, I think there is potentially a valid scientific discussion to be had here, around whether highly competitive sport from a young age can affect development such that weight gain in later life becomes more likely. And there is also a valid distinction between women and men in terms of gymnastics, because of the different disciplines involved. Several posters have made good points on these subjects without being bigoted IMHO, although I also acknowledge that as a privileged white male I am not in the best position to judge such.
TLDR: I think this thread could have merit if moderated appropriately. The first two posts since its resurrection are perhaps questionable but after that it seems to me people are focusing on the science rather than personal appearance.
As to the question itself, maybe there isn’t a GQ answer unless someone can unearth a study on the subject. Otherwise, we’re just left with the obvious (already stated) fact that some athletes put on significant weight after retirement, some do not (and like most of us presumably have to work more on more on maintaining the same weight as they get older), and there is no scientific evidence for athletes or gymnasts being more prone to that than the general population, though a couple of people have posted plausible theories.
Sandra Izbasa, the former gymnast whose photo I have posted, is quite proud of the way she looks. Besides being a sports coach, she is pursuing an acting career at the moment and from time to time she posts pictures of herself for fans.
I appreciate your reasoned response to my post. I think both of us have valid points to offer. I too enjoyed the science of the subsequent posts.
I think the OP’s question was phrased as misogyny, most likely inadvertently. Glad to hear the board has made progress on eliminate misogyny over the last 20 year. I have only been around for less than a year. I felt the need to call it out when I saw it so weI believe as a culture we need to stop commenting on people’s appearance whether it is about males or female. After all, racism is based on what a person appears to look like superficially, not on their character or personhood. The question was posed about what female gymnasts looked like, not about who they were now or what they had done with their lives after they quit competing. If someone comments upon or values a male differently because of appearance, that is androgyny and I consider that as abhorrent. I also try very, very hard to not be an androgynist. I want my children and grandchildren to be able to live in a world without any -isms.
Again, I an enjoying the discussion. Thank you for engaging. Standing alone, the science is fascinating.
Irrelevant - anecdotal gratuitous cheesecake photo. There was no good reason to post it here, despite how proud she is of her burgeoning acting career.
Exactly. Why is this even being discussed, if there’s no actual evidence it’s even a thing? Looks an awful lot like confirmation bias.
There’s always math. Everything is math once you scratch the surface to get beyond the handwaving.
Sorry to be a party-pooper. 
Okay, lesson learned. 
I imagine part of the reason for this perception might be contrast between their competitive years and their post-retirement years. An older non-athlete might be overweight, but they might well have been similarly overweight in their younger years as well: An old photo might thus not look appreciably different from a more recent one. But a competitive gymnast, in his or her competitive years, is almost guaranteed to have an extremely low body fat level, and so if (like many people) they put on weight later in life, even if only to a normal (non-overweight) level, they’ll still be significantly stouter than they were in their pime.
First Donald Duck showing me I don’t know anything about playing pool and now this.
This is it, in a nutshell. Athletes are extremely fit, but when we see them on TV they are At peak competition fitness. Many remain very fit for decades afterwards, but not at that standard.
Just watch some veterans or legends games and it can be a shock to see some of them looking so overweight, even a few short years after retirement, most of the time they aren’t really, the juxtaposition of what you are seeing with your memory is what’s making you think they are.
Plus athletes physique changes throughout their career, watching someone’s early years can be jarring sometimes as they often have a youthful build and haven’t reached their final body type.
Here is Serena Williams in the 1999 US open final.
Here is Serena at 2019 US Open final
Big difference. She has become for the want of a better term more chunky. She is obviously still top level fit, her record speaks for its self, but if without any context someone saw that, they could easily say she has gotten fat. No, she is a teenager in the first and a grown woman in the other.
I think with female gymnasts, it’s a double whammy. Not just the loss of top level fitness post retirement but since most of them tend to be teenagers during their prime athletic years, our memory is of a highly athletic girl not an adult woman, even if the adult women is perfectly fit, even if they are extremely fit.
Well, gymnasts are extremely strong for one thing so that adds bulk. The only high level female gymnast I knew personally did not. She was very attractive and while she gained “curves” in college the rest of her remained thin (and extremely strong).