Would the top 100 men in most sports beat each of the top 100 women?
In The Ancestor's Tale, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins makes the following statement about sexual dimorphism:
Our sexual dimporhism is moderate but undeniable. Lots of women are taller than lots of men, but the tallest men are taller than the tallest women. Lots of women can run faster, lift heavier weights, throw javelins further, play better tennis, than lots of men. But for humans, unlike for racehorses, the underlying sexual dimorphism precludes sex-blind open competition at the top level in almost any sport you care to name. In most physical sports, every single one of the world’s top hundred men would beat every single one of the world’s top hundred women.
I wonder if this has been backed up with proper data.
sport
New contributor
|
show 7 more comments
In The Ancestor's Tale, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins makes the following statement about sexual dimorphism:
Our sexual dimporhism is moderate but undeniable. Lots of women are taller than lots of men, but the tallest men are taller than the tallest women. Lots of women can run faster, lift heavier weights, throw javelins further, play better tennis, than lots of men. But for humans, unlike for racehorses, the underlying sexual dimorphism precludes sex-blind open competition at the top level in almost any sport you care to name. In most physical sports, every single one of the world’s top hundred men would beat every single one of the world’s top hundred women.
I wonder if this has been backed up with proper data.
sport
New contributor
1
You should look up male variability hypothesis and why it's important for the top 100 of anything
– K Dog
6 hours ago
1
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
– K Dog
6 hours ago
3
Additionally, since men are the arbiters of what constitutes a sport, it follows that they wound be biased toward activities they are better at.
– Daniel T.
5 hours ago
4
@DanielT. Not only that, but men are more predisposed towards competition. There is a lot of debate about what makes a sport. My friend has a theory that if there are variable physical outcomes based on skill (ie not quantized), then it is a sport. So chess would not be a sport because the pieces go into discrete squares based on intention, while darts would be a sport because they can land anywhere on the board, despite your intention of a discrete location. Poker: not a sport. Golf: sport. Interesting theory.
– Chloe
5 hours ago
3
Basically, yes. However, that is a useless comparison. The better question is: Would a female competing against a male of equal height, weight, training, and determination be able to win ~50% of the time.
– MonkeyZeus
3 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
In The Ancestor's Tale, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins makes the following statement about sexual dimorphism:
Our sexual dimporhism is moderate but undeniable. Lots of women are taller than lots of men, but the tallest men are taller than the tallest women. Lots of women can run faster, lift heavier weights, throw javelins further, play better tennis, than lots of men. But for humans, unlike for racehorses, the underlying sexual dimorphism precludes sex-blind open competition at the top level in almost any sport you care to name. In most physical sports, every single one of the world’s top hundred men would beat every single one of the world’s top hundred women.
I wonder if this has been backed up with proper data.
sport
New contributor
In The Ancestor's Tale, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins makes the following statement about sexual dimorphism:
Our sexual dimporhism is moderate but undeniable. Lots of women are taller than lots of men, but the tallest men are taller than the tallest women. Lots of women can run faster, lift heavier weights, throw javelins further, play better tennis, than lots of men. But for humans, unlike for racehorses, the underlying sexual dimorphism precludes sex-blind open competition at the top level in almost any sport you care to name. In most physical sports, every single one of the world’s top hundred men would beat every single one of the world’s top hundred women.
I wonder if this has been backed up with proper data.
sport
sport
New contributor
New contributor
edited 3 hours ago
New contributor
asked 11 hours ago
I. Haage
936
936
New contributor
New contributor
1
You should look up male variability hypothesis and why it's important for the top 100 of anything
– K Dog
6 hours ago
1
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
– K Dog
6 hours ago
3
Additionally, since men are the arbiters of what constitutes a sport, it follows that they wound be biased toward activities they are better at.
– Daniel T.
5 hours ago
4
@DanielT. Not only that, but men are more predisposed towards competition. There is a lot of debate about what makes a sport. My friend has a theory that if there are variable physical outcomes based on skill (ie not quantized), then it is a sport. So chess would not be a sport because the pieces go into discrete squares based on intention, while darts would be a sport because they can land anywhere on the board, despite your intention of a discrete location. Poker: not a sport. Golf: sport. Interesting theory.
– Chloe
5 hours ago
3
Basically, yes. However, that is a useless comparison. The better question is: Would a female competing against a male of equal height, weight, training, and determination be able to win ~50% of the time.
– MonkeyZeus
3 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
1
You should look up male variability hypothesis and why it's important for the top 100 of anything
– K Dog
6 hours ago
1
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
– K Dog
6 hours ago
3
Additionally, since men are the arbiters of what constitutes a sport, it follows that they wound be biased toward activities they are better at.
– Daniel T.
5 hours ago
4
@DanielT. Not only that, but men are more predisposed towards competition. There is a lot of debate about what makes a sport. My friend has a theory that if there are variable physical outcomes based on skill (ie not quantized), then it is a sport. So chess would not be a sport because the pieces go into discrete squares based on intention, while darts would be a sport because they can land anywhere on the board, despite your intention of a discrete location. Poker: not a sport. Golf: sport. Interesting theory.
– Chloe
5 hours ago
3
Basically, yes. However, that is a useless comparison. The better question is: Would a female competing against a male of equal height, weight, training, and determination be able to win ~50% of the time.
– MonkeyZeus
3 hours ago
1
1
You should look up male variability hypothesis and why it's important for the top 100 of anything
– K Dog
6 hours ago
You should look up male variability hypothesis and why it's important for the top 100 of anything
– K Dog
6 hours ago
1
1
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
– K Dog
6 hours ago
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
– K Dog
6 hours ago
3
3
Additionally, since men are the arbiters of what constitutes a sport, it follows that they wound be biased toward activities they are better at.
– Daniel T.
5 hours ago
Additionally, since men are the arbiters of what constitutes a sport, it follows that they wound be biased toward activities they are better at.
– Daniel T.
5 hours ago
4
4
@DanielT. Not only that, but men are more predisposed towards competition. There is a lot of debate about what makes a sport. My friend has a theory that if there are variable physical outcomes based on skill (ie not quantized), then it is a sport. So chess would not be a sport because the pieces go into discrete squares based on intention, while darts would be a sport because they can land anywhere on the board, despite your intention of a discrete location. Poker: not a sport. Golf: sport. Interesting theory.
– Chloe
5 hours ago
@DanielT. Not only that, but men are more predisposed towards competition. There is a lot of debate about what makes a sport. My friend has a theory that if there are variable physical outcomes based on skill (ie not quantized), then it is a sport. So chess would not be a sport because the pieces go into discrete squares based on intention, while darts would be a sport because they can land anywhere on the board, despite your intention of a discrete location. Poker: not a sport. Golf: sport. Interesting theory.
– Chloe
5 hours ago
3
3
Basically, yes. However, that is a useless comparison. The better question is: Would a female competing against a male of equal height, weight, training, and determination be able to win ~50% of the time.
– MonkeyZeus
3 hours ago
Basically, yes. However, that is a useless comparison. The better question is: Would a female competing against a male of equal height, weight, training, and determination be able to win ~50% of the time.
– MonkeyZeus
3 hours ago
|
show 7 more comments
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
Expanding on Xen2050's information, the wikipedia List of Olympic records in Athletics page has links to each individual sport, listing the top 25 results by gender. I've compiled the information showing the 25th-best men's result vs. the best women's result. (I skipped the 110m hurdles since they are not directly comparable.) This does not prove the claim (top 100 men vs. top 100 women) but it does give a better feel for the discrepancy between genders in the results:
Sport: 25th-ranked men's result: top-ranked women's result:
100m 9.87 10.49
200m 19.80 21.34
400m 44.10 47.60
800m 1:42.81 1:53.28
1500m 3:29.59 3:50.07
5000m 12:51.00 14:11.15
10000m 26:49.94 29:17.45
Marathon 2:04:32 2:15:25
400m Hurdle 47.67 52.34
3000m Steeplechase 8:04.95 8:44.32
4x100 Relay 37.58 (*) 40.82
4x400 Relay 2:57.87 3:15.17
20k Walk 1:18:06 1:23:39
50k Walk 3:36:20 (**) 4:05:56
High Jump 2.38m 2.09m
Long Jump 8.51m 7.52m
Pole Vault 5.98m 5.06m
Triple Jump 17.75m 15.50m
Shot Put (+) 22.08m 22.63m (would get 10th place on men's listing)
Discus Throw (+) 69.95m 76.80m (would get 1st place on men's listing)
Hammer Throw (+) 82.54m 82.98m (would get 19th place on men's listing)
Javelin Throw (+) 89.02m 72.28m
Decathlon 8663 points 8358 points
notes:
(*): 20th-place result; lower results not available
(**): 10th-place result; lower results not available
(+): the equipment used is different between men and women. For example, the men's discus weighs 2kg and is 22cm in diameter, while the women's discus weighs 1kg and is 18cm in diameter. The shots, hammers and javelins are also lighter for the women's events. Therefore, these events are not really directly comparable.
New contributor
3
The US high-school records for men are almost all better, and the women's records wouldn't even have won many of the events (especially sprints and middle distance) at the latest high school nationals. There are certainly more than 100 elite male athletes in the world with better than HS performance.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
3
While this doesn't prove anything, it sounds like this answer is leaning towards 'yes top men tend to outperform top women' since in every category that is directly comparable men outperform. Or am I missing something?
– David Grinberg
5 hours ago
3
@DavidGrinberg I don't think you're missing anything.
– Hellion
5 hours ago
6
So men are better at running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running...
– user673679
4 hours ago
9
@user673679 don't forget jumping-while-running, walking fast, jumping-after-running, and jumping-with-a-stick. :-) (Unfortunately, wikipedia isn't nearly as helpful with top-25 lists for other sports.)
– Hellion
4 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
On the evidence of the IAAF, the 100th best male athlete is significantly faster and/or stronger than a female. Here are a few examples:
Event 100th Man 1st Woman
100m 10.15 10.85
1500m 3:38.28 3:56.68
Marathon 2:08:46 2:18:11
High Jump 2.23 2.04
Long Jump 7.91 7.05
Javelin 77.27 68.92
And if men are more athletic at athletics, they should have the same advantage in team games such as football or rugby, but direct competitions, and therefore comparisons, aren't available.
However, this article has some revealing opinions from champions of both sexes into men's vs. women's tennis.
New contributor
If you look at the heat times for the 2016 Olympics, (mens vs. womens) you can see that the top women would not only qualify but actually beat some of the male athlete's times.
– Richard
3 hours ago
2
Raw physical ability is more valuable in some sports than others. Top-notch athletes do not necessarily make good baseball players, for example (Michael Jordan comes to mind).
– David Thornley
3 hours ago
@Richard Yes, a female athlete from a country with a strong culture of sprinting can beat a man from Tuvalu or Kiribati, if he's qualifying and she's sprinting at a final pace. Her qualifying times would not have been successful in any male heat, her semifinal time was too slow to qualify for the men's final and her final time would have left her embarrassingly last against the men.
– Boodysaspie
2 hours ago
@David Thornley Well, yes, to become a top-class footballer you need to start from the bottom and work up in football, rather than spend most of your life doing something else, swapping to a new discipline and struggling. Can you provide any data, or even anecdotes, on how well the best women's baseball team would fare against the 100th best men's team?
– Boodysaspie
1 hour ago
Sure. but there were men in the top 100 who attained worse times than the top women. They wouldn't have won any heats but nor would they have come last.
– Richard
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
The fuller quote is talking about "the top level in almost any sport," and that's almost the literal definition of the Olympics, where more than 100 of the top athletes compete.
Here's the events & their records from Wikipedia's List of Olympic records in athletics, I'll try formatting them by sport, with the mens & women's records side-by-side for easier comparison:
Records
Event Men's Women's
===== ===== =======
100m 9.63 10.62
200 metres 19.30 ♦21.34
400 metres ♦43.03 48.25
800 metres ♦1:40.91 1:53.43
1,500 metres 3:32.07 3:53.96
5,000 metres 12:57.82 14:26.17
10,000 metres 27:01.17 ♦29:17.45
Marathon 2:06:32 2:23:07
110 metres hurdles 12.91 12.35
* only 100m hurdles for women
400 metres hurdles ♦46.78 52.64
3,000 m steeplechase 8:03.28 8:58.81
4×100 m relay ♦36.84 ♦40.82
4×400 m relay 2:55.39 ♦3:15.17
20 km walk 1:18:46 1:25:02
High jump 2.39 m 2.06 m
Long jump 8.90 m 7.40 m
Pole vault 6.03 m 5.05 m
Triple jump 18.09 m 15.39 m
Shot put 22.52 m 22.41 m
* men's shot weighs 16 lb, women's 8.8 lb
Discus throw 69.89 m 72.30 m
* men's weigh 2kg/4.4 lb, women's 1kg/2.2 lb
Hammer throw 84.80 m 82.29 m
* men's weigh 16 lb, women's 8.82 lb
Javelin throw 90.57 m 71.53 m
* men's weigh 800g/1.76 lb, women's 600g/1.32 lb
Decathlon 8893 pts ♦7291 pts
(♦ denotes a performance that is also a current world record.
Statistics are correct as of 19 August 2016.)
It appears that the men's records are faster/longer for everything except the item throwing events. But given that the weight of the shot, discus, and hammer are twice as heavy for men, and the records are still within 4%, they still seem in line with the other event results.
New contributor
13
This shows that the top male athlete could beat the top female athlete. It doesn't match the claim - that even the 100th "best" male athlete could beat the top female athletes.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
1
Some reasons to reject your argument: 1) You don't make it in the answer. 2) Olympics do not include "most sports" - which is a big problem with the question being vague, and I am struggling with how to deal with it. 3) 7.7 billion people don't play any particular sport. If the sport has only 1000 players, the chance of the claim being true is much higher.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
4
It is a particularly strange quote, claiming that out of the top 100 athletes in "almost any / most sports", that every man would beat every women... but the Olympic records are well verified and recorded and easily compared, probably the best "data" available, I don't know where to find the top 10 or top 100 Olympic results, but I would be skeptical if they were significantly different from the top records
– Xen2050
8 hours ago
3
@Xen2050 You're not comparing 100th to 100th. You're comparing 100th to 1st.
– wizzwizz4
3 hours ago
2
@Mazura I think the fact that the throwing events usually have such a drastic weight difference actually speaks volumes.
– Xen2050
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
The question can not be honestly answered as it is stated remarkably imprecise ( in more than two instances ).
Success in "sport" disciplines depend on sportive qualities that are distinct from each other ranging from fast strategic thinking (chess) over teamwork (i.e. climbing, ice-stick shooting, curling and alike team sports) to athletic capabilities.
While many of these qualities are not tangled to sex, muscular strength, fast power and endurance performance are.
There are physiological differences in muscular composition between males and females in homo sapiens that are rooted in sex driven hormonal differences that beside direct impact interact in various ways with growth and motoric ability. Some of these sex differences might be overcome by hormonal substitution combined with training at least in young fit individuals (this is because the bone composition / tendonous apparatus needs to adapt to muscular strength and the timeframe for bone composition change is early in lifespan).
Therefore only in "sports" that depend foremost on power of the muscular skeletal system in a challenge of comparable conditioned man and women, the males are unlikely to be beaten even by exceptional strong females i.e. olympic weightlifting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_weightlifting)
Some selective literature:
Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition
K. M. Haizlip, B. C. Harrison, L. A. Leinwand
Physiology (Bethesda) 2015 Jan; 30(1): 30–39. doi: 10.1152/physiol.00024.2014
PMCID: PMC4285578
The exercise sex gap and the impact of the estrous cycle on exercise performance in mice
Aderbal S. Aguiar, Jr, Ana Elisa Speck, Inês M. Amaral, Paula M. Canas, Rodrigo A. Cunha
Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 10742. Published online 2018 Jul 16. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29050-0
PMCID: PMC6048134
Sex-Related Differences in Muscle Composition and Motor Unit Firing Rates of the First Dorsal Interosseous: 114 Board; Wray, Mandy & Sterczala, Adam & Miller, Jonathan & L. Dimmick, Hannah & Herda, Trent. (2018) #3 May 30 9. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 50. 8. 10.1249/01.mss.0000535111.46582.39.
Sex-Related Differences in Gene Expression in Human Skeletal Muscle
Stephen Welle, Rabi Tawil, Charles A. Thornton
PLoS One. 2008; 3(1): e1385. Published online 2008 Jan 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001385
add a comment |
Billard "sports", including 9 ball and straight pool, are examples of activities where strength plays a very minor role, yet the men are at a higher level than the women. Part of this could be simply lack of interest of women in certain "sports", reducing the pool of women that could be competitive.
On the other hand, with Indy cars, Danica Patrick won a few races, and she ran mid-pack when she switched to Nascar oval tracks. For motorcycle road course races there are very few women, probably an issue with the risk factor.
Women have proven to be competitive in drag racing for pro-stock motorcycles and top fuel, and women have won yearly championships in top fuel events. Although top fuel is mostly the car (clutch is mechanically programmed, the driver just pegs the throttle, and the key driver factor is how close they can get to the allotted 0.4 second reaction time without going under (red light), most of the races are determined by the car, except for some races that are very close. Enough of those close races should occur within a season, so winning a championship shows women are competitive. The motorcycles have pre-programmed rev-limiters for launch, but the rider does have to control the clutch (I'm not sure if these are pre-programmed for pro-stock motorcycles).
New contributor
add a comment |
I can give a counterexample of a physical sport where only three male athletes are definitely better than the best female.
The sport is hard rock climbing, where "hard" means "pushing the limits of what is humanly possible" (as opposed to competition climbing, which necessarily does not allow much time to figure out optimal movements, let alone specialized training).
This website has a complete list of known ascents of sport climbs in the highest (5.15 Yosemite scale) difficulty grade. You will (as of 2018-12-26) find 76 unique athletes on that list, and 3 of them are female (Margot Hayes, Angela Eiter and Anak Verhoeven). The ratio becomes even smaller if we restrict the list to difficulty 5.15b and higher, where we have only 19 male athletes as good or better than the best female athlete (Angela Eiter) - and only 3 are definitely better.
Sidenote: the best male athlete, Adam Ondra, dominates the entire field by a ridiculous margin.
Caveats:
- the list is potentially incomplete since these ascents are not done at events that have an "official" status, nor is there an official recording. But given how much of an achievement any ascent at this level is, it's highly unlikely to be kept secret or not reach anyone really following the news in climbing, especially since most athletes on the list are professionals whose income depends on being worth sponsoring.
- Grading is somewhat subjective, especially in routes that have only seen a single ascent. But inflating the grade of a new route you created only to have it downgraded by others is seen as highly embarrassing (unless it's a small difference) and something that climbers try very hard to avoid.
2
So, basically, this answer boils down to "if you choose a sport with a small enough sample size, the claim might be false?" Or am I missing something here? "I have done x" does not prove "There do not exist 100 people who could do x better than I did it," even if no other person has ever done x.
– reirab
1 hour ago
1
@reirab: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. What is the sample size you're talking about and how is it relevant? You can only compare performances that have actually ocurred, whatever the sport. How do your statements about x hold up for the case of x = "running 100m in under 9 seconds"?
– Michael Borgwardt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Expanding on Xen2050's information, the wikipedia List of Olympic records in Athletics page has links to each individual sport, listing the top 25 results by gender. I've compiled the information showing the 25th-best men's result vs. the best women's result. (I skipped the 110m hurdles since they are not directly comparable.) This does not prove the claim (top 100 men vs. top 100 women) but it does give a better feel for the discrepancy between genders in the results:
Sport: 25th-ranked men's result: top-ranked women's result:
100m 9.87 10.49
200m 19.80 21.34
400m 44.10 47.60
800m 1:42.81 1:53.28
1500m 3:29.59 3:50.07
5000m 12:51.00 14:11.15
10000m 26:49.94 29:17.45
Marathon 2:04:32 2:15:25
400m Hurdle 47.67 52.34
3000m Steeplechase 8:04.95 8:44.32
4x100 Relay 37.58 (*) 40.82
4x400 Relay 2:57.87 3:15.17
20k Walk 1:18:06 1:23:39
50k Walk 3:36:20 (**) 4:05:56
High Jump 2.38m 2.09m
Long Jump 8.51m 7.52m
Pole Vault 5.98m 5.06m
Triple Jump 17.75m 15.50m
Shot Put (+) 22.08m 22.63m (would get 10th place on men's listing)
Discus Throw (+) 69.95m 76.80m (would get 1st place on men's listing)
Hammer Throw (+) 82.54m 82.98m (would get 19th place on men's listing)
Javelin Throw (+) 89.02m 72.28m
Decathlon 8663 points 8358 points
notes:
(*): 20th-place result; lower results not available
(**): 10th-place result; lower results not available
(+): the equipment used is different between men and women. For example, the men's discus weighs 2kg and is 22cm in diameter, while the women's discus weighs 1kg and is 18cm in diameter. The shots, hammers and javelins are also lighter for the women's events. Therefore, these events are not really directly comparable.
New contributor
3
The US high-school records for men are almost all better, and the women's records wouldn't even have won many of the events (especially sprints and middle distance) at the latest high school nationals. There are certainly more than 100 elite male athletes in the world with better than HS performance.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
3
While this doesn't prove anything, it sounds like this answer is leaning towards 'yes top men tend to outperform top women' since in every category that is directly comparable men outperform. Or am I missing something?
– David Grinberg
5 hours ago
3
@DavidGrinberg I don't think you're missing anything.
– Hellion
5 hours ago
6
So men are better at running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running...
– user673679
4 hours ago
9
@user673679 don't forget jumping-while-running, walking fast, jumping-after-running, and jumping-with-a-stick. :-) (Unfortunately, wikipedia isn't nearly as helpful with top-25 lists for other sports.)
– Hellion
4 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
Expanding on Xen2050's information, the wikipedia List of Olympic records in Athletics page has links to each individual sport, listing the top 25 results by gender. I've compiled the information showing the 25th-best men's result vs. the best women's result. (I skipped the 110m hurdles since they are not directly comparable.) This does not prove the claim (top 100 men vs. top 100 women) but it does give a better feel for the discrepancy between genders in the results:
Sport: 25th-ranked men's result: top-ranked women's result:
100m 9.87 10.49
200m 19.80 21.34
400m 44.10 47.60
800m 1:42.81 1:53.28
1500m 3:29.59 3:50.07
5000m 12:51.00 14:11.15
10000m 26:49.94 29:17.45
Marathon 2:04:32 2:15:25
400m Hurdle 47.67 52.34
3000m Steeplechase 8:04.95 8:44.32
4x100 Relay 37.58 (*) 40.82
4x400 Relay 2:57.87 3:15.17
20k Walk 1:18:06 1:23:39
50k Walk 3:36:20 (**) 4:05:56
High Jump 2.38m 2.09m
Long Jump 8.51m 7.52m
Pole Vault 5.98m 5.06m
Triple Jump 17.75m 15.50m
Shot Put (+) 22.08m 22.63m (would get 10th place on men's listing)
Discus Throw (+) 69.95m 76.80m (would get 1st place on men's listing)
Hammer Throw (+) 82.54m 82.98m (would get 19th place on men's listing)
Javelin Throw (+) 89.02m 72.28m
Decathlon 8663 points 8358 points
notes:
(*): 20th-place result; lower results not available
(**): 10th-place result; lower results not available
(+): the equipment used is different between men and women. For example, the men's discus weighs 2kg and is 22cm in diameter, while the women's discus weighs 1kg and is 18cm in diameter. The shots, hammers and javelins are also lighter for the women's events. Therefore, these events are not really directly comparable.
New contributor
3
The US high-school records for men are almost all better, and the women's records wouldn't even have won many of the events (especially sprints and middle distance) at the latest high school nationals. There are certainly more than 100 elite male athletes in the world with better than HS performance.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
3
While this doesn't prove anything, it sounds like this answer is leaning towards 'yes top men tend to outperform top women' since in every category that is directly comparable men outperform. Or am I missing something?
– David Grinberg
5 hours ago
3
@DavidGrinberg I don't think you're missing anything.
– Hellion
5 hours ago
6
So men are better at running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running...
– user673679
4 hours ago
9
@user673679 don't forget jumping-while-running, walking fast, jumping-after-running, and jumping-with-a-stick. :-) (Unfortunately, wikipedia isn't nearly as helpful with top-25 lists for other sports.)
– Hellion
4 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
Expanding on Xen2050's information, the wikipedia List of Olympic records in Athletics page has links to each individual sport, listing the top 25 results by gender. I've compiled the information showing the 25th-best men's result vs. the best women's result. (I skipped the 110m hurdles since they are not directly comparable.) This does not prove the claim (top 100 men vs. top 100 women) but it does give a better feel for the discrepancy between genders in the results:
Sport: 25th-ranked men's result: top-ranked women's result:
100m 9.87 10.49
200m 19.80 21.34
400m 44.10 47.60
800m 1:42.81 1:53.28
1500m 3:29.59 3:50.07
5000m 12:51.00 14:11.15
10000m 26:49.94 29:17.45
Marathon 2:04:32 2:15:25
400m Hurdle 47.67 52.34
3000m Steeplechase 8:04.95 8:44.32
4x100 Relay 37.58 (*) 40.82
4x400 Relay 2:57.87 3:15.17
20k Walk 1:18:06 1:23:39
50k Walk 3:36:20 (**) 4:05:56
High Jump 2.38m 2.09m
Long Jump 8.51m 7.52m
Pole Vault 5.98m 5.06m
Triple Jump 17.75m 15.50m
Shot Put (+) 22.08m 22.63m (would get 10th place on men's listing)
Discus Throw (+) 69.95m 76.80m (would get 1st place on men's listing)
Hammer Throw (+) 82.54m 82.98m (would get 19th place on men's listing)
Javelin Throw (+) 89.02m 72.28m
Decathlon 8663 points 8358 points
notes:
(*): 20th-place result; lower results not available
(**): 10th-place result; lower results not available
(+): the equipment used is different between men and women. For example, the men's discus weighs 2kg and is 22cm in diameter, while the women's discus weighs 1kg and is 18cm in diameter. The shots, hammers and javelins are also lighter for the women's events. Therefore, these events are not really directly comparable.
New contributor
Expanding on Xen2050's information, the wikipedia List of Olympic records in Athletics page has links to each individual sport, listing the top 25 results by gender. I've compiled the information showing the 25th-best men's result vs. the best women's result. (I skipped the 110m hurdles since they are not directly comparable.) This does not prove the claim (top 100 men vs. top 100 women) but it does give a better feel for the discrepancy between genders in the results:
Sport: 25th-ranked men's result: top-ranked women's result:
100m 9.87 10.49
200m 19.80 21.34
400m 44.10 47.60
800m 1:42.81 1:53.28
1500m 3:29.59 3:50.07
5000m 12:51.00 14:11.15
10000m 26:49.94 29:17.45
Marathon 2:04:32 2:15:25
400m Hurdle 47.67 52.34
3000m Steeplechase 8:04.95 8:44.32
4x100 Relay 37.58 (*) 40.82
4x400 Relay 2:57.87 3:15.17
20k Walk 1:18:06 1:23:39
50k Walk 3:36:20 (**) 4:05:56
High Jump 2.38m 2.09m
Long Jump 8.51m 7.52m
Pole Vault 5.98m 5.06m
Triple Jump 17.75m 15.50m
Shot Put (+) 22.08m 22.63m (would get 10th place on men's listing)
Discus Throw (+) 69.95m 76.80m (would get 1st place on men's listing)
Hammer Throw (+) 82.54m 82.98m (would get 19th place on men's listing)
Javelin Throw (+) 89.02m 72.28m
Decathlon 8663 points 8358 points
notes:
(*): 20th-place result; lower results not available
(**): 10th-place result; lower results not available
(+): the equipment used is different between men and women. For example, the men's discus weighs 2kg and is 22cm in diameter, while the women's discus weighs 1kg and is 18cm in diameter. The shots, hammers and javelins are also lighter for the women's events. Therefore, these events are not really directly comparable.
New contributor
edited 4 hours ago
New contributor
answered 8 hours ago
Hellion
32614
32614
New contributor
New contributor
3
The US high-school records for men are almost all better, and the women's records wouldn't even have won many of the events (especially sprints and middle distance) at the latest high school nationals. There are certainly more than 100 elite male athletes in the world with better than HS performance.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
3
While this doesn't prove anything, it sounds like this answer is leaning towards 'yes top men tend to outperform top women' since in every category that is directly comparable men outperform. Or am I missing something?
– David Grinberg
5 hours ago
3
@DavidGrinberg I don't think you're missing anything.
– Hellion
5 hours ago
6
So men are better at running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running...
– user673679
4 hours ago
9
@user673679 don't forget jumping-while-running, walking fast, jumping-after-running, and jumping-with-a-stick. :-) (Unfortunately, wikipedia isn't nearly as helpful with top-25 lists for other sports.)
– Hellion
4 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
3
The US high-school records for men are almost all better, and the women's records wouldn't even have won many of the events (especially sprints and middle distance) at the latest high school nationals. There are certainly more than 100 elite male athletes in the world with better than HS performance.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
3
While this doesn't prove anything, it sounds like this answer is leaning towards 'yes top men tend to outperform top women' since in every category that is directly comparable men outperform. Or am I missing something?
– David Grinberg
5 hours ago
3
@DavidGrinberg I don't think you're missing anything.
– Hellion
5 hours ago
6
So men are better at running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running...
– user673679
4 hours ago
9
@user673679 don't forget jumping-while-running, walking fast, jumping-after-running, and jumping-with-a-stick. :-) (Unfortunately, wikipedia isn't nearly as helpful with top-25 lists for other sports.)
– Hellion
4 hours ago
3
3
The US high-school records for men are almost all better, and the women's records wouldn't even have won many of the events (especially sprints and middle distance) at the latest high school nationals. There are certainly more than 100 elite male athletes in the world with better than HS performance.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
The US high-school records for men are almost all better, and the women's records wouldn't even have won many of the events (especially sprints and middle distance) at the latest high school nationals. There are certainly more than 100 elite male athletes in the world with better than HS performance.
– Kevin
7 hours ago
3
3
While this doesn't prove anything, it sounds like this answer is leaning towards 'yes top men tend to outperform top women' since in every category that is directly comparable men outperform. Or am I missing something?
– David Grinberg
5 hours ago
While this doesn't prove anything, it sounds like this answer is leaning towards 'yes top men tend to outperform top women' since in every category that is directly comparable men outperform. Or am I missing something?
– David Grinberg
5 hours ago
3
3
@DavidGrinberg I don't think you're missing anything.
– Hellion
5 hours ago
@DavidGrinberg I don't think you're missing anything.
– Hellion
5 hours ago
6
6
So men are better at running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running...
– user673679
4 hours ago
So men are better at running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running, running...
– user673679
4 hours ago
9
9
@user673679 don't forget jumping-while-running, walking fast, jumping-after-running, and jumping-with-a-stick. :-) (Unfortunately, wikipedia isn't nearly as helpful with top-25 lists for other sports.)
– Hellion
4 hours ago
@user673679 don't forget jumping-while-running, walking fast, jumping-after-running, and jumping-with-a-stick. :-) (Unfortunately, wikipedia isn't nearly as helpful with top-25 lists for other sports.)
– Hellion
4 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
On the evidence of the IAAF, the 100th best male athlete is significantly faster and/or stronger than a female. Here are a few examples:
Event 100th Man 1st Woman
100m 10.15 10.85
1500m 3:38.28 3:56.68
Marathon 2:08:46 2:18:11
High Jump 2.23 2.04
Long Jump 7.91 7.05
Javelin 77.27 68.92
And if men are more athletic at athletics, they should have the same advantage in team games such as football or rugby, but direct competitions, and therefore comparisons, aren't available.
However, this article has some revealing opinions from champions of both sexes into men's vs. women's tennis.
New contributor
If you look at the heat times for the 2016 Olympics, (mens vs. womens) you can see that the top women would not only qualify but actually beat some of the male athlete's times.
– Richard
3 hours ago
2
Raw physical ability is more valuable in some sports than others. Top-notch athletes do not necessarily make good baseball players, for example (Michael Jordan comes to mind).
– David Thornley
3 hours ago
@Richard Yes, a female athlete from a country with a strong culture of sprinting can beat a man from Tuvalu or Kiribati, if he's qualifying and she's sprinting at a final pace. Her qualifying times would not have been successful in any male heat, her semifinal time was too slow to qualify for the men's final and her final time would have left her embarrassingly last against the men.
– Boodysaspie
2 hours ago
@David Thornley Well, yes, to become a top-class footballer you need to start from the bottom and work up in football, rather than spend most of your life doing something else, swapping to a new discipline and struggling. Can you provide any data, or even anecdotes, on how well the best women's baseball team would fare against the 100th best men's team?
– Boodysaspie
1 hour ago
Sure. but there were men in the top 100 who attained worse times than the top women. They wouldn't have won any heats but nor would they have come last.
– Richard
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
On the evidence of the IAAF, the 100th best male athlete is significantly faster and/or stronger than a female. Here are a few examples:
Event 100th Man 1st Woman
100m 10.15 10.85
1500m 3:38.28 3:56.68
Marathon 2:08:46 2:18:11
High Jump 2.23 2.04
Long Jump 7.91 7.05
Javelin 77.27 68.92
And if men are more athletic at athletics, they should have the same advantage in team games such as football or rugby, but direct competitions, and therefore comparisons, aren't available.
However, this article has some revealing opinions from champions of both sexes into men's vs. women's tennis.
New contributor
If you look at the heat times for the 2016 Olympics, (mens vs. womens) you can see that the top women would not only qualify but actually beat some of the male athlete's times.
– Richard
3 hours ago
2
Raw physical ability is more valuable in some sports than others. Top-notch athletes do not necessarily make good baseball players, for example (Michael Jordan comes to mind).
– David Thornley
3 hours ago
@Richard Yes, a female athlete from a country with a strong culture of sprinting can beat a man from Tuvalu or Kiribati, if he's qualifying and she's sprinting at a final pace. Her qualifying times would not have been successful in any male heat, her semifinal time was too slow to qualify for the men's final and her final time would have left her embarrassingly last against the men.
– Boodysaspie
2 hours ago
@David Thornley Well, yes, to become a top-class footballer you need to start from the bottom and work up in football, rather than spend most of your life doing something else, swapping to a new discipline and struggling. Can you provide any data, or even anecdotes, on how well the best women's baseball team would fare against the 100th best men's team?
– Boodysaspie
1 hour ago
Sure. but there were men in the top 100 who attained worse times than the top women. They wouldn't have won any heats but nor would they have come last.
– Richard
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
On the evidence of the IAAF, the 100th best male athlete is significantly faster and/or stronger than a female. Here are a few examples:
Event 100th Man 1st Woman
100m 10.15 10.85
1500m 3:38.28 3:56.68
Marathon 2:08:46 2:18:11
High Jump 2.23 2.04
Long Jump 7.91 7.05
Javelin 77.27 68.92
And if men are more athletic at athletics, they should have the same advantage in team games such as football or rugby, but direct competitions, and therefore comparisons, aren't available.
However, this article has some revealing opinions from champions of both sexes into men's vs. women's tennis.
New contributor
On the evidence of the IAAF, the 100th best male athlete is significantly faster and/or stronger than a female. Here are a few examples:
Event 100th Man 1st Woman
100m 10.15 10.85
1500m 3:38.28 3:56.68
Marathon 2:08:46 2:18:11
High Jump 2.23 2.04
Long Jump 7.91 7.05
Javelin 77.27 68.92
And if men are more athletic at athletics, they should have the same advantage in team games such as football or rugby, but direct competitions, and therefore comparisons, aren't available.
However, this article has some revealing opinions from champions of both sexes into men's vs. women's tennis.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 4 hours ago
Boodysaspie
2212
2212
New contributor
New contributor
If you look at the heat times for the 2016 Olympics, (mens vs. womens) you can see that the top women would not only qualify but actually beat some of the male athlete's times.
– Richard
3 hours ago
2
Raw physical ability is more valuable in some sports than others. Top-notch athletes do not necessarily make good baseball players, for example (Michael Jordan comes to mind).
– David Thornley
3 hours ago
@Richard Yes, a female athlete from a country with a strong culture of sprinting can beat a man from Tuvalu or Kiribati, if he's qualifying and she's sprinting at a final pace. Her qualifying times would not have been successful in any male heat, her semifinal time was too slow to qualify for the men's final and her final time would have left her embarrassingly last against the men.
– Boodysaspie
2 hours ago
@David Thornley Well, yes, to become a top-class footballer you need to start from the bottom and work up in football, rather than spend most of your life doing something else, swapping to a new discipline and struggling. Can you provide any data, or even anecdotes, on how well the best women's baseball team would fare against the 100th best men's team?
– Boodysaspie
1 hour ago
Sure. but there were men in the top 100 who attained worse times than the top women. They wouldn't have won any heats but nor would they have come last.
– Richard
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
If you look at the heat times for the 2016 Olympics, (mens vs. womens) you can see that the top women would not only qualify but actually beat some of the male athlete's times.
– Richard
3 hours ago
2
Raw physical ability is more valuable in some sports than others. Top-notch athletes do not necessarily make good baseball players, for example (Michael Jordan comes to mind).
– David Thornley
3 hours ago
@Richard Yes, a female athlete from a country with a strong culture of sprinting can beat a man from Tuvalu or Kiribati, if he's qualifying and she's sprinting at a final pace. Her qualifying times would not have been successful in any male heat, her semifinal time was too slow to qualify for the men's final and her final time would have left her embarrassingly last against the men.
– Boodysaspie
2 hours ago
@David Thornley Well, yes, to become a top-class footballer you need to start from the bottom and work up in football, rather than spend most of your life doing something else, swapping to a new discipline and struggling. Can you provide any data, or even anecdotes, on how well the best women's baseball team would fare against the 100th best men's team?
– Boodysaspie
1 hour ago
Sure. but there were men in the top 100 who attained worse times than the top women. They wouldn't have won any heats but nor would they have come last.
– Richard
1 hour ago
If you look at the heat times for the 2016 Olympics, (mens vs. womens) you can see that the top women would not only qualify but actually beat some of the male athlete's times.
– Richard
3 hours ago
If you look at the heat times for the 2016 Olympics, (mens vs. womens) you can see that the top women would not only qualify but actually beat some of the male athlete's times.
– Richard
3 hours ago
2
2
Raw physical ability is more valuable in some sports than others. Top-notch athletes do not necessarily make good baseball players, for example (Michael Jordan comes to mind).
– David Thornley
3 hours ago
Raw physical ability is more valuable in some sports than others. Top-notch athletes do not necessarily make good baseball players, for example (Michael Jordan comes to mind).
– David Thornley
3 hours ago
@Richard Yes, a female athlete from a country with a strong culture of sprinting can beat a man from Tuvalu or Kiribati, if he's qualifying and she's sprinting at a final pace. Her qualifying times would not have been successful in any male heat, her semifinal time was too slow to qualify for the men's final and her final time would have left her embarrassingly last against the men.
– Boodysaspie
2 hours ago
@Richard Yes, a female athlete from a country with a strong culture of sprinting can beat a man from Tuvalu or Kiribati, if he's qualifying and she's sprinting at a final pace. Her qualifying times would not have been successful in any male heat, her semifinal time was too slow to qualify for the men's final and her final time would have left her embarrassingly last against the men.
– Boodysaspie
2 hours ago
@David Thornley Well, yes, to become a top-class footballer you need to start from the bottom and work up in football, rather than spend most of your life doing something else, swapping to a new discipline and struggling. Can you provide any data, or even anecdotes, on how well the best women's baseball team would fare against the 100th best men's team?
– Boodysaspie
1 hour ago
@David Thornley Well, yes, to become a top-class footballer you need to start from the bottom and work up in football, rather than spend most of your life doing something else, swapping to a new discipline and struggling. Can you provide any data, or even anecdotes, on how well the best women's baseball team would fare against the 100th best men's team?
– Boodysaspie
1 hour ago
Sure. but there were men in the top 100 who attained worse times than the top women. They wouldn't have won any heats but nor would they have come last.
– Richard
1 hour ago
Sure. but there were men in the top 100 who attained worse times than the top women. They wouldn't have won any heats but nor would they have come last.
– Richard
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
The fuller quote is talking about "the top level in almost any sport," and that's almost the literal definition of the Olympics, where more than 100 of the top athletes compete.
Here's the events & their records from Wikipedia's List of Olympic records in athletics, I'll try formatting them by sport, with the mens & women's records side-by-side for easier comparison:
Records
Event Men's Women's
===== ===== =======
100m 9.63 10.62
200 metres 19.30 ♦21.34
400 metres ♦43.03 48.25
800 metres ♦1:40.91 1:53.43
1,500 metres 3:32.07 3:53.96
5,000 metres 12:57.82 14:26.17
10,000 metres 27:01.17 ♦29:17.45
Marathon 2:06:32 2:23:07
110 metres hurdles 12.91 12.35
* only 100m hurdles for women
400 metres hurdles ♦46.78 52.64
3,000 m steeplechase 8:03.28 8:58.81
4×100 m relay ♦36.84 ♦40.82
4×400 m relay 2:55.39 ♦3:15.17
20 km walk 1:18:46 1:25:02
High jump 2.39 m 2.06 m
Long jump 8.90 m 7.40 m
Pole vault 6.03 m 5.05 m
Triple jump 18.09 m 15.39 m
Shot put 22.52 m 22.41 m
* men's shot weighs 16 lb, women's 8.8 lb
Discus throw 69.89 m 72.30 m
* men's weigh 2kg/4.4 lb, women's 1kg/2.2 lb
Hammer throw 84.80 m 82.29 m
* men's weigh 16 lb, women's 8.82 lb
Javelin throw 90.57 m 71.53 m
* men's weigh 800g/1.76 lb, women's 600g/1.32 lb
Decathlon 8893 pts ♦7291 pts
(♦ denotes a performance that is also a current world record.
Statistics are correct as of 19 August 2016.)
It appears that the men's records are faster/longer for everything except the item throwing events. But given that the weight of the shot, discus, and hammer are twice as heavy for men, and the records are still within 4%, they still seem in line with the other event results.
New contributor
13
This shows that the top male athlete could beat the top female athlete. It doesn't match the claim - that even the 100th "best" male athlete could beat the top female athletes.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
1
Some reasons to reject your argument: 1) You don't make it in the answer. 2) Olympics do not include "most sports" - which is a big problem with the question being vague, and I am struggling with how to deal with it. 3) 7.7 billion people don't play any particular sport. If the sport has only 1000 players, the chance of the claim being true is much higher.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
4
It is a particularly strange quote, claiming that out of the top 100 athletes in "almost any / most sports", that every man would beat every women... but the Olympic records are well verified and recorded and easily compared, probably the best "data" available, I don't know where to find the top 10 or top 100 Olympic results, but I would be skeptical if they were significantly different from the top records
– Xen2050
8 hours ago
3
@Xen2050 You're not comparing 100th to 100th. You're comparing 100th to 1st.
– wizzwizz4
3 hours ago
2
@Mazura I think the fact that the throwing events usually have such a drastic weight difference actually speaks volumes.
– Xen2050
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
The fuller quote is talking about "the top level in almost any sport," and that's almost the literal definition of the Olympics, where more than 100 of the top athletes compete.
Here's the events & their records from Wikipedia's List of Olympic records in athletics, I'll try formatting them by sport, with the mens & women's records side-by-side for easier comparison:
Records
Event Men's Women's
===== ===== =======
100m 9.63 10.62
200 metres 19.30 ♦21.34
400 metres ♦43.03 48.25
800 metres ♦1:40.91 1:53.43
1,500 metres 3:32.07 3:53.96
5,000 metres 12:57.82 14:26.17
10,000 metres 27:01.17 ♦29:17.45
Marathon 2:06:32 2:23:07
110 metres hurdles 12.91 12.35
* only 100m hurdles for women
400 metres hurdles ♦46.78 52.64
3,000 m steeplechase 8:03.28 8:58.81
4×100 m relay ♦36.84 ♦40.82
4×400 m relay 2:55.39 ♦3:15.17
20 km walk 1:18:46 1:25:02
High jump 2.39 m 2.06 m
Long jump 8.90 m 7.40 m
Pole vault 6.03 m 5.05 m
Triple jump 18.09 m 15.39 m
Shot put 22.52 m 22.41 m
* men's shot weighs 16 lb, women's 8.8 lb
Discus throw 69.89 m 72.30 m
* men's weigh 2kg/4.4 lb, women's 1kg/2.2 lb
Hammer throw 84.80 m 82.29 m
* men's weigh 16 lb, women's 8.82 lb
Javelin throw 90.57 m 71.53 m
* men's weigh 800g/1.76 lb, women's 600g/1.32 lb
Decathlon 8893 pts ♦7291 pts
(♦ denotes a performance that is also a current world record.
Statistics are correct as of 19 August 2016.)
It appears that the men's records are faster/longer for everything except the item throwing events. But given that the weight of the shot, discus, and hammer are twice as heavy for men, and the records are still within 4%, they still seem in line with the other event results.
New contributor
13
This shows that the top male athlete could beat the top female athlete. It doesn't match the claim - that even the 100th "best" male athlete could beat the top female athletes.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
1
Some reasons to reject your argument: 1) You don't make it in the answer. 2) Olympics do not include "most sports" - which is a big problem with the question being vague, and I am struggling with how to deal with it. 3) 7.7 billion people don't play any particular sport. If the sport has only 1000 players, the chance of the claim being true is much higher.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
4
It is a particularly strange quote, claiming that out of the top 100 athletes in "almost any / most sports", that every man would beat every women... but the Olympic records are well verified and recorded and easily compared, probably the best "data" available, I don't know where to find the top 10 or top 100 Olympic results, but I would be skeptical if they were significantly different from the top records
– Xen2050
8 hours ago
3
@Xen2050 You're not comparing 100th to 100th. You're comparing 100th to 1st.
– wizzwizz4
3 hours ago
2
@Mazura I think the fact that the throwing events usually have such a drastic weight difference actually speaks volumes.
– Xen2050
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
The fuller quote is talking about "the top level in almost any sport," and that's almost the literal definition of the Olympics, where more than 100 of the top athletes compete.
Here's the events & their records from Wikipedia's List of Olympic records in athletics, I'll try formatting them by sport, with the mens & women's records side-by-side for easier comparison:
Records
Event Men's Women's
===== ===== =======
100m 9.63 10.62
200 metres 19.30 ♦21.34
400 metres ♦43.03 48.25
800 metres ♦1:40.91 1:53.43
1,500 metres 3:32.07 3:53.96
5,000 metres 12:57.82 14:26.17
10,000 metres 27:01.17 ♦29:17.45
Marathon 2:06:32 2:23:07
110 metres hurdles 12.91 12.35
* only 100m hurdles for women
400 metres hurdles ♦46.78 52.64
3,000 m steeplechase 8:03.28 8:58.81
4×100 m relay ♦36.84 ♦40.82
4×400 m relay 2:55.39 ♦3:15.17
20 km walk 1:18:46 1:25:02
High jump 2.39 m 2.06 m
Long jump 8.90 m 7.40 m
Pole vault 6.03 m 5.05 m
Triple jump 18.09 m 15.39 m
Shot put 22.52 m 22.41 m
* men's shot weighs 16 lb, women's 8.8 lb
Discus throw 69.89 m 72.30 m
* men's weigh 2kg/4.4 lb, women's 1kg/2.2 lb
Hammer throw 84.80 m 82.29 m
* men's weigh 16 lb, women's 8.82 lb
Javelin throw 90.57 m 71.53 m
* men's weigh 800g/1.76 lb, women's 600g/1.32 lb
Decathlon 8893 pts ♦7291 pts
(♦ denotes a performance that is also a current world record.
Statistics are correct as of 19 August 2016.)
It appears that the men's records are faster/longer for everything except the item throwing events. But given that the weight of the shot, discus, and hammer are twice as heavy for men, and the records are still within 4%, they still seem in line with the other event results.
New contributor
The fuller quote is talking about "the top level in almost any sport," and that's almost the literal definition of the Olympics, where more than 100 of the top athletes compete.
Here's the events & their records from Wikipedia's List of Olympic records in athletics, I'll try formatting them by sport, with the mens & women's records side-by-side for easier comparison:
Records
Event Men's Women's
===== ===== =======
100m 9.63 10.62
200 metres 19.30 ♦21.34
400 metres ♦43.03 48.25
800 metres ♦1:40.91 1:53.43
1,500 metres 3:32.07 3:53.96
5,000 metres 12:57.82 14:26.17
10,000 metres 27:01.17 ♦29:17.45
Marathon 2:06:32 2:23:07
110 metres hurdles 12.91 12.35
* only 100m hurdles for women
400 metres hurdles ♦46.78 52.64
3,000 m steeplechase 8:03.28 8:58.81
4×100 m relay ♦36.84 ♦40.82
4×400 m relay 2:55.39 ♦3:15.17
20 km walk 1:18:46 1:25:02
High jump 2.39 m 2.06 m
Long jump 8.90 m 7.40 m
Pole vault 6.03 m 5.05 m
Triple jump 18.09 m 15.39 m
Shot put 22.52 m 22.41 m
* men's shot weighs 16 lb, women's 8.8 lb
Discus throw 69.89 m 72.30 m
* men's weigh 2kg/4.4 lb, women's 1kg/2.2 lb
Hammer throw 84.80 m 82.29 m
* men's weigh 16 lb, women's 8.82 lb
Javelin throw 90.57 m 71.53 m
* men's weigh 800g/1.76 lb, women's 600g/1.32 lb
Decathlon 8893 pts ♦7291 pts
(♦ denotes a performance that is also a current world record.
Statistics are correct as of 19 August 2016.)
It appears that the men's records are faster/longer for everything except the item throwing events. But given that the weight of the shot, discus, and hammer are twice as heavy for men, and the records are still within 4%, they still seem in line with the other event results.
New contributor
edited 2 hours ago
New contributor
answered 9 hours ago
Xen2050
1945
1945
New contributor
New contributor
13
This shows that the top male athlete could beat the top female athlete. It doesn't match the claim - that even the 100th "best" male athlete could beat the top female athletes.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
1
Some reasons to reject your argument: 1) You don't make it in the answer. 2) Olympics do not include "most sports" - which is a big problem with the question being vague, and I am struggling with how to deal with it. 3) 7.7 billion people don't play any particular sport. If the sport has only 1000 players, the chance of the claim being true is much higher.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
4
It is a particularly strange quote, claiming that out of the top 100 athletes in "almost any / most sports", that every man would beat every women... but the Olympic records are well verified and recorded and easily compared, probably the best "data" available, I don't know where to find the top 10 or top 100 Olympic results, but I would be skeptical if they were significantly different from the top records
– Xen2050
8 hours ago
3
@Xen2050 You're not comparing 100th to 100th. You're comparing 100th to 1st.
– wizzwizz4
3 hours ago
2
@Mazura I think the fact that the throwing events usually have such a drastic weight difference actually speaks volumes.
– Xen2050
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
13
This shows that the top male athlete could beat the top female athlete. It doesn't match the claim - that even the 100th "best" male athlete could beat the top female athletes.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
1
Some reasons to reject your argument: 1) You don't make it in the answer. 2) Olympics do not include "most sports" - which is a big problem with the question being vague, and I am struggling with how to deal with it. 3) 7.7 billion people don't play any particular sport. If the sport has only 1000 players, the chance of the claim being true is much higher.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
4
It is a particularly strange quote, claiming that out of the top 100 athletes in "almost any / most sports", that every man would beat every women... but the Olympic records are well verified and recorded and easily compared, probably the best "data" available, I don't know where to find the top 10 or top 100 Olympic results, but I would be skeptical if they were significantly different from the top records
– Xen2050
8 hours ago
3
@Xen2050 You're not comparing 100th to 100th. You're comparing 100th to 1st.
– wizzwizz4
3 hours ago
2
@Mazura I think the fact that the throwing events usually have such a drastic weight difference actually speaks volumes.
– Xen2050
2 hours ago
13
13
This shows that the top male athlete could beat the top female athlete. It doesn't match the claim - that even the 100th "best" male athlete could beat the top female athletes.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
This shows that the top male athlete could beat the top female athlete. It doesn't match the claim - that even the 100th "best" male athlete could beat the top female athletes.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
1
1
Some reasons to reject your argument: 1) You don't make it in the answer. 2) Olympics do not include "most sports" - which is a big problem with the question being vague, and I am struggling with how to deal with it. 3) 7.7 billion people don't play any particular sport. If the sport has only 1000 players, the chance of the claim being true is much higher.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
Some reasons to reject your argument: 1) You don't make it in the answer. 2) Olympics do not include "most sports" - which is a big problem with the question being vague, and I am struggling with how to deal with it. 3) 7.7 billion people don't play any particular sport. If the sport has only 1000 players, the chance of the claim being true is much higher.
– Oddthinking♦
9 hours ago
4
4
It is a particularly strange quote, claiming that out of the top 100 athletes in "almost any / most sports", that every man would beat every women... but the Olympic records are well verified and recorded and easily compared, probably the best "data" available, I don't know where to find the top 10 or top 100 Olympic results, but I would be skeptical if they were significantly different from the top records
– Xen2050
8 hours ago
It is a particularly strange quote, claiming that out of the top 100 athletes in "almost any / most sports", that every man would beat every women... but the Olympic records are well verified and recorded and easily compared, probably the best "data" available, I don't know where to find the top 10 or top 100 Olympic results, but I would be skeptical if they were significantly different from the top records
– Xen2050
8 hours ago
3
3
@Xen2050 You're not comparing 100th to 100th. You're comparing 100th to 1st.
– wizzwizz4
3 hours ago
@Xen2050 You're not comparing 100th to 100th. You're comparing 100th to 1st.
– wizzwizz4
3 hours ago
2
2
@Mazura I think the fact that the throwing events usually have such a drastic weight difference actually speaks volumes.
– Xen2050
2 hours ago
@Mazura I think the fact that the throwing events usually have such a drastic weight difference actually speaks volumes.
– Xen2050
2 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
The question can not be honestly answered as it is stated remarkably imprecise ( in more than two instances ).
Success in "sport" disciplines depend on sportive qualities that are distinct from each other ranging from fast strategic thinking (chess) over teamwork (i.e. climbing, ice-stick shooting, curling and alike team sports) to athletic capabilities.
While many of these qualities are not tangled to sex, muscular strength, fast power and endurance performance are.
There are physiological differences in muscular composition between males and females in homo sapiens that are rooted in sex driven hormonal differences that beside direct impact interact in various ways with growth and motoric ability. Some of these sex differences might be overcome by hormonal substitution combined with training at least in young fit individuals (this is because the bone composition / tendonous apparatus needs to adapt to muscular strength and the timeframe for bone composition change is early in lifespan).
Therefore only in "sports" that depend foremost on power of the muscular skeletal system in a challenge of comparable conditioned man and women, the males are unlikely to be beaten even by exceptional strong females i.e. olympic weightlifting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_weightlifting)
Some selective literature:
Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition
K. M. Haizlip, B. C. Harrison, L. A. Leinwand
Physiology (Bethesda) 2015 Jan; 30(1): 30–39. doi: 10.1152/physiol.00024.2014
PMCID: PMC4285578
The exercise sex gap and the impact of the estrous cycle on exercise performance in mice
Aderbal S. Aguiar, Jr, Ana Elisa Speck, Inês M. Amaral, Paula M. Canas, Rodrigo A. Cunha
Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 10742. Published online 2018 Jul 16. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29050-0
PMCID: PMC6048134
Sex-Related Differences in Muscle Composition and Motor Unit Firing Rates of the First Dorsal Interosseous: 114 Board; Wray, Mandy & Sterczala, Adam & Miller, Jonathan & L. Dimmick, Hannah & Herda, Trent. (2018) #3 May 30 9. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 50. 8. 10.1249/01.mss.0000535111.46582.39.
Sex-Related Differences in Gene Expression in Human Skeletal Muscle
Stephen Welle, Rabi Tawil, Charles A. Thornton
PLoS One. 2008; 3(1): e1385. Published online 2008 Jan 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001385
add a comment |
The question can not be honestly answered as it is stated remarkably imprecise ( in more than two instances ).
Success in "sport" disciplines depend on sportive qualities that are distinct from each other ranging from fast strategic thinking (chess) over teamwork (i.e. climbing, ice-stick shooting, curling and alike team sports) to athletic capabilities.
While many of these qualities are not tangled to sex, muscular strength, fast power and endurance performance are.
There are physiological differences in muscular composition between males and females in homo sapiens that are rooted in sex driven hormonal differences that beside direct impact interact in various ways with growth and motoric ability. Some of these sex differences might be overcome by hormonal substitution combined with training at least in young fit individuals (this is because the bone composition / tendonous apparatus needs to adapt to muscular strength and the timeframe for bone composition change is early in lifespan).
Therefore only in "sports" that depend foremost on power of the muscular skeletal system in a challenge of comparable conditioned man and women, the males are unlikely to be beaten even by exceptional strong females i.e. olympic weightlifting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_weightlifting)
Some selective literature:
Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition
K. M. Haizlip, B. C. Harrison, L. A. Leinwand
Physiology (Bethesda) 2015 Jan; 30(1): 30–39. doi: 10.1152/physiol.00024.2014
PMCID: PMC4285578
The exercise sex gap and the impact of the estrous cycle on exercise performance in mice
Aderbal S. Aguiar, Jr, Ana Elisa Speck, Inês M. Amaral, Paula M. Canas, Rodrigo A. Cunha
Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 10742. Published online 2018 Jul 16. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29050-0
PMCID: PMC6048134
Sex-Related Differences in Muscle Composition and Motor Unit Firing Rates of the First Dorsal Interosseous: 114 Board; Wray, Mandy & Sterczala, Adam & Miller, Jonathan & L. Dimmick, Hannah & Herda, Trent. (2018) #3 May 30 9. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 50. 8. 10.1249/01.mss.0000535111.46582.39.
Sex-Related Differences in Gene Expression in Human Skeletal Muscle
Stephen Welle, Rabi Tawil, Charles A. Thornton
PLoS One. 2008; 3(1): e1385. Published online 2008 Jan 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001385
add a comment |
The question can not be honestly answered as it is stated remarkably imprecise ( in more than two instances ).
Success in "sport" disciplines depend on sportive qualities that are distinct from each other ranging from fast strategic thinking (chess) over teamwork (i.e. climbing, ice-stick shooting, curling and alike team sports) to athletic capabilities.
While many of these qualities are not tangled to sex, muscular strength, fast power and endurance performance are.
There are physiological differences in muscular composition between males and females in homo sapiens that are rooted in sex driven hormonal differences that beside direct impact interact in various ways with growth and motoric ability. Some of these sex differences might be overcome by hormonal substitution combined with training at least in young fit individuals (this is because the bone composition / tendonous apparatus needs to adapt to muscular strength and the timeframe for bone composition change is early in lifespan).
Therefore only in "sports" that depend foremost on power of the muscular skeletal system in a challenge of comparable conditioned man and women, the males are unlikely to be beaten even by exceptional strong females i.e. olympic weightlifting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_weightlifting)
Some selective literature:
Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition
K. M. Haizlip, B. C. Harrison, L. A. Leinwand
Physiology (Bethesda) 2015 Jan; 30(1): 30–39. doi: 10.1152/physiol.00024.2014
PMCID: PMC4285578
The exercise sex gap and the impact of the estrous cycle on exercise performance in mice
Aderbal S. Aguiar, Jr, Ana Elisa Speck, Inês M. Amaral, Paula M. Canas, Rodrigo A. Cunha
Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 10742. Published online 2018 Jul 16. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29050-0
PMCID: PMC6048134
Sex-Related Differences in Muscle Composition and Motor Unit Firing Rates of the First Dorsal Interosseous: 114 Board; Wray, Mandy & Sterczala, Adam & Miller, Jonathan & L. Dimmick, Hannah & Herda, Trent. (2018) #3 May 30 9. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 50. 8. 10.1249/01.mss.0000535111.46582.39.
Sex-Related Differences in Gene Expression in Human Skeletal Muscle
Stephen Welle, Rabi Tawil, Charles A. Thornton
PLoS One. 2008; 3(1): e1385. Published online 2008 Jan 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001385
The question can not be honestly answered as it is stated remarkably imprecise ( in more than two instances ).
Success in "sport" disciplines depend on sportive qualities that are distinct from each other ranging from fast strategic thinking (chess) over teamwork (i.e. climbing, ice-stick shooting, curling and alike team sports) to athletic capabilities.
While many of these qualities are not tangled to sex, muscular strength, fast power and endurance performance are.
There are physiological differences in muscular composition between males and females in homo sapiens that are rooted in sex driven hormonal differences that beside direct impact interact in various ways with growth and motoric ability. Some of these sex differences might be overcome by hormonal substitution combined with training at least in young fit individuals (this is because the bone composition / tendonous apparatus needs to adapt to muscular strength and the timeframe for bone composition change is early in lifespan).
Therefore only in "sports" that depend foremost on power of the muscular skeletal system in a challenge of comparable conditioned man and women, the males are unlikely to be beaten even by exceptional strong females i.e. olympic weightlifting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_weightlifting)
Some selective literature:
Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition
K. M. Haizlip, B. C. Harrison, L. A. Leinwand
Physiology (Bethesda) 2015 Jan; 30(1): 30–39. doi: 10.1152/physiol.00024.2014
PMCID: PMC4285578
The exercise sex gap and the impact of the estrous cycle on exercise performance in mice
Aderbal S. Aguiar, Jr, Ana Elisa Speck, Inês M. Amaral, Paula M. Canas, Rodrigo A. Cunha
Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 10742. Published online 2018 Jul 16. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-29050-0
PMCID: PMC6048134
Sex-Related Differences in Muscle Composition and Motor Unit Firing Rates of the First Dorsal Interosseous: 114 Board; Wray, Mandy & Sterczala, Adam & Miller, Jonathan & L. Dimmick, Hannah & Herda, Trent. (2018) #3 May 30 9. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 50. 8. 10.1249/01.mss.0000535111.46582.39.
Sex-Related Differences in Gene Expression in Human Skeletal Muscle
Stephen Welle, Rabi Tawil, Charles A. Thornton
PLoS One. 2008; 3(1): e1385. Published online 2008 Jan 2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001385
edited 5 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
ABri
21913
21913
add a comment |
add a comment |
Billard "sports", including 9 ball and straight pool, are examples of activities where strength plays a very minor role, yet the men are at a higher level than the women. Part of this could be simply lack of interest of women in certain "sports", reducing the pool of women that could be competitive.
On the other hand, with Indy cars, Danica Patrick won a few races, and she ran mid-pack when she switched to Nascar oval tracks. For motorcycle road course races there are very few women, probably an issue with the risk factor.
Women have proven to be competitive in drag racing for pro-stock motorcycles and top fuel, and women have won yearly championships in top fuel events. Although top fuel is mostly the car (clutch is mechanically programmed, the driver just pegs the throttle, and the key driver factor is how close they can get to the allotted 0.4 second reaction time without going under (red light), most of the races are determined by the car, except for some races that are very close. Enough of those close races should occur within a season, so winning a championship shows women are competitive. The motorcycles have pre-programmed rev-limiters for launch, but the rider does have to control the clutch (I'm not sure if these are pre-programmed for pro-stock motorcycles).
New contributor
add a comment |
Billard "sports", including 9 ball and straight pool, are examples of activities where strength plays a very minor role, yet the men are at a higher level than the women. Part of this could be simply lack of interest of women in certain "sports", reducing the pool of women that could be competitive.
On the other hand, with Indy cars, Danica Patrick won a few races, and she ran mid-pack when she switched to Nascar oval tracks. For motorcycle road course races there are very few women, probably an issue with the risk factor.
Women have proven to be competitive in drag racing for pro-stock motorcycles and top fuel, and women have won yearly championships in top fuel events. Although top fuel is mostly the car (clutch is mechanically programmed, the driver just pegs the throttle, and the key driver factor is how close they can get to the allotted 0.4 second reaction time without going under (red light), most of the races are determined by the car, except for some races that are very close. Enough of those close races should occur within a season, so winning a championship shows women are competitive. The motorcycles have pre-programmed rev-limiters for launch, but the rider does have to control the clutch (I'm not sure if these are pre-programmed for pro-stock motorcycles).
New contributor
add a comment |
Billard "sports", including 9 ball and straight pool, are examples of activities where strength plays a very minor role, yet the men are at a higher level than the women. Part of this could be simply lack of interest of women in certain "sports", reducing the pool of women that could be competitive.
On the other hand, with Indy cars, Danica Patrick won a few races, and she ran mid-pack when she switched to Nascar oval tracks. For motorcycle road course races there are very few women, probably an issue with the risk factor.
Women have proven to be competitive in drag racing for pro-stock motorcycles and top fuel, and women have won yearly championships in top fuel events. Although top fuel is mostly the car (clutch is mechanically programmed, the driver just pegs the throttle, and the key driver factor is how close they can get to the allotted 0.4 second reaction time without going under (red light), most of the races are determined by the car, except for some races that are very close. Enough of those close races should occur within a season, so winning a championship shows women are competitive. The motorcycles have pre-programmed rev-limiters for launch, but the rider does have to control the clutch (I'm not sure if these are pre-programmed for pro-stock motorcycles).
New contributor
Billard "sports", including 9 ball and straight pool, are examples of activities where strength plays a very minor role, yet the men are at a higher level than the women. Part of this could be simply lack of interest of women in certain "sports", reducing the pool of women that could be competitive.
On the other hand, with Indy cars, Danica Patrick won a few races, and she ran mid-pack when she switched to Nascar oval tracks. For motorcycle road course races there are very few women, probably an issue with the risk factor.
Women have proven to be competitive in drag racing for pro-stock motorcycles and top fuel, and women have won yearly championships in top fuel events. Although top fuel is mostly the car (clutch is mechanically programmed, the driver just pegs the throttle, and the key driver factor is how close they can get to the allotted 0.4 second reaction time without going under (red light), most of the races are determined by the car, except for some races that are very close. Enough of those close races should occur within a season, so winning a championship shows women are competitive. The motorcycles have pre-programmed rev-limiters for launch, but the rider does have to control the clutch (I'm not sure if these are pre-programmed for pro-stock motorcycles).
New contributor
edited 2 hours ago
New contributor
answered 3 hours ago
rcgldr
1373
1373
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
I can give a counterexample of a physical sport where only three male athletes are definitely better than the best female.
The sport is hard rock climbing, where "hard" means "pushing the limits of what is humanly possible" (as opposed to competition climbing, which necessarily does not allow much time to figure out optimal movements, let alone specialized training).
This website has a complete list of known ascents of sport climbs in the highest (5.15 Yosemite scale) difficulty grade. You will (as of 2018-12-26) find 76 unique athletes on that list, and 3 of them are female (Margot Hayes, Angela Eiter and Anak Verhoeven). The ratio becomes even smaller if we restrict the list to difficulty 5.15b and higher, where we have only 19 male athletes as good or better than the best female athlete (Angela Eiter) - and only 3 are definitely better.
Sidenote: the best male athlete, Adam Ondra, dominates the entire field by a ridiculous margin.
Caveats:
- the list is potentially incomplete since these ascents are not done at events that have an "official" status, nor is there an official recording. But given how much of an achievement any ascent at this level is, it's highly unlikely to be kept secret or not reach anyone really following the news in climbing, especially since most athletes on the list are professionals whose income depends on being worth sponsoring.
- Grading is somewhat subjective, especially in routes that have only seen a single ascent. But inflating the grade of a new route you created only to have it downgraded by others is seen as highly embarrassing (unless it's a small difference) and something that climbers try very hard to avoid.
2
So, basically, this answer boils down to "if you choose a sport with a small enough sample size, the claim might be false?" Or am I missing something here? "I have done x" does not prove "There do not exist 100 people who could do x better than I did it," even if no other person has ever done x.
– reirab
1 hour ago
1
@reirab: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. What is the sample size you're talking about and how is it relevant? You can only compare performances that have actually ocurred, whatever the sport. How do your statements about x hold up for the case of x = "running 100m in under 9 seconds"?
– Michael Borgwardt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I can give a counterexample of a physical sport where only three male athletes are definitely better than the best female.
The sport is hard rock climbing, where "hard" means "pushing the limits of what is humanly possible" (as opposed to competition climbing, which necessarily does not allow much time to figure out optimal movements, let alone specialized training).
This website has a complete list of known ascents of sport climbs in the highest (5.15 Yosemite scale) difficulty grade. You will (as of 2018-12-26) find 76 unique athletes on that list, and 3 of them are female (Margot Hayes, Angela Eiter and Anak Verhoeven). The ratio becomes even smaller if we restrict the list to difficulty 5.15b and higher, where we have only 19 male athletes as good or better than the best female athlete (Angela Eiter) - and only 3 are definitely better.
Sidenote: the best male athlete, Adam Ondra, dominates the entire field by a ridiculous margin.
Caveats:
- the list is potentially incomplete since these ascents are not done at events that have an "official" status, nor is there an official recording. But given how much of an achievement any ascent at this level is, it's highly unlikely to be kept secret or not reach anyone really following the news in climbing, especially since most athletes on the list are professionals whose income depends on being worth sponsoring.
- Grading is somewhat subjective, especially in routes that have only seen a single ascent. But inflating the grade of a new route you created only to have it downgraded by others is seen as highly embarrassing (unless it's a small difference) and something that climbers try very hard to avoid.
2
So, basically, this answer boils down to "if you choose a sport with a small enough sample size, the claim might be false?" Or am I missing something here? "I have done x" does not prove "There do not exist 100 people who could do x better than I did it," even if no other person has ever done x.
– reirab
1 hour ago
1
@reirab: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. What is the sample size you're talking about and how is it relevant? You can only compare performances that have actually ocurred, whatever the sport. How do your statements about x hold up for the case of x = "running 100m in under 9 seconds"?
– Michael Borgwardt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I can give a counterexample of a physical sport where only three male athletes are definitely better than the best female.
The sport is hard rock climbing, where "hard" means "pushing the limits of what is humanly possible" (as opposed to competition climbing, which necessarily does not allow much time to figure out optimal movements, let alone specialized training).
This website has a complete list of known ascents of sport climbs in the highest (5.15 Yosemite scale) difficulty grade. You will (as of 2018-12-26) find 76 unique athletes on that list, and 3 of them are female (Margot Hayes, Angela Eiter and Anak Verhoeven). The ratio becomes even smaller if we restrict the list to difficulty 5.15b and higher, where we have only 19 male athletes as good or better than the best female athlete (Angela Eiter) - and only 3 are definitely better.
Sidenote: the best male athlete, Adam Ondra, dominates the entire field by a ridiculous margin.
Caveats:
- the list is potentially incomplete since these ascents are not done at events that have an "official" status, nor is there an official recording. But given how much of an achievement any ascent at this level is, it's highly unlikely to be kept secret or not reach anyone really following the news in climbing, especially since most athletes on the list are professionals whose income depends on being worth sponsoring.
- Grading is somewhat subjective, especially in routes that have only seen a single ascent. But inflating the grade of a new route you created only to have it downgraded by others is seen as highly embarrassing (unless it's a small difference) and something that climbers try very hard to avoid.
I can give a counterexample of a physical sport where only three male athletes are definitely better than the best female.
The sport is hard rock climbing, where "hard" means "pushing the limits of what is humanly possible" (as opposed to competition climbing, which necessarily does not allow much time to figure out optimal movements, let alone specialized training).
This website has a complete list of known ascents of sport climbs in the highest (5.15 Yosemite scale) difficulty grade. You will (as of 2018-12-26) find 76 unique athletes on that list, and 3 of them are female (Margot Hayes, Angela Eiter and Anak Verhoeven). The ratio becomes even smaller if we restrict the list to difficulty 5.15b and higher, where we have only 19 male athletes as good or better than the best female athlete (Angela Eiter) - and only 3 are definitely better.
Sidenote: the best male athlete, Adam Ondra, dominates the entire field by a ridiculous margin.
Caveats:
- the list is potentially incomplete since these ascents are not done at events that have an "official" status, nor is there an official recording. But given how much of an achievement any ascent at this level is, it's highly unlikely to be kept secret or not reach anyone really following the news in climbing, especially since most athletes on the list are professionals whose income depends on being worth sponsoring.
- Grading is somewhat subjective, especially in routes that have only seen a single ascent. But inflating the grade of a new route you created only to have it downgraded by others is seen as highly embarrassing (unless it's a small difference) and something that climbers try very hard to avoid.
edited 1 hour ago
answered 2 hours ago
Michael Borgwardt
2,87411518
2,87411518
2
So, basically, this answer boils down to "if you choose a sport with a small enough sample size, the claim might be false?" Or am I missing something here? "I have done x" does not prove "There do not exist 100 people who could do x better than I did it," even if no other person has ever done x.
– reirab
1 hour ago
1
@reirab: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. What is the sample size you're talking about and how is it relevant? You can only compare performances that have actually ocurred, whatever the sport. How do your statements about x hold up for the case of x = "running 100m in under 9 seconds"?
– Michael Borgwardt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
2
So, basically, this answer boils down to "if you choose a sport with a small enough sample size, the claim might be false?" Or am I missing something here? "I have done x" does not prove "There do not exist 100 people who could do x better than I did it," even if no other person has ever done x.
– reirab
1 hour ago
1
@reirab: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. What is the sample size you're talking about and how is it relevant? You can only compare performances that have actually ocurred, whatever the sport. How do your statements about x hold up for the case of x = "running 100m in under 9 seconds"?
– Michael Borgwardt
1 hour ago
2
2
So, basically, this answer boils down to "if you choose a sport with a small enough sample size, the claim might be false?" Or am I missing something here? "I have done x" does not prove "There do not exist 100 people who could do x better than I did it," even if no other person has ever done x.
– reirab
1 hour ago
So, basically, this answer boils down to "if you choose a sport with a small enough sample size, the claim might be false?" Or am I missing something here? "I have done x" does not prove "There do not exist 100 people who could do x better than I did it," even if no other person has ever done x.
– reirab
1 hour ago
1
1
@reirab: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. What is the sample size you're talking about and how is it relevant? You can only compare performances that have actually ocurred, whatever the sport. How do your statements about x hold up for the case of x = "running 100m in under 9 seconds"?
– Michael Borgwardt
1 hour ago
@reirab: I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. What is the sample size you're talking about and how is it relevant? You can only compare performances that have actually ocurred, whatever the sport. How do your statements about x hold up for the case of x = "running 100m in under 9 seconds"?
– Michael Borgwardt
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1
You should look up male variability hypothesis and why it's important for the top 100 of anything
– K Dog
6 hours ago
1
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variability_hypothesis
– K Dog
6 hours ago
3
Additionally, since men are the arbiters of what constitutes a sport, it follows that they wound be biased toward activities they are better at.
– Daniel T.
5 hours ago
4
@DanielT. Not only that, but men are more predisposed towards competition. There is a lot of debate about what makes a sport. My friend has a theory that if there are variable physical outcomes based on skill (ie not quantized), then it is a sport. So chess would not be a sport because the pieces go into discrete squares based on intention, while darts would be a sport because they can land anywhere on the board, despite your intention of a discrete location. Poker: not a sport. Golf: sport. Interesting theory.
– Chloe
5 hours ago
3
Basically, yes. However, that is a useless comparison. The better question is: Would a female competing against a male of equal height, weight, training, and determination be able to win ~50% of the time.
– MonkeyZeus
3 hours ago