Women are better endurance athelettes than men.

This extensive test proves that per their size women are indeed faster at endurance running and sprinting than men. Why all the big talk from guys about how great they are? A man of equal height can't out run a woman, biologically speaking according to this. Isn't a simple footrace the manly end all to the discussion of who's better?

In this snipet they compare the two fastest cross country runners in the world. According to this the only thing keeping a male in front is his god given height, not any biological superiority.

That's great, but aren't men still faster if we look at the very top-level athletes? Let's compare two of the 'hottest' Kenyan runners - Paul Tergat, current world cross country champion, and Tegla Loroupe, winner of the 1994 New York Marathon and an assortment of other major races. Paul is 1.82 metres tall and has run the half-marathon (21 . 1 K) in about 60 minutes. Tegla is just 1.5 metres in height and covers the half-marathon in 68 minutes. Paul's pace for the half-marathon is about 11,593 heights/3600 seconds = 3.22 heights per second. Tegla's tempo is 14,067 heights/4080 seconds = 3.45 heights per second. Tegla is actually faster than the world champion male!

Here's another snippet of the comparison of the world's fastest male and female sprinters. According to this again, a man holds the record only by his god given height. The fastest woman is actually 2% faster.

What about world record performances? Certainly you would think that the very best male sprinter would be faster than the topmost female. Leroy Burrell, who stands 6 feet tall, currently holds the men's world record for 100 metres with a clocking of 9.85 seconds, which turns out to be a velocity of 5.55 heights per second. Florence Griffith-Joyner, who stands 5'6-1/2' tall, holds the women's world record for 100 metres with a time of 10.49 seconds, which is a speed of 5.64 heights per second. Using fair velocity comparisons (in heights per second, not metres per second), the fastest woman in the world is almost 2 per cent faster than the quickest man !

I think the attitude that women are inferior in terms of physical ability needs to be rethought. The fact that women are discouraged from participating in sports or any physically demanding environment is stupid.

source

reply to post by Thestargateisreal


Height is the part of being "better".


Honestly...does it matter?

I would have to agree, I've known several women that could literally pound away for hours.

Joking aside watch this, nothing wrong with this mans endurance

Sounds like someone has a chip on their shoulder.

Ultimately it comes down to the individual and how much time and effort they put into improving themselves. Race or gender aside, practice makes perfect.

hi op
when i was at school years ago
we were taught that woman are better endurance runners
due to the fat stores in their bodys
true or not
im not sure

If you overlook the sexual divide in Olympic events, the men are faster than women in many of the respective events.

Men/Women 100 meter: 9.58/10.49

Men/Women 200 meter: 19.19/21.34

Men/Women 400 meter: 43.18/47.60

Men/Women 5000 meter: 12:37.35/14:11.15

Even though this doesn't back up what you're saying, I can understand that being not as bulky can help out endurance.

Originally posted by satron
If you overlook the sexual divide in Olympic events, the men are faster than women in many of the respective events.

Men/Women 100 meter: 9.58/10.49

Men/Women 200 meter: 19.19/21.34

Men/Women 400 meter: 43.18/47.60

Men/Women 5000 meter: 12:37.35/14:11.15

Even though this doesn't back up what you're saying, I can understand that being not as bulky can help out endurance.

edit on 20-8-2011 by satron because: (no reason given)

The point is that women are faster than men when graded by distance covered proportionally to height. So all things even, a woman that's a given height racing a man that's the same height will win if they're maximizing each of their bodies in training and diet. Whether it be sprinting or endurance.

This man would beg to differ with you.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8999b441d015.jpg[/atsimg]

However here is a more scientific article to explain why women can only hope to approach the level of a mans endurance and rarely suprass it.

Gender and endurance performance

faculty.washington.edu...

reply to post by Thestargateisreal


Not so

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by kro32


Selective reading? According to that women are most likely biologically superior in anything lasting longer than 2 hours and can even finish with times equal to men that can beat them over smaller distances. How does this prove men are superior?

From your article

It has been shown that women can sometimes finish ultramarathons in times similar to those of men who can beat them in "short" (26.2-mile) marathons.

reply to post by Thestargateisreal


Hahahahahaha good one! Thanks for the funny joke, great way to start off my morning.. that must be why all the top endurance athletes are men... hum...


O, o... you wanna hear another funny joke...?

The WNBA

Yes, and cheetahs aren't the fastest land mammals, because, pound for pound, shrews are way quicker.

Is there no end to this dishonest feminist bollocks ?

reply to post by Thestargateisreal


In case you don't know there is nothing that lasts over 2 hours with a man.

I rest my case

reply to post by kro32


Wouldn't also prove my point another way?

If sex was considered an athletic event, I might agree.

How can Women be better endurance athletes than Men when Men are required to work longer, harder and faster in almost every sport imaginable? And it's actually the comparatively larger Respiratory system as well as comparatively stronger muscles and bones which are why Men out-perform and out-endure Women in almost all physical activities.

Originally posted by Thestargateisreal
reply to post by kro32

 

Wouldn't also prove my point another way?

Well i'm assuming you read my link as you commented on it so per the text you quoted it states that sometimes a woman can finish as good as a man. This indicates that the man is better and sometimes the woman can reach his level of endurance.

reply to post by kro32


It demonstrates that the longer the event the better a woman will do. What if the event was even longer? According to your article women have more fat on their body and rely less on carbs. That is why the article claims women start to "catch up". Does anyone know for sure that given the distance women will not surpass men? By that scientific proof women should last longer before they collapse and cannot go any further.

Originally posted by Thestargateisreal
reply to post by kro32

 

It demonstrates that the longer the event the better a woman will do. What if the event was even longer? According to your article women have more fat on their body and rely less on carbs. That is why the article claims women start to "catch up". Does anyone know for sure that given the distance women will not surpass men? By that scientific proof women should last longer before they collapse and cannot go any further.

I am actually gonna flip sides and help you argue your point because I feel like it

Women beat men on muscle endurance

www.mydr.com.au...

When performing certain isometric exercises, the endurance of women is almost twice that of men performing the same exercise, according to results presented at a meeting of international scientists. Both sexes performed the exercises at the same percentage of their maximum strength.

The study, conducted at the University of Colorado in the US, confirmed that women outlasted men by an average of 75 per cent and, importantly, showed that the reason women had longer endurance times was not due to differences in the motivation levels between men and women, or within the nervous system, but due to differences within muscle.

So based on the scientific research the man only has more endurance because of his size advantage while the woman far surpasses him in actual ability.

reply to post by kro32


Why?