Men vs Women (Warning: Logic free zone).

walshb

RacoonQueen wrote: »

I believe Richard Donovan holds the record for it, for now...

How much of a record (endurance/physical) can it really be if a woman looks set to break it?

gerard65

walshb wrote: »

How much of a record (endurance/physical) can it really be if a woman looks set to break it?

If I were you I start running now:D

walshb

gerard65 wrote: »

If I were you I start running now:D

Well, it has to be looked at, I mean, we are talking about a physically tough event, something that men will always dominate.

Due to the other controversial thread on this issue, this is a telling point?

A man holds the record, and now a woman is set to break it. Something ain't right.

When ever will ANY woman come remotely close to to some of the Irish
Male distance running records, never mind the world records.

kennyb3

walshb wrote: »

How much of a record (endurance/physical) can it really be if a woman looks set to break it?

I hope you are joking, but it appears not. as a moderator i would expect better. move along now before your reported

walshb

kennyb3 wrote: »

I hope you are joking, but it appears not. as a moderator i would expect better. move along now before your reported

Reported? Are you serious? I am asking a serious question about a record attempt.

So, because I think it's highly unlikely that a woman could do an event like this quicker than a man, this somehow warrants reporting?

And, if for some reason she completes the task quicker, is it not safe to assume that
the man wasn't all that good, or didn't really put in his best effort?

RoadKillTs

How much of a record (endurance/physical) can it really be if a woman looks set to break it?

Thats a prity sexist remark.

TFBubendorfer

walshb wrote: »

So, because I think it's highly unlikely that a woman could do an event like this quicker than a man

It has actually been proven that women can be better at ultra running than men. At the very least the gap between genders narrows considerably compared to shorter distances. There are plenty of ultra races that have been won by women on several occasions, even high-profile ones like Badwater.

You are merely showing your own ignorance.

walshb

RoadKillTs wrote: »

Thats a prity sexist remark.

FFS, is it not a glaring remark? So, men are physically stronger and faster than women, I point this out and that is sexist?

walshb

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

It has actually been proven that women can be better at ultra running than men. At the very least the gap between genders narrows considerably compared to shorter distances. There are plenty of ultra races that have been won by women on several occasions, even high-profile ones like Badwater.

You are merely showing your own ignorance.

Ok, let me spell it out here.

On average, the average man or woman in any physical sport, it is extremely unlikely that the average woman will be better than the average man.

Now, world athletes into account. Nobody can tell me that women will perform better than men in athletic events. It's just never been recorded.

Please, if there is ONE single distance running world best held by a woman, point
it out, if not, then maybe it is your ignorance.

robinph

RoadKillTs wrote: »

Thats a prity sexist remark.

No it's not. It's just stating that generally the male of the species is faster/ stronger/ etc.

I think that endurance events are where the balance starts to tip the other way though and the difference in standards between males and females should become less.

kingQuez

walshb wrote: »

How much of a record (endurance/physical) can it really be if a woman looks set to break it?

If you read the report for the current record, you'll see that the man who set it got stress fractures (and subsequently compensating injuries) from day 2. HM is injury free, and the only thing causing issue has been the intense heat and impact this has had with blisters and swelling of her feet.

walshb

robinph wrote: »

No it's not. It's just stating that generally the male of the species is faster/ stronger/ etc.

I think that endurance events are where the balance starts to tip the other way though and the difference in standards between males and females should become less.

Becomes less? Well, obviously over greater distances the chances are that
records will "appear" to be closer.

Take the Male 10k record. Will a woman ever get to this in our life time?

I doubt a woman will ever get close to the Irish record held by a man.

walshb

kingQuez wrote: »

If you read the report for the current record, you'll see that the man who set it got stress fractures (and subsequently compensating injuries) from day 2. HM is injury free, and the only thing causing issue has been the intense heat and impact this has had with blisters and swelling of her feet.

Now we are getting somewhere. The man had issues and problems and injuries. I thought so, because lets be quite honest here, a man and a woman take this on free from major problems or injury, and a woman stands next to no chance.

RubyK

walshb wrote: »

And, if for some reason she completes the task quicker, is it not safe to assume that
the man wasn't all that good, or didn't really put in his best effort?

No, it just means she's a bloody good athelete.

I'm really disappointed with the way this thread has gone. It's supposed to be supportive. Not picking holes in peoples achievements.

rainbow kirby

kingQuez wrote: »

If you read the report for the current record, you'll see that the man who set it got stress fractures (and subsequently compensating injuries) from day 2. HM is injury free, and the only thing causing issue has been the intense heat and impact this has had with blisters and swelling of her feet.

On a slightly related note to that, what I've attached here is an analysis of the gender differences between men and women in the Comrades ultra. Found it quite a worthwhile read.

Also, found this relating to female performance at ultra-distance.

RacoonQueen

walshb wrote: »

How much of a record (endurance/physical) can it really be if a woman looks set to break it?

To be fair RD picked up some bad injuries along the way.

walshb

RubyK wrote: »

No, it just means she's a bloody good athelete.

I'm really disappointed with the way this thread has gone. It's supposed to be supportive. Not picking holes in peoples achievements.

Who said she wasn't a great person or athlete?

She is a bloody good athlete, but not to the point where IT
explains her being able to perform the task quicker than the best men
available, and as has been pointed out, the man who holds the record
had issues and injuries.

racheljev

RubyK wrote: »

No, it just means she's a bloody good athelete.

I'm really disappointed with the way this thread has gone. It's supposed to be supportive. Not picking holes in peoples achievements.

Exactly. There's enough going on about this run without dragging the whole "men are faster/stronger/better than women" into it. Can we not keep this thread for good wishes for Jo, and start the other discussions elsewhere?
Go Jo!

PeakOutput

walshb wrote: »

Now we are getting somewhere. The man had issues and problems and injuries. I thought so, because lets be quite honest here, a man and a woman take this on free from major problems or injury, and a woman stands next to no chance.

i can kinda see were your coming form but <mod edit>

numerous people have said that there is a slimmer to no gap between men and women over this distance, numerous people who, i dare say, know more about long distance running than you

what was said was the man who tried this gained injuries during the attempt so was healthy going in so if a woman can do it without gaining injuries during the attempt dosnt that mean she is better?

if the record she sets is so easy to beat by a man step right up and do it instead of trying to undermine the achievement, if it is not as good as mans effort then show me the man who can beat and let him have at it

walshb

PeakOutput wrote: »

i can kinda see were your coming form but <mod edit>
numerous people have said that there is a slimmer to no gap between men and women over this distance, numerous people who, i dare say, know more about long distance running than you

what was said was the man who tried this gained injuries during the attempt so was healthy going in so if a woman can do it without gaining injuries during the attempt dosnt that mean she is better?

if the record she sets is so easy to beat by a man step right up and do it instead of trying to undermine the achievement, if it is not as good as mans effort then show me the man who can beat and let him have at it

Slimmer to no gap? I disagree. Take a marathon, a good 15-20 minutes difference
over 26 miles, this has to increase as the distance does. It cannot decrease.
It may slacken off in is increase, but the gap won't get shorter. As in, 52 miles
the difference is 10 minutes? It would be more like 25-35 minutes.

How am I being an asshole when to me it is like the elephant in the room.

I commend her and praise her for doing it, but when I heard that she was setting a record, I expected to hear that it would be a female record. When I didn't, I instantly thought that the record musn't really be up to much.
Or, that not many if any serious men had attempted it.

menoscemo

walshb wrote: »

Who said she wasn't a great person or athlete?

She is a bloody good athlete, but not to the point where IT
explains her being able to perform the task quicker than the best men
available, and as has been pointed out, the man who holds the record
had issues and injuries.

It is common for women to outperform men in ultra endurance events. Perhaps the most famous (and tough) ultra event is the badwater race through death valley, which was won 2 years in a row (2002 and 2003) by a 40 something woman called Pam Reed (on the second occasion she beat Dean Karnazes into 2nd place) http://www.badwater.com/results/index.html

walshb

menoscemo wrote: »

It is common for women to outperform men in ultra endurance events. Perhaps the most famous (and tough) ultra event is the badwater race through death valley, which was won 2 years in a row (2002 and 2003) by a 40 something woman called Pam Reed (on the second occasion she beat Dean Karnazes into 2nd place)

I must research more into this; but seriously, history and genetics and nature have proved that on average, men will be the more physically dominant. I will still place my bet on
the best man beating the best woman over one, two, three, four, five, six etc marathons.

menoscemo

walshb wrote: »

I must research more into this; but seriously, history and genetics and nature have proved that on average, men will be the more physically dominant. I will still place my bet on
the best man beating the best woman over one, two, three, four, five, six etc marathons.

Why don't you start a new thread on it? This is not really the place for this TBH

MarieC

walshb as HM is in her final hours of completing this monumental task can you please refrain from debating your topic until after the event. If you cant get over it/yourself for the rest of the day then just move along. What Jo has undertaken, and is doing right now as we type/read this thread is massive, so please.....a bit of respect.

PeakOutput

walshb wrote: »

Slimmer to no gap? I disagree. Take a marathon, a good 15-20 minutes difference
over 26 miles, this has to increase as the distance does. It cannot decrease.
It may slacken off in is increase, but the gap won't get shorter. As in, 52 miles
the difference is 10 minutes? It would be more like 25-35 minutes.

so do a google and find out the times of the super marathons man v woman because people in the know in this thread have disagreed with you

How am I being an asshole when to me it is like the elephant in the room.

because who has or has not done the record before is irrelevant if she breaks it it will be a record end of story, if someone wants to try and break that then go for it and bringin it up in a thread like this smacks of begrudgery and assholeness particularly from someone who i assume is an athlete(mod of boxing)

I commend her and praise her for doing it, but when I heard that she was setting a record, I expected to hear that it would be a female record. When I didn't, I instantly thought that the record musn't really be up to much.
Or, that not many if any serious men had attempted it.

what if there are no serious male runners of this type in the country(their might be i dont know) does she then not deserve the overall record.

thats all im saying, i think your out of line and this is such a massive thing to attempt that sex irrelevant

walshb

copacetic wrote: »

Lets face it, you haven't the first clue of what you are talking about. Firstly the difference in the marathon is less than 15 mins.

Secondly, you are totally wrong saying the gap won't start to close at longer distances, it's under 20 mins difference at 100km between men and womens records.

Anyway

Go Jo!

Wow, I was out by a few minutes. Paula has a time that is just under 12 mins behind
Haile, and this means I have no clue?

Now, if the difference is 12 minutes for 26 miles, and I clearly said that as the distance increases, so will the time difference. Now, you posted that at 100 km (63 miles) it is 20 mins. Is this an increase?

No brainer to me. Yet, I don't have a clue?

walshb

100 km 6:10:20 Don Ritchie (GB) London Oct. 28, 1978
150 km 10:36:42 Don Ritchie (GB) London Oct. 15, 1977

100 km 7:23:28 Valentina Liakhova (Rus) Nantes Sep. 28, 1996
150 km 13:45:54 Hilary Walker (GB) Blackpool Nov. 5-6, 1988

Last post on this....

See above and then tell me that as distance increases, time decreases?

No, it does not. At 100 km, the difference is 73 minutes.
At 150 km the difference is 189 minutes..... Increase if ever.

I fail to see practically "NO GAP" between the sexes over the longer distances, as some
are claiming.

copacetic

walshb wrote: »

Wow, I was out by a few minutes. Paula has a time that is just under 12 mins behind
Haile, and this means I have no clue?

Now, if the difference is 12 minutes for 26 miles, and I clearly said that as the distance increases, so will the time difference. Now, you posted that at 100 km (63 miles) it is 20 mins. Is this an increase?

No brainer to me. Yet, I don't have a clue?

No, you said it would be 25-35 minutes, and are denying you did now, you are just trolling at this stage.

MarieC

Do they not teach anything about sportsmanship in boxing no?

time and a place for all of this, and its neither here or now

walshb

copacetic wrote: »

No, you said it would be 25-35 minutes, and are denying you did now, you are just trolling at this stage.

OMG, that was a rough guess without research, when I checked I got
precise figures which STILL back my claim that as distance increases, so will
the gap in time....

Hence my words, more like, as in, guess....

50 miles, almost two marathons:

50 mi 4:51:49 Don Ritchie (GB) Hendon March 12, 1983

50 mi 5:55:41 Valentina Liakhova (Rus) Nantes Sep. 28, 1996

Now, copacetic, you wanna' argue with this. I actually underestimated
the difference. At 50 miles, the difference here is not 25-35 minutes, it's
64 minutes....

Me doubts an apology is en route

Munster_Gal

walshb wrote: »

100 km 6:10:20 Don Ritchie (GB) London Oct. 28, 1978
150 km 10:36:42 Don Ritchie (GB) London Oct. 15, 1977

100 km 7:23:28 Valentina Liakhova (Rus) Nantes Sep. 28, 1996
150 km 13:45:54 Hilary Walker (GB) Blackpool Nov. 5-6, 1988

Last post on this....

Se above and then tell me that as distance increases, time decreases?

No, it does not.

Seriously! It really really really doesn't matter and has absolutely no relevance to what Jo is doing! If ur not willing to support her then you dont really need to be on this thread!

copacetic

walshb wrote: »

OMG, that was a rough guess without research, when I checked I got
precise figures which STILL back my claim that as distance increases, so will
the gap in time....

Hence my words, more like, as in, guess....

50 miles, almost two marathons:

50 mi 4:51:49 Don Ritchie (GB) Hendon March 12, 1983

50 mi 5:55:41 Valentina Liakhova (Rus) Nantes Sep. 28, 1996

Now, copacetic, you wanna' argue with this. I actually underestimated
the difference. At 50 miles, the difference here is not 25-35 minutes, it's
64 minutes....

Me doubts an apology is en route

I dunno where you got the 'research' but it appears to be totally wrong. Why would I apologise to a troll?

walshb

copacetic wrote: »

I dunno where you got the 'research' but it appears to be totally wrong. Why would I apologise to a troll?

Oh, the you are a troll lame argument...:rolleyes:

http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/ultramentor/records_running.html

Tell me, is this info spurious, fake, inaccurate?

TFBubendorfer

walshb wrote: »

100 km 7:23:28 Valentina Liakhova (Rus) Nantes Sep. 28, 1996
150 km 13:45:54 Hilary Walker (GB) Blackpool Nov. 5-6, 1988

Your google button is seriously broken. Either that, or the problem sits between keyboard and screen.

Women, road racing
100 KM 6:13:33 Takahiro Sunada 19-Jan-73 JPN Tokoro 21-Jun-98

walshb

Well, the personal abuse doesn't help, does it.

All I asked was how great the record is if a woman is setting it?

Never said she wasn't great and also did say that the cause was great..

Back on topic, best of luck to the woman.

shels4ever

walshb wrote: »

How much of a record (endurance/physical) can it really be if a woman looks set to break it?

A good women will beat an average man
An elite women will beat most men.
An Elite man will beat all women(going on 2:18 as elite for mrathon?)

walshb

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Your google button is seriously broken. Either that, or the problem sits between keyboard and screen.

Women, road racing
100 KM 6:13:33 Takahiro Sunada 19-Jan-73 JPN Tokoro 21-Jun-98

Hey, I didn't mention or claim that these were the ABSOLUTE best. I just used them as
a guide, hence "rough". The ones I listed are for track

Seeing as you have the accurate info, could you post the male record for 100 km on the road?

walshb

shels4ever wrote: »

A good women will beat an average man
An elite women will beat most men.
An Elite man will beat all women(going on 2:18 as elite for mrathon?)

In a nutshell, spot on. But I doubt you will be abused for this view.

BTW, in you view, if the difference over 26 mils is 12 minutes, do you think the difference over 52 miles or 100 miles will be less or greater than 12 minutes?

shels4ever

walshb wrote: »

In a nutshell, spot on. But I doubt you will be abused for this view.

BTW, in you view, if the difference over 26 mils is 12 minutes, do you think the difference over 52 miles or 100 miles will be less or greater than 12 minutes?

I would say that the gap will be bigger, but the % gain per mile may start to decrease with distance. But think that would take some analysis

TFBubendorfer

walshb wrote: »

Hey, I didn't mention or claim that these were the ABSOLUTE best. I just used them as
a guide, hence "rough". The ones I listed are for track

Seeing as you have the accurate info, could you post the male record for 100 km on the road?

100 KM 6:13:33 Takahiro Sunada 19-Jan-73 JPN Tokoro 21-Jun-98
That's the 20 mins difference someone had mentioned earlier. That's 12 seconds per km.

In contrast, the difference in the marathon is 11:26, which equates to about 16 seconds per km.

See how we're talking about the gap narrowing? And M2M is a lot further than 100km.

DeVore

Historically in sport that has been true.

Whats NOT logically true is to say "if any elite woman beats an elite man, we should suspect cheating".

Thats insulting and sexist. Can you understand why?? It denies the possibility, and clearly its a possibility.

This will probably be my one and only contribution to this thread as the logical basis being used it inherently flawed in several ways on both sides. Sorry, but it just is

DeV.

kennyb3

walshb wrote: »

But I doubt you will be abused for this view.

I think a big problem that a lot of people would have with what you said is:

1. your comment came across as far more sexist. it was the tone and language used. We are all aware of the difference between men and women in terms of physique and the relevant records from 100m to marathon etc. thank you very much

2. You have never been seen to post one positive or helpful comment on the ART board before. So when you come along and post something like that it wont be taken favourably.

TFBubendorfer

Sh*t, sorry, I just noticed I goofed up on the C&P for the women's record. I'll try again:

Men:100 KM 6:13:33 Takahiro Sunada 19-Jan-73 JPN Tokoro 21-Jun-98

Women:
100 KM 6:33:11 Tomoe Abe 13-Aug-71 JPN Tokoro 25-Jun-00

Again, just as in my previous post, that's the 20 minutes difference,.

shels4ever

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

100 KM 6:13:33 Takahiro Sunada 19-Jan-73 JPN Tokoro 21-Jun-98
That's the 20 mins difference someone had mentioned earlier. That's 12 seconds per km.

In contrast, the difference in the marathon is 11:26, which equates to about 16 seconds per km.

See how we're talking about the gap narrowing? And M2M is a lot further than 100km.

So at what point would Paula pass Haile

walshb

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

100 KM 6:13:33 Takahiro Sunada 19-Jan-73 JPN Tokoro 21-Jun-98
That's the 20 mins difference someone had mentioned earlier. That's 12 seconds per km.

In contrast, the difference in the marathon is 11:26, which equates to about 16 seconds per km.

See how we're talking about the gap narrowing? And M2M is a lot further than 100km.

Please recheck your info, the time you gave is for a man
http://www.gbrathletics.com/wrec.htm
At least that is what the links says, so it's a man who is running
100 km in 6;13

Ok, edit: 20 mins at 100 km, at 100 miles this jumps considerably.

Stark

RAINBOWS

JKF

Stark wrote: »

RAINBOWS

First time I've smiled at any point reading this thread.. Does it REALLY matter what gender set the record??
A record is a record and either way is a massive achievement not to made little of just because it was set by a woman OR a man for that matter

I'm going back to hide in the off topic thread

shels4ever

JKF wrote: »

First time I've smiled at any point reading this thread.. Does it REALLY matter what gender set the record??
A record is a record and either way is a massice achievement not to made little of just because it was set by a woman OR a man for that matter

I'm going back to hide in the off topic thread

So just have one record for all events thats a good idea, do away with the whole womens and mens records

walshb

Just did a little research and to be diplomatic, as the distance increases, the time percentage difference decreases. I based this off comparing the 1500 metre differences between men and women, men being 11 percent quicker.

Over 100 km the time percentage difference is 5 percent. I never argued against this.

All I said was that as distance increases, the time gap will also increase, this being true.

gerard65

I thought the OP was joking in his first post. I now cant believe how a mindless thread could be followed up on this forum. This is how kids carry on - 'we're better than you' 'my daddys bigger than yours na na na'. Grow up.

walshb

gerard65 wrote: »

I thought the OP was joking in his first post. I now cant believe how a mindless thread could be followed up on this forum. This is how kids carry on - 'we're better than you' 'my daddys bigger than yours na na na'. Grow up.

Hey, discussion of this nature doesn't interest you, pass it by. I find it interesting. I am a divil' for detail...