stiksandstones said:
Yes, and let's never question the "why" of things, just accept them as they are.
Are you this un-curious about everything in life?
why are women slower
- Thread starter bluride
- Start date
Yes, and let's never question the "why" of things, just accept them as they are.
Are you this un-curious about everything in life?
it's not being curious or not.. Who cares why they are slower over all.. Why not figure out why the sport is dying and less time on what goes thru a womans mind when she is approaching a rock obstical.. Again, stupid question..binary visions said:
Yes, and let's never question the "why" of things, just accept them as they are.
Are you this un-curious about everything in life?
Wow. I guess I'll never understand the mind that is never curious about anything. If you don't care, then you're not curious, so yes, it is "being curious or not."Sgt Brown said:
Sure, there's a physical strength issue, but there's a lot of other, more subtle things that contribute to this fact (that women are slower). Some of us like to speculate and have discussions about the reasons behind the facts, and I'm not sure why that makes us stupid? I wouldn't jump into a thread you started about why the sport is dying and call you stupid.
Sgt brown should change his name to Negative Nancy.
For what it's worth (to you curious people) it takes a tremendous amount of skill to drive that race car in circles. Road courses are harder. And I don't care how long you have been driving your street car, it does not prepare you for race driving. It may take more strength to ride MX, but I don't think you can compare MX skills Vs. say, Indy Car skills. Two very different arenas.Drag racing I can't coment on, I don't know anything about it.
For what it's worth (to you curious people) it takes a tremendous amount of skill to drive that race car in circles. Road courses are harder. And I don't care how long you have been driving your street car, it does not prepare you for race driving. It may take more strength to ride MX, but I don't think you can compare MX skills Vs. say, Indy Car skills. Two very different arenas.Drag racing I can't coment on, I don't know anything about it.
Uh oh. Two accounts is a major nono.negativenancy said:That is a great idea.. Good to have found some use out of this tread...
I think the #1 reason why women aren't as fast as guys is because there are just fewer of them that take up the sport! I have never found that downhilling requires tons of strength, or size. It's the combination of skill, endurance, bike setup, confidence, and strength required that makes our sport so unique.
Yes, racing in a circle or racing a dragbike in a straight line is easier than racing a motocross bike or racing a DH bike. Quit acting stupid.Sgt Brown said:
because people are becoming bored of the crappy narrow-minded attitudes involved.......Sgt Brown said:
... or Tai Lee Muxlow would have been World Champ before now![/QUOTE]
THE MUX!
THE MUX!
This was actually kind of an interesting read for me, so I'm gonna bring it back up. Reason? Well, I raced my first DH in Telluride a couple of weeks ago after sustaining a fairly serious injury that involved an extremely invasive hip surgery that kept me off my feet for 6 weeks or better. The time I posted was SO far off the back of what I expected, I've been trying to figure it out since then. What I noticed in Telluride was that my musclular endurance was TOAST, and my aerobic fitness was so bad that I couldn't make a sub-3 minute DH run without stopping. Physically UNABLE to - my body would go so anaerobic that my vision was like looking through a paper towel tube... total tunnel-style... and I couldn't hold on to the bars without catching my breath. When I finished my run, my body was in such shock that I threw up, which has never happened to me. Being that your legs are the largest muscles, a lot of aerobic fitness is tied into using them. Turns out I lost more aerobic and muscular fitness with a broken femur in 6 weeks than I did with 5 fractured vertebrae in 12+ weeks, simply because I was able to walk with the broken back!
How does this relate?
Thinking my aerobically out-of-shape experience might shed some light on the question at hand, I did a little research (very little) and found that men have a higher VO2max than women, and additionally they have higher capillary density, which from what I understand makes it "easier" to increase VO2 measurements with smaller increases in cardiac (heart) output. For women to get the same results, it's postulated that they need to actually increase their skeletal capillary density. Also, testosterone promotes the production of haemoglobin, which carries oxygen inside red blood cells. Testosterone also increases the concentration of red cells in the blood - like legalized blood doping. Estrogen has no such effect. Interestingly enough, the % difference between the amount of oxygen a male can carry in his red blood cells and a woman is roughly the same % difference in performance times among runners (long distance and sprinters). Hmmmmm...
My conclusion? You can't race if you can't breathe, and if men have a greater "breathing capacity" than women, that's probably a large part of the answer. With that said, I'm back on the road bike. My VO2max is still shot.
How does this relate?
Thinking my aerobically out-of-shape experience might shed some light on the question at hand, I did a little research (very little) and found that men have a higher VO2max than women, and additionally they have higher capillary density, which from what I understand makes it "easier" to increase VO2 measurements with smaller increases in cardiac (heart) output. For women to get the same results, it's postulated that they need to actually increase their skeletal capillary density. Also, testosterone promotes the production of haemoglobin, which carries oxygen inside red blood cells. Testosterone also increases the concentration of red cells in the blood - like legalized blood doping. Estrogen has no such effect. Interestingly enough, the % difference between the amount of oxygen a male can carry in his red blood cells and a woman is roughly the same % difference in performance times among runners (long distance and sprinters). Hmmmmm...
My conclusion? You can't race if you can't breathe, and if men have a greater "breathing capacity" than women, that's probably a large part of the answer. With that said, I'm back on the road bike. My VO2max is still shot.
Spitfired said:
I bet she would rock the men's times.
that is a man with boobs
i just do NOT understand why a woman does that to herself...
for sure. I've done all 4, at least sorta:stiksandstones said:
- raced go-karts
- raced mini-moto (KX90cc) informally; owned/rode YZ250
- drag raced a '69 Mustang many times (bracket racing)
- ridden DH race courses on DH/FR bikes while trying my danged best to pin it.
racing moto is hardest
DH MTB next hardest
oval/round/turny track racing next
drag racing doesnt count, man. it's all timing, no technical steering involved.
roberts said:
Spitfired said:
I bet she would rock the men's times.
No kidding!! Black top and shorts with a white scrunchie?!! What was she thinking?ridetoofast said:
Racing cars doesn't require much physical performance, it requires mostly mental performance (skills, experience, reflexes, timing, balls...)
Racing bikes or motorcycles requires those mental traits in addition to physical performance (throwing the bike around, pumping, pedaling, balance...)
Racing bikes or motorcycles requires those mental traits in addition to physical performance (throwing the bike around, pumping, pedaling, balance...)
This makes a lot of sense. Up till now I was thinking that MOST of the difference had to do with social conditioning, physiologial and psychological differences that are inherent to male and female, and how early one gets involved in sports. I still think that growing up male gives you more of an aggressive edge than growing up female (and for this reason think M Dumaresque should not be racing women).Full Trucker said:
But the VO2 max thing has given me more to think about.
Interesting discussion.
Yes and no.toodles said:
Ive ridden with Vanessa Quin(yay for living in such a small country!) and she is faster than me overall, mainly through time on the bike and fitness, dang that woman can pedal!, but there were sections where I was faster because of my bulldozer style, which comes down to strength(and lack of style
).Oh and she can jump stuff better than me, which comes down to beer and pies.
sharpshooting.BSEVEER said:
figure skatingBSEVEER said:
ballet?dhkid said:
long distance, open water swimming. the woman's higher fat content lends to slower body core temperature loss as compared to a man.BSEVEER said:
also, didn't susan butcher win the iditarod like 4 times in a row?
Not exactly. They are more gracefull on the ice for sure but when you see the tricks between men and women, you can see that the men are better.Transcend said:
It is a strength/body weight ratio thing. It's not wrestling, so the size of the person compaired to another person doesn't matter. It's the amount of muscle mass compaired to your own body weight.
While the suspension in your bike does a lot to help you going over bumps, rocks, jumps, etc... your arms and legs still must do a lot of work to get over these obsticals smoothly. Watch Earthed or Synopsys where they show both men and women comming through the same section of a rock garden. When the men come through their arms act as strong and efficient shock absorbers. When you watch the women come through that same section, you can see them having to work much harder to keep from getting thrown around.
While the suspension in your bike does a lot to help you going over bumps, rocks, jumps, etc... your arms and legs still must do a lot of work to get over these obsticals smoothly. Watch Earthed or Synopsys where they show both men and women comming through the same section of a rock garden. When the men come through their arms act as strong and efficient shock absorbers. When you watch the women come through that same section, you can see them having to work much harder to keep from getting thrown around.
give me a break. watching Earthed proves that women have a lower strength to bodyweight?
you see what you want to see, VeG, and not a whole lot more.
funny, when I watch Earthed, Plush 2 and Earthed 2 I am amazed at Mio Suemasa's smoothness in the choppiest terrain. she doesn't look the least bit weak or less strong than the men.
what you are seeing, VeG, is the effect of rough terrain on one who hasn't chosen a smooth line.
sometimes the smoother line requires a higher speed, and sometimes the rider is afraid to lay off the brakes.
there's a whole lot more going on here than simple "body weight to strength" ratios.
but that sure is a nice Old Wive's Tale you've offered.
you see what you want to see, VeG, and not a whole lot more.
funny, when I watch Earthed, Plush 2 and Earthed 2 I am amazed at Mio Suemasa's smoothness in the choppiest terrain. she doesn't look the least bit weak or less strong than the men.
what you are seeing, VeG, is the effect of rough terrain on one who hasn't chosen a smooth line.
sometimes the smoother line requires a higher speed, and sometimes the rider is afraid to lay off the brakes.
there's a whole lot more going on here than simple "body weight to strength" ratios.
but that sure is a nice Old Wive's Tale you've offered.
sunny said:
Yeah. I think there's likely a combination of factors. Personally, I'm tall and I lift and I don't think I have a weaker upper body than at least SOME of the guys who race. (There are some skinny little guys who race and race really well...) And while I know most of the DH racer guys I know don't seem to have nearly the fear issues the women do - the guys I know who only ride XC or don't ride at all think I'm INSANE for just riding a DH course, let alone racing.
But there have got to be some physiological difference there (and I have to admit it pisses me off sometimes) - because no matter how hard I train, lift, do cardio, practice, eat right... My husband can sit on the sofa eating Doritos for weeks on end while I bust my ass to get in shape, and then we go out riding and he kicks my ass uphill and down. It's frustrating as hell. I've attributed a good portion of that to the fact that he's been riding since he was a kid - I first got on a mountain bike when I was 27, but still.... grrr. Not to mention it gets mentally frustrating to feel like you're working twice as hard just to barely keep up.
But I do think the lack of experience is fairly typial for women - most of the other expert class women I race with didn't learn to ride until their mid to late 20's - compared to the fact that most of the guys we race with have been racing BMX, MX, or MTB since they were kids. That's probably 10-15 EXTRA years of riding experience - compared to the 5 years I've been riding total.
gonzostrike,
Watching videos may not prove that mens musculoskeletal structure makes them generaly stronger than a woman. However, if you were to take an anatomy and kinesiology class, you would learn that it is a fact.
A little light reading from.....
http://www.springerlink.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=a58e0745b1d54aae9dd70a841422986d&referrer=parent&backto=issue,12,17;journal,42,248;linkingpublicationresults,1:400513,1
Summary Strength and muscle characteristics were examined in biceps brachii and vastus lateralis of eight men and eight women. Measurements included motor unit number, size and activation and voluntary strength of the elbow flexors and knee extensors. Fiber areas and type were determined from needle biopsies and muscle areas by computerized tomographical scanning. The women were approximately 52% and 66% as strong as the men in the upper and lower body respectively. The men were also stronger relative to lean body mass. A significant correlation was found between strength and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA; P0.05). The women had 45, 41, 30 and 25% smaller muscle CSAs for the biceps brachii, total elbow flexors, vastus lateralis and total knee extensors respectively. The men had significantly larger type I fiber areas (4597 vs 3483 m2) and mean fiber areas (6632 vs 3963 m2) than the women in biceps brachii and significantly larger type II fiber areas (7700 vs 4040 m2) and mean fiber areas (7070 vs 4290 m2) in vastus lateralis. No significant gender difference was found in the strength to CSA ratio for elbow flexion or knee extension, in biceps fiber number (180 620 in men vs 156 872 in women), muscle area to fiber area ratio in the vastus lateralis 451 468 vs 465 007) or any motor unit characteristics. Data suggest that the greater strength of the men was due primarily to larger fibers. The greater gender difference in upper body strength can probably be attributed to the fact that women tend to have a lower proportion of their lean tissue distributed in the upper body. It is difficult to determine the extent to which the larger fibers in men represent a true biological difference rather that a difference in physical activity, but these data suggest that it is largely an innate gender difference.
Watching videos may not prove that mens musculoskeletal structure makes them generaly stronger than a woman. However, if you were to take an anatomy and kinesiology class, you would learn that it is a fact.
A little light reading from.....
http://www.springerlink.com/app/home/contribution.asp?wasp=a58e0745b1d54aae9dd70a841422986d&referrer=parent&backto=issue,12,17;journal,42,248;linkingpublicationresults,1:400513,1
Summary Strength and muscle characteristics were examined in biceps brachii and vastus lateralis of eight men and eight women. Measurements included motor unit number, size and activation and voluntary strength of the elbow flexors and knee extensors. Fiber areas and type were determined from needle biopsies and muscle areas by computerized tomographical scanning. The women were approximately 52% and 66% as strong as the men in the upper and lower body respectively. The men were also stronger relative to lean body mass. A significant correlation was found between strength and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA; P0.05). The women had 45, 41, 30 and 25% smaller muscle CSAs for the biceps brachii, total elbow flexors, vastus lateralis and total knee extensors respectively. The men had significantly larger type I fiber areas (4597 vs 3483 m2) and mean fiber areas (6632 vs 3963 m2) than the women in biceps brachii and significantly larger type II fiber areas (7700 vs 4040 m2) and mean fiber areas (7070 vs 4290 m2) in vastus lateralis. No significant gender difference was found in the strength to CSA ratio for elbow flexion or knee extension, in biceps fiber number (180 620 in men vs 156 872 in women), muscle area to fiber area ratio in the vastus lateralis 451 468 vs 465 007) or any motor unit characteristics. Data suggest that the greater strength of the men was due primarily to larger fibers. The greater gender difference in upper body strength can probably be attributed to the fact that women tend to have a lower proportion of their lean tissue distributed in the upper body. It is difficult to determine the extent to which the larger fibers in men represent a true biological difference rather that a difference in physical activity, but these data suggest that it is largely an innate gender difference.
Ultramarathons.narlus said:
Pam Reed was the overall winner at the Badwater ultramarathon (135 miles, uphill in 120+ degree heat) for 2 consecutive years (2002 and 2003) and beat the 2nd place finisher in 2002 (who was male, and 10 years younger for that matter) by something like 4.5 hours (!).
1) but that's not what you said above. you said your "proof" was watching the videos.VeG said:
2) bucko, my B.S. degree is in biology, and I know anat/phys. you can say that generally, women carry more bodyfat per pound of bodyweight, but athletic women who are very CV-fit tend to shed a lot of that fat, and some of them even go off their menstrual cycles because of the hypertraining.
3) citing to the Internet as another form of "proof" is dangerously close to saying that Urban Legends are true.
I dunno..there arent many podium pros that I look at and go damn..how much can he lift? I'd imagine a woman who trained could reach something comprableVelocity Girl said:I think it's that men (in general) are stronger than women more than anything else. It's that way in almost every sport...it's a lot harder to manhandle a bike the way the boys can
At Christmas 2 years ago I took my neice and nephew to Home Depot, where we went to the very back (it was practically empty) and raced shopping carts. Extra points if you won with a passenger in your cart. I don't remember if the boys or the girls won that day...BSEVEER said:
Does this count as a sport? Probably not. We weren't really shopping.
Yes! Good to hear someone else say this. As a girl, I don't often have another female to share common experiences with, and many of these thoughts get pushed back in the corners. As much as I like to think I understand the male-dominated conversation, it's so refreshing to hear another female say something I would say.altagirl said:
I'm a complete freak in the eyes of many of the people who know me... I take a chairlift to the top of a mountain that is too steep to safely walk down, strap on body armour, and ride a bike down it. My husband has said to me on more than one occasion, "Honey, would you mind hosing off before you come inside?" I have been nursing some kind of injury since I began riding, and have honestly lost track of them. Women don't DO this...
I think women have a harder time overcoming fear and fighting against the self-preservation gene. I think we have to be taught (or teach ourselves) to be aggressive. And I think the one advantage we do have is a higher pain threshold.
Any woman on the DH circuit is there contrary to nature. Much of what she does is by sheer force of will.
You would, for the most part, be wrong to imagine that. For the most part, even a guy who's made barely a half-assed attempt at staying in shape will be able to outlift most hard-training women. Most of the men on the podium are in pretty good shape, and they'll certainly outlift any woman on the field. Women simply do not have the upper body capabilities that men do.thesacrifice said:
Well, except for that freak posted at the beginning of the thread - there are exceptions to everything
Gonzostrike,
It sounds like you are a woman with quite the large chip on her shoulder.
In the case of the video reference, perhaps the word Illustration is more accurate than the word proof. However, if you do in fact have your B.S. in biology, perhaps you should reference your textbooks for this information that you must have completely overlooked. And since you are a fact finder this should be fun and enlightening for you.
It sounds like you are a woman with quite the large chip on her shoulder.
In the case of the video reference, perhaps the word Illustration is more accurate than the word proof. However, if you do in fact have your B.S. in biology, perhaps you should reference your textbooks for this information that you must have completely overlooked. And since you are a fact finder this should be fun and enlightening for you.
and your slipperiness and duplicity is matched only by Karl Rove.VeG said:
I'm a guy.
I have no chip. and I have a B.S. in Bio from Wheeling College, where we had anat/phys lecture and lab, both basic and advanced, and I took and did well in both.
what's your point in getting academic? you surely aren't going to "prove" or "illustrate" that I was wrong. you mis-spoke, and you are trying to point the finger at me. wrong move, charlie.
I think you do the very unscientific thing of adding to the science a bunch of "common wisdom" that you hear from fellow male athletes, or P.E. teachers, or the like.
Again, be a scientist and then use that "expertise" and explain Anne-Caro.