I’m going to slide this over to the Game Room.
While maybe true, this is also mostly irrelevant as modern spelling competitions are more about efficiently memorizing large reams of material than intrinsic spelling ability.
What is intrinsic spelling ability? Are males better at it?
Actually according to brain scans while men and women are just as good at spelling words, they appear to be doing so in very different ways. So there are at least two kinds of “intrinsic spelling ability”.
Even in snooker where the general object of the break off (at least at high levels) is to return the cue ball to the baulk with minimal disturbance of the object balls (though of course you must hit the pack). I believe the highest rank a woman has ever achieved is 85 (in the World). In terms of the strength required (ignoring the technique) a good snooker break off is easily doable for any reasonably firm person, male or female.
There are woman who can compete with men in snooker at all but the very highest level, but as to why they can’t compete at the highest level is a matter of debate. It could be due to less strength (but cue power is more about technique than brute strength), it could be due to some intrinsic difference between men and woman or it could simply be less women participate in the sport.
Diving? The women seem more flexible and perhaps splash less than men. Does not appear to require brute strength as much as strength with finesse.
Ok, for fun, here is a scene from Coneheads illustrating the splash thing.
Altho, being a judged sport, it would be hard to tell who was better unless the divers were all required to do the same tricks.
For the same reason that nearly all other sports are gender-separated: So that the best women will actually make some prize money (if there’s any going).
Women have the advantage in figure skating. Grace, elegance, smooth coordinated movements.
Guys just don’t have those qualities. I could care less if they can muscle their way through some move.
I accept this as a reason for having separate events for men and women. I am having a harder time understanding why women need to have shorter events while competing only against other women. Cross-country skiing and cycling are two such examples. Other sports, such as water polo, have smaller fields of play for women. Why?
I think this goes with equestrian - what is the gender of the horse / dogs?
I do know that Susan Butcher has won the Iditarod 4 times
Brian
Speaking of which, I was reading an article the other day about a woman participating in professional arena football as a running back, with men. She could certainly handle the rough aspect of the sport (not sure what her long term career looks like), but she just didn’t seem to be competitive at 5’2" 130 lbs.
I was certainly in her corner for doing it, but the mismatch in physical ability was just too apparent.
But if the women are as good as the men, why not open competition for the big bucks?
Because in chess they cannot compete with men? Or are you saying that there are so many men in competitive chess and so few women that the odds are that men will get all the prize money?
Yes, why is that? I’ve noticed that cycling events will have shorter courses for the women. I’m guessing this a historical artifact but I’ve never really seen confirmation on this.
Have you ever watched men’s figure skating? The women might have MORE grace etc but the men certainly don’t lack it. Johnny Weir isn’t muscling through anything.
Women don’t really stand a chance against men in tennis. The best ever women’s players would get crushed by Joe Schmoe ranked 200th or 350th on the men’s tour. Cite.
From what I’ve seen of horse vaulting (gymnastics performed aboard a real live horse at the canter), it appears to be 90% females doing it.
I don’t know how much competition there is in it, but I’ve noticed a remarkable proportion of very-long-distance swimming stunts seem to be done by women.
It is difficult to think of any sporting endeavour at which the best women would beat the best men with any regularity. Certainly not when you take any subjective judging element out of it (which I don’t think has any place in Olympic Sport. Faster! Higher! Stronger!..Nicer?)
The outliers in the male ability bell curve are simply more so than the women and as it is from this freakish end of the gene pool that we get our champions then it is unlikely to be a woman (not impossible though)
Ski-jumping was mentioned but I’ve yet to see any stats for comparison. There are so many variables to take into account that you’d have to run a unified competition under standardised conditions to know if there was a difference. (and there is that damn subjective judging again)
As for gymnastics, if you bundled all the events into one super-competition and looked for an overall winner I suspect it would be a man as they could approach the level of flexibility required by some of the women only events far closer than the women could approach the strength required of the men’s events. Are there any moves that a women does that a man could not and vice-versa? But again we run into the problem of subjective judging
Equestrian? Probably the best case for equality and rightly it exists as an open field. The Badminton 3-day event has a 35/24 split male/female winners though neither the individual Olympics eventing or showjumping has ever been won by a woman.
The only event in common for men and women’s gymnastics is the floor routine, I think.
How well would the women compare to the men in an individual floor routine competition? My guess is that the men would own every medal every time; don’t they do more turns/spins/twists in their elements than the women?