Billie Jean King - Wikipedia is best known for beating Bobby Riggs who made chauvinistic remarks about women and having proved that women were as good as men at sports. The question is: Why are sports still segregated by gender? Wouldn’t it be more interesting to watch the best athletes compete against a larger pool of competitors? I want to know who the best players are, period. I don’t need to know who the best women players are and who the best mens players are. What do you think?
He was 55, she was 30 at the time. He was a shadow of his former self, she was at the top of her game. What does that prove?
Look at the records of any sport where men and women compete in the same events(track and field for example). The womens records are not at the level as the mens.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. There really are physical differences, although some exceptional women are, in fact, stronger or faster or bigger than an average man. There are female wrestlers out there who could pick up the typical, average, representative-sample male infantry soldier and break him across her knee.
The two bell-curves overlap. (A kind of “brassiere curve.”)
I once saw a woman try out for (junior college) football quarterback. VERY impressive. She stood there, facing the blitz, and waited for the right time to release. She did a damn sight better than several of the men in try-outs.
I believe Navratoliva played Connors, when he was 40 under compromise rules (he only had one serve and she could hit into the doubles court). He won both sets.
Women can compete in certain sorts but not at the top level.
That’s a ridiculous conclusion at which to arrive, based on one sporting event.
Congratulations on your second post. Since you abandoned the thread you started with your first post, and this one is even dumber, I guess you won’t be back here, either.
Anyway, Annika Sorenstam says hi.
Auto racing is one of the few sports where there is no inherent advantage for either sex. Women have competed since the sport began in the early 1900s. None have excelled, though there have been a few excellent ones.
Part of that is cultural. Few women were encouraged to play professional sports before the Seventies. Even fewer were pointed towards getting their fingernails dirty. Women haven’t had any major impact competing in similar equipment. Danica Patrick has had the entire media machine behind her and has a bigger advantage than anyone she’s competed against. I’m fairly sure that she will fail to be the Billy Jean King of motorsports.
On average, I don’t believe that women’s brains are wired for competing head-to-head at the top level of sports as they currently exist. There are always exceptions, but those are rare enough that the hype will turn most fans against them. It’s hard to win when everyone is booing you.
Not to mention that the whole thing was a giant publicity stunt. Riggs wasn’t even close to a real chauvinist. I was a small child when I watched that live and even then I knew it was a put on.
It has nothing to do with how their brains are wired. Smaller muscle mass and a higher bodyfat percentage has a lot more to do with it.
ETA: women also tend to have a lower VO2 Max
She beat a man who had won Wimbledon 4 years before she was born? The same man earlier defeated the world’s top female player (and to this day the most successful player of all time in Grand Slams). How the hell is that supposed to prove…anything? Except that Maria Sharapova could probably beat John McEnroe. Not Andy Murray.
Tennis is still segregated by gender so that the top women have a shot at prize money; if it weren’t segregated then no woman would make a thin dime. Simple as.
I think it does to a degree. Most obviously, men and women tend to enjoy doing different things; which means that in most comparisons between the genders, one gender is going to have a huge advantage in terms of the talent pool it’s drawing from. If 10 times as many men do sport X, then you can be pretty sure that all the top players at X will be men even if the genders are equal in terms of intrinsic ability at X.
There’s also the related problem that since most sports were originally defined as sports by men, they tend to lean heavily towards things that men like doing and are good at; if women are good at something, it’s probably defined as a “craft” or “art”, not a sport.
And another “wired” problem; men are more typically willing to be self destructively competitive to win. And as a rule, the person who wins at the top levels of competition is someone who is willing to largely sacrifice everything else in their life to that single goal.
Plus, (male) viewers like the tits, arses and the grunting. Boosts the ratings no-end, so the advertisers are happy as pigs in shit.
Debatable. Michelle Mouton did extremely well in a few seasons with the Audi rally team, and finished second in the world championship in 1982. And Shirley Muldowney won the NHRA (drag racing) Top Fuel championship three times.
I’ve heard it argued that the prize money in Grand Slam tennis (or Wimbledon, at least) actually favors women. The top prize is the same for men and women, but the women play less tennis to get there, two-out-of-three rather than three-out-of-five. On a per-set or per-point basis, the women make more. I think the lighter workload also makes it easier for them to compete in singles and doubles at the same event, with the chance to earn money in both.
Reanne Evans has been the Women’s Snooker champion for 7 years running but failed to qualify for the Men’s pro tour and is currently ranked 97th in the world.
Snooker participation currently skews about 78:22 male:female and there’s no real particular advantage to greater muscle mass, lower body fat percentage or higher VO2 Max.
This is the typical apples to oranges comparison; comparing “exceptional women” to the “average man.”
The female QB seemed impressive, in part, because she was a woman competing in a sport requiring the strength, size and agility typically associated with a man.
So she made have looked impressive relative to the weakest of the male aspirants, but relative to the guy who won the starting job, she was not.
You need to hang around some female athletes for a while.
Snooker is a game, not a sport. 
Who do not exactly represent most women. I never said that no women were as self destructively competitive in that way as men; just that they were much less prone to that particular defect.
http://www.totalprosports.com/2012/05/30/11-female-athletes-caught-using-performance-enhancing-drugs/
http://www.womenssportsfoundation.org/en/home/research/articles-and-reports/mental-and-physical-health/drug-use
http://www.tampabay.com/sports/basketball/college/article444534.ece
While these articles are about world-class athletes, the pressure starts much lower on the ladder, often even back to high school.
Is there even such a thing as a male-only sports league? I’m pretty sure that there’s no rule against women competing in the NFL, or MLB, or NBA: Those leagues already feature only the best athletes from the broadest talent pool. It’s just that the best athletes from the broadest talent pool are all, 100%, men.