I don’t think you can say one way or another for sure.
What we do know for a fact is that fmri’s show significant consistent differences between male and female brain activation for some tasks. For example, for one task females showed activation in both hemispheres but males for the same task showed activation in one hemisphere.
True dat. They play less tennis, against weaker opposition, and put fewer bums on seats, but it would be unfair to reward them less highly than the men.
I’m don’t watch much tennis, but the only player I’ve seen with T&A worth a second look is Serena Williams (although several have pretty faces), and I HATE the grunting.
I’ll confess only to admiring the legs.
I think you’re right. I mentioned Annika Sorenstam above. For those who don’t know, she was by far the best woman golfer in the world around ten years ago. She was given a sponsor’s exemption to play in a medium-quality men’s event, and missed the cut (failed to qualify for the final two rounds of the tournament).
Michelle Wie also tried and failed to make a cut on the PGA tour, several times (she used to be a lot better than she is now; it would be a sad joke for her to try today). If memory serves, she did make a cut in some minor men’s event in Korea. The only woman to ever make a cut on the PGA tour was Babe Zaharias, but not only was she probably the best woman athlete who ever lived, she did it in 1945, when the PGA tour was comprised mostly of 4-F’s who were judged unfit for service. It’s no coincidence that Byron Nelson set his unbreakable records that year, playing against extremely weak fields.
Golf sponsors are always trying to generate crowd interest, and would welcome a woman who had a legitimate chance to contend. But in nearly a century of experience, only one woman has made the cut on the PGA tour, and her best finish was 33rd place.
Hitting a golf ball is an athletic move, so IMO golf is a sport, but it’s about as close as you can get to not being a sport, as some of the overweight, chain-smoking tournament winners attest. If women can’t compete in golf, then I don’t know where they can, other than solo, judged events like ice skating or gymnastics.
Billie Jean King helped demonstrate that women deserve to be taken seriously as athletes and that they shouldn’t be dismissed or denied a chance to play sports based on gender. She didn’t prove women can compete on equal footing with men in sports, and she wasn’t trying to. I don’t think even she would have claimed she could beat the best men’s players of that era - guys like Jimmy Connors. In addition to being one of the best tennis players ever she accomplished a lot socially and helped get the WTA started. Few athletes of either gender can say they did as much on or off the field, nevermind both.
Many people are going to argue the point but I don’t think you can attribute this entirely to physical causes. People have already mentioned billiards and auto racing but you can also include chess - competitions where physical advantages are insignificant but women still aren’t competed at the same level as men.
Maybe there are psychological factors. Competing at the very top level requires an almost complete devotion to the sport and maybe women are too rational to devote that much attention to a game.
Or maybe it’s social. Girls aren’t encouraging to compete the way boys are. Girls certainly can compete but they don’t have the same support system that drives and rewards them for it.
Yes; female brains are “wired” very differently and work differently even when doing something they are as good at or better than men. Given how different they are it’s rather amazing than men and women come across as similar to each other as they do.
I like the grunting grunting once in awhile, but it’s a bit too ubiquitous for my tastes. The screaming OTOH is definitely too much – that would be impressive if the ladies were in a pre-gunpowder warrior movie, and then, just one scream really puts the point across.
apples and oranges. Long distance track racing is a very physical sport. Drag racing is one of timing. The only time I saw Shirley Mulldowney racing she was solid off the line in both lanes all day long.
Another point; men are known to be more variable than women. Which among other things, means that comparing men and women in general is not the same thing as comparing the best (or worst) men and women; it’s entirely possible that even with something that women are as a whole better then men, the very best will still be men. And that’s exactly the kind of results that comparing sports will give you; who’s the best.
And considering that the other side of the equation is that men are more likely to be sick (mentally as well as physically) or dead (including not even making it to birth), it doesn’t make a good argument for men being “better”. Maybe for a particular man who won the genetic lottery, but not men in general.
Moving over to the GameRoom.
And rallying? Some of those events (especially at the time Mouton was competing) make Le Mans drivers look like punks.
As John McEnroe has said, the 300th ranked man in tennis could beat the #1 women in the world in straight sets 9 out of 10 times.
That’s how much higher level the mens tennis game is compared to the women.
However, a big point people are ignoring in the tennis issue is that women tend to have more volleys per point then men. A 3 set women’s match can approach and even exceed the time it takes for a 5 set men’s match. A 5-set women’s match would last too long. So if you look at a per hour basis, the payoff actually isn’t that different, nor should it be.
It has a ton to do with wiring. Men evolved in a certain way and competition was core to their success. Men are superior to women in lots of things that aren’t dictated by muscle mass and size. There are a lot of sports and games that rely heavily on dexterity, certain types of mental aptitude and hand-eye coordination that men also dominate.
The reason for this is cultural. Men self select for these things. It’s also probably genetic and physiological. There’s some things that the male mind and body are just adept at. It’s not an insurmountable advantage, certainly less insurmountable than something like basketball, but it’s still a tough road to hoe.
Men and women are different in many ways. The tasks that people tend to keep score for tend to be tasks that men are better at. Whether it’s the chicken or the egg doesn’t change the fact that it’s true.
Annika Sorenstam tried one time in a PGAT Tournament, and failed to make the cut by 4 shots. Under enormous pressure with millions of eyeballs.
She was dominating the Ladies game at the time, and I think if given more opportunities she could have made a cut on the PGAT maybe 25% of the time.
The talent gap between her and the best Men golfers was considerable, but I think if she had tried, she could have had a journeyman type career in Men’s golf. And she was by no means a freak womens golfer. She was average height who worked tremondously hard at her game. Put her work ethic into a tremondously physically gifted body (like Michelle Wie) I think she could have done very well in Men’s golf.
And here is some related evidence to support that theory:
After Annika played in 2003, Teaching Professional Suzy Whaley “qualified” to play in the 2003
Hartford Tournament through the Connecticut PGA Section. This women had tried and failed to qualify for the LPGA. Her golf resume was not very good.
Most of the so called experts were predicting predicting scores into the high 80’s at best for Suzy Whaley at the Hartford. To the surprise of everyone, Suzy shot respectable scores of 75-78. She finished pretty close to DFL but her scores were not embarrassing.
For full disclosure, Suzy Whaley qualified for the Hartford tournament with andicap. She was competing against men pros but from a shorter set of tees. But, she did play the Hartford PGAT tournament from the same set of tees as the men.
Yes, if the stars align to yield a freak of nature with incredible work ethic, I think a woman can be competitive with guys on the golf course and perhaps win a couple tournaments.
Michelle Wie missed the cut by one shot in a PGAT Tournament. At the age of 14. She shot 71-68 on a PGAT golf course. FWIW, Michelle Wie was a much much better golfer before she turned pro at age 16. She is at best an average pro on the LPGA at the age of 23. I think if she had the 75% of the ambition, drive, and work ethic of Annika Sorenstam she could have qualified for the PGAT. But she got burned out and you can’t do it on talent alone.
A best-of-three match is unlikely to outlast a best-of-five regardless of the gender of the players - it can happen, it just doesn’t very often - and on average I don’t think the women play faster or hit more shots than the men do. I’m in favor of equal pay because they’re all playing the same sport. They’re being paid for achievement and for entertainment; they’re not being paid by the hour or for meeting a quota.
Agreed, and Shirley Muldowney gets a lot of respect among drag racers. I think that Shirley ranks below Garlits, Amato and Schumacher but three titles is nothing to shake a stick at. So yeah, I’ll say that she was an exception, but of all the racers out there, she’s a very small minority. My argument was that muscle mass, bodyfat etc. are not major factors in motorsports and females have a very even playing field. The results don’t reflect that they can compete equally.
Rallying doesn’t get a lot of play in the USA. I doubt that most motorsports fans could tell you that Loeb is the champion. Which is astounding considering he has won it nine years in a row. I don’t expect anyone in the US except Audi geeks to know who Mouton was, and I’ve no knowledge of European attitudes toward her.
She also never won a title. Loeb excelled, as did Mäkinen, Kankkunen and some others. Mouton was a bridesmaid. Once.