Do women really have stronger legs than men?

[Soe_Jinn]

There is a lot of odd feminist rhetoric and sexual fantasies from males that wish to be dominated by women, when it comes to this topic. This is why it can be hard to get at the truth, because people want to interject their fantasies or wishes.

Real world proof that men are stronger than women at the same body weight and how much stronger they are, can be clearly seen in Olympic Weightlifting competitions. Olympic lifts, the snatch and the clean and jerk, require the legs and the entire body.

At the same body weight, where both the man and woman weigh 150 pounds for example, men are 25% stronger.

Biologically, male testosterone will clearly make male stronger in the vast majority of cases.

Men have a strength advantage in the legs, as well as the upper body. That is why, for example, male sprinters are faster than female sprinters.

However, men have less of an advantage in leg strength, than they do in upper body strength. So women are closer, but not quite equal in leg strength. The difference in upper body strength should be obvious.

Another point, is that you rarely use your legs independent from the rest of your body. You use your hips, stomach, back, etc… So the type of exercise and movement is also important in calculating strength differences.

[md2000]

@Mijin

If, hypothetically, women did have stronger legs than men in absolute terms, we might still expect men to excel in track and field.

Women’s pelvises are somewhat of a compromise between being able to give birth and walk (the Obstetrical dilemma). Obviously men’s pelvises can be more optimized for just movement.

I was wondering if the OP meant front-to-back movement strength, as in running, or side-to-side strength, as in opening and closing their legs? The latter seems to be the strength of some women.

[Ambivalid]

@md2000

I was wondering if the OP meant side-to-side strength, as in closing their legs? …seems to be the strength of some women.

At least in my life.

[Shodan]

In athletic competitions, especially those with weight classes, strength isn’t measured relative to lean body mass, but to body mass overall. Therefore, since women on average have less lean body mass than men of the same weight, they are usually going to be weaker both in absolute terms and relative to their body mass.

Regards,
Shodan

[colonial]

@Blake

Look at the weight records for a squat, which is a pretty good approximation of length strength.

276 class 1008 lifted = 3.6X body weight
198 class 838 lifted = 4.2x body weight
148 class 750 lifted = 5.0x body weight
114 class 663 lifted = 5.8x body weight

Thank you for reporting the men’s powerlifting squat records.

I looked for the women’s records and could not locate consistent information,
so I took the heaviest lifts from the following two sites:

[Women’s Powerlifting World Records #1 ](http://www.nasa- sports.com/American%20Records/WomenPLWR.htm)
Women’s Powerlifting World Records #2

There is a 198+ class rather than a 276 class for women, so body weight (bw)
to weight lifted ratios cannot even be estimated.

198 record lift = 505 = 2.6 bw = **3.2 lean bw, assuming 20% body fat **
148 record lift = 413 = 2.8 bw = **3.5 lean bw, assuming 20% body fat **
114 record lift = 319 = 2.8 bw = **3.5 lean bw, assuming 20% body fat **

20% body fat may be too high for a woman who must make weight,
but even so, the ratios are enough less than the unadjusted ratios
for men to falsify any notion that women have relatively stronger legs
if the powerlift squat is a legitimate measure of overall leg strength.

Also, women sprinters are substantially slower than male sprinters despite
probably training down to nearly equivalent body fat ratios, and women have
less upper body mass to move, so with stronger legs they should be able to
sprint faster than men.

I would like to know where this Ivy League Biologist and Women’s Studies
big shot gets the idea that women have relatively stronmger legs than men,
and I suspect she is guilty of shoddy scholrship, or plain old propagandizing with
no serious regard for the truth.

[md2000]

@Ambivalid

At least in my life.

“Ouch your sore head…”?

[A_Sniveling_Mess]

@md2000

I was wondering if the OP meant front-to-back movement strength, as in running, or side-to-side strength, as in opening and closing their legs? The latter seems to be the strength of some women.

To be honest,I didn’t even think about that when I started the thread;I just meant overall leg strength.
@Soe Jinn:Yeah,those fantasies really do make the debate a lot cloudier.A lot of people probably are talking as if they believe women have stronger legs,when in fact they might just want to believe that.

[Lalosantillana]

I have read the men are 25 to 30% stronger than women. this is because of testoterone levels wich are way higher in man than in women. men also have stronger and more dense bone structure, which help us hold more muscle mass than females. so, sorry ladies males are stronger in all physical aspects, but women might have more endurance than men and can survive with out food longer than men, because they have more fat and consume less calories.

[Fubaya]

Only one way to settle it… Any women wanna leg wrestle?

[IceQube]

It’s likely because women tend to wear “zero-drop” shoes (term usually used to describe athletic/running shoes).

Women, for example, I think, wear flip-flops more than men. Flip-flops are flat. There is not a substantial amount of heel cushioning, or for that, any cushioning.

By wearing these shoes without the built-up heels, women have to use their calves more.

(If you’re a serious runner then you already know where I’m going with this).

These “zero-drop” (height differential between the heel and toes) shoes, such as, but not limited flip-flops, have become increasingly popular in the running community. Shoes like the Nike Frees, New Balance Minimus, and Saucony GridFlexes - especially the Nike Frees … are becoming insanely popular … I’ve noticed an explosion in the number of Nike Free wearers in the last few months. One caveat about wearing these shoes is sore calves (because these shoes force you to use your calves more by being essentially flat; your calves have to raise your heel greater distances, and it adds up over a course of a run).

As a matter of fact, Nike recommends new Free wearers to start by only running fractions of their usual distances, most likely so customers don’t start suing over severely overworked (and possibly damaged) calf muscles.

@Nike

As you increase the use of your Nike Frees, you may experience some muscle soreness, just like when you exercise other muscles in your body. This shows that your Nike Frees are working. Keep in mind that everyone responds differently, so your progress may be different than others wearing Nike Free.

[Chief_Pedant]

@Lanzy

My acedotal evidence that it can be true.
My daughter was in HS and was a soccer player. She got into an argument with a male football player that her legs were stronger than his. They were both about 145 lbs. His leg press was 700lbs, she topped out at 1100 lbs. To her regret this caused her nickname to be “Rambo” from that day forward.

Out of curiosity, who had longer legs? Were they thinking that a leg press with the same weight in the same position is a measurement of strength and not mechanical advantage?

[Mijin]

Zombies’ legs are probably weaker than either fully-alive gender. Indeed, they are prone to simply falling off.

[vrsuihka]

It’s probably a misconception, but the way I understand it, if there were
a man and a woman with equal upper body strength, the womans legs would be stronger. Also nowadays it is very possible, because a lot of women have started to hit the gym and work mainly their legs to get better lookinh legs and butt, where as lots of men just skip leg day at the gym

[Nelson_Pike]

OP thesis is mistaken. Women’s legs are not as strong as men’s, even relatively with the superheavyweight comparison being irrelevant for reasons explained below.

Also, I am not sure women should get a bodyweight handicap due to presumptive higher bodyfat levels. I strongly suspect that world class female athletes have much lower bodyfat levels than non-competitive women who are in good shape. This would be especially true in a sport such as weightlifting where the competitors must make weight.

Here are the men’s world squat records (from: http://www.powerliftingwatch.com/files/PLWR-M-05-22-15.pdf):

Men Squat X-Bwt Male Lifter/ Nationality/ YOB/ Date/ Actual Weight/ Exact Bodyweight/ Location/ Federation
114 (52) 662.5 (300.5) *6.01X Andrzej Stanaszek (Poland/71) 11/5/03 (300.5 kg. @ 50.0 kg.) (Vejle, Denmark) (IPF)
123 (56) 644.9 (292.5) *5.61X Andrzej Stanaszek (Poland/71) 3/22/03 (292.5 kg. @ 52.1 kg.) (Landshut, Germany) (IPF)
132 (60) 705.5 (320.0) 5.33X Magnus Karlsson (Sweden/67) 10/2/99 (320.0 kg.) (Malmo, Sweden) (IPF)
148 (67.5) 806.9 (366.0) *5.43X Gerry McNamara (Ireland/63) 3/23/13 (366.0 kg. @ 67.4 kg.) (Limerick, Ireland) (GPC)
165 (75) 887.4 (402.5) *5.37X Al Caslow (US/80) 3/22/09 (397.5 kg. @ 75.0 kg., which was accidentally misloaded to 402.5 kg.)
(Omaha, Nebraska) (APF)
181 (82.5) 935.0 (424.1) *5.17X Derek Wilcox (US/87) 4/16/11 (935.0 lb. @ 181.0 lb.) (Asheville, North Carolina) (SPF)
198 (90) 1055.0 (478.5) *5.32X Shawn Frankl (US/77) 8/22/09 (1055.0 lb. @ 198.2 lb.) (Sharonville, Ohio) (SPF)
220 (100) 1100.0 (499.0) *5.02X Sam Byrd (US/81) 6/7/08 (1100.0 lb. @ 219.0 lb.) (Gatlinburg, Tennessee) (SPF)
242 (110) 1140.0 (517.1) *4.75X Chuck Vogelpohl (US/65) 8/23/09 (1140.0 lb. @ 239.8 lb.) (Sharonville, Ohio) (SPF)
275 (125) 1210.0 (548.8) *4.46X Dave Hoff (US/87) 8/17/13 (1210.0 lb. @ 271.1 lb.) (York, Pennsylvania) (IPA)
308 (140) 1267.7 (575.0) *4.18X Jonas Rantanen (Finland/84) 10/8/11 (575.0 kg. @ 137.4 kg.) (Helsinki, Finland) (GPC)
SHW 1265.0 (573.8) *3.28X Donnie Thompson (US/64) 8/21/11 (1265.0 lb. @ 385.4 lb.) (Covington, Kentucky) (SPF)

The bodyweight coefficients for men range from 6.01 at the 114 class to 5.37 at the 165 class, which is the men’s class where the Men’s record first begins to exceed the Women’s Superheavyweight record.

Here are the womens’ squat records (from: http://www.powerliftingwatch.com/records/raw/women-world)
Women Squat X-Bwt Female Lifter/ Nationality/ Date/ Actual Weight/ Exact Bodyweight/ Location/ Federation
97 (44) 378.1 (171.5) *3.92X Wei-Ling Chen (Chinese Taipei/82) 5/27/05 (171.5 kg. @ 43.8 kg.) (Ylitorniolla, Finland) (IPF)
105 (48) 463.0 (210.0) *4.40X Margaret Kirkland (US/63) 8/4/07 (210.0 kg. @ 47.7 kg.) (Rosemont, Illinois) (AAPF/AWPC)
114 (52) 518.1 (235.0) *4.52X Margaret Kirkland (US/63) 12/5/09 (235.0 kg. @ 52.0 kg.) (Jacksonville, Florida) (APF)
123 (56) 530.0 (240.4) *4.31X Natalie Carr-Harrington (US/83) 4/14/12 (530.0 lb. @ 123.0 lb.) (Cincinnati, Ohio) (SPF)
132 (60) 556.7 (252.5) *4.24X Nance Greenspan-Avigliano (US/56) 8/25/02 (252.5 kg. @ 59.5 kg.) (Red Deer, Alberta, Canada)
(APF/WPC)
148 (67.5) 675.0 (306.2) *4.67X Rheta West (US/74) 8/16/14 (675.0 lb. @ 144.4 lb.) (York, Pennsylvania) (IPA)
165 (75) 775.0 (351.5) *4.70X Laura Phelps-Sweatt (US/80) 3/11/12 (775.0 lb. @ 164.8 lb.) (Knoxville, Tennessee) (SPF)
181 (82.5) 770.0 (349.3) *4.56X Laura Phelps-Sweatt (US/80) 1/27/07 (770.0 lb. @ 169.0 lb.) (Columbus, Ohio) (APF)
198 (90) 804.7 (365.0) *4.08X Becca Swanson (US/73) 3/3/06 (365.0 kg. @ 89.45 kg. Heaviest female quadruple bodyweight squat of
all time.) (Columbus, Ohio) (WPO)
SHW 854.3 (387.5) *3.46X Becca Swanson (US/73) 10/29/05 (387.5 kg. @ 112.1 kg. First woman to squat 700 pounds. Only
woman to squat over 800 pounds.) (Chicago, Illinois) (WPO)

All Women’s bodyweight coefficient classes are below 5.00, while all Men’s are above 5.00 at bodyweights up to 181, so the men must be considered relatively as well as absolutely stronger, since the Men’s 181 record far exceeds the women’s SHW record.

[DSeid]

Obviously an old thread but Nelson Pike that is a silly approach. There is, by nature of the sport and culture, a much better chance that the men with the greatest potential to become the best powerlifters will both go into the sport and get training such as to optimize their performance than there is that the women with the greatest potential to become the best powerlifters will both go into the sport and get training such as to optimize their performance. Also power lifting is more than mere leg strength.

Probably this is one of those factoids that is based on some small kernel of truth by some particular (and possibly somewhat contrived) metric and then gets repeated out of context because it sounds so counterintuitive.

[the_diego]

Engineers, is there a reason for idiots to insist on relative strength over absolute?

[DSeid]

Of all, engineers (including biomechanical engineers) often care the most about relative strength more than absolute strength. It is referred to as “specific strength” and any time a new one tops out old numbers it is engineering news. A thread of spider silk is easily broken but its relative strength makes it a subject of great engineering interest. It is also one of the reasons for such interest in carbon nanotubes.

Using less material and weight to produce a desired effect is often a very big deal.

A 140 pound man benching 280 is an impressive task; a 300 pound man benching 290 is not so much so … even though 290 is in absolute terms a larger number.

[Nelson_Pike]

@DSeid

Obviously an old thread but Nelson Pike that is a silly approach.

On the contrary, there is no other valid approach. However…

@DSeid

There is, by nature of the sport and culture, a much better chance that the men with the greatest potential to become the best powerlifters will both go into the sport and get training such as to optimize their performance than there is that the women with the greatest potential to become the best powerlifters will both go into the sport and get training such as to optimize their performance. Also power lifting is more than mere leg strength.

…You bring up a reasonable objection that I had not thought of, namely that there is, due to cultural gender norms, a much larger pool of male competitors than of female competitors.

On the other hand, the significance of sample size diminishes rapidly with increase, so the larger male pool of people who self-select for weightlifting may not provide a better basis for generalization than the admittedly smaller female pool.

@DSeid

Probably this is one of those factoids that is based on some small kernel of truth by some particular (and possibly somewhat contrived) metric and then gets repeated out of context because it sounds so counterintuitive.

There is nothing whatsoever contrived or out of context about the weight lifted to bodyweight coefficient.

[billfish678]

@the_diego

Engineers, is there a reason for idiots to insist on relative strength over absolute?

Well, if you considered rock climbing.

One could argue that women are better built for it (for certain types of rock climbing at least).

[scr4]

If women’s legs were stronger relative to body weight, they would be able to jump higher. But men’s records are consistently higher for various jump-related events.