Even so, in the absolute, male skiers may well still be likely to be stronger than their female counterparts, due to greater weight and muscle mass.
I think you answered your own question there!
But here’s the thing…the men are carrying more weight that their legs need to deal with.
So, when turning, the man may be stronger overall but he is less able to manage the mass taking that corner than a woman.
Physics.
ETA: Think a nimble small car versus a sluggish, if more powerful, SUV.
Find yourself a ski expert, please, and argue this with them.
You find one. Physics is on my side.
A heavier roller coaster is faster than a lighter one. Heavier men are faster than women for the same reason. More momentum.
That does not tell us why women are made to ski a less challenging course. I’d be willing to bet they absolutely could if given the chance.
I provided a cite that women are stronger than men in their legs and skiing is mostly about the leg strength (as far as the strength component goes). I think you need better than telling me to go find an expert. You go find an expert.
You are the one who’s insisting that it makes no sense, neighbor, because “physics.” Go do your own research on skiing, specifically.
I’ve provided my cites and thinking. It’s up to you to refute that. Not tell me to do more research. Your turn to do the research.
Your cite says nothing about skiing. If you are convinced that you are right (and you clearly are convinced of this), go do your own digging on why they don’t do it the way you think they should, rather than arguing with random non-skiing experts on a message board.
Guess I will put this here: Woman tries various Olympic events. Here is XC skiing:
There are bunch of others.
Brian
I’ve been re-thinking the gender-specific venues. Not sure about the physics thing. If you’ve run or watched a marathon like Boston or NY, the men and women run the exact same course, but at the finish they separate to two chutes the last few meters. I think that’s so the elite female runners can finish/be photographed alongside other females, who they are competing against, and not among a bunch of men.
For that same reason, the women are given their own course and venue to compete against other women, without getting compared to the men - specifically for the timed events. I have no doubt female skiers, for example, can handle any race course the men have, but the inevitable comparisons to the men’s times would always cast a shadow on the women’s results. Maybe that’s also the reason for the whole monobob/4-person bobsled thing? Having a separate course and separate event ensures separate results, and eliminates comparisons.
That might be it. I can’t believe that a course that is ideal for the best men would be impossible for the best women. I totally believe the men would, on average, be faster. (In fact, curious about this, i watched the times as they were going down, and the top speeds achieved by the men were a few klicks faster than those for the women.)
And yet the ski courses are totally different. Not, “women start a little lower”, completely different slope. For both downhill and super G. (The two I’ve watched.) And the women’s courses looked more interesting. I thought it was very odd.
I suspect that choosing a course for a ski race is probably a lot more complicated than most of us realize. The downhill usually has a couple rolls where the slope drops down quickly and the competitors get airborne. They have to plan their trajectory so they land in the right place to be prepared for the next turn. I imagine the course designer knows pretty well how fast the skiers will be going, and how far they’ll jump. A woman on a men’s course might not get airborne at all, making the course less challenging. A man on a woman’s course might jump too far and be unable to make the next turn.
Robot_Arm gets it. Men achieve higher speeds only because they are heavier. Nothing to do with strength or skill. That higher overall speed translates to more airtime and more distance needed between course obstacles, etc. This is why different courses are required.
That’s basically what I said further up the thread. Different speeds will change the set up required. I assume faster speeds mean circumference of turns will be higher, racing lines change etc.
I was more responding to Telemark’s assertion that it would be dangerous to have women ski on the men’s course, when it would be the opposite - The men’s course would be less challenging for women, since they wouldn’t achieve the speeds that the men’s courses are designed for.
Yeah, i don’t buy “too dangerous”. Alpine skiing is intrinsically dangerous, but the bigger you are, the harder you fall. And there’s a lot of variation in how fast the competitors go down. They don’t let Freddie the Eagle on the course any more, but there’s a big spread between the best and worst of the competitors. So i don’t think the course suddenly gets a lot more dangerous if you are going a little slower.
Ah right, sorry, yes that makes sense.
Eddie 
Being older, I remember very well how everybody assumed that the USSR’s Protopopov/Belousova figure skating team was totally unbeatable. Looking at their 1968 performance, i’m feeling like “Meh. Is that all?” Certainly, they were graceful and beautiful to watch. But if someone came in doing the exact same routine and did just as well, would they even win a medal? I’m seeing grace but I’m not seeing athleticism and no throws at all.
Oh my God! they landed those jumps exactly the same. And that side by side thing at the end was amazing.
Anyway, both the rules and the scoring of figure skating have changed since then. They had to skate actual figures then, like perfect circles and figures 8. Someone doing one of today’s acrobatics routines back then would have confused the judges, i think, whole picking up all sorts of little demerits for being slightly out of sync.