I thought it was interesting that the men's cycling road race was 150 miles, but the womens today was only 85. In track, women used to run the 3000, not even the 5000m and of course the marathon wasn't a women's event until 1984. But now women's olympic track includes the 5000, 10,000, and marathon. And why is women's tennis only 3 sets, not 5 like the men's? Are these shorter events in cycling and tennis insulting to women?
It could be because of quality drop off. If women run a marathon within 20 minutes of the elite men (Paula aside) they are competitive with elite club runners. Maybe if a female cyclist cycles 150 miles they are only competitive with non elite weekend warrior types?
This is one of those times when you won't hear any women screaming about equality
Though they demand equal pay at tennis Grand Slams.
BJK had to go best-of-5 against Bobby Riggs, though admittedly the match was likely fixed (mob).
It's all probably rooted historically in "women are weaker" but there's no reason for variances today.
As for tennis - the only place where men and women really differ are at the Slams, where men play all rounds best of five and women play all rounds best of three. There have been plenty of discussion about women earning equal pay at the Slams but not playing an equal amount. But, at this point, there's a practical reason not to change the women to best of 5 every round - they'd never finish the tournament in the allotted two weeks.
Men actually only play best of 3 at regular tour events. The finals (and only the finals) of many non-Slam tournaments used to be best of five, but they've stopped that, except for the finals of the ATP Finals year-end championships. For a short period in the late 80s/early 90s the women's WTA Championships at the end of the year played a best of 5 final.
olympics watcher wrote:
I thought it was interesting that the men's cycling road race was 150 miles, but the womens today was only 85. In track, women used to run the 3000, not even the 5000m and of course the marathon wasn't a women's event until 1984. But now women's olympic track includes the 5000, 10,000, and marathon. And why is women's tennis only 3 sets, not 5 like the men's? Are these shorter events in cycling and tennis insulting to women?
You want to see women squatting for a tinkle half way through a bike race?
okdj wrote:
This is one of those times when you won't hear any women screaming about equality
But you'll hear incessant whining from privileged dudes.
47 track events, women don't do the 50k walk and there isn't a shorter option (other than the walking event they do participate in. Two events for men, one for women.
Let's not forget the high hurdles, they only race 100 meters while them men race 110. An outrage
And lighter throwing implements, shorter hurdles/steeple barriers.
Why not lower the rim for basketball?
They play with smaller size basketball.
Exactly. Why is Serena Williams outraged when women don't get paid equally at Grand Slams, but she isn't outraged that women aren't playing best three out of five sets? If you want equal pay you should do equal work. But I have to say that the 85mi vs 150mi difference in the Olympic road race is ridiculous. The women are barely doing over half what the men are doing. If the women were racing say, 120 mi, that might be more reasonable.
More equal than others wrote:
Though they demand equal pay at tennis Grand Slams.
BJK had to go best-of-5 against Bobby Riggs, though admittedly the match was likely fixed (mob).
Pay is not about length of matches, it is about how much money they are bringing in.
Worse still, the race featured less climbing, which would have broken the race apart more and probably resulted in a different winner.
Of course it probably would have resulted in more hospitalisations as they'd have had to manage the descent for each successive loop.
the discussion is useless. Even if for example womens roadraces would be longer, they still would be only "half" as fast. Its better to pay men and women according to the public interest. I for example like women's tennis or volleyball more than men's. So if everyone would be like me, paying women in these sports more would be logical.
It's insulting to me. I believe in equal racing distances, make the females work as hard for their glory, why not?
And where the he11 is the women's decathlon?
Women do all the component events now
There's already a precedent for updating it (5 events to 7)
Although heptathlon marks will be "lost" (who remembers pentathlon records?), even decathlon scores disappear eventually as the tables are revised for improved individual marks
It's unfortunate that Jackie Joyner-Kersee's 7291 heptathlon record is probably the best mark in the sport and is 28 years old (for example: Ennis's PR is 6955; next-best after JJK is Kluft's 7032), but that's just chance. Women should get to be decathletes in more than the occasional novelty way.
Serena should be outraged. If they were best of 5, she would likely be more dominant. Her problem is not being hot enough to get the sweet endorsement deals.
I find it stupid that women don't do the same events as the men, with the cycling road race being just about the worst example. 150miles with so much climbing made it a very tough race for the men, for the women it wasn't so tough, more like a quite hard day in the saddle that many weekend warriors would often do.
All other events should be the same for men and women in my opinion. The men's hurdles should be reduced to 100m, why do they do 110m anyway?? I'm not sure about the height of the hurdles though, that could make it difficult fo some smaller women. Women can do a decathlon too, there is no need to cut out 3 events for them.
I'm gymnastics the men compete in 6 different apparatus while the women compete in 4 different apparatus