Women are forced to compete in the 100m Hurdles; men get to compete in the 110m Hurdles.

Where is the Outcry?! wrote:

I can understand lower hurdles... but why the shorter distance???

Women run with shorter strides, so the shorter distance allows them to still get three steps in between hurdles without having to awkwardly elongate their stride.

The sexism is against the men.

They are forced to run 10m further.

There is a 14m run in form the last hurdle to the line.

Just make it 4m and have them leaning as soon as they come off the final hurdle.

Women are on average 10% slower, so all women's events should be 10% shorter, and then they could chase the same time standards. So women could be going for sub-13 and sub-27 in the 4500m and 9000m. The embarrassing outlier would be Paula's WR, which would have been sub-2:00, 12 years ago.

three steps wrote:

Where is the Outcry?! wrote:

I can understand lower hurdles... but why the shorter distance???

Women run with shorter strides, so the shorter distance allows them to still get three steps in between hurdles without having to awkwardly elongate their stride.

Some women have longer strides than others, you sexist pig.

The distance isn't an issue. The fact that a "high" hurdle never increases from 33", while male standards increase from 33" in MS(some states), to 39" in HS, to 42" in college/pro. Huge difference and women should be offended.

Ever have a flat on a trip with the wife or girlfriend? Who gets out and changes it?

Where is the Outcry?! wrote:

That is the most blatantly sexist thing I have ever heard. At least female soccer and basketball players that play with a smaller ball get to use regulation goals... I can understand lower hurdles... but why the shorter distance???

Wrong. The most blatant sexist thing is tennis where women get equal prize $$$ but only have to play best of 3 sets. Don't hear women tennis players bitching. Why doesn't Andy Murray?

Where is the Outcry?! wrote:

Women are forced to compete in the 100m Hurdles

By whom? My wife and daughters are all women. None of them have ever reported being forced to run the 100m hurdles.

stephen snell wrote:

Where is the Outcry?! wrote:

That is the most blatantly sexist thing I have ever heard. At least female soccer and basketball players that play with a smaller ball get to use regulation goals... I can understand lower hurdles... but why the shorter distance???

Wrong. The most blatant sexist thing is tennis where women get equal prize $$$ but only have to play best of 3 sets. Don't hear women tennis players bitching. Why doesn't Andy Murray?

I'd be pissed about it if I were a woman. What's the fun in only best of 3?

Women's Hurdles distances are:

Start to 1st hurdle - 13m

in-between - 8.5m

Last (10th) to Finsih - 10.5m

Reasonably even number. Not so the boys. The spacings are lame^2.

Start to 1st hurdle - 13.72m

in-between - 9.14m

Last (10th) to Finish - 14.02m

Notfair wrote:

The distance isn't an issue. The fact that a "high" hurdle never increases from 33", while male standards increase from 33" in MS(some states), to 39" in HS, to 42" in college/pro. Huge difference and women should be offended.

I have always thought this. Women's open hurdles should be 36 inches, increasing from 33 inches in HS. Because the hurdles are so low, too many women hurdlers get away with crappy technique. They are very fast. so speed not technical skills makes them successful - Gail Devers is the prime example.

How dare you wrote:

three steps wrote:

Women run with shorter strides, so the shorter distance allows them to still get three steps in between hurdles without having to awkwardly elongate their stride.

Some women have longer strides than others, you sexist pig.

And some men have longer strides than others but nobody is going to put people in height divisions. Men are generally taller than women and have longer strides. For this reason, men run an extra 10m. This makes three stepping feel more natural. Saying that men have longer strides than women is not sexist at all. It is stating a biological fact.