She’s a guy.
And at her age I ran considerably faster than her/him for the same distance.
I’m a guy.
She’s a guy.
So, stupid looking long hair doesn’t make you a female or a record holder.
She’s a guy.
And at her age I ran considerably faster than her/him for the same distance.
I’m a guy.
She’s a guy.
So, stupid looking long hair doesn’t make you a female or a record holder.
It’s a dude
Armstronglivs wrote:
MatthewXCountry wrote:
meh it's a really soft record. If Hassan or Kipyegon went for this record, they could easily break this a a couple of seconds. The fact that O'Sullivan had this record before speaks volumes.
It's a soft world record - for a man. As we have just seen.
I find it infuriating that Obiri feels like she needs to take to the roads. Are we really going to have another whole group of women that don't get the medals and recognition that they deserve (ala the Women's 800 in Rio)?
Armstronglivs wrote:
MatthewXCountry wrote:
meh it's a really soft record. If Hassan or Kipyegon went for this record, they could easily break this a a couple of seconds. The fact that O'Sullivan had this record before speaks volumes.
It's a soft world record - for a man. As we have just seen.
It's soft, full stop. Kipyegon or Hassan would run 5:17 no problem. That is what their 1500m PBs are worth. This is not a real story until the record actually drops to a reasonable time.
That does it for me. I’m done. So long track and field. It is over. Loved it since I was 12 years old. Absolutely hate it now. I’m just here for the politics and training threads now.
MatthewXCountry wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
It's a soft world record - for a man. As we have just seen.
It's soft, full stop. Kipyegon or Hassan would run 5:17 no problem. That is what their 1500m PBs are worth. This is not a real story until the record actually drops to a reasonable time.
So it's not a problem that she wins Diamond League races, it's not a problem that she breaks world records as long as those records are soft? Semenya never set any world records, but it was a problem. Mboma is on a trend that is problematic for women's sprints. Now is the time to fix this. The longer XY athletes are allowed to compete in the women's division, the harder it's going to be to change.
Nuge wrote:
She’s a guy.
And at her age I ran considerably faster than her/him for the same distance.
I’m a guy.
She’s a guy.
So, stupid looking long hair doesn’t make you a female or a record holder.
Oh, nice for you. Was your best distance, the one you trained for until a couple years ago, 800 meters? Did you face the options of either having your testicles removed, or taking female contraceptive pills or injections to lower your testosterone - with the potential to mess you and your sense of self up quite badly - if you wanted to continue running?
There is a component of perseverance here that is quite impressive.
Meanwhile, the current rule of "from here to there is forbidden, otherwise ok" is quite absurd, seemingly created just to get Caster Semenya out of the sport.
arte wrote:
Nuge wrote:
She’s a guy.
And at her age I ran considerably faster than her/him for the same distance.
I’m a guy.
She’s a guy.
So, stupid looking long hair doesn’t make you a female or a record holder.
Oh, nice for you. Was your best distance, the one you trained for until a couple years ago, 800 meters? Did you face the options of either having your testicles removed, or taking female contraceptive pills or injections to lower your testosterone - with the potential to mess you and your sense of self up quite badly - if you wanted to continue running?
I think I can answer that last question on behalf of Nuge.
No, because he never attempted to compete in the female category. 🤣
Armstronglivs wrote:
600 sq ft apartment, need roommate wrote:
It is almost like testosterone helps at all distances. How could the IAAF have known this in advance? If only there was some data. Like results from every race.
Being male helps at all distances.
Except the march down the aisle. That burden for a male is paralyzing.
arte wrote:
Nuge wrote:
She’s a guy.
And at her age I ran considerably faster than her/him for the same distance.
I’m a guy.
She’s a guy.
So, stupid looking long hair doesn’t make you a female or a record holder.
Oh, nice for you. Was your best distance, the one you trained for until a couple years ago, 800 meters? Did you face the options of either having your testicles removed, or taking female contraceptive pills or injections to lower your testosterone - with the potential to mess you and your sense of self up quite badly - if you wanted to continue running?
There is a component of perseverance here that is quite impressive.
Meanwhile, the current rule of "from here to there is forbidden, otherwise ok" is quite absurd, seemingly created just to get Caster Semenya out of the sport.
Why would he deal with any of that? He just ran with the other dudes like he was supposed to.
Nuge wrote:
She’s a guy.
And at her age I ran considerably faster than her/him for the same distance.
I’m a guy.
She’s a guy.
So, stupid looking long hair doesn’t make you a female or a record holder.
Not sure I really agree with much of that, she's intersex rather than "a guy", but, yes, whilst she's not really a perfect fit for either the men's or women's class, it's IMO difficult to sensibly argue that the former isn't a better fit.
1. Not convinced we have anywhere near the detailed scientific knowledge to say that testosterone makes the ONLY difference even if it makes a very big or perhaps most of it. I think I can be allowed to be sceptical of that.
2. Just because you have okay testosterone may not negate that if you had high testosterone during your development, you may have developed long term athletic advantages that will persist even after you have suppressed your testosterone. Biological development has very little reversibility so I suspect that this is definitely the case.
xy chromosome means biologically a male.
arte wrote:...Did you face the options of either having your testicles removed, or taking female contraceptive pills or injections to lower your testosterone - with the potential to mess you and your sense of self up quite badly - if you wanted to continue running?...
pretty much - all biological males have the choice of running in the men's category or else taking medication to qualify for the female.
Nuge wrote:
She’s a guy.
And at her age I ran considerably faster than her/him for the same distance.
I’m a guy.
She’s a guy.
So, stupid looking long hair doesn’t make you a female or a record holder.
I used to joke back in the day that I held the American women's 800 meter record (pre Jearl Mile Clark).
Little did I know...
Of course she did, she has much higher levels of Testosterone than any other female running. I think a good example of this, is go to a US middle school cross country meet (ages 12-14), the boys who have started producing Testosterone are the ones with a huge advantage over the boys who haven't. This is due to the higher levels of Testosterone they have started to produce.....
This is not a social equity issue, this is a biological issue and the women who have to compete against this should be upset because it's ruining the integrity of their sport.
THOUGHTSLEADER wrote:
So for the men's record it's basically going through 1600 in 3:48 and kicking a 56.
Now thinking of Faith K. or Sifan Hassan, they'd be going through a 1600 in 4:18 and kicking in a 63?
Seems quite doable and both could go through in more like 4:15-16 and still have a 62-63.
It's not that it's impossible for a woman to run that time, it's that this person is possibly generally good at running because she has some male genetics. What other runner could be best in the world at the 800 as well as a medal contender in the 5k/10k??? Imagine Nijel Amos running his 1:41 800, but then also running 12:50 for 5k and 26:55 for 10k. It would be unheard of. And that's what Francine is doing because of her male genetics. She isn't running world class guy times, but how many guys actually hit those times of 1:55 800, 14:20 5k?? Basically she's running guy times that you would expect from someone who has trained for several years as a guy, and makes sense why someone would train for several years if you're making a lot of money from it.
jonnicristofi wrote:
Just because you have okay testosterone may not negate that if you had high testosterone during your development, you may have developed long term athletic advantages that will persist even after you have suppressed your testosterone. Biological development has very little reversibility so I suspect that this is definitely the case.
The evidence indicates that in distance running, testosterone does not provide a lasting advantage once it has been suppressed. Of course, it's possible that there's a tiny difference at the margins that we are so far unable to detect, but at least in the case of intersex athletes, I think it's sensible to have rules based on what we know, and not what could conceivably be true but hasn't been demonstrated.
The situation is almost certainly different for sports where body mass matters (e.g., rugby).
arte wrote:
There is a component of perseverance here that is quite impressive.
Meanwhile, the current rule of "from here to there is forbidden, otherwise ok" is quite absurd, seemingly created just to get Caster Semenya out of the sport.
No, this isn't impressive within the sport. AND, the DSD athlete can continue to run all they want. So this isn't impressive. I think many people understand that the DSD athlete faces an unfortunate life challenge. But that doesn't mean we should destroy the women's category to compensate for the their misfortune. The rules that were created are stupid, yes they are. But they aren't stupid for the reasons you say. The rules are stupid because they are not clear that the Women's category should be for XX-Chromosome women ONLY. That solve this inanity. Notice how there are no DSD runners in the Men's category? There's a reason. You comment is frivolous at best and more likely misguided.
800 dude wrote:
jonnicristofi wrote:
Just because you have okay testosterone may not negate that if you had high testosterone during your development, you may have developed long term athletic advantages that will persist even after you have suppressed your testosterone. Biological development has very little reversibility so I suspect that this is definitely the case.
The evidence indicates that in distance running, testosterone does not provide a lasting advantage once it has been suppressed. Of course, it's possible that there's a tiny difference at the margins that we are so far unable to detect, but at least in the case of intersex athletes, I think it's sensible to have rules based on what we know, and not what could conceivably be true but hasn't been demonstrated.
The situation is almost certainly different for sports where body mass matters (e.g., rugby).
Can you cite this evidence please? Also, please specify the exact level to which males who've undergone male puberty must suppress the T their testes make in order to lose all the male-over-female sports advantage they have in distance running - and for how long.
If you mean the (non peer-reviewed) paper that Joanna Harper wrote about the self-reported experiences of 8 distance runners, one of whom was Harper, I hope you know that it's been debunked - and even Harper has backed away from its dubious claims.
Also, the athletes at issue here are not "intersex." They have differences of male sex development or DSDs that caused them to be born with anatomical anomalies of the genitals and urinary tracts. Other than that, they are robustly healthy individuals with normal, functioning male gonads (testes) that produce male levels of T; moreover, they have male-typical sensitivity to the endogenous testosterone their testes produce that enable them to make use of T as males customarily do. These athletes have the same physiological characteristics that give males such a huge advantage over females in athletics that males who were born with normal genitals and urinary anatomy have.