Why do most college girls burn out by their soph year of college?

no cool handle wrote:

I've seen the same thing in other girls: the 3 b's at 16--boobs, butts and boyfriends. but why do some girls continue to run well in college? someone like sara hall for example. she ran well all through HS and college and now beyond.

Sara Hall? No B's, really.

ok, fair enough. but seriously, why do most girls either quit running after their soph year or get progressively slower? my sister was pretty quick in her time and quit after her soph year. any ideas?

The real question is why do people have a hard time understanding that women really don't like competition. I've only really seen them compete with their looks. Few actually enjoy sports and/or competing in them.

Most girls don't even make it to college competing.

I don't think the premise of this thread is valid. You're mistaken.

I wouldn't say "burnout" is a realistic representation. I think alot of girls lose interest in college because the expectations typically are higher, putting more of a premium on being competitive, which isn't the real reason they started running in the first place.

no cool handle wrote:

I've seen the same thing in other girls: the 3 b's at 16--boobs, butts and boyfriends.

I'm gonna try to make this suggestion as gingerly as possible, because I really do not intend to insult you.

If you don't see your "boobs, butts, and boyfriends" comment as patronizing and potentially offensive, then you are probably not the most sensitive person when it comes to gender. I'm certainly not calling you sexist, but if I had a female coach that said similar things about men I would probably enjoy the sport less, at least while she was coaching me. I'm not saying that's going on with your athlete, but as a general trend I think a lot of female runners out there could benefit from female coaches, or at least coaches who are more understanding and receptive toward the challenges that a developing female athlete faces. Perhaps the trend that you're noticing is not just a result of burnout but is, in part, a result of dissatisfaction at the male-centric culture of the sport.

I doubt shes even a coach. GO away troll.

You have forgot the fourth B. Booz

wanna know bro wrote:

You have forgot the fourth B. Booz

Who are the first 3 B. Booz's?? And how do the first three B. Booz's have anything to do with this thread?

the first three Bs are boobs,butts and boyfriends.follow along

wanna know bro wrote:

the first three Bs are boobs,butts and boyfriends.follow along

Y'know, I think OMR was actually making a comment about the poster's punctuation and spelling.

p.n. wrote:

wanna know bro wrote:

the first three Bs are boobs,butts and boyfriends.follow along

Y'know, I think OMR was actually making a comment about the poster's punctuation and spelling.

if dat be the case,you barking up the wrong tree cuz this be a message board not a damn english class

Actually, and without intending in the least to be sexist ( a necessary disclaimer around here), I think women often mature earlier and recognize how they want to get on with the rest of their lives. And given that so few runners can really have a future in the sport, rational processes start to kick in and they start putting energies toward a non-running future.

I see it in my own daughter. She is focused on finishing Phi Beta Kappa (a near certainty), completing her degree in a difficult major, making grad school plans, and finally, making all of that compatible with the plans of her long time boyfriend. And she clearly is preparing to have children in her mid-to late 20's - its what she wants. Spending lots of time running just doesn't appear sensible to her. I enjoyed NCAA Div. 1 running back in the day, but I do wish I had spent more time developing my future away from the track earlier than I did, so I really support my daughter's choices. And I see similar ones in many of her friends.

no cool handle wrote:

I've been observing this phenomenon for quite a while. why is it that girls at 20 years old can't run as well as they did at 16-17? I'm coaching a girl now who is averaging between 6:50-7:05 mile pace for 5 and 6k races, but was running 6:20 pace as a junior. I started coaching her in february of this year and she took some time off, but i thought that after 9 months of Lydiard-esque training she'd start to come around.

I've seen the same thing in other girls: the 3 b's at 16--boobs, butts and boyfriends. but why do some girls continue to run well in college? someone like sara hall for example. she ran well all through HS and college and now beyond.

Can you say, HIPS ????

As the hips grow during the late teen years, it changes the angle of the femur at the knee. It totally messes with the ladies. Just look at most HS state meets. They are almost always won by freshmen and sophomores and rarely by seniors.

dogman is a good bit right.

also i do agree that girls aren't nearly as competitive. so when competition gets more fierce in college some of them don't rise up to match it, whereas guys pretty much always try to.

one thing that makes me think that women aren't as competitive is if you watch a guys race you can see pretty much every guy will be dead at the end of the race and kicking the life outta themselves to finish strong. Whereas maybe 10% of girls look like they are really hurting themselves to finish strong and kick to pass someone right in front of them. They almost never speed up. I guess for the most part they just don't want to go through the kinda pain that guys are willing to. All throughout high school and college it was pretty rare to see a girl really pushing through the pain to run faster.

SMART HAVARD PERSON wrote:

I doubt shes even a coach. GO away troll.

What's a Havard? Never heard of that type of person, let alone that there are smart ones.

wanna know bro wrote:

You have forgot the fourth B. Booz

You mean Boaz? He's crazy guy, but I doubt he can be blamed for hundreds of failing female athletes...

different view wrote:

Actually, and without intending in the least to be sexist ( a necessary disclaimer around here), I think women often mature earlier and recognize how they want to get on with the rest of their lives. And given that so few runners can really have a future in the sport, rational processes start to kick in and they start putting energies toward a non-running future.

Different View has the correct answer. Girls grow up faster, are frequently dating guys who are older, and out of college before they are, and typically see that athletic competition for most people ends after college. At least this was my experience. The 3 B's was not my issue at all, was just ready to move on to the next phase in my life after 9 years of competing.

All of the above comments about girls not being competitive is bullsh!t. We like to win just as much as anyone.

Most women simply are not built to run. The hips are too wide, and the Q-angle (angle of knee to pelvis) is too great. Eventually these structural problems get the best of most women.

Your best females runners are those who have put mother nature on hold. They are physically immature. This could be said for a lot of active women who do not menstruate regularly. They develop mild or severe amenhorrea, which leads to bone loss, which leads to stress fractures, which leads to reduced training load, which leads to less success.

The first two "b's" are fairly accurate. Girls go through another growth spurt in the mid to late teens and develop excess areas of fat in two major areas: chest and glutes. This is not made for optimal distance running.

Alan