Which female athletes could beat a Top 100 male?

justin is a friend of women wrote:

Chewbacca wrote:

Every time I think the whiny misogynisys of lrc couldn't possibly be any more pathetic, a thread like this pops up.

The misogynists are happy with something (anything) of theirs pops up.

Coming from 2 basement-dwelling losers who have never been intimate with a woman. Or, at least voluntarily.

Milethon wrote:

Top women golfers could beat top 100 male golfers, granted they would need to be having a pretty bad off day.

Top female golfers could beat top 100 men in certain circumstances.

First, consider that Anika Sorenstam played well at the Colonial, shooting eight strokes better than Las Vegas had predicted. She did miss the cut but she was under tremendous pressure and had massive galleries following her. The hype made it a rather unpleasant experience for her and she had no interest in repeating it.

Michelle Wie, as a teenager, played in a few men's tournaments and did fairly well. She missed the cut at the Sony Open by one stroke at age 14 and missed by two strokes at the John Deere Classic at age 15. She was in no way considered a top female player at the time. Hyped, yes. Top player, no.

If you put a #1 ranked woman in a field with the top 100 men and played four rounds over a fairly short and tight course (like Colonial, which Anika picked for a reason), which would mitigate the disadvantage off the tee, you would likely find that the woman does not come in last all the time.

Oh, and Mike Rossi cheated.

Ronda Rousey is ranked #4 pound for pound even in a poll which includes men, she is a Bantamweight and she is ranked above the #1 men's Bantamweight TJ Dillashaw, so this means she would be favored to beat TJ Dillashaw. http://www.ufc.com/rankings

I think Rousey should move up to featherweight and challenge the #1 pound for pound fighter Jose Aldo, what a fight that would be.

douglas burke wrote:

Ronda Rousey is ranked #4 pound for pound even in a poll which includes men, she is a Bantamweight and she is ranked above the #1 men's Bantamweight TJ Dillashaw, so this means she would be favored to beat TJ Dillashaw.

http://www.ufc.com/rankings

What idiocy. Dillashaw would totally annihilate her. In like 10 seconds. Have you seen her punch? Yes, like a girl. Her body is one of fat. Pretty much no muscle. Her punches lack any power. Are we supposed to believe women get trounced in every other sport except MMA? High school kids run 45 seconds and the fastest lady ever who was doped to the gills ran 47.60. And we are to believe that the best bantamweight in the world who pummeled twice the champ who had not lost to the best in almos a decade would lose to a rotund lady who is fighting women who basically have no business in the Octagon?

Yeah, this is just silly.

Whether she could beat a boxer, like Floyd Mayweather, might be worth a conversation. It would be a question of whether she could shoot in and get him to the mat before he punches her in the face and puts her lights out.

But her against a man of equal weight, who is prepared to fight on his feet, on his back, in the mount, defending against the mount, both trying to apply and defend against submission holds and chokes, with experience fighting against the fence, with years and years of training, who then arrives at the set weight with far more lean muscle mass and experience being hit by people who hit a lot harder than she will and are faster than she will be...?

Dillashaw would kill her.

Another way to look at it...to illustrate the difference in explosiveness between male and female - Britney Griner is 6'8" and is about only WNBA player to dunk during games. She barely can dunk. Mugsey Bogues is 5'3". Like a foot-and-a-half shorter. He can dunk with flourish. Just no comparison.

Polly P wrote:

Another way to look at it...to illustrate the difference in explosiveness between male and female - Britney Griner is 6'8" and is about only WNBA player to dunk during games. She barely can dunk. Mugsey Bogues is 5'3". Like a foot-and-a-half shorter. He can dunk with flourish. Just no comparison.

Britney Griner is a man.

The only men who feel the need to compare the athletic accomplishments of men and women side by side are men who are totally insecure about their own accomplishments. What's the matter fellas, did you get beat by a woman in a race and now you feel the need to bash all female sports in general? Grow up.

If it's long enough and cold enough, women will win. Also women may have more flexibility than men. Any sport that does not include any of these factors will be dominated by men.

joedirt wrote:

The only men who feel the need to compare the athletic accomplishments of men and women side by side are men who are totally insecure about their own accomplishments. What's the matter fellas, did you get beat by a woman in a race and now you feel the need to bash all female sports in general? Grow up.

I don't see the need for the ad hominem attack. Very few of the posts are just bashing women. I think there's room for some discourse.

I coached women, married a very good athlete and have a daughter who is an athlete and I am a big fan of a lot of women's sports (LPGA, USA Women's Soccer, Track and Field, among others). I'm not saying, "Men good...women bad," like a neanderthal.

Wondering how a top woman would do against top 100 men in some sports is a fair conversation. I don't see this as bashing women or female sports in general.

And I'll add one thing.

Let's say we asked how a softball pitcher would do against the best batters that MLB has to offer. We might conclude that they would knock that crap out of the park. The ball is too big and moves too slowly.

But then someone actually puts the pitcher and batters together and guess what happens? She strikes them out easily.

http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/11/why-barry-bonds-strikes-out-to-jennie-finch.html

And that isn't about woman bashing. That's someone having the willingness to say, "I wonder..." and then taking it from there.

You have to understand in today's PC world, women can never NEVER be relegated below man. Women are superior in everything.

give to the women chance to be at the same T level.

then...

There is an Olympic sport in which men and women compete against one another.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_equestrian

Look how many women have won medals against men.

Mckayla Maroney

Milethon wrote:

Top women golfers could beat top 100 male golfers, granted they would need to be having a pretty bad off day.

Golf ain't a sport, and golfers ain't athletes.

Rock climbing. The top female boulderer is ranked 17th in the 8a rankings (generally regarded as a very accurate ranking, it is based on ascents of famous climbs per year). There are other females (and of course males) who don't use 8a but I don't think you'd find someone who's knowledgeable about climbing who would say that Puccio and Wurm don't belong in the top 25-50. That's in bouldering, which is much more power based than lead or sport, where you'd expect women to be worse. Their smaller fingers and lower center of gravity are a huge advantage.

The only real answer wrote:

Rock climbing. The top female boulderer is ranked 17th in the 8a rankings (generally regarded as a very accurate ranking, it is based on ascents of famous climbs per year). There are other females (and of course males) who don't use 8a but I don't think you'd find someone who's knowledgeable about climbing who would say that Puccio and Wurm don't belong in the top 25-50. That's in bouldering, which is much more power based than lead or sport, where you'd expect women to be worse. Their smaller fingers and lower center of gravity are a huge advantage.

Rock climbing??? LOL. Like 100 people in the world do rock climbing. NEXT!!!