Tennis.
That is all I can think of.
Old news, but:
Tennis.
That is all I can think of.
Old news, but:
I would say this is true for the marathon as well even. The best women in the world run in the low 2:20s. WR is 2:18 something? Making the olympic trials is 2:19 if i recall correctly. I think I would say a 2:20 man would be sub-elite and would lose to a handful of the best female marathoners.
There have been multiple instances where women have won ultra races outright.
What leads you to believe they can compete in tennis?
Blah Blah. wrote:
There have been multiple instances where women have won ultra races outright.
I have actually heard that. Good call.
Any idea whether or not the men in these races were well-represented? I have no idea.
I don't think that a woman could beat a man in tennis if they are both still at a young age and playing at their top ability. Riggs was well into his 50s when he lost to Billie Jean King. Although I'd guess Serena could beat a 400ish ranked male some days but I'd say the male wins more often than not.
Saint Mary's men's basketball can beat their women's soccer team at soccer.And their men's soccer team can beat their women's basketball team at basketball. Not elite by any means but still just goes to show men have the clear advantage just due to athleticism.
tennis? wrote:
What leads you to believe they can compete in tennis?
The better question would be: what do I mean by "sub-elite"? Let's say: DI NCAA, never professional.
My rationale, tho, is that highly technical activities will favor the athlete who has devoted more time to it. The less technical, the more the male would be favored regardless.
Blah Blah. wrote:
There have been multiple instances where women have won ultra races outright.
ultras indeed. The Appalachian Trail FKT was held by a woman for quite some time before Scott Jurek was barely able to beat it...
Sub-elite Men lose to World Class women in
- Triathlon
- Archery
- Tennis
- Downhill Skiing
- Marathon
- Ultra marathon
- Nascar
- NHRA
- probably Golf
- Shooting
- Sailing
- i could go on all day, unlike you with a world class woman
Wasn't there a link on here not long ago about a male tennis player, who was pro but ranked 50 or something, easily beat Serena in a couple of matches. I wouldn't be so quick to say tennis.
But again, the definition of sub-elite is elusive. I would consider a marathon runner with a best of 2:15 to be sub-elite. So the best woman marathoner could not beat the best sub-elite marathoner.
Bowling.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/annanorth/7-sports-in-which-women-have-beaten-men?utm_term=.kpGl54Nj7M#.pgk4W9P3oj wrote:
Bowling
In 2010, Kelly Kulick became the first women to win a national tournament on the Professional Bowlers Association Tour, when she took first prize in the Tournament of Champions. She beat out 62 of the country’s top male bowlers to win the title. She also impressed Billie Jean King, who called her win “a motivational and inspirational event for girls and women competing at all levels all around the world.â€
Other notables:
Indy cars (Danica Patrick)
Rock Climbing
Equestrian (1993 Belmont Stakes)
Ultras (Pam Reed won Badwater twice, plus there are others)
Possibly...
Gymnastics, sharpshooting, long-distance swimming
lover of women wrote:
Sub-elite Men lose to World Class women in
- Triathlon
- Archery
- Tennis
- Downhill Skiing
- Marathon
- Ultra marathon
- Nascar
- NHRA
- probably Golf
- Shooting
- Sailing
- i could go on all day, unlike you with a world class woman
What constitutes "sub elite"? Is a 2:19 marathoner sub elite? I would say so. They are beating the women.
Skiing--no way.
Shooting--sure, I bet the woman from WVU who would the first Gold of the Rio Games can outshoot 99.99999% of men in the world.
Golf--nope, put them on the same tees and see what happens.
Sailing--well the women's only team struggled in some big race around the world competition recently. Takes a good deal of strength and endurance to sail.
Has a woman won a major NASCAR or IndyCar race? I think Cha Cha in NHRA.
No way. A good college male player would crush any female pro, including the beast Serena.
kl1212 wrote:
Other notables:
Indy cars (Danica Patrick)
Rock Climbing
Equestrian (1993 Belmont Stakes)
Ultras (Pam Reed won Badwater twice, plus there are others)
Possibly...
Gymnastics, sharpshooting, long-distance swimming
Ultras, not really - unless you are talking about really long, multi-day events (Badwater typically does not have elite men).
Another example is drag racing. Shirley Muldowney is ranked number 5 on the National Hot Rod Association's 50th Anniversary list of its Top 50 Drivers of all time.
man behind the pro wrote:
Wasn't there a link on here not long ago about a male tennis player, who was pro but ranked 50 or something, easily beat Serena in a couple of matches. I wouldn't be so quick to say tennis.
But again, the definition of sub-elite is elusive. I would consider a marathon runner with a best of 2:15 to be sub-elite. So the best woman marathoner could not beat the best sub-elite marathoner.
I think 2:18 to say 2:29 is elite. Come on, 2:15 is world class
Beryl Burton:
she is still the holder of the 12 hour record (277.25 miles, set in 1967). Her 1967 assault on the 12-hour time trial was the more remarkable for the fact that she was pitted against men, and the distance she covered in that time was 5 3/4 miles further than the British men's record at that time. Cycling folklore has it that as she passed the leading man she offered him a stick of liquorice as "the poor dear seemed to be struggling a bit".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/leeds/content/articles/2008/05/15/people_beryl_burton_feature.shtml
man behind the pro wrote:
Wasn't there a link on here not long ago about a male tennis player, who was pro but ranked 50 or something, easily beat Serena in a couple of matches. I wouldn't be so quick to say tennis.
No way the 50th ranked tennis player in the world is sub-elite. There is the main professional tour and there are satellite tours. If you can make a living off the sport (playing it, not teaching), then you are elite.
thejeff wrote:
Tennis.
That is all I can think of.
Old news, but:
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/australian-womens-national-team-lose-70-to-team-of-15yearold-boys-a3257266.html
No, most certainly not tennis.
Venus and Serena Williams played a guy ranked outside of the top 200 (Karsten Braasch) and were both blown away.
In nearly every tennis match conducted in this manner, there is some handicap placed to heavily favor the female player. For example, Bobby Riggs was well over 50+ and retired when he lost to King, and when Connors beat Navratilova, he was 40+ and only permitted 1 serve per point.
Chicks can never win - period.
I would not consider division one tennis players to be "sub-elite". They are "sub-sub-sub elite". Even most all american college tennis players would not even close to being ranked in the top 500. Division one tennis, unlike basketball, track, football, etc. is generally not a pathway to professional tennis. Very few college tennis players go on to have successful pro careers. There are exceptions, but they are, well, the exception. A good friend of mine who played at UNC and was their 2nd best player for a couple years a while back told me himself that he'd get crushed by any of the top female tennis players.
be serious wrote:
No way. A good college male player would crush any female pro, including the beast Serena.