New York prep girls far superior to their boys - Any other states with same issue?

If you look back a few years, the guys in NY were actually on par with the girls. They placed three teams in the top ten at NXN in 2014 and had a few all Americans at both NXN and Footlocker I believe. Last year the boys lacked a lot of team depth, but I think this year they could be a little better. The boys weren't necessarily bad last year-still better than most states. It's hard to say, but I think the FM girls set such a high standard for the rest of the state, which helps bring some more girls teams up. Just my observations anyway.

Kelsey Chmiel is quite good!

What does "relative to gender" mean in today's world?

Twitter SJW wrote:

What does "relative to gender" mean in today's world?

He's pointing out what all societies agree on: the fact that women are less skilled and inferior to men.

So we tell women that them running 4:40 for 1600 is as impressive as a 4:10 is for a guy. It's a lie, but it keeps them happy.

Same thing with female doctors, senators, authors, etc.

Why would girls being better be an "issue"?

OP is somethihg else wrote:

Twitter SJW wrote:

What does "relative to gender" mean in today's world?

He's pointing out what all societies agree on: the fact that women are less skilled and inferior to men.

So we tell women that them running 4:40 for 1600 is as impressive as a 4:10 is for a guy. It's a lie, but it keeps them happy.

Same thing with female doctors, senators, authors, etc.

And that's why nobody likes you.

How good are you relative to species?

Speaking of NY Preps - Is Mary Cain Update?

trollism wrote:

OP is somethihg else wrote:

He's pointing out what all societies agree on: the fact that women are less skilled and inferior to men.

So we tell women that them running 4:40 for 1600 is as impressive as a 4:10 is for a guy. It's a lie, but it keeps them happy.

Same thing with female doctors, senators, authors, etc.

And that's why nobody likes you.

Nobody likes him except the others who haven't soaked their head in equality and are not blinded to the fact that there is nothing equal or superior about any female athletic peroformance in any state at any level.

OP is somethihg else wrote:

He's pointing out what all societies agree on: the fact that women are less skilled and inferior to men.

Kd kdd,did,lelsle wrote:

Nobody likes him except the others who haven't soaked their head in equality and are not blinded to the fact that there is nothing equal or superior about any female athletic peroformance in any state at any level.

Do you not think any high school performances by males are impressive because compared to NCAA/pro they suck donkey balls?

Probably like that in most states. Its called football.

Pretty easy to figure out. Talented NY girls are ID'd as 12 year olds. The tradition of being good sparks running programs exposing their girls to talented individuals and how they train.

The girls are more mature, motivated, and usually thin. They see themselves winning races easily as there are big gaps in talent. Most good female HS runners are upper-middle class and are probably seeing Div.1 as realistic possibilities very early. All it takes is a few sub 18m times and a good stride and they are on their way to recruiting letters and years of hearing from coaches. Boys usually don't see this until after their Jr. years.

Stop Pre (pubescent) wrote:

Relative to gender the NY prep girls are a clear cut above the boys. What other states do we see this in and why?

New Hampshire is currently in a similar situation, with the girls XC being far ahead of the boys. Of course this is relative, since NH is a small state you won't see a lot of them at national level meets.

Realistically its just random variance. There also seems to be a larger gap between the girls in the times than the boys, the outliers seem to be a little more extreme in general.

Stop Pre (pubescent) wrote:

Relative to gender the NY prep girls are a clear cut above the boys. What other states do we see this in and why?

Not sure, but in private schools (in MI), the girls teams were generally way more successful than the boys compared to the public.

Since girls mature earlier it seems like when you have motivated ones they get closer to "national class" or NCAA times in HS. Where boys develop later they improve a ton in the 8 years of HS through the end of college.

The manley states? Where men are men and girls are too.

Girl preps from Iowa have been better for the most part than the boys in the last 15 or so years. Just look at NCAA champs Katie Flood, Shelby Houlihan, and Karissa Schweitzer, as well as a handful of NXN/Footlocker qualifiers. The boys have began to produce some top talent in the last 4 or so years, but not to the level of girls have.

Girls runners and teams have been far better in Oregon than the boys. Last year the state had two top 10 teams at one point in Jesuit and Sunset and Ember Stratton placed 2nd at nationals while she wasn't even the best runner on her team in track which proves that the competition is higher for girls than boys.