Should women be allowed to compete in track and field if their body fat percentage is less than 11%?

Oddly, this is where female competition is headed, which virtually spells the end of the women's division. Transgender athletes will eventually dominate the field, rendering it uninteresting and unnecessary.

NCAA wrestling already does similar stuff to this, for both sexes.

Women should stay home and make babies. Women's sports should be replaced by transwomen, with no hormone requirements.

Curious Gorge wrote:

Oddly, this is where female competition is headed, which virtually spells the end of the women's division. Transgender athletes will eventually dominate the field, rendering it uninteresting and unnecessary.

Wouldn't a minimum body fat percentage make it harder for trans women to compete in the female division?

Elvin wrote:

Curious Gorge wrote:

Oddly, this is where female competition is headed, which virtually spells the end of the women's division. Transgender athletes will eventually dominate the field, rendering it uninteresting and unnecessary.

Wouldn't a minimum body fat percentage make it harder for trans women to compete in the female division?

No. Biological men are much more competitive than women at 11% body fat.

Curious Gorge wrote:

Elvin wrote:

Wouldn't a minimum body fat percentage make it harder for trans women to compete in the female division?

No. Biological men are much more competitive than women at 11% body fat.

I'm not understanding your logic. My point was not that a biological male with a body fat of 11% does not have an advantage over a woman. My point was that a minimum body fat percentage of 11% would make it harder, not easier, for men to compete as females.

Explain why the 11% minimum would give biological males a larger advantage than they already have.

Elvin wrote:

Curious Gorge wrote:

No. Biological men are much more competitive than women at 11% body fat.

I'm not understanding your logic. My point was not that a biological male with a body fat of 11% does not have an advantage over a woman. My point was that a minimum body fat percentage of 11% would make it harder, not easier, for men to compete as females.

Explain why the 11% minimum would give biological males a larger advantage than they already have.

Simple. There are more biological men who can compete with women at 11%.

We allow women with dicks to compete, so body fat shouldn’t matter.

There seems to be a trans obsession on this board

The topic here is how to solve the current problem of unhealthy weight is female track

Yes, the same rule should apply to trans competing in the Female Category, even if technically it does not impact them the same way from a health standpoint. They would only need to live with this rule.

Hjsjsjsj wrote:

There seems to be a trans obsession on this board

As long as mentally ill men are allowed to compete against women, there should be discussion about them.

A radical approach would be to require all women to race at a weight of 120 pounds or above. Women who weigh less than 120 would have to carry weights. If I'm not mistaken, this is how they even the field with jockeys in horse racing.

Well for sure any woman with >11% bf should not be allowed to wear bunhuggers.

what is the bf% of the kenyans and ethiopeans?

Most elite female distance runners are between 7-1/2% and 10%. Problem is, what method must be used in determining %?

bcvb wrote:

Women should stay home and make babies.

That's an incredibly insensitive statement to make.

They're supposed to stay home and make sandwiches.

Hog wrote:

Most elite female distance runners are between 7-1/2% and 10%. Problem is, what method must be used in determining %?

You may have a point. I have read up on the accuracy of the low cost methods and they seem to be too inaccurate. The accurate methods seem to be cost prohibitive and impractical.

Given that most elite female runners are forced to carry dangerously low fat %, what could be done?

Maybe women should not e allowed to compete at elite levels in any distance events over 800m (until we can figure out an accurate, low cost method of calculating fat %). I don’t think that it’s a big deal. Realize that the Diamond League only goes up to the 3000m now, so it’s not as if women would be excluded from that many events.

Of course, women should still be allowed to participate in low key long distance events (where there is no pressure to carry low fat %).

What is Cain’s take/solution to this problem?

Hog wrote:

Most elite female distance runners are between 7-1/2% and 10%. Problem is, what method must be used in determining %?

No. This is not true. Essential body fat for women is between 10-13% typically. Perhaps there are some genetic outliers who can get below 10% but that is very much pushing it. 7% is pretty much out of the range of even the low range of normal. In fact, elite men are typically between 5-8%, so that would not even be outside of the range of an elite man.

Most elite female distance runners are more like 10.5-13%. Where does this nonsense and misinformation come from? FWIW most fit decent female recreational runners, say 2:55-3:20 marathoners have closer to 20% body fat, with some who are genetically leaner being closer to 15-18, and some being in the low 20s.

women shouldn't be allowed to compete in track and field period

random person # wrote:

Hog wrote:

Most elite female distance runners are between 7-1/2% and 10%. Problem is, what method must be used in determining %?

No. This is not true...

Most elite female distance runners are more like 10.5-13%. Where does this nonsense and misinformation come from? s.

Are you saying that Hassan (5foot 7 and 108 pounds) and Koko (5foot9 and 106 pounds) have 10.5% body fat? Or what about Rowbury, who is on lipoflow?

Not sure who is spreading misinformation here...