- Joined
- Nov 2, 2008
- Messages
- 22,046
For realz... at least some species the female kills the male right after mating. Human females keep the male mate alive and slowly torture them them to death.
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Why are women not rated 1000+ rated?
- Thread starter BlazedOrangeHat
- Start date
DiscgolfStu
Birdie Member
1950s called, wants it's shtick back.
Men and women aren't different? Do you need the birds and the bees talk? Or is that sexist as well?
Hayley Wickenheiser
- Widely regarded as the greatest female hockey player of all time
- Born into an athletic family (cousin Doug was 1st pick in the 1980 NHL draft)
- Began playing organized hockey at the earliest age (5)
- Played exclusively on male teams until the age of 13
- First woman to play on a pro men's team (3rd division Finish league)
- Career numbers in 3rd tier pro Euro leagues: 54GP, 3G, 11A, 14PTS
THUGNIFICENT763
Banned
Yup, back when I played hockey, if a girl was too skilled for girls' leagues, she skated on guys' teams. At least below Bantam level, which was non-checking. Wickenheiser was a really good player, way better than other women. Waaaaaaaay better. She played in Euro elite mens' leagues. The major thing that stopped her from playing NHL level is her lack of speed, but she could probably have done quite well as a stay-at-home defense-type role. I remember she was a card in EA NHL '13 and they had her at 86 Overall, which was the same as Anze Kopitar. That might be a touch aspirational hahahahaha. I would put her in the higher 60s to lower 70s. That is where most of the Euro league players that she would have been playing against are rated. But hey, she can beat up Patrick Kane...
There is a HUGE difference between Euro league players and players in 3rd tier of Finnish hockey league. Just sayin.
VictorB
* Ace Member *
Just because men and women are different doesn't mean that anyone is purposely trying to treat them differently.
Didn't someone even say in this thread that Des was pissed back in 2007/08 worlds when the women had different tees to play than the men? If anything, the PDGA is a great spot for women to be treated equally since they are allowed to play against the men if they so choose! Heck, they even get to play the exact same course/layout/tees at the same time. There are a ton of other sports where that just isn't going to happen no matter how bad they want to, or how good their skills are compared to the men. Physically, there will always be a gap. There is at the elite levels in every single sport. You can't deny biological differences.
We don't need to level the playing field. We don't need to get rid of gender protected divisions, as they are there for those that want them. We don't need women to play from shorter tees all the time, such as in ball golf - when men and women are playing the same course.
What do we need then? For everyone to play disc golf and not worry about gender being correlated directly to skill/rating/etc. I see it every day my wife and I get to play. I can outdrive her, with accuracy. Which is no surprise, as I'm stronger and have a more practiced technique; but many rounds she's hitting ICPs just as much if not at a higher rate than I am, and the only difference in our scores really is the difference in our drives. She's a good player no matter how far she drives (especially when she's practiced up). Her rating doesn't matter.
If people want to see a 1000 rated female player so badly, then implement a coefficient for ratings based on female gender. Otherwise, they can earn it just like any other male player. Level playing field.
My conclusion: On the FPO level, if the girls have the capability of driving good golf distances (325-350') then consistency has to be the key to them being rated better. It's a difference of 2-4 shots a round for the top girls to consistently see 1000 rated rounds. Once we have a full year of WDGT stats we can have concrete evidence where that consistency needs to come from.
sorry for the scatterbrained post. Haven't had my caffeine yet this morning :hfive:
corin_brown
Eagle Member
Don't wanna be a stickler but the guy said she played in a 3rd division "Finish" league. I know you didn't intend any offense, I just want to do my part to maintain the usual standards of accuracy, spelling and clarity found hear on DGCR and in every one of there threads.
In order to hold my end of the high standards of DGCR, I want to point out that it wasn't this guy who mentioned the 3rd division
ScottyLove
Double Eagle Member
I hate the whole physique excuse and not as strong crap. Sarah Hokom could kick Nikko's scrawny ass up and down the street if she wanted to. So why is rated higher than her? Because he's better and has better technique. It's very simple.
15 year old kids and crushing drives 500 feet because they have practiced and have good timing etc. and I'd beat them all up in a fight and I'm 50. Okay, maybe they'd kick my ass too, but the point is get better and you're rating will increase.
15 year old kids and crushing drives 500 feet because they have practiced and have good timing etc. and I'd beat them all up in a fight and I'm 50. Okay, maybe they'd kick my ass too, but the point is get better and you're rating will increase.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,855
The real reason:
Not enough bathrooms on every course.
Not enough bathrooms on every course.
VictorB
* Ace Member *
It's been shown in weightlifting and powerlifting that women are not as strong as men. Seriously, it's just a function of hormones and biology. That's why coefficients for scoring are used, not absolute weight lifted. That's how a 132lb woman can beat a 242lb man for best lifter award at the same meet, relative strength not raw strength.
Does Nikko have better technique off the tee than Paige? Maybe. Can you find a lot of flaws in either's technique? Probably not, and neither can I. What's the missing part of the equation? Simply skill? If it was only that, why aren't the most skilled women playing as well as the most skilled men? There are other parts to the equation that people are choosing to ignore. One of those variables absolutely is strength difference. How much of a factor this is has not been determined.
No one is arguing that 'getting better' will increase your rating. Just like if you lift weights, you'll get stronger. The centerpiece of the discussion is WHY there's a difference in the ratings of the elite men versus the elite women. A couple of strokes difference a round, but why hasn't that gap been closed?
Last edited:
It's comical that some people are not willing to accept physiological differences as fact. It's ok for boys and girls to be different.
corin_brown
Eagle Member
In order to hold my end of the high standards of DGCR, I want to point out that it wasn't this guy who mentioned the 3rd division
Lol, of course. Mea culpa. I was referencing to a post a few above Thug's.
For a while I've been thinking we need to change the putting rules in disc golf (No need to show balance, same rules from tee to basket) for 2 main reasons:
1) Simplification of rules and competitors having to make rulings
2) So that physically weaker players are not at a disadvantage (this can include children, women, men, disabled, and aging players)
For the sake of this conversation, do you think that women and girls would be better putters if they were able to follow through on their putts rather than have to show balance? I know that even as a 225lb athletic man I have to use more strength at 30' than I always want to (especially on uphill putts or raised baskets)
Are we giving men an advantage with this unnecessary rule?
1) Simplification of rules and competitors having to make rulings
2) So that physically weaker players are not at a disadvantage (this can include children, women, men, disabled, and aging players)
For the sake of this conversation, do you think that women and girls would be better putters if they were able to follow through on their putts rather than have to show balance? I know that even as a 225lb athletic man I have to use more strength at 30' than I always want to (especially on uphill putts or raised baskets)
Are we giving men an advantage with this unnecessary rule?
Females wouldn't gain any advantage, because everybody else would get that much better as well.
I don't see it that way. In the same way that a 3 point basketball shot takes less effort to get to the rim for a college male than it does for a 12 year old female-- so does a 30' putt. If you suddenly told basketball players they couldn't jump while shooting and must show balance, there would be a large advantage given to the stronger players.
I would be interested to hear from ladies on this, whether or not they would prefer to be able to follow through on their putts and use more whole-body strength.
DiscgolfStu
Birdie Member
I dont think anyone is arguing that. The argument is that in a sport like disc golf, where Eagle mcMahon and Paul McBeth can dominate, physical prowess is not the deciding factor for being good at it. Anyone can be good at it if they practice hard enough.
I find it comical that there's so many guys here whose panties are in a knot over the thought of girls being able to compete with them.
I have no problem getting beat by the ladies. I've been doing it all my life.
Just because Eagle and Paul don't LOOK physically imposing doesn't mean they aren't, especially when compared to the ladies. There's far more to athletic ability than the eye test.
Similar threads
