Hacker News Reader

Comment by js2 | Hacker News Reader

I don't know why you brought up records, especially sub-ultra. I admitted that: "Women semi-regularly win multi-day and 100+ mile races, even if women don't have course records at these times/distances."

I've run dozens of marathons, multiple 100 milers, and several 12-hour and 24-hour events. You can be the strongest, most prepared person in the world, and it very much might not matter because of how many things can go south in such an event compared to shorter races.

Yes, these events have fewer participants, but nonetheless, even at the most of elite of these events, sometimes women win, and it's not always because the best man didn't show up that day. Big's Backyard Ultra attracts the best in the world, but it was won by a woman in 2019 and 2020.

View on HN

> I don't know why you brought up records, especially sub-ultra.

To point out the performance difference is universal across all distances/speeds.

> and it very much might not matter because of how many things can go south in such an event compared to shorter races.

So your argument is now RNG plays a bigger role so eventually they'll score a win by luck?

> Yes, these events have fewer participants, but nonetheless, even at the most of elite of these events, sometimes women win, and it's not always because the best man didn't show up that day. Big's Backyard Ultra attracts the best in the world, but it was won by a woman in 2019 and 2020.

Are you arguing for me or against me with this line. That's basically a perfect example of the argument I used in my first paragraph.

It's not just RNG. Men are known to have more variance so top record holder can be a very different spread than the 10th best person of each gender.

> So your argument is now RNG plays a bigger role so eventually they'll score a win by luck?

Uh, no. His argument is that the ~10% or so superiority you're fighting so hard to claim is no longer enough to have dominate sway over the overall outcome. Other factors, not random.

I'm not trying to argue with you at all. I feel like you think I made some claim about women being stronger or faster than men, when I very specifically did not.

My only point was that women can sometimes win and/or set records at prestigious endurance events when factors other than strength/speed are relatively more likely to influence the outcome. Such as this record right here: rowing from CA to HI.

Obviously the more elite men in the competition, the less likely this is to occur. But I'm not talking about a small local 10K where a sub-elite woman happens to show up and there's no comparably competitive men and the woman wins overall. I mean events where men and women of comparable competitiveness show up, but a woman just outlasts a man that day due to grit or better preparation or better planning or whatever the factors happen to be. All I'm saying is: the longer events give women more opportunity to win those races, regardless of event size.

I have an acquaintance I've raced with a few times. I've got the better marathon time, but she's got the better 24-hour distance. It's cool that we can both have those wins. That's all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com