# Olympics: Women + snowboard tricks = Huh?



## aguy (Feb 10, 2014)

I'm an infrequent snowboarder and don't enjoy trick riding. I'm also old and never tried a jump as large as the Olympics slopestyle jumps.

It seems like the girls were outside of their comfort zone. Could someone who does these slopstyle jumps explain to me why all these girls are losing their air balance in the semifinals and flailing their arms like they just started doing these jumps a month ago? What am I missing? I get flailing the arms will help them land properly, preventing injury, but even with flailing they were wiping out. Do landing these jumps require a lot of strength? Do women just not have this strength? Do they all just "have to" wipe out, because they can't take the force or something?

I guess if strength is the issue, the jumps would be smaller, which would make sense they wouldn't have enough air time to complete a 1080 and 720 is a monster jump, so are the jumps smaller for women? Why is a 540 and barely landing it such an accomplishment (at the Olympic level)?

I also know nothing about what gets someone qualified for the Olympics. Do the winners from local (national) competitions get to go and there just isn't a lot of competition among the women and so the standards are lower? 

If competition is an issue? Why wouldn't a woman just train with the men? Like if I was a woman, interested at an Olympic I guess that gets into why do the tricks at all? I see it as gratification of outperforming one's self. Like adding an extra turn in some direction. The female halfpipe competition was even more surprising.


----------



## Jason (Feb 15, 2011)

I saw one girl catch her heel edge pretty bad. She cracked her helmet, I'll be shocked if she didn't get a concussion.


----------



## Pigpen (Feb 3, 2013)

Jason said:


> I saw one girl catch her heel edge pretty bad. She cracked her helmet, I'll be shocked if she didn't get a concussion.



I saw that, insane. She was knocked out for about 20 seconds. Surprised she got up.

And I agree with OP, been a LOT more arm flailing and "air swimming" thus far in the Olympics. Need more grabs and longer grabs


----------



## kaborkian (Feb 1, 2010)

JPOW said:


> I saw that, insane. She was knocked out for about 20 seconds. Surprised she got up.
> 
> And I agree with OP, been a LOT more arm flailing and "air swimming" thus far in the Olympics. Need more grabs and longer grabs


Yea, definitely KTFO Until she stopped sliding. I was amazed she rode down on her own. Concussion for sure.


----------



## CassMT (Mar 14, 2013)

a lot less of that in the final it seemed...but i think it was one of the biggest , toughest courses ever..tight rail section and frikkn huge jumps, i think they handled it well

some women were asking for a smaller course, and some were demanding to ride the same as mens...oviously the latter won out. the biggest voice for riding the mens was Spencer Obrien, who ironically got 10th


----------



## Lowlyffe (Jun 8, 2011)

The women usually do just fine on slope and pipe. This competition has been an anomaly. Maybe its the conditions? As you may have heard Sochi doesnt get much if any real snow from what I have heard. Almost all the snow you see is manmade and imported from other parts of the country. So it is possible its the conditions/grooming that could be causing it. In general, women dont get as much speed or air as the men, but they do tend to be very clean.


----------



## Varza (Jan 6, 2013)

Lowlyffe said:


> The women usually do just fine on slope and pipe. This competition has been an anomaly. Maybe its the conditions? As you may have heard Sochi doesnt get much if any real snow from what I have heard. Almost all the snow you see is manmade and imported from other parts of the country. So it is possible its the conditions/grooming that could be causing it. In general, *women dont get as much speed or air as the men*, but they do tend to be very clean.


Why is that? I have always been sure that there are some biomechanical reasons for women not going as fast, or as high as the men(the major one that comes to mind is the weight difference). Am I right or sorely mistaken?


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Take this from someone who hasn’t seen any other slopestyle contests and has missed the men's ones (sometimes I hate the closed-minded patriotic selection of broadcasting channel... no Swiss in the final? then we won't show it. mehmehmeh.), so I have no reference to compare to. Three Swiss girls in the final, thus the women’s slopestyle was broadcasted.

And I have to say, I was taken aback. No ten horses would bring me to even only _try_ to get on a – very low - rail, no way! Must be a very painful learning curve till you can keep balance on such stuff. And then seeing those (astonishingly sweet) rather petite girls tackling those fricking huge rollers! :blink: They seem to have an additional gland... I’m full of admiration :bowdown:


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

That course is very tight. Quite a few of guys couldn't get lined up in time and bailed out


----------



## Karpediem (Aug 29, 2007)

Yeah something with that course was off. I can't recall seeing so many people land so far down on the landings...it was either the first or second one. Even some of the girls were doing it.


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

neni said:


> ....And then seeing those (astonishingly sweet) rather petite girls tackling those fricking huge rollers! :blink: *They seem to have an additional gland... *I’m full of admiration :bowdown:


...or two of them if you ask me!! . And Big Brass ones at that! 

So far the women's slope style is the only event I've been able to catch.so I can't compare the men to women. I noticed that some of the jumps looked less than,... steezy? As well. _But_, I also saw a few of the ladies flat out _STOMP_ their landings too! And the Czech girl that heel slammed? Fricking split her helmet in two and got up to ride it out!!!!

All those ladies have my respect and admiration! :thumbsup:


----------



## CassMT (Mar 14, 2013)




----------



## Big Foot (Jan 15, 2013)

Having watched both the men's and women's final, I can say that the top 3 women weren't even close to the last place guys. There is a huge gap in ability between the guys and girls. I'm not really sure why. I will say though that even the worst women in the comp were infinately better than I'll ever be in my life, so I can't knock them.


----------



## Casual (Feb 9, 2011)

CassMT said:


> the biggest voice for riding the mens was Spencer Obrien, who ironically got 10th


True but if she landed her run she easily could have won, just a small mistake caused by going too big.



Big Foot said:


> There is a huge gap in ability between the guys and girls. I'm not really sure why.


Name one sport where this isn't true. Men are bigger, stronger and naturally more athletic than women, thats why they don't compete against each other.


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

Casual said:


> Name one sport where this isn't true. Men are bigger, stronger and naturally more athletic than women, thats why they don't compete against each other.


Shooting, archery, equestrian


----------



## Casual (Feb 9, 2011)

Bones said:


> Shooting, archery, equestrian


Equestrian can't possibly count, thats like saying video games since the horse is the athlete.

Shooting? Maybe.

Archery? Men shoot at 90m, woman at 70m...


----------



## JamesX (Feb 26, 2012)

Even in shooting men blow women away.

I think the world record for 50m male is over 1000 points, for female is 700.

Testosterone is a pretty big advantage.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Casual said:


> Equestrian can't possibly count, thats like saying video games since the horse is the athlete.


We've a winner in the "most ignorant post of the week" contest


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Women are not as athletic as men. Period.

On any thing where strenght isnt the main deciding factor, women are much closer.

It's no big deal. Men can't have babies. Nature ain't dumb.

I find people waste their time arguing about equality... the genders are not equal, they (should) have equal rights, but we're not totally equal. Thankfully!!


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

JamesX said:


> Even in shooting men blow women away.


Except when women have won gold and silver in '76 and '92 in the Open.

In Olympic archery, everyone shoots from the same distance and the top woman would have medalled in the men's if total score was used instead of head-to-head.


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

Casual said:


> Equestrian can't possibly count, thats like saying video games since the horse is the athlete.
> 
> Shooting? Maybe.
> 
> Archery? Men shoot at 90m, woman at 70m...


_Dude!!!!! _ :storm:

There are at least two female SBF members who ride and compete in equestrian events who you just threw down the gauntlet to!!! I REPEAT,.. :storm:

Do you _SERIOUSLY_ think it's _easy_ to ride and control 1200+ pounds of muscle and sinew??? That it's The Horse doing all the work??? Wtf? If anything, female equestrians are better riders and athletes than any male for being able to ride control their horses in spite of being generally smaller and less muscular. 

Not to mention, I've seen some females in the service and up in the far north, that I guarantee you would NOT, want to tangle with! :laugh: :eusa_clap:

Juss sayin'!!! :dunno:


----------



## Oldman (Mar 7, 2012)

F1EA said:


> Women are not as athletic as men. Period.


And we have the second most ignorant statement of the week. They are INDEED as athletic as men.

It is all relative!!!!!!!!!!!! You cannot compare apples to oranges. Within their own relm, women are as athletic as men in every way.

What you can say is that they are not equal in physical size. 

You CANNOT compare their athletic performances and define one as better than the other.

Why the hell do you think they have Men's & Women's events. 

Even the dumb asses at the International Sports Governing Bodies and the IOC figured that out.


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Oldman said:


> And we have the second most ignorant statement of the week. They are INDEED as athletic as men.
> 
> It is all relative!!!!!!!!!!!! You cannot compare apples to oranges. Within their own relm, women are as athletic as men in every way.
> 
> ...


Not sure if you realize.... but you're contradicting yourself.


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

F1EA said:


> Not sure if you realize.... but you're contradicting yourself.


Not really.

In any activity where mass gives you advantage, then the bigger participant will always have an advantage. The difference then becomes the skill that each participant has (usually called athleticism) As long as the participants are close in mass, then speed, time or distance is a reasonably accurate measurement of athleticism. If there is a big difference in mass (ie between men and women), then these measurements become a less accurate way of measuring "athleticism"


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

F1EA said:


> Not sure if you realize.... but you're contradicting yourself.


No he isn't. "Athletic" doesn't translate into "stronger" or "faster". Women can't compete head to head with men in most physical sports, but that doesn't mean men are "more athletic". Granted it's splitting hairs, but words have meanings.

A woman who is at the top of her field, who trains just as hard as the male equivalent, is just as athletic, even if her hundred-meter time is a second slower.


----------



## CassMT (Mar 14, 2013)

this thread sure took a shit...women are rad.


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

Donutz said:


> A woman who is at the top of her field, who trains just as hard as the male equivalent, is just as athletic, even if her hundred-meter time is a second slower.


There was a study attempting to compare the driving abilities of bobsled drivers. All about comparing speed differences entering and exiting turns (the theory being that better drivers lost less speed). The results generally came in that experience and fine motor skills were the defining factors, but that there was little difference between the genders at the same comparison points. The big difference was the initial speed, but good driver was a good driver.

Unfortunately, for the women, there is not a medal for driving ability as some can do more with less than some men.


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Bones said:


> Not really.
> 
> In any activity where mass gives you advantage, then the bigger participant will always have an advantage. The difference then becomes the skill that each participant has (usually called athleticism) As long as the participants are close in mass, then speed, time or distance is a reasonably accurate measurement of athleticism. If there is a big difference in mass (ie between men and women), then these measurements become a less accurate way of measuring "athleticism"


Ok, men and women are equal. It's all about mass. That explains why Travis Rice would absolutely blow Gigi ruf, max Parrot and Jake blauvelt in any competition they may enter together.

Have a nice day.


----------



## Joe77 (Feb 7, 2013)

Varza said:


> Why is that? I have always been sure that there are some biomechanical reasons for women not going as fast, or as high as the men(the major one that comes to mind is the weight difference). Am I right or sorely mistaken?


I noticed that the women speed check more aggressively before hitting the jumps so it's probably not about the weight but what they are capable and comfortable doing.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Joe77 said:


> I noticed that the women speed check more aggressively before hitting the jumps so it's probably not about the weight but what they are capable and comfortable doing.


Seing the slow motion of the landings I often thought, wow, they get pretty roughly folded from the impact of the landing. Is having less core muscles to absorb the landing impact limiting the hight? I.e. they _could_ get more air but avoid it due to the too high landing impact?


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

Bones said:


> There was a study attempting to compare the driving abilities of bobsled drivers. All about comparing speed differences entering and exiting turns (the theory being that better drivers lost less speed). The results generally came in that experience and fine motor skills were the defining factors, but that there was little difference between the genders at the same comparison points. The big difference was the initial speed, but good driver was a good driver.
> 
> Unfortunately, for the women, there is not a medal for driving ability as some can do more with less than some men.


In other words, where muscle mass isn't as much of a factor, there isn't as much of a difference. BTW, just to clear that up a bit, men are not only bigger overall but also have a higher percentage muscle. So to answer the questions about landings -- yes, males generally can take a harder landing. Also because more muscle will support/brace bones better, men can take harder hits (esp around the ribs) without breaking something, even allowing for bone density.


----------



## Casual (Feb 9, 2011)

neni said:


> We've a winner in the "most ignorant post of the week" contest


Not really. My point is the horse is the one jumping and running, not the rider therefore the playing field is level between men and woman.




chomps1211 said:


> _Dude!!!!! _ :storm:
> 
> There are at least two female SBF members who ride and compete in equestrian events who you just threw down the gauntlet to!!! I REPEAT,.. :storm:
> 
> ...


lol w/e, calm the fuck down I didn't say it doesn't take skill I said the horse is the athlete.

Anyways point is that in most sports, snowboarding included, men compete at a higher level due to overal strength, size and speed. It's not really debateable.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Casual said:


> Not really. My point is the horse is *the one jumping and running, not the rider* therefore the playing field is level between men and woman.


And the rider is what? Just sitting? 
With this logic, with downhill skiing it's not the guy who's the athlete since the skis do the gliding and F1 drivers are no athletes cos the engine is doing the work.
Merry-go-round... 

BTW: don't want to argue. I - like every equestrian - am used to such prejustices by friends n family. They stop after having had a 15min lunging lesson


----------



## Casual (Feb 9, 2011)

neni said:


> And the rider is what? Just sitting?
> With this logic, with downhill skiing it's not the guy who's the athlete since the skis do the gliding and F1 drivers are no athletes cos the engine is doing the work.
> Merry-go-round...
> 
> BTW: don't want to argue. I - like every equestrian - am used to such prejustices by friends n family. They stop after having had a 15min lunging lesson


I understand the equastrian thing has struck a chord with you and I get that but you are missing the point. If being bigger and stronger mattered then men would have an advantage but in fact being smaller and lighter as well as skilled and physically fit are advantageous for equestrian.

No matter how athletic the rider is it is still the horse that has to jump, you can't possibly deny that. If the horse is a piece of shit the best rider in the world is going to lose, man or woman.

Btw yes, I agree, there is no reason woman cannot compete in F1 provided they are strong enough to drive the car for a few hours. The skiing comment though, no way... those guys have massive quads and they use them all the way down.


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

Casual said:


> Not really. My point is the horse is the one jumping and running, not the rider therefore the playing field is level between men and woman.
> 
> lol w/e, calm the fuck down I didn't say it doesn't take skill I said the horse is the athlete.


Lol w/e,.. your own bad self! :laugh: I'm _quite_ calm! But that doesn't alter the fact that your statement is still wrong!

You're obviously not a rider of horses! Several occasions in my life where I was the most beat up I've _EVER_ felt, was after a few hours of hard horseback riding! Competitive riding takes not only skill, but strength and endurance! _"I"_ was just riding for fun! No jumping, no racing, just enjoying an afternoon galloping around on a stable horse!

I won't argue the "men are stronger" point. With some obvious exceptions, yes! In general men are bigger, stronger,.. etc. etc! -meh-

And I whole heartedly agree with what was stated earlier in this thread by another member,...

....Women _are_ "AWESOME!" * Vive la difference!!* :yahoo: :bowdown: :yahoo:


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

Donutz said:


> In other words, where muscle mass isn't as much of a factor, there isn't as much of a difference.


Actually, it is all about how you define "athletic" and how your chosen sport measures itself.

The best boxer isn't always the heavyweight. But if boxing didn't have weight classes, heavyweights would win all the medals. The idiots on here would have you believe that the featherweights aren't really athletes because they compete in a different category.


----------



## kaner3sixteen (Feb 15, 2013)

Casual said:


> No matter how athletic the rider is it is still the horse that has to jump, you can't possibly deny that. If the horse is a piece of shit the best rider in the world is going to lose, man or woman.


well, that's incorrect. the best rider's in the world will get an extra dimension from a bad horse, whereas you could put a complete novice on a great horse and they'd lose badly. In equestrian, course planning and management are just as important as the horses ability to run and jump, as knowing where and how to position the horse to jump is vital. also, it takes a lot of physical prowess to be able to communicate what you want the horse to do. It's not just a case of "point him at the fence and he'll do what he needs to do". 

I've seen the best riders in the world competing, men and women, and to be honest, size and strength are often negated by the physical ability to finesse a horse around the course. it's not a case of "strongest = best", it's a case of knowing what physicality is needed and then being able to translate that to the horse. you can legitimately compare a male rider like Ben Maher or Michael Whitaker to a female like Ellen Whitaker or Beezie Madden.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

Casual said:


> I understand the equastrian thing has struck a chord with you and I get that but you are missing the point. If being bigger and stronger mattered then men would have an advantage but in fact being smaller and lighter as well as skilled and physically fit are advantageous for equestrian.
> 
> No matter how athletic the rider is it is still the horse that has to jump, you can't possibly deny that. If the horse is a piece of shit the best rider in the world is going to lose, man or woman.


Yes, I probably misinterpreted your initial "the horse is the athlete" by mentally adding "and the rider is none". Agree with being athletic is necessary to a certain level but after that, a plus in strength won't make you faster/higher/better and only skills will achieve that. I guess, I get your point. Written language...


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Bones said:


> Actually, it is all about how you define "athletic" and how your chosen sport measures itself.
> 
> The best boxer isn't always the heavyweight. But if boxing didn't have weight classes, heavyweights would win all the medals. The idiots on here would have you believe that the featherweights aren't really athletes because they compete in a different category.


Spot on! That's why in all sports with weight classes they have men and women competing together.


----------



## snowklinger (Aug 30, 2011)

TLDR but Women OWN THE FUCK out of Curling.

Men's curling is complete dogshit, you can practically smell it through the tv.

Women's curling is a gift from god.


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

F1EA said:


> Spot on! That's why in all sports with weight classes they have men and women competing together.


Oh really...name them


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

Bones said:


> Oh really...name them


Yeah, I'm a little perplexed by that comment too.


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

That was sarcasm.
Because even if they had similar mass (ie going by weight class) there's still none of those sports which makes men and women compete agaisnt eachother.

Again, there's MANY activities in which women are better/equal etc than men, but athletic-type sports is not one of them. And even when they are not equally matched, women's sports are just as if not even more engaging... like tennis, volleyball, snowboarding... to name a few.

I think in the case of slopestyle, the women's contest was screwed by trying to go on the same run as men.... frankly, had the women been on a scaled down course, it would have been awesome to watch. 
I'm part of the audience who definitely does not need 80ft jumps and triple corks to enjoy the sport. But again, this falls back at people going the extra mile to show women and men are equal, when they are not, and it's frustrating. Vive la difference!


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

F1EA said:


> but athletic-type sports is not one of them.


Just what is an "athletic-type sport" to your way of thinking? Sports that aren't judged? Or is it only sports that are measured? or only sports that have head to head competition?


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

Bones said:


> Just what is an "athletic-type sport" to your way of thinking? Sports that aren't judged? Or is it only sports that are measured? or only sports that have head to head competition?


pretty sure that means sports that require physical exertion vs non-athletic "sports" like shooting or bowling or maybe golf which require skill to be good but not physical excellence.


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

Bones said:


> Just what is an "athletic-type sport" to your way of thinking? Sports that aren't judged? Or is it only sports that are measured? or only sports that have head to head competition?


Formula 1, Tennis, Snowboarding, Football, baseball, hockey, weight lifting, boxing, judo, tae kwon do, basketball, swimming (like speed/distance, not choreography), to name a few... not sure how to perfectly define athletic-type sports, so maybe sports where physical strenght/fitness plays a major part?

Doesnt mean the women's version of any of those are not as engaging/interesting... just that if men and women competed in those head to head or even part of a team, the men would win. Even at similar weight; which is also a moot point because men are generally bigger than women. So there's no point in saying "all things being equal, women would..." because all things are not equal.

So yea... it sounds chauvinist or whatever, but it isn't. And to make it more relevant, yep i think the female slopestylers should have ran a different course (or the same with some variations)....


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

ShredLife said:


> pretty sure that means sports that require physical exertion vs non-athletic "sports" like shooting or bowling or maybe golf which require skill to be good but not physical excellence.


Yup. That ^

I wouldn't even say physical excellence, but at least high-demand physical performance. Shooting, figure skating etc still require physical performance, but it is not the deciding factor.


----------



## Bones (Feb 24, 2008)

F1EA said:


> Yup. That ^
> 
> I wouldn't even say physical excellence, but at least high-demand physical performance. Shooting, figure skating etc still require physical performance, but it is not the deciding factor.


So figure skaters, gymnasts, baseball players, car drivers, ski jumpers, golfers, shooters, archers, sailors, etc. aren't athletes in your mind because they excel in an activity that you don't think requires high-demand physical activity? Like the ability to slow your heart-rate at will and shoot between heartbeats? or to be able withstand hours of high G forces and still preform fine-motor skill tasks better than anyone on the planet? Or to train for year to achieve incredible acts of flexibility and spatial control, but because the activity isn't heavily cardio or strength oriented, they aren't athletes? Like slopeside is somehow different than gymnastics? Like half-pipe is so much different than trampoline?


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

Therrrrrre baaaaa-ack!

OP's _one_ post troll, seems to be a smashing success! :blink:
I believe this forum has _another_ vermin infestation. 

DCsnow reincarnated?


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

:rolls eyes: I said... to name a few.



> OP's one post troll, seems to be a smashing success!
> I believe this forum has another vermin infestation.


Oh shit we was trolled!!


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

Bones said:


> So figure skaters, gymnasts, baseball players, car drivers, ski jumpers, golfers, shooters, archers, sailors, etc. aren't athletes in your mind because they excel in an activity that you don't think requires high-demand physical activity? Like the ability to slow your heart-rate at will and shoot between heartbeats? or to be able withstand hours of high G forces and still preform fine-motor skill tasks better than anyone on the planet? Or to train for year to achieve incredible acts of flexibility and spatial control, but because the activity isn't heavily cardio or strength oriented, they aren't athletes? Like slopeside is somehow different than gymnastics? Like half-pipe is so much different than trampoline?


----------



## stickz (Feb 6, 2013)

I remember last summer Olympics I saw a statistic that said within like 20-30 years women will be faster than men. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## Hank Scorpio (Oct 3, 2013)

Lol how did this thread get filled with so many whiteknights and male apologists?

*Men are overall better athletes than women. Period. It's an undeniable fact.*

The "no, they're just different" argument only holds water if you inherently hold women to a lower standard... which in turn, completely invalidates that theory while also highlighting the fact that they can't hold a torch to men athletically MOST of the time.

This isn't sexism or chauvinism either; there are differences between sexes in all of nature and that doesn't make one "better" or "worse", it just is. 

How so many men have been brainwashed by feminism, liberalism, and hell, even corporate marketing to believe any of this "Women are strong, proud warriors who are just as great as men athletically and there's nothing these goddesses can't do!" crap is ridiculous.

*As far as snowboarding goes in particular, it should tell you something that with the way judging has been for 4+ years now, if LITERALLY ONE female rider learned to stomp a double cork in either slopestyle or superpipe, she'd win just about every contest she entered...... so why is it that NONE of them has locked down a double yet?*

Really ask yourself why Jamie Anderson just won Gold at the Olympics with virtually the EXACT same run she's been doing for 5 YEARS now... a run which, by the way, couldn't have won a men's competition even in the last millennium. 

Just saying, I like watching women riders but they're not even close to being at the same level competitively as men, they don't push their boundaries the way the men do, and their side of the sport is suffering from a serious lack of progression.


----------



## stickz (Feb 6, 2013)

why didn't the chick that did a 1080 win? isn't it about the best tricks 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## aguy (Feb 10, 2014)

neni said:


> Seing the slow motion of the landings I often thought, wow, they get pretty roughly folded from the impact of the landing. Is having less core muscles to absorb the landing impact limiting the hight? I.e. they _could_ get more air but avoid it due to the too high landing impact?


This is exactly what I saw and was inquiring about. It seemed the jumps were too big for them as almost all were air swimming. There was one competitor that did a 1080, but was shocked she landed it (I'm 98% sure the last turn was unexpected). 

I would expect they would be fairly well-versed in the competition, and thus, prepared for the jumps. However, it sounds like there may be some sort of dispute about the size these jumps should be in the IOC? To be perfectly honest, I never watch these sort of competitions either (like X-games, no sat/cable), so I wasn't sure if this was normal.



chomps1211 said:


> Therrrrrre baaaaa-ack!
> 
> OP's _one_ post troll, seems to be a smashing success! :blink:
> I believe this forum has _another_ vermin infestation.
> ...


No, I didn't mean to troll. I'm not a regular and hoped to dip into your forum's collective wisdom. I think you guys may have started to troll yourselves with trying to define words and the argument over the horses. 

I was more interested in why the competition looked really unimpressive. I mean girls are built for flexibility and are traditionally better acrobats, so balance, twisting, and contorting in air are all things women can do better than men. I would expect their control in the air to be better, even if their jumps weren't as high, limiting air time. That's why I figured strength must be a larger factor than I realized and hoped to get feedback from people who do these size of jumps or setup tournament conditions for men/women. 

As an example for the fear/boldness factor, the downhill women skiers are pretty hardcore (I don't ski). I just point them out because they don't seem to be holding back; that is, I'm pretty impressed watching their speed and control. However because women have less strength, the run is 30% shorter than the men's. I'm guessing this allows them to go 100% rather than 80% for the full men's run.

I guess I was hoping to get feedback from someone why may setup these kind of tournaments/jumps or compete in them and what kind of effort goes into it or if there are even enough serious female competitors to have local competitions; limiting exposure to the sport.


----------



## aguy (Feb 10, 2014)

stickz said:


> why didn't the chick that did a 1080 win? isn't it about the best tricks


She botched the landing. As I remember it, she had to stabilize herself by pushing against the ground as she landed. Also, as I said in my previous comment, I'm not sure she even tried for a 1080. It seemed she over-rotated and ended up doing a 1080 by accident.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

aguy said:


> There was one competitor that did a 1080, but was shocked she landed it (I'm 98% sure the last turn was unexpected).





aguy said:


> Also, as I said in my previous comment, I'm not sure she even tried for a 1080. It seemed she over-rotated and ended up doing a 1080 by accident.


It was a Swiss girl, thus interviewed frequently for our Swiss channel. She was asked several times if she'll try her key jump - the 1080 - albeit the injury (herniated disc) in summer, and she commented to feel good today and may try. Thus I'd say it was intended.


BTW: sorry for the sidetracks. Got too agitated by the athlete/non-athlete horse thing  
I'm also honestly interested in where differences arise. But somehow questions as why men/women are better in this and that always end up in a sexism/chauvinism quarrel, although everyone is aware of differences. I've dared once to ask in an other forum for studies investigating biomechanical differences between ethnicities (having e.g. Kenian marathon runners in mind) and ended up being called a racist - ridiculous in so many ways :dizzy:


----------



## wrathfuldeity (Oct 5, 2007)

Just watched the women's ski slopestyle and it looked to me that the course was a bit too big; seemed that they could not get enough speed and were landing a bit short. I know my daughter 5'4" and 125 says when she has done a few jumps with the guys, she has to point it and often without checks so that she can clear the knuckle verses guys develop more speed due to more mass/weight...which imo is just a physics thing.


----------



## snowklinger (Aug 30, 2011)

wrathfuldeity said:


> Just watched the women's ski slopestyle and it looked to me that the course was a bit too big; seemed that they could not get enough speed and were landing a bit short. I know my daughter 5'4" and 125 says when she has done a few jumps with the guys, she has to point it and often without checks so that she can clear the knuckle verses guys develop more speed due to more mass/weight...which imo is just a physics thing.


not sure how that stands up though as alot of the top guys are tiny little midgets.

Halldor probably only weighs #135 with a backpack full of 40's...


----------



## MelC (Mar 6, 2012)

While I realize that we have already crapped all over the skiing long jump in another thread, interestingly there isn't much disparity between the genders there. Lighter is better and the women apparently often out land the men. Right now it looks like men have a marginal advantage but when one factors in the smaller opportunities for female competition and sport development that margin may well disappear now that it has some substance as an official olympic sport for women. I was reading about it in Outside or Popular Science recently. Here is a link to another article I quickly googled just now. http://www.businessinsider.com/men-women-ski-jumping-comparison-2014-2. The real question is then since women can get as much air as men on a jump, extrapolating, why haven't we progressed the other jump/trick sports more as everyone here has commented. Makes you wonder if it is physics or sociology.


----------



## hardasacatshead (Aug 21, 2013)

wrathfuldeity said:


> Just watched the women's ski slopestyle and it looked to me that the course was a bit too big; seemed that they could not get enough speed and were landing a bit short. I know my daughter 5'4" and 125 says when she has done a few jumps with the guys, she has to point it and often without checks so that she can clear the knuckle verses guys develop more speed due to more mass/weight...which imo is just a physics thing.


I think the issue with the speed in that even is more the fact that the conditions are just shit. It looks like spring slush on that hill.


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 25, 2013)

neni said:


> no Swiss in the final? then we won't show it. mehmehmeh.), so I have no reference to compare to. Three Swiss girls in the final, thus the women’s slopestyle was broadcasted.


You can see full competitions video here:
Snowboard - Sochi 2014 Olympics


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> You can see full competitions video here:
> Snowboard - Sochi 2014 Olympics


OK, at the risk of looking like a _complete_ moron,... _WTF am I missing?_ I've been all over that link and I can't find a single video for the men's _or_ women's slope style??? When I hit the only link that says "video" it's just interview video of ppl attending the events!

I must be interwebz illiterate! That, or suffering from webzpage dyslexia. :dunno:


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 25, 2013)

chomps1211 said:


> OK, at the risk of looking like a _complete_ moron,... _WTF am I missing?_ I've been all over that link and I can't find a single video for the men's _or_ women's slope style??? When I hit the only link that says "video" it's just interview video of ppl attending the events!
> 
> I must be interwebz illiterate! That, or suffering from webzpage dyslexia. :dunno:


Well, the website is really sucks. And it is not translated properly. It is a real shame.

But if you want to find video of competitions you should go:
Icon of the sport in the top (snowboard for example) -> Schedule and results -> Broadcast button near event you want to see.

For example Men's Slopestyle Qualification from 6th february:
http://www.sochi2014.com/en/video-broadcasting?id=1633079


----------



## chomps1211 (Mar 30, 2011)

Hey, Thanks for trying to help and posting that direct link! Unfortunately, looks like the content is blocked for viewing in the US! :dunno:


----------



## trapper (Jan 15, 2013)

chomps1211 said:


> Hey, Thanks for trying to help and posting that direct link! Unfortunately, looks like the content is blocked for viewing in the US! :dunno:


The land of the free right? Really it should be the land of the corporate profits and ad revenue.


----------



## everest (Jan 20, 2009)

This argument always seems to pop up every now and again either as a legit post or troll post and I have a slightly different take on the matter though whether or not it holds any real merit is up in the air. :dunno: It is a long winded theory full of grammatical errors.:thumbsup:

Progression seems to come out of a couple different factors-competition, exposure and money. Men tend to not really care about themselves and will willfully huck themselves off things to impress or otherwise get noticed and or for the sheer stupidity (ie. fun) of it. This gains them notoriety and entrance into the contest scene, magazines and films along with sponsors and some money. Other guys see this and want in on it, so naturally they step up to do something bigger than the last guy and so forth and so forth. The bigger these guys go, the more rewards/exposure they get so more and more guys try for the top. This translates to a contest scene that consists of guys who are doing huge spin numbers and triple cork this and that out of sheer necessity to stay in the spotlight. 

Women on the other hand, have seen a slower progression due to them not having had, nor received the same level of exposure/competition/money because they are/have been compared to the men in terms of tricks and abilities and not on their own merit. This causes a lack of the one-upmanship because there are not enough incentives to do so and there is no point in getting hurt for such small rewards. This translates to a contest scene that is more about just doing enough to beat out the others rather than having to go all out. 

These past couple of years has seen more progression and it is only going to get better. Anna Gasser has landed a cab 900 double cork, Torah Bright has been attempting the double cork in pipe for a while, unsure if successful yet. Sina Candrian landed the first 1080 in women's competition and has been practicing it for a while. Not to mention the urban scene in which the peep show girls are throwing the hammer down on the rails. 

As much as I dislike how the Olympic snowboarding is run I will say that it brings great exposure to the world and hopefully we will see a lot more progression in the coming years.


----------



## neni (Dec 24, 2012)

chomps1211 said:


> OK, at the risk of looking like a _complete_ moron,... _WTF am I missing?_ I've been all over that link and I can't find a single video for the men's _or_ women's slope style??? When I hit the only link that says "video" it's just interview video of ppl attending the events!
> 
> I must be interwebz illiterate! That, or suffering from webzpage dyslexia. :dunno:


Same here 




chomps1211 said:


> Hey, Thanks for trying to help and posting that direct link! Unfortunately, looks like the content is blocked for viewing in the US! :dunno:


And again: same here  as well as with CBC and BBC... rrrrr

@Pavel: thanks for the link anyway


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 25, 2013)

neni said:


> Same here
> And again: same here  as well as with CBC and BBC... rrrrr


Sorry)))

I suppose it is because Olympic committee has special agreements and any media representative should have accreditation for broadcasting Olympic video in particular region.

Olympic committee regulates strictly many fields, including advertisement, media and so on.

I do not think that any fucking government have ability to analyse and block such sites based on content.


----------



## Big Foot (Jan 15, 2013)

Here's the real question: If cooking, cleaning, and laundry were an Olympic sport, would men still out perform women?


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 25, 2013)

Some off-topic:
Iranian women footballers required to undergo gender-testing after four players on the national women's team were revealed to be men | Mail Online


----------



## Banni (Dec 17, 2013)

Jason said:


> I saw one girl catch her heel edge pretty bad. She cracked her helmet, I'll be shocked if she didn't get a concussion.


Saw that too! If she wasn't wearing a helmet that would have been her head! Good think it's compulsory!


----------



## Varza (Jan 6, 2013)

Big Foot said:


> Here's the real question: If cooking, cleaning, and laundry were an Olympic sport, would men still out perform women?


----------



## Banni (Dec 17, 2013)

Do men get marked harsher for mistakes such as hand plants on landings than women? The difference between snowboarding slopestyle and skiing was huge almost as if skiers got it easy!


----------



## Donutz (May 12, 2010)

Varza said:


>


This is actually a no-win situation for men. Women will often talk up how much better they are at these things and how pathetic men are, but if a man was to suggest that women were "naturals" at it...



:storm: :RantExplode:


----------



## Varza (Jan 6, 2013)

Donutz said:


> This is actually a no-win situation for men. Women will often talk up how much better they are at these things and how pathetic men are, but if a man was to suggest that women were "naturals" at it...
> 
> 
> 
> :storm: :RantExplode:


No, I genuinely did not understand his point. But heh I disagree that women are "naturals" at it. Guys can do it just as well. I've seen it 

Plus, these are menial tasks in my view. Saying "oh, but women are so much better at these menial tasks" while still maintaining the stance that they are not as good as men at other, less trivial physical tasks (sports and stuff), is... I dunno... not so cool.

Now, obviously, there are biological differences between women and men that make one group better at some physical tasks than the other (It switches off based on activity, I think). 

So... why is this thread still going on? I suppose it's my fault...


----------



## Konnal (Feb 13, 2014)

*Female doing a double cork*



Hank Scorpio said:


> Lol how did this thread get filled with so many whiteknights and male apologists?
> 
> *Men are overall better athletes than women. Period. It's an undeniable fact.*
> 
> ...


Anna Gasser from Austria doing a cab double cork: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXm7d_fGv6s

She had a bad run in the olympics as well and didn't pull out the double cork, but she can do it.


----------



## ShredLife (Feb 6, 2010)

Konnal said:


> Anna Gasser from Austria doing a cab double cork: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXm7d_fGv6s
> 
> She had a bad run in the olympics as well and didn't pull out the double cork, but she can do it.


that's not a double cork.


----------



## Hank Scorpio (Oct 3, 2013)

Konnal said:


> Anna Gasser from Austria doing a cab double cork: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXm7d_fGv6s
> 
> She had a bad run in the olympics as well and didn't pull out the double cork, but she can do it.


That's NOT a double-cork, it's a double underflip. Not an _easy_ trick per se, but definitely an easier trick.

Also, you're missing the point: there's a big difference between being able to do a trick once for a youtube highlight reel and being able to land it regularly in open competition. Ana Gasser can not (and does not) do that.

If she'd done an actual double cork at the Olympics and stomped it along with the rest of her normal run, she would have won because ZERO female pros have double corks on lock and can land them regularly in their runs.


----------



## F1EA (Oct 25, 2013)

People still hang on to this argument... Here's some more overwhelming proof:

1. Testosterone is a known performance enhancer... is estrogen? Who naturally produces more of which? 

2. So... men have more mass, muscle blah blah blah etc: Ayumu Hirano, men's silver at Sochi. Probably like 110 lbs... wet, in full gear.

You make your own conclusions. I personally like and appreciate women too much to think they are the same as men.

Have a nice day


----------

