Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 35 of 35 FirstFirst ... 25333435
Results 341 to 347 of 347
  1. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    The study included all events. But events outside the 400m-mile range didn't have enough DSD athletes with the quality and quantity of performances to give them sufficient data to feel confident that restricting those events would stand up to CAS.
    Thank you for that clarification, which refreshes my recollection as to the details of the rationale for the limitation of the rule to certain events.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Abilene, TX
    Posts
    1,826
    Let me add my thanks as well.


    "both from the extra strength and power derived from the increases in muscle mass and strength"

    Seems like that would be very important in distances from 60-200 meters. (I'm being rhetorical...of course it's important!)
    You there, on the motorbike! Sell me one of your melons!
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui
    Posts
    6,342
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    The study included all events. But events outside the 400m-mile range didn't have enough DSD athletes with the quality and quantity of performances to give them sufficient data to feel confident that restricting those events would stand up to CAS.

    This statement from the IAAF's press release seems to imply they would restrict all women's events if they could.

    https://www.iaaf.org/news/press-rele...ligibility-reg
    In other words, they had a single athlete
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    No, I do believe they had other athletes in the 800-mile range, but they had far fewer in other events.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indian Territory
    Posts
    13,321
    Doesn't matter how many examples they had of what alphabetical combinations of chromosomes in what events, men have an advantage over women.
    Certainly there are elite women who can beat many men at every event but I contend there is no event at which women can beat equally talented men. Look at the records.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by 18.99s View Post
    The study included all events. But events outside the 400m-mile range didn't have enough DSD athletes with the quality and quantity of performances to give them sufficient data to feel confident that restricting those events would stand up to CAS.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tuariki View Post
    In other words, they had a single athlete
    No and No.
    Please reread the abstract of the most commonly cited study (not the only study):
    https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/51/17/1309.full
    That study supported the proposition that higher free testosterone (fT) in women produced improved performances (but not in men), in response to CAS's request that IAAF quantify the advantage of increased fT. The study used the best results of every athlete in every event at the 2011 and 2013 World Championships (2127 data points), divided those results into tertiles (thirds) by fT, and compared highest third with lowest thirds. It was clearly not restricted to DSD athletes.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    Quote Originally Posted by Master403 View Post
    No and No.
    Please reread the abstract of the most commonly cited study (not the only study):
    https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/51/17/1309.full
    Reread? Someone read that and thought 2127 = 1 ? ;-)
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •