Men are faster. That is why marathons are now starting women first so they won't have to compete against the men.
2007-11-13 12:35:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by One Bad Mama Jama 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Generally faster-yes, but that's based on results from every type of race I've been in or read about.
The police test itself doesn't prove anything because it deals with a very small group of men and women who are being selected for a job that only a certain pool of people would apply for. Additionally, the police department may need to fill either a greater # of female openings or need to hire a greater % of its female applicants, so certain requirements may have been adjusted.
It's also difficult to assume that because the mens record in the mile(3:44)is 27 seconds faster that the womens(4:13)that the average or median man would be faster than an average women. However, to the extent that at almost every single running event(high school,local road race,IAAF worlds), other than ultramarathons,the top male as well as the median male times are faster than the female's, you have at least empirical evidence.
2007-11-10 01:38:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Police departments lower the physical requirements because they have far fewer female applicants, but they still want to hire females. I'd say women can run about as fast, if they are training for it. Where it differs between men and women most: Women don't have the same upper body strength, so the change in other parts of the test are very fair and reasonable.
2007-11-09 14:22:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
men are naturally physically stronger than females. They have more muscle mass, so in most cases, the average male is faster than the average female. I think the time differences are BS though. They should have the same requirements across the board no matter what gender. They both have to do the same task, so they both need to be equally fit.
2007-11-09 14:19:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by trick 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
As a group, yes.
The fastest woman runs about as quickly as the fastest 14-year-old male.
Can some women beat some men? Absolutely. But we're talking individually speaking.
2007-11-09 14:52:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by wdx2bb 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The difference is because women have more body fat. The difference in running speed between male and female runners for three Olympic sprint events closely matched the difference in percent body fat of the men compared to the women.
2016-05-29 00:49:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
1. Depends on the man and the woman. 99.9% of men wouldn't stand a chance against FloJo.
2. Depends on who's fatter.
3. Well, we are built differently. There's a reason for the difference in standard.
2007-11-09 14:37:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by yip yip yip 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes, men run faster than women, which is why athletics is divided into male and female competition.
There will always be women who can out run some men, but in general the men are faster.
Why if this test is for the same job is the pass point different?
2007-11-09 14:23:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by lestermount 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I would have to say yes, though I don't know why. I've heard that women have stronger leg muscles than men and i would think that would make women faster. So this makes no sense to me. Maybe men are less wind resistant? lol!
2007-11-09 14:20:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Brigit B 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes the fit man would beat the fit woman. men produce testoterone. always in cross country the top male runner finishes at least 3 minutes faster than the top female runner
2007-11-09 15:19:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋