Originally Posted by
SprinterSmak
If the question is 'are they finishing higher than they would having not benefited from male puberty?'
If you can %100 tell me that these women are benefiting than I'd say u are kidding yourself. The same women that started this discussion, who won the tour de Tucson seems to have done better competing as a male against males. Going back to 2011-
4/25 crit
4/20 crit
6/13 crit
2/58 rr
1/7 xc
3/11 crit
8/29 crit
10/24 crit
3/18 crit
7/39 rr
I'm seeing top ten finishes across the board. Do you mean to tell me she carried that into women's racing? I think her results speak for themselves. If she was still carrying that physiological advantage there would be evidence.
You are talking about a cheater (a man that dopes) vs a women who is competing in accordance with a rule the IOC has already passed. There is no cheating here. And, unless you can show me results that say otherwise, no advantage.
I can't 100% say anything. Neither can you. That's kind of the point.
I'm not calling it cheating, I'm wondering aloud if it's an unfair advantage. And, if so, what the right way to handle it might be.
Again, I don't mean to tell you anything. I do, however, agree with an earlier observation by another poster - that there is no research directly addressing sports with a power component (in cycling's case, sprinting) and the advantages that might be conferred via a body that underwent male puberty.
Data isn't the plural of anecdote (or, in your case, datum isn't the singular of it). You can't generalize your experience across all trans athletes.
Again, I'm just acknowledging that it likely isn't as simple as it appears.