Perhaps you should read the reviews that I posted after this one you have replied to, and let me know why you think female tennis players have more injuries? I would be open to hearing your reasons why, or do you dismiss the evidence?
It is not ‘Victorian’ to understand the impacts on female athletes bodies of performing at elite level over time. It is also not ‘Victorian’ to understand that men and women have physical differences and yet we play on the same sized court.
“The progress of sports science means that all athletes, male and female, can do things now that would have been a higher risk of injury 50 years ago. Training, technique and equipment all mitigate that.”
And yet female players have higher rates of injury.
”But it's simply not true that female tennis players are at a greater risk of injury than male ones.”
Am I misreading the injury reviews?
Are female tennis games as skilful and as fit? Yes. Are they working at peak capacity just like the male tennis players? Yes. Are male tennis players ‘better’ than female players? Fuck no. I believe I also suggested that female player are working just as hard as the male players because the logic of physics and biomechanics say to me that for the duration of each game they may be taking more strides and hitting the balls which might require them to reach more often than men to cover the distance. They also are doing this with racquets that allow more power to transfer to the ball and there are multiple studies now available that women have more injury prone connective tissue. It was no surprise to me to read that they are suffering foot and wrist injuries as focus areas according to the injury reviews. It made sense.
I have also read that male and female players tend to cover close to the same distance in a game. How many strides are female players taking versus male players and in what time? Did that movement require the female player to expend more explosive power to get their compared to a male player?
To me, it is a question of sustainable biomechanics vs ability.
There is, of course, no suggestion that women ‘cannot’ play 5 sets at all. The question was asked as to why they don’t. I added that women playing 5 sets is physically asking more of women than of men in output. I also noted that in at least one of the reviews I linked mentioned how long each game took. For instance “while female players showed more game duration on the grass
courts (4:15 min) than males (4:12 min)”
That you, personally, could play 5 sets is no bearing on whether a professional female athlete should play 5 sets at a Grand Slam or not.
If you can come up with a better explanation as to why female tennis players are being recorded as having more injuries than male players despite playing 3 not 5 sets, please do make suggestions.
TLDR: This is sounding dangerously close to the Victorian argument that women shouldn't play sport at all because of their delicate constitutions
Maybe this thread below might be interesting reading for you if you actually believe I was in any way saying that.
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5142027-save-female-sports-evidence-thread?page=1