I already have answered to you. Such win is not a equivalent competition on principle. Also -
Michaela Hutchison went to the Reno Tournament of Champions two years in a row. Reno has a good tournament where it tries to get the best of the best wrestlers from the nation to compete on who is the best. Other national tournaments do this is as well such as Freshman to Senior Nationals, Ironman, etc. The tournament does it best to draw out the best wreslters, but it is whoever goes to the tournament. So it has some but not all the best wrestlers.
Michala Hutchison was ranked 6th in the Reno Tournament which was a big mistake. Still scratching my head why they did that, and both times she went she was ranked 6th and both times she was defeated very quickly. On her second trip to Reno, she lost her first match to some unknown kid and in the consilidation rounds, she was eliminated. She never comes close to placing at all.
I thought so that the authors are not the sportswomen, but politicians.
Therefore they can declare that "a lower center of gravity and are better able to pin their opponent". How they can know that if the female wrestlers would have a low centre of gravity, it would mean that they have a very weak upper level of a body and hands. How it is possible to win by such hands, the authors don't explain it being limited by the inexpensive political mottos.
You quote:
Co-ed (men + women) competitions - I am all for it! But what female wrestlers think?
You wrote:
At types of sports where phisical power is required "a lot of examples of women competing successfully against men" are not found out by me. Will help me? ))))
But what female wrestlers think? 