Now, a good question might be why are there not as many female FAers at a really high level?

Let's take that as our theory, and see if that matches the real world. Well, naturally, people will fall within a bell curve of ability. Most people will be in the middle, while there will be a few outliers on either side. The more the participants, the larger the bell curve.

Since perhaps twice the number of men as women climb, it might look something like this:


Please note that on the far right side, where the number of climbers in each set drop to zero, the male curve extends further right (higher max climbing difficulty) than does the female, though both are similar.

and blue eyed people are better climbers as well

Maybe one of the choices should be whether or not women have superior reading skills to men?

Curt

I hear left handed, and blue eyed people are better climbers as well

You obviously didn't get my point. To make it more obvious, apply the same rationale to 15a. No women climb 15a while some men do. Thus men are better than women climbers.

wan-qui, you seem to have forgetten the orginal question. It is "Do you think female climbers are as good as males" not "Do you think female climbers could be as good as males if more of them climbed".

True. However, the male curve also extends further to the left than the female curve. Thus, your theory implies that men will be both the best and the worst climbers, and therefore women will be the most mediocre.

I hope you're not looking for a climbing girlfriend.

Jay

While GO's fancy chart looks nice, it is based on the assumption that the median climbing ability of women and men is equal.

My experience has shown otherwise. I believe that if you poll all male climbers and all female climbers, men will have a higher medial climbing ability. Think about the range in which most women and men climb at your local gym.

This would thus shift the men's bell curve to the right, making men better climbers.

Can anyone guess that my little girl - Nika - is going to be a lawyer? Year one at Harvard LS. Did anyone actually read her whole diatribe to the end? Whatever you do - don't argue with her - just stick her on something burly and that will shut her up...

Hmm, that's not very nice. Course you're her dad, it's your job to tease.

But honestly, she made a very valid point.

I haven't done more than a handful or two of FAs, but as you know, I set at the gym, and have been setting for about four years. One thing I quickly realized is that one sets to one's own strengths. I had to shift up the difficulty ratings on my climbs, because other climbers who were capable of doing stuff at that level could not get up them.

If you think Nika's mistaken, just try getting on one of Tanya's routes some time!

GO

On the other hand, women don't boulder as hard as men do.

So the answer is YES, except maybe at bouldering. Duh.

...
But on the whole, all seem to hit a plateau at 5.8, another at about 5.9, and a longer one at 5.10. But this often takes a long time - longer than I instructed them, so I don't have enough experience to speak to the issue of how long each of these plateaus lasts for men and women.

GO

Clausti, I don't disagree with your experience, however it is not universal. I have as much if not more experience with noobs as do you (among other things, I taught noobs to climb for several years at a YMCA). My experience differed in several ways from yours.

I found that men often got up a harder climb their first night, than women. Women may have picked up technique very slightly faster than men, but not enough to allow them to catch up within a short time (with exceptions, of course). Also, both men and women equally had issues with how they were perceived on the rock (plastic?). Neither wanted to look bad. To avoid the perception of failure, they both used a variety of tactics. The most common tactic, used equally by men and women, was "I can't". By not trying, they take control, and don't have to worry about being perceived as trying hard and then looking foolish when they failed. When they did try a little harder but still had trouble, women tended sometimes to pull back a bit - climbing more conservatively, so when they failed, at least they failed in control, while men tended more towards veering into the goofy right before failure. Plenty of examples where men took the conservative route, and women the goofy, I'm just talking about trends. All of these behaviours lessened, in both genders as the climbers got more into the climbs, and would push to true failure.

But on the whole, all seem to hit a plateau at 5.8, another at about 5.9, and a longer one at 5.10. But this often takes a long time - longer than I instructed them, so I don't have enough experience to speak to the issue of how long each of these plateaus lasts for men and women.

GO

Both crack and clausti bring up great points and the contrast is interesting. I think one important variable that clausti dismissed was age. ...

Also, the idea of plateaus and who is able to break through plateaus more readily is also interesting. While there are some compelling arguments for why women might excel at learning climbing skills I think clausti correctly points out that duration of climbing experience will most likely end up being different for men and women. However, she fails to note that in the harder grades women will be forced to spend more time developing strength and I'd argue that the development curve for women overcoming that plateau is steeper for women.

Because putting up new routes at that level requires competency with power tools. Duh.

I haven't done more than a handful or two of FAs, but as you know, I set at the gym, and have been setting for about four years. One thing I quickly realized is that one sets to one's own strengths. I had to shift up the difficulty ratings on my climbs, because other climbers who were capable of doing stuff at that level could not get up them.

If you think Nika's mistaken, just try getting on one of Tanya's routes some time!

GO