Since at least Victorian times, women have been treated as the weaker sex. In terms of muscle power, this is true, so that the best women are typically 10-15% slower than the best men over the distances that most fell races are run; the gap is maybe a bit less over the longer distances. But in events which require sheer endurance, do the anatomical and physiological differences between the sexes actually favour the women? And what about psychological differences?
I am not trying to take anything away from Jasmin; knocking twelve hours off the Spine Race course record is a remarkable achievement for anyone, and her place in the fell-running hall of fame alongside the likes of Joss Naylor is secure. I am just wondering whether we should actually consider it to be the norm that events like this are won by women. Is it only the remnants of those Victorian attitudes that are preventing this being the case?