# How to Grow Women's Pro-Cycling



## Flying_Monkey (17 Aug 2012)

There's a piece on CyclingNews today by Sarah Connolly about how women's cycling can be developed. She suggests 4 ways:

1. Celebrating the differences between men's and women's cycling. Shorter distances mean different tactics etc. (see: the Olympic road races);
2. Don't try to force teams to have a women's squad - use incentives at all levels;
3. Change the UCI registration system for women - at the moment, there is only one level and it's the same rules as for men's continental teams, which favours youth and development.
4. Make races more visible. More TV coverage etc. She suggests this is a matter of 'political will' of the governing bodies of the sport.

My problems with these arguments?

1. Well, for a start No.1 is purely the result of the prejudices that already exist in the sport. There is no reason why women's races have to be shorter, in fact, as physiological research has show, women perform better when stamina and staying power are concerned. In ultra-distance running, for example, the top men women regularly beat the top men.
2. Secondly, incentives mean money. The fundamental problem is how to get the money in to support the sport. And I actually do support compulsion of teams. Entry to the World Tour should be conditional on having a men's and a women's team. Now, certainly this could be financially supported in some way - in fact it would need the same kind of cash injection as incentives at any other level.
3. Yes. The registration rules are stupid.
4. Yes, but it's easier said than done.

Additionally, more work needs to be done with national federations. Some are really active in encouraging women's cycling, others much less so.

What do others think?


----------



## PpPete (17 Aug 2012)

Agree with FM on 1,2 and 4
Don't know anything about the registration system so no opinion on 3.


----------



## Chuffy (17 Aug 2012)

I don't know much about womens cycling, or sports admin/politics generally, but I was struck by the inherent contradiction posed by arguing in favour of the shorter distances, given all the grumbling there was during the Olympics about women's races being shorter than mens.

On another point - not quite sure your ultra-distance running analogy is a fair one for pro-cycling. Ultra-distance running is a closer fit to long audaxes than it is to pro-cycling. Henri Desgrange isn't churning out 400k stages anymore...


----------



## sheddy (17 Aug 2012)

I suspect if you can encourage women to cycle for recreation/commuting then sport take up will follow.
Having said that, do Dutch/Danish women actually dominate world cycling ?


----------



## lordloveaduck (17 Aug 2012)

As long as the old guards are running things the woman's side will always be side lined. It's like the football at the Limpics, if the men had done as well as the women there would have been more news about it.

It's not just about the UCI it's also about the TV networks (I so want to spank that Boardman chap and the other commentators for there lame sexist commentary during the Olympics ) advertisers and the public, a case of supply and demand.

This was the first time i have watched the Olympics and it as such an inspiration to me, it has got me off my bottom
and started me exercising.

Would like to join a club, just need to pick up on my stamina and other things.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Aug 2012)

Chuffy said:


> On another point - not quite sure your ultra-distance running analogy is a fair one for pro-cycling. Ultra-distance running is a closer fit to long audaxes than it is to pro-cycling. Henri Desgrange isn't churning out 400k stages anymore...


 
True... but the general point was that women are not weak and feeble.


----------



## Chuffy (17 Aug 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> True... but the general point was that women are not weak and feeble.


Got that, I was just being pedantic.

The author makes the point that shorter races, whatever the reasoning behind them, make for more exciting racing. Isn't she right? The logic behind making women ride shorter distances might be Victorian rubbish, but isn't it a red-herring?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Aug 2012)

sheddy said:


> I suspect if you can encourage women to cycle for recreation/commuting then sport take up will follow.
> Having said that, do Dutch/Danish women actually dominate world cycling ?


 
Well, Vos is Dutch. But actually I don't think that there is a real correlation between everyday cycling and sport cycling - and if you check out Grant Peterson's new book,_ Just Ride_, he suggests that we should all stop thinking they are connected. I don't go that far, but in countries like Colombia there is very little everyday cycling, yet they churn out top (male) riders; whereas, if it was based on everyday cycling, Denmark and the Netherlands would dominate cycling - and while they have a lot of riders, they certainly aren't dominant. The only way in which more ordinary cycling might help is if more drivers were also cyclists, which would make them behave better towards riders on the road (whether commuters, racers, or leisure cyclists).

But this is a broader topic than just encouraging women's cycling. I think that has to come from the top: from the UCI, from national federations, and from governments; and from the bottom: from local clubs and schools. And somehow too, we have to get past this ridiculous body image thing that stops young girls wanting to do any sport (because they don't want 'big thighs' etc.). Although that's way too big a job for cycling, at least in Britain, the success of British women at the Olympics might help a bit and encourage more girls to take up the sport.


----------



## redcard (17 Aug 2012)

Isn't the problem that we're not really bothered much by female sports? It's not as if this is a cycling problem - we don't care about women's football either. If that sport isn't going anywhere, then what chance does cycling have?


----------



## Smokin Joe (17 Aug 2012)

You cannot have distances in women's cycling that are as long as those in men's races until you have fields that are as big. A 180 mile race with just 50 riders will just turn into a very negative slog.


----------



## oldroadman (17 Aug 2012)

Smokin Joe said:


> You cannot have distances in women's cycling that are as long as those in men's races until you have fields that are as big. A 180 mile race with just 50 riders will just turn into a very negative slog.


 Correct. A field of 200 would probably be a slog as well. About 150/160km would be OK with 100 starters. Men's races are long because attrition needs to work out, and that's when it gets past 4 hours. With the women it may be a little less, plus a look at average speeds shows a difference, even when distances are shorter. The 140km Olympic race was not bad at all, reasonably fast, but only around 60 starters, and they were leaving the back of the peloton in shedloads first time over Box Hill - which is not difficult by pro standards. The key is getting a larger and more evenly matched peloton, and that means a bigger base to start with, etc., etc.
Look at BC membership as an example, 85% male, 15% female. Thus the base is 1/6 of the men, and so we can expect 1/6 of the number of women to rise to prominence compared to men, which means that races are much more diverse in ability. This leads to a mindset of hanging on as long as possible, until the big players decide to move, then it's down to no more tha 6 or so, in domestic races.
The injection of cash and compulsion to force pro teams to fund a women's team is probably not the answer, but might seed a movement. Question is, would proteams bother, or just pay a fine (possibly cheaper to do), and you could not see UCI deregistering QuickStep, SKY, et al, for not running a women's team! Then, where does the cash come from, and the races? Sponsors for top level mens teams are tough to get, and organisers need to be persuaded to run women's races as aa stand alone event. Quite a few run in support of major mens races, but TV only bother with the last few kms, because otherwise not much happens (just like a mens race at times!).
In the end, the public decide, if they support women's races then more will get put on and more riders will appear, Chicken and egg, 'm afraid.

Little postscript, I see AA Drinks are folding at the end of this season, so the team which all the top British women has is going, and yet again they will be faced with finding a new employer. Sign of the times?

It's just so easy for a journo to spout off in the press, when they have probably never competed at a decent level, or run a race, or run a team, or indeed done anything except report and comment. I do hope the article in CW has been written by someone who at least has had a go at some level, at one of these activities.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Aug 2012)

oldroadman said:


> It's just so easy for a journo to spout off in the press, when they have probably never competed at a decent level, or run a race, or run a team, or indeed done anything except report and comment. I do hope the article in CW has been written by someone who at least has had a go at some level, at one of these activities.


 
Surely the quality of their arguments, and whether they are right or not, matters rather more...


----------



## Smokin Joe (17 Aug 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> 2. Secondly, incentives mean money. The fundamental problem is how to get the money in to support the sport. And I actually do support compulsion of teams. Entry to the World Tour should be conditional on having a men's and a women's team. Now, certainly this could be financially supported in some way - in fact it would need the same kind of cash injection as incentives at any other level.


Forcing pro teams to have a women's section is like building a house from the roof down. You've got to build the base level before you before you try and increase the number of women competing professionally or you'll just end up with a load quota pros who aren't up to it and will just make the sport look stupid.

Then it's a case of whether a sufficient number of women would be interested in racing. Even in athletics and tennis which have traditionally been sports which are more open to women their numbers are far exceeded by male participants.


----------



## lukesdad (17 Aug 2012)

If you want 4. to become reality making womens races longer would be counter productive. Women following the model of mens racing will not work in promoting it.
The womens scene needs a radical re-think IMO. A european capitals street race series maybe ( not seriously suggesting it ) but you get the idea.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Aug 2012)

Why do you think this is (or should be) about the male audience though? In the USA and Canada now, women constitute the main viewing base for women's soccer and hence it is growing, fast.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 Aug 2012)

Smokin Joe said:


> Forcing pro teams to have a women's section is like building a house from the roof down. You've got to build the base level before you before you try and increase the number of women competing professionally or you'll just end up with a load quota pros who aren't up to it and will just make the sport look stupid.


 
There are easily enough credible female cyclists in the world to sustain a top-level competition. The problem is the lack of interest from sponsors.


----------



## redcard (17 Aug 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Why do you think this is (or should be) about the male audience though? In the USA and Canada now, women constitute the main viewing base for women's soccer and hence it is growing, fast.



Every sport you've never heard of gets the 'fastest growing' tag.


----------



## redcard (17 Aug 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> There are easily enough credible female cyclists in the world to sustain a top-level competition. The problem is the lack of interest from sponsors.



Sponsors are like bookies; they don't walk past opportunities to make money or gain exposure.


----------



## Smokin Joe (17 Aug 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> There are easily enough credible female cyclists in the world to sustain a top-level competition. The problem is the lack of interest from sponsors.


Now where near enough to mount 200 strong fields and three week stage races.

As for sponsors, they invest their money where they think public interest will provide the biggest return. Force them to do what they don't want to and they'll walk away and look somewhere else.


----------



## marinyork (17 Aug 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> 4. Make races more visible. More TV coverage etc. She suggests this is a matter of 'political will' of the governing bodies of the sport.
> 
> My problems with these arguments?
> 
> ...


 
I only know about 4. As no one else has said I'm going to throw an often overlooked observation to do with coverage into the arena. Apart from status consciously attributed as some sports have done, women's sports can get anywhere near parity usually when the events are integrated/run parallel/broadly at the same time. So Tennis, athletics and so on. I think this point is overlooked to a very considerable extent and people say 'yeah, get it on tv'. Well how? Well why not just integrate the events instead.

The article does actually **get** bits of what needs to be done, but it could have gone into more detail. In the UK a lot of 'minority' coverage does actually start out as red button or recorded on websites. That's not even just BBC. ITV4 actually went red button for a lot of their coverage of the TDF going back a few years ago, they even specially launched a red button service for it. They then decided to go whole hog. Similar things in (bits of) track cycling. Yes, really.

So my suggestions would be 1) what they've suggested
2) Try and get broadcasters to do the same with perhaps shorter clips. It might even be easier than they think to licence this sort of stuff to bulk up 'boring' content deserts like the BBC website. If they don't like it there are a lot of other things you can do like rider features. Maybe do it centrally.
3) explore red button type service possibilities
4) integrating some events would go a very long way to solving these problems.

I know what people are going to say about integrating it. It can't be done and so on. The Giro donne is the only grand tour left. The 2012 variant was 9 stages. If you look at the mens and the rest days, mountain days, days spent in denmark/holland/the moon/whatever and time trials I think it's doable. All you do is be smart. The events don't even need to overlap. You could have the first 2 days of the Giro Donne run before the mens even starts and have a duality between 'days'. There are loads of dualities you could think up:- mens TT and women's gruelling mountain stage; men's rest day - women's long flat stage (perhaps even filling in some of the gaps; women's TT. Some of them would even add to the viewing experience. A rest day for viewers? Nope, you get a top end women's stage to watch rather than listening to Roche pontificating in the studio instead.


----------



## zizou (17 Aug 2012)

Smokin Joe said:


> Forcing pro teams to have a women's section is like building a house from the roof down. You've got to build the base level before you before you try and increase the number of women competing professionally or you'll just end up with a load quota pros who aren't up to it and will just make the sport look stupid.
> 
> Then it's a case of whether a sufficient number of women would be interested in racing. Even in athletics and tennis which have traditionally been sports which are more open to women their numbers are far exceeded by male participants.


 
+ 1 to that, the problems at the top are representative that at the grassroots of sport cycling - eg the club run - women are a very small minority and the ones that race are even smaller subsection. I dont know how it is across the rest of the country but at the Scottish crit championships last year there was only about 10 riders and within that there was quite a substantial mix in abilities that the mens races didnt have because with more entrants races can then be done via category group (with many potential racers not getting entry at all because it was over subscribed). There are going to be various reasons for this lack of participation at a grass roots level and that is a real problem that cycling has to address before worrying about the top of the game. Outside of the olympics sports like running and swimming get virtually no media coverage either yet at grassroots level there is much higher participation rates amongst women, how can these sports do it when cycling struggles?

As for the subject of compulsion to have male and female teams - the finances in pro cycling are bad enough without forcing teams into running token women teams too, its not like there are bundles of cash and spare sponsors floating about waiting to be spent.


----------



## black'n'yellow (17 Aug 2012)

Number of women's entries received for Welsh National Circuit Race Champs 2011 = 2 - not even enough for a full podium, let alone an interesting race. The category wasn't even run for this year's champs at Builth Wells. If it carries on like that, there won't be any women racing in a few years...


----------



## lukesdad (17 Aug 2012)

Nicole cooke raced men for years I can still picture her geeing the 3/4 cat riders to pick the pace up less they were caught.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (17 Aug 2012)

Why do we need womens races at all, in this time of equality we should just have bike racing in which the best compete against one another, the gender of someone is not important imho
By seperating women from men you are in fact suggesting that one is inferior as they are not able to compete with the other. Who wants to watch something which is lacking, inferior? - You can force teams to put ladies out there, but until they do the same races, same distances they will lack the same credibility to the general public.


----------



## oldroadman (17 Aug 2012)

V for Vengedetta said:


> Why do we need womens races at all, in this time of equality we should just have bike racing in which the best compete against one another, the gender of someone is not important imho
> By seperating women from men you are in fact suggesting that one is inferior as they are not able to compete with the other. Who wants to watch something which is lacking, inferior? - You can force teams to put ladies out there, but until they do the same races, same distances they will lack the same credibility to the general public.


Are you serious? Is this a wind-up? Have you actually looked comparativelyat levels of acceleration and agression? Do you want the women to look daft? Mixing does not work unless it's 1st cat women with 3/4/youth males, at amateur level only.
Pro level is a different world, credibility and attractive racing is because the riders are of similar ability, which women and men simply are not. No one's fault, just a simple fact. Please don't try to quote "exceptions" because if there are any, they are just that, and put into a 240km road race........
It's a bit like suggesting Anna Meares is on the same level of strength and speed as Jason Kenny. Both gold medallists, but different, and the sport is the better for it.


----------



## thom (18 Sep 2012)

An interesting story about Wiggins being interested to contribute financially to a women's cycling team.
Apparently for Sky it is "not the right time" or something.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (18 Sep 2012)

oldroadman said:


> Are you serious? Is this a wind-up? Have you actually looked comparativelyat levels of acceleration and agression? Do you want the women to look daft? Mixing does not work unless it's 1st cat women with 3/4/youth males, at amateur level only.
> Pro level is a different world, credibility and attractive racing is because the riders are of similar ability, which women and men simply are not. No one's fault, just a simple fact. Please don't try to quote "exceptions" because if there are any, they are just that, and put into a 240km road race........
> It's a bit like suggesting Anna Meares is on the same level of strength and speed as Jason Kenny. Both gold medallists, but different, and the sport is the better for it.


and there is the rub.

in nearly every sport, and FM has rightly pointed at one of the few exceptions, if you picked the top 5, 10, 50 or 100 performers in the world for a dream team regardless of gender how many of them would be women? Then there is a question to ask about how inevitable this is given nearly all the sports are designed by men for men and women just take them up.

Take women's soccer, or rugby union. Knowing that on average elite women players generally don't have the strength and power and speed of their male peers why are they expected to perform on a pitch the same size as their male counterparts? The playing field is literally wrong. Why do the women themselves cavil at the idea of a slightly smaller pitch in both sports? The result of mismatch of pitch and players renders watching the women's elite games as something like non-league soccer or community rugby and isn't a great advert for elite women's sport.

So with cycling. If you made event 'open' and say had a field of 100 men and 100 women how many of the women are going to get top 20 places let alone podium finishes. Sure there's plenty of gurls who can kick my butt on and off road on a bike but then I'm not the sort of person they are racing against.

Men are the main consumers of sport as spectators, sports generally have been designed for men by men and women are therefore at a double disadvantage.


----------



## thom (18 Sep 2012)

GregCollins said:


> and there is the rub.
> ...
> Men are the main consumers of sport as spectators, sports generally have been designed for men by men and women are therefore at a double disadvantage.


 
Greg, to back up part of your thoughts and feed your Pooley penchant, take a read of this : Haute Route:

"Some of the guys are really fast and I've been hanging on to the front group, but it's great training," Pooley added.
"Peter Pouly – no relation – has been super-strong. He's just been playing with us really. He could go off [the front] any time he likes and ride to the finish alone 20 minutes ahead of the rest of us. So, for me, it has been great training because I've really being pushed on by the guys on the climbs and I've been riding on my limit quite a lot of the time which is great.

If an non-pro road cyclist compares like this, you can bet the whole pro peloton compares even more starkly.

I wouldn't take your line about adjusting the playing field to fit a woman's physique though. It's not really for people outside the sport to say and actually who's to say the men haven't got it wrong ?
Women's sports need to think about differentiating their products from the male versions because like in football, they have an opportunity to evolve to a place that leaves behind many of the issues in the male version. They don't need to try to make them exactly the same as the male versions.

There is a circular problem about women's sport requiring funding to improve the quality of the sport, to get more spectators, to attract more advertising/funding.
Personally, I think the people at the top of male dominated sports like cycling and football need to do more to promote their female versions. McQuaid for example does not have the energy to go about this and does not care enough to create a position of someone else doing it. Like in football, the female part of the sport suffers from having an entrenched old school power hungry supremo.

In a nut shell, it's not that the female versions are designed by men that is the main problem, it's that they're run by men.


----------



## BJH (22 Sep 2012)

Cash can create it.

BC needs a road team to give somewhere for the track team to work and with the level of interest following the Olympics I am sure Dave Brailsford has realised he has to do something.

Let's have a Sky ladies team for a start.

In terms of big races here's a thought - why not put some BC cash into developing a large scale ToB for woman, while other races are falling apart and disappearing this could become huge on the calendar in woman's cycling


----------



## raindog (25 Sep 2012)

This is quite heart-warming
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/fan-funded-womens-team-nearly-a-reality


----------



## laurence (25 Sep 2012)

raindog said:


> This is quite heart-warming
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/fan-funded-womens-team-nearly-a-reality


 
i've pledged my £100 for this.


----------



## thom (14 Oct 2012)

A lesser known cycling scandal


----------



## Flying_Monkey (14 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> A lesser known cycling scandal


 
Good piece.


----------



## Rob3rt (15 Oct 2012)

GregCollins said:


> and there is the rub.
> 
> in nearly every sport, and FM has rightly pointed at one of the few exceptions, if you picked the top 5, 10, 50 or 100 performers in the world for a dream team regardless of gender how many of them would be women? Then there is a question to ask about how inevitable this is given nearly all the sports are designed by men for men and women just take them up.
> 
> ...


 
Just noticed this thread, there were a few people complaining on here about the Olympic BMX course being different between the men and women! Not going to rehash my comment's re that topic but the discussion is somewhere on the board if you are interested in the debate at all.

As for how to grow women's pro cycling, a good start would be to stop referring to female athlete's as sex object and talking about how pretty their smiles are, how lovely they are and how much you love them because they didn't tell you to fark off when you "met" them etc. Turns my stomach when a female athlete puts in the performance of their lives and people commend their smile and start blathering about how pleasant and lovely she is etc. Next time Cav pull's off an epic win, how many people will be commenting on his lovely dandruff free scalp?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Oct 2012)

Vos calls for women's versions of the one-days classics. Too right. There might well be arguments around the GTs, but I can't see any good reason why there shouldn't be women's versions of most big one-day races. With good co-ordination, they could be held on the same weekend or even the day; disruption would not be much greater than with just the men's race, and it would mean even bigger crowds and greater economic benefits.


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Vos calls for women's versions of the one-days classics. Too right. There might well be arguments around the GTs, but I can't see any good reason why there shouldn't be women's versions of most big one-day races. With good co-ordination, they could be held on the same weekend or even the day; disruption would not be much greater than with just the men's race, and it would mean even bigger crowds and greater economic benefits.


Yeah definitely and the UCI could if they wanted create a disincentive for races not to do so by reducing the status of races that don't do so. What is more important ? A fair equitable sport or that MSR is a bastion of alpha males ?
Practically speaking it might be hard to run races on the same day for events that loop back on themselves or come close to doing so unless one race set off sufficiently early but if that's the case, run them on consecutive days

Edit: in addition, in logistical terms it makes it easier for teams to run parallel male and female teams
you could make an argument that teams should only be allowed to the highest Pro level if they have both a male and female team and in consideration of admittance to that level, take into account the points women's teams earn too.


----------



## User169 (16 Oct 2012)

Consecutive days on a weekend might be problematic given that most classics now run a sportif the day before.


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

Delftse Post said:


> Consecutive days on a weekend might be problematic given that most classics now run a sportif the day before.


True but what's more important ? An equitable sport or a sportive ?


----------



## Rob3rt (16 Oct 2012)

Delftse Post said:


> Consecutive days on a weekend might be problematic given that most classics now run a sportif the day before.


 
Real racing should always take precedence over pretend racing!


----------



## User169 (16 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> True but what's more important ? An equitable sport or a sportive ?


 
It wasn't really a comment on desirability, more of a comment on appetite from race organisers. FM suggested running a women's event alongside the men's would be relatively straight-forward and would generate bigger crowds and revenue. I'm not so sure given that it would likely involve loss of sportive-related income. Doesn't mean to say that it isn't the right thing to do.


----------



## thom (16 Oct 2012)

Delftse Post said:


> It wasn't really a comment on desirability, more of a comment on appetite from race organisers. FM suggested running a women's event alongside the men's would be relatively straight-forward and would generate bigger crowds and revenue. I'm not so sure given that it would likely involve loss of sportive-related income. Doesn't mean to say that it isn't the right thing to do.


point taken
i think innovative rase organisers ought to be able to solve such problems but the UCI ought to offer incentives for them to address the issue
With MSR for example, I guess it's a problem that the point of the race is to go from Milan to San-Remo... from one climate to another and welcome in the Spring. It's a supremely long race for the men. Were you to commence a women's race 
from the 200km distance, it isn't MSR any more. 
I think it just requires a will though.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (16 Oct 2012)

Delftse Post said:


> It wasn't really a comment on desirability, more of a comment on appetite from race organisers. FM suggested running a women's event alongside the men's would be relatively straight-forward and would generate bigger crowds and revenue. I'm not so sure given that it would likely involve loss of sportive-related income. Doesn't mean to say that it isn't the right thing to do.


 
Well, if they've already blocked the whole weekend, then there's even more of an argument for the same day then. The disruption will not increase at all. It's particularly odd that you will have a mixed sportive, then a men's race, but no women's race...


----------



## beastie (16 Oct 2012)

As has been commented previously, women's sports gains the highest profile, and gets nearest to equality when run in parallel with men's sport. 
Tennis, athletics, gymnastics. Can one day races not follow the model of the London marathon? Three different starts: women's elite, men's elite and the sportive. The starts do not have to be at the same place or time, or even follow precisely the same route. 

Is this model not being used for an event in London next year now that I think about it?


----------



## beastie (16 Oct 2012)

RideLondon 2013.


----------



## thom (18 Oct 2012)

Cycling news interview with UCI rep on developing women's cycling.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (18 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> Cycling news interview with UCI rep on developing women's cycling.


 
The fact that they have a man in charge of this shows they have no sense of irony at all. And if you read the answers he gives to the questions, it seems he is rejecting almost every sensible, workable idea.


----------



## thom (18 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> The fact that they have a man in charge of this shows they have no sense of irony at all. And if you read the answers he gives to the questions, it seems he is rejecting almost every sensible, workable idea.


Yes - progress of sorts but with caveats. At least they have this position now - there's clearly a lot of frustration in women's cycling about the UCI and part of that was because nobody spent any time on it. At least there is a conduit for this purpose now.


----------



## redcard (18 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> The fact that they have a man in charge of this shows they have no sense of irony at all. And if you read the answers he gives to the questions, it seems he is rejecting almost every sensible, workable idea.



Talking about irony, there's not many women contributing to this thread either


----------



## Flying_Monkey (18 Oct 2012)

User said:


> I think the only hope for womans cycling is totaly rebranding it, eg.. cycling in cities, countries, areas were the men don't race, still are a "grand tour" but start their own, .


 
This is what already happens. It doesn't work. There has to be some connection. It isn't patronizing to suggest that many events should have both men's and women's versions - it's pragmatic and more to the point, it's what the top women cyclists want.


----------



## johnr (19 Oct 2012)

The parallel races are a great idea. The iconic names in the cycling calendar are the ones the public know (if any). My own experience as a fan who has taken to going to races over the past 5 years or so would bear it out.

My partner and I went to the nationals in N Yorks earlier this year. Sarah Storey's race-long attempt to catch the leading quartet was the stand-out performance of the day. We'd not have seen it if the race was not at the same course.

Sending the women out on the ToB course a few hours before the men would give them a roadside audience of millions in this country.


----------



## oldroadman (19 Oct 2012)

johnr said:


> The parallel races are a great idea. The iconic names in the cycling calendar are the ones the public know (if any). My own experience as a fan who has taken to going to races over the past 5 years or so would bear it out.
> 
> My partner and I went to the nationals in N Yorks earlier this year. Sarah Storey's race-long attempt to catch the leading quartet was the stand-out performance of the day. We'd not have seen it if the race was not at the same course.
> 
> Sending the women out on the ToB course a few hours before the men would give them a roadside audience of millions in this country.


 If anyone commenting had the slightest idea how much a race like ToB costs, then double it for all the extra staff, police, motos, commissaires, teams, etc, then can suggest a sponsor who would double their input to support a women's race on what would have to be a shorter route (stage of 200km at what pace??), and need another TV crew to provide about three minutes of "highlights" a day, send your answers on a postcard to the ToB organisers. I'm sure they would be pleased to hear from you.

In essence, combining women and men racing on track, at cyclo-cross, MTB works because the logistics work - UK national trophy cross races are an example.

On the road it's an entirely different matter, and putting women on the same route and distances as men would make a very poor comparison. ASO tried a "Tour Feminin", with stages around 120-130km (I was involved a little at one point), and it simply didn't work economically, and as the organisers of big races are in the main commercial operators there has to be a profit in it to pay the extra staff and costs.
Simply trying to force the organisers to run a women's race ahead of/after the men's race will probably make them raise two fingers and go off to run other stuff, like golf, less problems and more cash, which would only leave struggling amateurs.
None of this is a solution, but is reality, and I think the future for women's racing could be good, but needs careful marketing and sensible wage rates for riders and staff, decent well promoted stand alone races, piggy-backing on men's races where it works, and quality racing. The blocks I can see are the poor strength in depth of the professional women's peloton, and the financial one.
It's chicken and egg, enough big events to aspire to, more women race, quality goes up. But you have to look at figures, for every woman racing there are about 8 men, so the base of the triangle which eventually produces top riders is larger.
Easy solution - there isn't one, much as it would be nice to say there is.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (19 Oct 2012)

redcard said:


> Talking about irony, there's not many women contributing to this thread either


 
..they are watching it though..


----------



## fimm (19 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> ..they are watching it though..


Indeed...


----------



## Spinney (19 Oct 2012)

Indeedy...


----------



## thom (19 Oct 2012)

Spinney said:


> Indeedy...


So are you watching because it's amusing to watch us making fools of ourselves earnestly pronouncing solutions and trying to make ourselves look enlightened ? 
Or have any of us made any sense ?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (19 Oct 2012)

oldroadman said:


> If anyone commenting had the slightest idea how much a race like ToB costs, then double it for all the extra staff, police, motos, commissaires, teams, etc, then can suggest a sponsor who would double their input to support a women's race on what would have to be a shorter route (stage of 200km at what pace??), and need another TV crew to provide about three minutes of "highlights" a day, send your answers on a postcard to the ToB organisers. I'm sure they would be pleased to hear from you.


 
Personally, I made it very clear, as did Marianne Vos, that we were talking about day races (and especially the ones which already have sportives attached the day before). I agree that stage races are another problem.


----------



## Spinney (19 Oct 2012)

Sense, mostly. There is no easy answer. I'm guilty myself to a certain extent - I know the names of far more male top level cyclists, because I see them on the TdF coverage etc, and they make the news more often. So because I know some of the names, I tend to follow mens races more and don't really try to watch the women's ones.

Something I should try to change, maybe...

[edit] Sorry - that was in reply to thom #60


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (19 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> So are you watching because it's amusing to watch us making fools of ourselves earnestly pronouncing solutions and trying to make ourselves look enlightened ?
> Or have any of us made any sense ?


 
Ofcourse some of you make sense (as clearly indicated by quite a few "likes"). However I think it's quite amusing seeing men trying to break a vicious circle. It's good to search deep, but some times there are no deep causes, only the obvious and sometime superficial ones! The way I see it it's simple: women's pro-cycling will never become as popular as men's, same as it never manage to become in any other -indoor or outdoor- sport! Regardless our personal love for the sport there is one driving power behind all: money!
Women in their majority are not big fans of sports => there is a smaller number of women spectators* => smaller viewing figures => less coverage => less advert/sponsor money in => less business people/brands interested in sponsoring a female team => less sponsors have interest in promoting the sport in order to make their sponsorship profitable.. and take it from the start to complete the circle .. => less promoted sport is highly unlikely to create more fans!

* let's not fool ouselves, men like to watch men compete. Even I sometimes prefer watching men compete! And, yes, they might watch women as well, when they have absolutely nothing better to do or as said before in combined events.


----------



## totallyfixed (19 Oct 2012)

I believe the crux of the problem is the media, especially TV where the old boys network is alive and well and the newer generation of producers follow the lead of the old guard, indeed I think it is required. Following the ok coverage of the Olympics - did anyone see Lucy Garner's road race? No, I'll bet you didn't and therein lies much of the problem. I know Lucy but haven't yet seen her to ask her thoughts, but having spoken to some of our top ladies I can tell you that they are desperate to have equal billing with the men. No, there are not enough women or more importantly junior girls / women in the sport but there might be if the bloody media would stop reverting to default mode which is prolonged discussions on football, how quickly they forgot how much the nation enjoyed many of the other minority sports in the Olympics, mind you our cause wasn't exactly furthered when a drugs cheat won the men's road race, I digress.
Oh and while I am occupying the soap box why is it that in every sport shown on tv that women are always the warm up for the men, they always peak with the men, makes me sick, Yes men will 99% of the time be quicker / stronger than women but what has that got to do with it? Women are just different so the way they compete will be different, comparing them with men is where it all goes wrong and unfortunately the way most of us think is manipulated by the media which by and large is run by men. Damn, I've come full circle . Just to add, Emma Pooley and Sarah Storey [both highly intelligent women] both want to compete over the same distances as men and they have a little better insight into what is going on than most, if not all of us on here.


----------



## thom (19 Oct 2012)

totallyfixed said:


> Following the ok coverage of the Olympics - did anyone see Lucy Garner's road race?


There were only guys taking photos on the finish line that I saw.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (19 Oct 2012)

User said:


> I disagree, now don't take this the wrong way and I'm not trying to disrepectful, but like most top sports women, they suffer from bouts of delusion


 
You're actually verging on outright misogyny now. It's worse than disrespectful.


----------



## thom (19 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> Ofcourse some of you make sense (as clearly indicated by quite a few "likes"). However .....
> ..... Even I sometimes prefer watching men compete! And, yes, they might watch women as well, when they have absolutely nothing better to do or as said before in combined events.


 
I can't help feel that all sports are a bit like that though. If you build something and market it, people will come and watch it. 

It may be the wrong time to look for cycling sponsorship because of it's problems and because of the economy so that purely financial aspect is really hard.

One thing the UCI want to encourage is the complementary men's/women's teams. Perhaps if there was a cross-over of UCI points, so say half the women's team points would contribute to the men's team when teams try to qualify for the various tour categorisations every few years (and vice-versa, men's points go to women's teams), then you see for example you can help secure Tour de France entry based upon having a decent women's team.


----------



## Spinney (19 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> I can't help feel that all sports are a bit like that though. If you build something and market it, people will come and watch it..


 
"If you build it, they will come...."


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (19 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> I can't help feel that all sports are a bit like that though. If you build something and market it, people will come and watch it. .


 
Exactly what I'm saying! It's a vicious circle.. They need the reasurance that if they put the money to market it, there will be a -significant- profit and without marketing, there is no popularity that in its turn may secure a certain degree of profit..
The problem is that the ones willing to gumble on women's sports (not necessarily cycling) lost their bets and as you very well said, during "lean years" the preference is swifted towards safer investments..



Spinney said:


> "If you build it, they will come...."


 
You are right! (great movie btw) But the question is: who is going to "build it", when they know their money will have greater and faster return if they target the opposite sex?


----------



## thom (19 Oct 2012)

User said:


> the problem I see here, it really will only help the top teams with the healthy budgets, big sponsers etc, who will then buy the top women riders....
> I don't see how this would encourage the lesser sponsors to continue sponsoring...


 
But the big teams don't need to do it - smaller teams like say an AG2R or Euskadi-Euskaltel who are struggling for points could possibly use it as a way in.
You could say that if they had two teams, the points target is lower, or other criteria for entry are relaxed.


----------



## thom (19 Oct 2012)

User said:


> look I'm just throwing out some stupid ideas, I don't really have a solution but this problem is common in most womens sports.


Sure, I don't think anyone has them - it's clearly not an easy problem but unless people come up with ideas of any sort, nothing changes. 

Good ideas are hard to find - you need a good few stupid ones first ;-)


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (19 Oct 2012)

User said:


> it looks like my post was removed, which is fair enough, I apologise if any offence was caused but I stand by comments aimed at flying monkey and hope he read them before they were removed...


 
I think also he meant "chauvinism" (prejudice towards a gender, or group) and not "misogyny" (hatred towards female as a whole), as clearly there was no hint of hatred towards women in your post..
Lots of people get confused, but I admit it sounds good!


----------



## Flying_Monkey (20 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> I think also he meant "chauvinism" (prejudice towards a gender, or group) and not "misogyny" (hatred towards female as a whole), as clearly there was no hint of hatred towards women in your post...


 
This is OT, but I meant what I said. Misogyny encompasses far more than that outdated dictionary definition - for example, see this recent story prompted by Julia Gillard's rather epic take-down of her misogynistic opposite number in the Australian parliament.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (20 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> This is OT, but I meant what I said. Misogyny encompasses far more than that outdated dictionary definition - for example, see this recent story prompted by Julia Gillard's rather epic take-down of her misogynistic opposite number in the Australian parliament.


 
Your opinion. Allow me to have one as well. In my opinion IOTCB's post was chauvinistic and not misogynistic. Outdated or not, until someone actually forms it differently -surprisingly enough- I'd rather take the dictionary as reference! No offense..


----------



## resal (24 Oct 2012)

Applying sense and market forces is wrong. Rigged markets remain rigged and defeat norms, for centuries if necessary. This is a rigged market - from the governance - women's 500m TT/ men's kilo, through to the male commentator who talks in so derogatory manner of women's races or in Hugh Porter's case often talks over the race about the next men's race. Sky are a massive part of the problem and it sickens me each time I read about their initiatives to grow the sport at the grass roots - only have aspiration if you are male. 

There is only one way to break a rigged market and that is with legislation. Anything else and you will be planning going around the same tree, in 75 year's time.

So - I am sorry to say, I have a view - Are the guys at Sky who make the decisions not to do a women's team chauvinists or misogynists ? Are Harmon, Porter and the others chauvinists or misogynists ? Are the rulemakers at the UCI chauvinists or misogynists ? Are the program commissioners at Eurosport chauvinists or misogynists ? Dead easy test. Swap the story. 

Instead of male/female [because that is ok the poor weak little girls, well they are no good at sport anyway and they don't really want to do it, well only the weird ones anyway, and nobody is interested in it anyway, well not anybody who counts, like a man, well I suppose they might watch it if all the other channels are broken and the porno channels have not started up yet (Fluff - that is exactly how you come across !)] make it

white/black. We will segregate sport on colour of skin. We will restrict event lengths and Tour lengths. We will rig sports coverage. We will show lots of white people racing but never ever show a complete black race apart from the Olympics or World Championships when we will look and point and beat our chests and say how fair we are, And on those few occasions when we see a black person race, we will have only white people report on black peoples races and they can make outrageous comments about how they are not real racers and decry them at all points. As a consequence, pay for backs would be about 100th that of the equivalent white athlete and then as a defence we could say that they did not ride the same distance so that justifies them earning 100th of the white athletes and we can have a nice warm feeling that we have justified our outrageous and disgusting attitudes. Would that be modest bias or an outrage against humanity ? 

Flying Monkey gets my vote.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (24 Oct 2012)

Brilliant speech! What do you propose exactly?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (24 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> Your opinion. Allow me to have one as well. In my opinion IOTCB's post was chauvinistic and not misogynistic. Outdated or not, until someone actually forms it differently -surprisingly enough- I'd rather take the dictionary as reference! No offense..


 
This is getting silly. 'The dictionary' (in this case, the OED) has _more_ in it than you claimed and has done for at least a decade. That's not really a matter of opinion. I am not saying that the definition of misogyny you provided is wrong - it is the older definition of misogyny - only that you were incorrect to claim that I was wrong. 

And whether our Irish exile in Spain is 'angry' about this or not is something he needs to deal with. I'd rather talk with people like resal who know and love women's cycling.


----------



## oldroadman (24 Oct 2012)

resal said:


> Applying sense and market forces is wrong. Rigged markets remain rigged and defeat norms, for centuries if necessary. This is a rigged market - from the governance - women's 500m TT/ men's kilo, through to the male commentator who talks in so derogatory manner of women's races or in Hugh Porter's case often talks over the race about the next men's race. Sky are a massive part of the problem and it sickens me each time I read about their initiatives to grow the sport at the grass roots - only have aspiration if you are male.
> 
> There is only one way to break a rigged market and that is with legislation. Anything else and you will be planning going around the same tree, in 75 year's time.
> 
> ...


 
Crikey, do you feel better for getting that out in the open?


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> This is getting silly. 'The dictionary' (in this case, the OED) has _more_ in it than you claimed and has done for at least a decade. That's not really a matter of opinion. I am not saying that the definition of misogyny you provided is wrong - it is the older definition of misogyny - only that you were incorrect to claim that I was wrong.
> 
> And whether our Irish exile in Spain is 'angry' about this or not is something he needs to deal with. I'd rather talk with people like resal who know and love women's cycling.


 
This type of anger and aggressiveness is the very reason many CC members are reluctant to post in this type of threads!
FGS Monkey, I never disagreed with you per se, I just didn't think that IOTCB's post was _that_ offensive and found it too harsh to be called misogynist!! This is my opinion. If you're not interested in hearing different opinions, or if you'd rather talk with like minded people like resal, I'd suggest to invite them over to your place for coffee and chat.. no reason for open forum threads!


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

resal said:


> Instead of male/female [because that is ok the poor weak little girls, well they are no good at sport anyway and they don't really want to do it, well only the weird ones anyway, and nobody is interested in it anyway, well not anybody who counts, like a man, well I suppose they might watch it if all the other channels are broken and the porno channels have not started up yet (Fluff - that is exactly how you come across !)] make it.


 
I've been a woman for the last 43 years and pro athlete for 16, so allow me to know first hand about how people perceive women in sports!
Now if you like to believe that men would prefer to watch women's cycling over men's given the choice (and feel free to swap porno channels with Champions League, Premier League, Rugby Union Heineken Cup, the Ashes or any other goodies for that matter..) be my guest! That's your opinion and we live in a free country!


----------



## lyn1 (25 Oct 2012)

[quote="resal, Applying sense and market forces is wrong. Rigged markets remain rigged and defeat norms, for centuries if necessary. This is a rigged market - from the governance - women's 500m TT/ men's kilo, through to the male commentator who talks in so derogatory manner of women's races or in Hugh Porter's case often talks over the race about the next men's race. Sky are a massive part of the problem and it sickens me each time I read about their initiatives to grow the sport at the grass roots - only have aspiration if you are male.
quote]


I assume SKY do not preclude females attending Go ride events so presumably your criticism relates to pro team level issues. I struggle to understand the suggestions that SKY should have a women’s road team and blaming them for current apathy, as these arguments do not present any evidence. Having spent 20 years in sponsorship trying to convince companies that sponsorship is not patronage and should deliver a commercial return I cannot buy in to the emotional argument. Presumably, SKY has some communication objectives they wish to fulfil over the next few years. These will include a variety of promotional options of which sponsorship of a men’s cycling team is one element. If, for example, the objective is to increase subscriptions, then brand awareness in key target markets may be a precursor. Who generally makes the decision within a household as to whether to subscribe to SKY? Males or females or both? If it is usually males then heavy focus on a female target is unnecessary. If it is females, then there are many promotional opportunities that could target them. Sponsorship may not be optimal. Even if it is, non sport forms may be better than sport options. Even if it is sport, other female sports may be more effective than cycling. Just because a men’s cycling team contributes to one objective does not mean that a female cycle team can necessarily add anything. 
Would you be happy if Sky withdraw all their support for cycling so they no longer represent a problem?


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

lyn1 said:


> I assume SKY do not preclude females attending Go ride events so presumably your criticism relates to pro team level issues. I struggle to understand the suggestions that SKY should have a women’s road team and blaming them for current apathy, as these arguments do not present any evidence. Having spent 20 years in sponsorship trying to convince companies that sponsorship is not patronage and should deliver a commercial return I cannot buy in to the emotional argument. Presumably, SKY has some communication objectives they wish to fulfil over the next few years. These will include a variety of promotional options of which sponsorship of a men’s cycling team is one element. If, for example, the objective is to increase subscriptions, then brand awareness in key target markets may be a precursor. Who generally makes the decision within a household as to whether to subscribe to SKY? Males or females or both? If it is usually males then heavy focus on a female target is unnecessary. If it is females, then there are many promotional opportunities that could target them. Sponsorship may not be optimal. Even if it is, non sport forms may be better than sport options. Even if it is sport, other female sports may be more effective than cycling. Just because a men’s cycling team contributes to one objective does not mean that a female cycle team can necessarily add anything.
> Would you be happy if Sky withdraw all their support for cycling so they no longer represent a problem?


 
Amen!!!!!


----------



## oldroadman (25 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> Amen!!!!!


 
MF, you commented that you are a professional sportsperson, and have been for 16 years. Which is great, in what sport may I ask, as a point of interest? As an old has-been, I'm always interested to see the succession of people actiually maiking a living from sport.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

oldroadman said:


> MF, you commented that you are a professional sportsperson, and have been for 16 years. Which is great, in what sport may I ask, as a point of interest? As an old has-been, I'm always interested to see the succession of people actiually maiking a living from sport.


 
I PM'd you oldroadman, as I don't think that anybody else is very keen on reading my life story..


----------



## oldroadman (25 Oct 2012)

MF, thanks for the PM, and your confidence that I would respect privacy, which I will.
Suffice to say that your background required a lot of dedication - much respect for hanging in there so long.


----------



## Trail Child (25 Oct 2012)

oldroadman said:


> MF, thanks for the PM, and your confidence that I would respect privacy, which I will.
> Suffice to say that your background required a lot of dedication - much respect for hanging in there so long.


I am the daughter of two former pro-athletes. I can understand the dedication and sacrifice it takes in a small way.

I have no idea how to promote women's pro-cycling. I definitely watch it when it's on (maybe once a year and only highlights on an all-sports channel?). But than again, I live in a country in which pro-cycling is rarely on TV. I have to rely on satellite sports channels that concentrate on European sports in between soccer games, rugby, cricket & hurling. US channels will show TdF, but rarely anything else. 

Women's soccer has become more and more popular here due to the increase in participation from the grassroots. Maybe that is what is needed. Make cycling more appealing to women and women might want to participate at the amateur & professional level more, therefore watch it and demand to watch it. It's hard to get into the ground level when bike stores are all men, geared towards men, and bike shows all have bikini-clad women showing off the latest bikes. Women are only featured at men pro tours as podium girls and masseuses. 

It would be nice to have some more cycling heroines and not be the only girl at the cycling club.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

oldroadman said:


> MF, thanks for the PM, and your confidence that I would respect privacy, which I will.
> Suffice to say that your background required a lot of dedication - much respect for hanging in there so long.


 
You're most welcome!


----------



## Flying_Monkey (25 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> I've been a woman for the last 43 years and pro athlete for 16, so allow me to know first hand about how people perceive women in sports!
> Now if you like to believe that men would prefer to watch women's cycling over men's given the choice (and feel free to swap porno channels with Champions League, Premier League, Rugby Union Heineken Cup, the Ashes or any other goodies for that matter..) be my guest! That's your opinion and we live in a free country!


 
MF, this is much more interesting. The argument about definitions is pointless - I didn't intend for that to be an issue on this thread and I apologise for helping to divert the main topic. (But I don't know how you read "anger and aggressiveness" into my post BTW. There is neither in the words or the intent, and certainly not directed towards you.)

FWIW, first of all, I don't think it should be just about the consumption of sport (i.e. the selling of images as products). The job of organisations like the UCI and national feds like BC is to encourage participation first of all and this should always be primary. The question of who watches is a secondary one, I would say, because it relates more to how one funds this participation. It would be pretty sad to me to reduce the question of how to grow women's cycling to whether men like to watch it or not. Think of triathlon as a counter-example. Triathlon has grown as a sport for men and women almost purely on the back of participation. Almost no-one watches it. I agree that women's cycling is probably never going to be a major spectator sport, so we shouldn't try to support it on that market-based foundation, instead it should be promoted strategically and subsidized by the UCI and national feds simply because, given the opportunity_, women and girls want to race._ I can't see the point of either type of organisation if they are not supporting people who want to race.

(PS: I believe resal is also female and involved in competitive cycling, although I may be wrong).


----------



## Flying_Monkey (25 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> I PM'd you oldroadman, as I don't think that anybody else is very keen on reading my life story..


 
Well, actually I think your experience would be a very valuable lesson for everyone. If you don't want to post it in the thread, I would love to hear it too...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (25 Oct 2012)

User said:


> deleted for brevity


 
I didn't actually call you a misogynist, I said that your statement verged on outright misogyny. I made no insinuations or accusations about you, your personal life or anything beyond this. I sincerely apologise if you received this impression. It was certainly not intended. I would like to bring this to a close because it is an unconstructive diversion from what we are here to discuss.


----------



## thom (25 Oct 2012)

Trail Child said:


> Women's soccer has become more and more popular here due to the increase in participation from the grassroots. Maybe that is what is needed. Make cycling more appealing to women and women might want to participate at the amateur & professional level more, therefore watch it and demand to watch it.


I think you're right about that - my general impression in the UK is that there is unequal attention in schools to boys/girls sports. Certainly that was the case at my school in N.Ireland 20 years ago.
Things are different in the US due to legislation (I have no idea about Canada) but I suspect it is broadly the same through europe as in the UK - (anyone here who can comment ...?). 
I don't buy that a priori women wouldn't be interested in sport but I do think its one of those things that needs to be part of your life when you grow up.
That said, what help is possible for women's pro-cycling now ?
I seriously think that making certain qualification standards easier for men's teams with female counterparts would be beneficial, at least sending a message that the UCI is prepared to back women's cycling.


----------



## thom (25 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> I PM'd you oldroadman, as I don't think that anybody else is very keen on reading my life story..


I have to say I preferred the other avatar ;-)
This picture looks like that of a craven caffeine fiend


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> I have to say I preferred the other avatar ;-)
> This picture looks like that of a craven caffeine fiend


 


How about that? A bit of competition..


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> FWIW, first of all, I don't think it should be just about the consumption of sport (i.e. the selling of images as products). The job of organisations like the UCI and national feds like BC is to encourage participation first of all and this should always be primary. The question of who watches is a secondary one, I would say, because it relates more to how one funds this participation. It would be pretty sad to me to reduce the question of how to grow women's cycling to whether men like to watch it or not. Think of triathlon as a counter-example. Triathlon has grown as a sport for men and women almost purely on the back of participation. Almost no-one watches it. I agree that women's cycling is probably never going to be a major spectator sport, so we shouldn't try to support it on that market-based foundation, instead it should be promoted strategically and subsidized by the UCI and national feds simply because, given the opportunity_, women and girls want to race._ I can't see the point of either type of organisation if they are not supporting people who want to race.
> 
> (PS: I believe resal is also female and involved in competitive cycling, although I may be wrong).


 
As I said before, I totally agree with your point of view, my only objection to what you say is that it's possibly too romantic for a world where everything is translated as money! Triathlon is indeed growing, but then again it's still quite "pure" if you like. Not much money earned, not much money invested, not yet spoiled, plus in itself it's a lower maintenance sport in terms of its supporting mechanism (at least compared to stage racing in cycling, team participations etc).


----------



## thom (25 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> How about that? A bit of competition..


 
 Excellent !


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (25 Oct 2012)

thom said:


> Excellent !


----------



## steve52 (25 Oct 2012)

there are women cyclists now?.............................................hide behind sofa!


----------



## thom (26 Oct 2012)

Interesting blogging site and show with : a podcast.


----------



## thom (26 Oct 2012)

Season's highlights - slightly OT I know but well:


----------



## Scruffmonster (26 Oct 2012)

Flying_Monkey said:


> There's a piece on CyclingNews today by Sarah Connolly about how women's cycling can be developed. She suggests 4 ways:
> 
> 1. Celebrating the differences between men's and women's cycling. Shorter distances mean different tactics etc. (see: the Olympic road races);
> 
> ...


 
Your '1' and her '1' are seperate points.

I don't think that people really judge womens cycling to be inferior as the stages are shorter. Her point was that womens racing doesn't generally work the same as men's as the stages are shorter. The dynamic is completely different.

As a direct comparison, you never see womens tennis matches becoming wars of attrition. Both women competing are capable of playing for at least two hours longer than even the longest matches. This results in them remaining fresh for the entire best of 3 sets, never having to worry about fatigue in the way that mens tennis players do. They don't get as sloppy as men do, they execute more frequently, the standard remains higher. Womens tennis celebrates these facts. It's very rare for anyone to comment on the length of womens matches vs mens.

In that way, she has a point. I had never watched a womens road race until the Olys. While I'm still not at a point that I'd actively seek them out, I'd certainly watch if it came on.


----------



## II tanfi3ld II (26 Oct 2012)

I think a re-instatement of the women's U23 programme would certainly improve women's cycling as a whole


----------



## resal (26 Oct 2012)

I did say what was needed - legislation. It is dead easy.I will address it in two ways.

plcs are required to have a policy on corporate governance. In there is a load of waffle saying none of their activities will discriminate on gender race or colour of skin. They will not run Tescos where they charge whites for parking but let Lithuanians park for free, beans are 30p a can for white OAPs but 40p if you are black. So far so good, everyone gets its. Some have specific policy statements on their community programs and sponsorship, they will only get involved in things that offer equality of opportunity or take up. Flora pulled out of sponsorship of a major sporting event some years ago, because the organisers thought the girls turned up to be decoration and did not deserve the same prizemoney. Dead simple - you have "cave-man" ideas, you don't get our sponsorship, we respect humans irrespective of gender, race or colour of skin. Most marketing departments are acting in direct contravention of the corporate ethics policies of their parent plcs, but you watch everybody run, when you point it out. "But girls don't like cricket". OK so don't sponsor cricket. "But w've done it for years ! Yep you have advantaged one sector of society against another for years - carry on if you want to be unethical, but if you want to be ethical, you need to recognise females and not give them mini-bats, bowl 4 ball overs on reduced length pitches and soft balls and then whine on saying nobody is interested in the girlie version of the sport. 

Then there is the governing body. Above is what cycling effectively does with its rule book. That is part of the problem. The BMB ran mountain biking in GB. They were forced by UK Sport to amalgamate with the BCF. They were given an ultimatum. Subsume or we ensure your sport has no funding or support at any level (this was before it became an Olympic sport). Enshrined in the articles of the BMB was a statement about equality. Any event had to have equal prizemoney. Simple, honest and decent. You don't want to comply, don't put on an event. UK Sport have a policy stating they will not allow any sports, they support, to discriminate on the basis of gender. They have an officer with responsibility for gender and race equality matters in sport. HE thought it was ok to discriminate in terms of prize money. His idea was that the sport would evolve and equality would be achieved in future. HE failed to understand that we can be here until domesday and with a rigged market, all the media coverage, all the prizemoney, all the sponsorship, all the everything geared around the men, never would it evolve to equality, rigged markets want to stay rigged. UK Sport instructed the BMB to subsume and turned a blind eye as the ideals of that organisation were trampled on by, what was at the time, a pretty shonky set up. The equality officer did care, but did not care very much, certainly not enough to do anything about it and certainly not enough to think hard about the questions I put to him. 

There was a great program on Radio 4 last night. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01ngnwq the bottom line. There were so many cracking gems it was hard to remember them all. A lovely theme was that the Federation "blazers" really loved their sport. They were passionate about it, cared for its well-being and wanted to develop it. But they were always, totally useless at doing so. They were a always a complete waste of time. They always came up with 100 reasons why not. The program contributors were also highly critical of the developmental capability of the media. And that is exactly where we are at. Women's road cycling has been in decline for the last 8 years. It is now common practise for teams to renage on wages or unilaterally impose fines of "a months wages". The UCI are useless. The women's Giro is hanging on by a thread, the organisation this year was poorer than it has been since the very early 90's. It is not because the organisers are bad or incompetent, they just don't have the funds or goodwill from others to do what they have done so well over the last few years. When the women's MSR or Amstel disappear, the Women's Tour is hunted to destruction, because that was exactly what happened, when a hugely well established and well run tour like L'Aude goes after many years and nothing comes into replace it, you will understand there is no evolution. That has been tried for the last 30 years. It does not work.

What you stick in any legislation is secondary. That will come from the principle. And that is where you start. How do you view female participation in sport ? Let's take a recent Boucle stage (funny how the Tour organisation smashed Boue over the use of the title "Tour", he came up with the name "Boucle" and now the Tour use the Boucle in their press material as an alternative - oh and he started in Corsica a few years ago). but back to the principle - are you ok with women doing a stage over the Izoard 2361, Mongenevre 1850 & Sestriere and being treated as irrelevant, getting not 1/100 but about 1/1000 the prizemoney of the men, the UCI not even providing enough governance to secure a minimum wage that a cleaner in a cafe at the ski station would get ? If you are fine with that - then I hope your God blesses you. Governing bodies - completely useless at developing the sport. I am glad I only listened. I thought it, But I don't count.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (26 Oct 2012)

@resal
Very convenient! So your pride allows you to be humiliated by forcing your place by legislation!!
Not because your earned it, or because you proved to anybody that you are worth watching, but because there will be a law not allowing the teams _not_ having you. Well let me tell you that men used to ride -not that many years ago- for the glory alone and the honour of participation and they earned their priviledge to be rewarded. No marketing trick or legislation made this sport spectacular to watch but the athletes alone. The money came afterwards and because of this very reason! I didn't see you saying anything about wanting to be given the right to compete for the pleasure of competition though! Your concerns are focused on prize equality!!
And what will you say if, when you force your place in, they decide to grand your wish by letting you compete against men -which at the end of the day would be the fairest of all, if you insist on equality- and you manage to get on a podium once every blue moon? How much will your prize money be then and how many women will be encouraged to participate knowing their odds?
And I don't know if you count or not. That's your decision to make. I know _I do_ when I need to..


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (26 Oct 2012)

II tanfi3ld II said:


> I think a re-instatement of the women's U23 programme would certainly improve women's cycling as a whole


 
Re-instatement? Isn't Women's Endurance element still on? (did I miss an issue.. or two?)


----------



## resal (28 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> @resal
> Very convenient! So your pride allows you to be humiliated by forcing your place by legislation!!
> Not because your earned it, or because you proved to anybody that you are worth watching, but because there will be a law not allowing the teams _not_ having you. Well let me tell you that men used to ride -not that many years ago- for the glory alone and the honour of participation and they earned their priviledge to be rewarded. No marketing trick or legislation made this sport spectacular to watch but the athletes alone. The money came afterwards and because of this very reason! I didn't see you saying anything about wanting to be given the right to compete for the pleasure of competition though! Your concerns are focused on prize equality!!
> And what will you say if, when you force your place in, they decide to grand your wish by letting you compete against men -which at the end of the day would be the fairest of all, if you insist on equality- and you manage to get on a podium once every blue moon? How much will your prize money be then and how many women will be encouraged to participate knowing their odds?
> And I don't know if you count or not. That's your decision to make. I know _I do_ when I need to..


 
You just don't get it. Are you part of the rigged market ? The guy at UK sport who let the BCF walk over the BMB principle was the problem every bit as much as the misogynists at the BCF. He definitely did not get it. He looked at his job title and pointed. He was a defender of equality - his badge said so.

You have distorted the argument I put, to support your position.


----------



## resal (28 Oct 2012)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> Re-instatement? Isn't Women's Endurance element still on? (did I miss an issue.. or two?)


There is no full time women's road program, the coach - Chris Newton - even at the time of the Olympics had two hats (one being the men's development program) and was stopped from attending women's races in Belgium on account of the cost of getting him there ! The Women's U 23 program seems to come and go with the wind. What more evidence of lack of commitment could be shown. But I am confident that to anyone connected with the women's program at BC currently, I am sure everything in the garden is rosy. Nobody is going up that pole unless they get the music and sing....


----------



## black'n'yellow (29 Oct 2012)

so maybe the 'ultimate' equality measure would be to abolish the women's categories, and have them racing with the men..? it already happens at amateur level...


----------



## thom (8 Nov 2012)

An article on cyclismas by Stefan Wyman about women's cycling in the UK.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (15 Nov 2012)

Well, US Cycling is introducing major reforms next season along the lines that I was suggesting earlier - events that include both men's and women's races, increases in pay and prize money for women etc. Let's see how it pans out, but if the US can do it, I'm sure Europe could manage it.


----------



## thom (30 Nov 2012)

*Lizzie Armitstead and Marianne Vos united in fighting prejudice*


----------



## oldroadman (2 Dec 2012)

If, as an experiment, women's raci g got the same coverage as men for a year, and then the TV audience was measured to see if the money spent was warranted by viewing figures, would that make resal happy? Because in the end at a professional level, what matters is numbers. All the other stuff about prize money and whatever is a second tier matter.
It's a bit sad when someone manages to have a go at people they probably don't even know at BC. But let's not let solid facts get in the way of a lively discussion, eh?


----------



## Flying_Monkey (3 Dec 2012)

oldroadman said:


> It's a bit sad when someone manages to have a go at people they probably don't even know at BC. But let's not let solid facts get in the way of a lively discussion, eh?


 
I think you'll find that resal has quite a lot of experience in cycle racing in the UK. Just because someone has a different point of view of certain things or people from you does not mean they 'don't know' those things or people.

And no, viewing figures are not the be-all and end-all - if that was the case, female tennis players would actually get paid more than men, women's tennis being more popular. It is not a free market - and nor should it be - It is a rigged market. We can either arrange it to favour more just and equitable social goals or we can arrange it to favour the status quo. Whatever your experience and your knowledge of the (male) sport, your attitude seems to indicate that you aren't much interested in the former.


----------



## black'n'yellow (3 Dec 2012)

Smokin Joe said:


> Now where near enough to mount 200 strong fields and three week stage races.


 


black'n'yellow said:


> Number of women's entries received for Welsh National Circuit Race Champs 2011 = 2 - not even enough for a full podium, let alone an interesting race. The category wasn't even run for this year's champs at Builth Wells. If it carries on like that, there won't be any women racing in a few years...


 
Fellas - either you are not listening, or you are not getting it. The problems in Women's cycling are the ones that smokin joe outlined on page 1 and I outlined on page 2. The 'top down' approach is not sustainable for those reasons...


----------



## resal (8 Dec 2012)

oldroadman said:


> If, as an experiment, women's raci g got the same coverage as men for a year, and then the TV audience was measured to see if the money spent was warranted by viewing figures, would that make resal happy? Because in the end at a professional level, what matters is numbers. All the other stuff about prize money and whatever is a second tier matter.
> It's a bit sad when someone manages to have a go at people they probably don't even know at BC. But let's not let solid facts get in the way of a lively discussion, eh?


A scenario is proposed that has no connection with reality and a conclusion assumed. That does not make "solid fact". plcs are required to have policies on corporate governance - fact. I am not aware of any that promote discrimination by race, colour of skin or gender. All, that I am aware of, promote precisely the opposite. However, a good number, but certainly not all, allow their marketing agencies to hoodwink them into programs supporting sports, that in their design are discriminatory. Some plcs recognise this and walk away or change the terms of reference of their involvement.

"Bottom up" has been tried for over 30 years now. If you followed women's road cycling you would understand that in the last 8 years it has been in serious decline. The market is rigged and as flying monkey puts it so well, not with any sense of anything approaching a morally sustainable viewpoint but one that entrenches an attitude that has required legislation to remove it from many aspects of human activity, in many societies around the World, e.g. employment legislation - you cannot discriminate in terms of payment, by gender. That was a rigged market and at the time, just as many cave men were saying that women just were not worth as much as the equivalent male because of "x", "y" or "z".

Oldroadman, I am not going to change your mind just as I am not going to be able to help you understand how contradictory your statement above is and how you will appear to others who do not share your prejudices.


----------



## oldroadman (10 Dec 2012)

Well that's me told then. I know nothing, after all these years in the sport and working with various teams (including women), nothing learned. I accept I am a prejudiced old bloke just working away in a sport he loves, doing what I can to make it better for us all, irrespective of gender, race, colour, inclinination. Experience indicates that a steady evolution approach gets things accepted, whereas revolution may seem OK until the counter-revolution comes. Better just carry on quietly and ignore the insults, eh?


----------



## thom (13 Dec 2012)

Wiggle join sponsorship of women's cycling : Wiggle - Honda.
Sounds like the deal is good for the athletes in terms of wages.
Given Brad's involvement, the Wiggo Wiggle - Honda (try saying that quickly) tie up is destined for great things (at least alliteratively).

They'll be riding Colnago bikes, slate grey with Orange highlights (hairdresser bike?). No doubt soon there will be replicas available through the online site. Quite interesting to see if Colnagos, like Pinarellos become much more common place on UK roads, like the BMW vs Merc rivalry.

Can't help thinking this is a great idea for a tie-up. Wiggle customers are knowing cyclists with funds. Merchandising is going to be dead easy to make available and you can't help think Wiggle's clientele will like the idea of assisting funding those nice GB women cyclists.


----------



## black'n'yellow (13 Dec 2012)

The team is great news, but the only downside is that Wiggle has now dumped all of its other sponsored riders, leaving a lot of promising talent (male and female) without support for next year.


----------



## oldroadman (13 Dec 2012)

black'n'yellow said:


> The team is great news, but the only downside is that Wiggle has now dumped all of its other sponsored riders, leaving a lot of promising talent (male and female) without support for next year.


 Every action has an equal and opposite reaction...only so much money to go round and operating at a high level is not cheap. How many riders did Wiggle actually properly employ (as opposed to dishing out kit and bikes plus a bit of travel), because they didn't seem to have huge impact in press coverage?


----------



## snailracer (26 Dec 2012)

Professional sport is a double-edged sword. While it can sometimes promote participation at the grass-roots level, it also distorts sport into entertainment, no better than watching pop videos or soap operas on TV. Sitting on my @rse watching a bike race/footie match, buying overpriced replica team kit or Wiggo's wheels/Beckham's boots - how does that benefit me, really? It mainly benefits those who make money from the sales, while making me poorer and fatter.

Nobody cries discrimination that so few men (AFAIK) watch "Desperate Housewives", or buy the products "placed" on "Sex and the City" or what designer clothes the stars wear to the Oscars. Pro sport, to non-sporty people (men and women) is no different from any other entertainment they buy into. It may simply be that women choose to spend their leisure money on different things.

This thread presupposes that women would spend their leisure money on pro-cycling, if only we "sold" it to them better. That might be true, but then we are simply discussing sales tactics, to which the ethics of fairness and discrimination are superfluous.


----------



## resal (31 Dec 2012)

snailracer said:


> Professional sport is a double-edged sword. ..........
> This thread presupposes that women would spend their leisure money on pro-cycling, if only we "sold" it to them better. That might be true, but then we are simply discussing sales tactics, to which the ethics of fairness and discrimination are superfluous.


 
If only.

It is not about selling anything to anybody because the market is so rigged nobody gets to see the product. It won't evolve in a billion years. It can't. It gets no oxygen or water. In shop terms it is still in the brown box it came in out the back. Nobody is going to buy it because it is not on the shelf. At the Olympics, when it was available to be viewed by mass viewership, that mass viewership did not give a fig what sex the competitors were. People just saw boys and girls trying equally hard and doing heroic deeds.

That is why the "fariness" has to be put in at the point where the unfairness is generated and that is right at the start. You want to sponsor a team - here it is - male and female. Then the sponsors would quickly start squealing if the money they spent on the XX chromosome athletes did not get the coverage that their investment in the XY chromosome athletes garnered. Market forces would then come into play.


----------



## oldroadman (1 Jan 2013)

Partially agree there, without exposure a product does not sell - simple.
Look at the example quoted, the Olympics, and the audience settled to watch GB competitors in many sports, regardless of gender. The Olympic RR for men disappointed many, but the women's race in nasty conitions was a classic. At Putney bridge, where I was standing in the wet, the crowd was still there when the camion balai canme through with a little group about 20 minutes down, still cheering them - great.
That said, the Olympics were a "special effect" in that people did watch an awful lot of sport, so it's hard to get a true measure of whether a major women's race would get the audience. Mind, if most races were as brutal and fierce as the Olymopic one, the word would soon go around, the the audience numbers would start showing, and in would come the sponsors and organisers.
The idea of compelling teams to have men and women sections has an interesting issue - looking at BC site's annual report I think women are about 15-16% of the members, and about 40% have a race licence.
So, there may be a problem actually finding riders of a sufficient quality to justify any domestic sponsor paying wages - the last thing women's racing needs is a situation where a few class riders dominate and the rest simply trail in via small groups, that is not the spectacle that is needed. Which domestically can be the problem, either that or a very negative and steady paced ecvent with a sprint finish.
Resal may have a view on the last point, I am not convinced that simply compelling sponsors and organisers will have the effect expected, rather it might discourage them from investing in the first place, which helps nobody of either gender, or the sport in general.


----------



## Zofo (6 Jan 2013)

redcard said:


> Isn't the problem that we're not really bothered much by female sports? It's not as if this is a cycling problem - we don't care about women's football either. If that sport isn't going anywhere, then what chance does cycling have?


Let's face it most men - who after all are the main target audience for sports viewing, aren't remotely interested in women's sport apart from maybe tennis and beach volleyball.


----------



## resal (6 Jan 2013)

Zofo said:


> Let's face it most men - who after all are the main target audience for sports viewing, aren't remotely interested in women's sport apart from maybe tennis and beach volleyball.


This was the unthinking commentator's (believe me I am being as kind as I can) trump card to any argument stating that women's sports had an audience, before this summer. Sadly the mega viewing figures showed that the public did not care about the genitalia attached to the athletes. They viewed it for what it was - the drama of boys and girls turning themselves inside out, in an attempt to win. We watched it all.

What that did exposed was the misogyny of the sporting press and the fallacy of that argument. The censorship they exercise, playing out their own prejudices, then masquerades as the "preferred" option. And if we doubt that the press are like that - just look at the Lance debacle. Too many of them have been too damned lazy and spineless to report on what every single one of them knew was happening. Not the sharpest tools in the box and add to that - without principle. It was just too darned easy to keep their snouts in the gravy train. Look at the screaming now going on about Ligget, Sherwin and Watson. Look at the writings of Fotheringham and Gallagher. Gallagher folded under pressure from Sky over his Yates story. Pathetic. I nearly spewed when I read the peace here http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/blog/535201/how-armstrong-tried-to-bully-us.html from Robert Garbutt trying to pose as "we were not in the Lance camp". I had taken Cycling Weekly all my life and one of the things that made me give up was Lance appearing on every dam* cover and pages of "Lance blows his nose", inside.

Does Garbutt really think we have such short memories ? I don't need to assert that this collective pack are a spineless bunch, they have proved it with how they have behaved over the past 14 years and the 180° spin they are attempting to foist on us now.

By all means spout their mantras - "There is no audience for women's sport". But all that does is place you firmly in a camp with a bunch of people who found it easier to sit around and cheer on Lance and bought his yellow wrist bands. It did not make sense years ago and it certainly looks ridiculous now.


----------



## resal (6 Jan 2013)

I did not come here to respond as I did above but I happened to be reading some motoring history. Post WW 2 on the rally scene there were a pile of female rally drivers, winning the Alpine Rally and things. Ann Wisdom, Pat Moss, Mary Handley Page. So why hasn't motor sport evolved so that Formula 1 now see equal representation? Since the motive power for the vehicles is not human generated, surely it becomes an equal playing field ? Is it that cars are complicated things and dumb women have trouble with fitting their handbags in and stuff ? Girlies just can't drive - I have seen it loads of times in the car park at Tescos - believe me, they only look in the mirror to check their make up ? 

Trash the physiology arguments, this mirrors exactly what is at play in cycling. It is a male dominated sport that rigs the market to make sure women don't progress. In half a century since the female rally drivers were making an impact they have been shoved back. Nothing evolves anywhere whilst there is a rigged market. And only one thing is doing the shoving. 

It certainly is not a nice concept. We know that in a racial sense it is so disgusting it would get the perpetrators locked up in jail. Face it - it is going on in our sport. 

"No - cycling is good an healthy only nice people ride bikes !"

Yeah that is why the World's greatest sporting fraud took place on a bike aided and abetted by all those "nice" fans.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (7 Jan 2013)

someone's a bit bitter lately..


----------



## Rob500 (26 Jan 2013)

There was an item on the news about the Wiggle-Honda Team but I caught it as it ended. Did anyone catch what it was about?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2013)

Rob500 said:


> There was an item on the news about the Wiggle-Honda Team but I caught it as it ended. Did anyone catch what it was about?


I saw a short photo-opp for the launch on BBC news yesterday. More details here - http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/article/wiggle-honda-womens-pro-cycling-team-launch-36272/


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (26 Jan 2013)

...and ofcourse the usual suspect(s) will shortly start whining about the fact that they're only aiming for single-day events and sprints. And about the pay ofcourse! And the insufficient media coverage! And the lack of government support! And the gender specific components that clearly is encouraging sex discrimination! And possibly the fact that black & orange is so out of fashion this year..! 
Can't win when women are involved..


----------



## Rob500 (26 Jan 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> I saw a short photo-opp for the launch on BBC news yesterday. More details here - http://www.bikeradar.com/road/news/article/wiggle-honda-womens-pro-cycling-team-launch-36272/


Thanks for the link. Hope they have great success.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2013)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> ...and ofcourse the usual suspect(s) will shortly start whining about the fact that they're only aiming for single-day events and sprints. And about the pay ofcourse! And the insufficient media coverage! And the lack of government support! And the gender specific components that clearly is encouraging sex discrimination! And possibly the fact that black & orange is so out of fashion this year..!
> Can't win when women are involved..


 
And just wait until the lass on the right starts making eyes at Jason Kenny






Actually, who is that lass on the left? I don't recognise her.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (26 Jan 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> And just wait until the lass on the right starts making eyes at Jason Kenny
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
The problem would be if Bronzini starts making eyes at JK.. 

(would that be Elinor Barker? or do you mean on the left of the blondie on the right?  )


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2013)

Marshmallow_Fluff said:


> The problem would be if Bronzini starts making eyes at JK..
> 
> (would that be Elinor Barker? or do you mean on the left of the blondie on the right?  )


 
Silly me, I'm confusing left and right! It looks like Elinor on the left but I meant the blondie on the right - I thought it might be Schnitzmeier but she looks too ''girlie.''


----------



## resal (26 Jan 2013)

This is going to be fun !

http://www1.skysports.com/cycling/n...landers-and-world-and-national-titles-in-2013

So Lizzie is going for the World title, National Champs and Flanders before Vos can win that. Well I wonder how Lizzie will publicise the run for team leader prior to the Worlds ?

Wiggle are doing their thing. (@137 Marshmallow fluff you had the first 6 words entirely right, then you went off track.) 

And Cookson is going to land Phat's job and then be squarely in the frame for Women's cycling, so he can develop it exactly the way he wants to.


----------



## Marshmallow_Fluff (26 Jan 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Silly me, I'm confusing left and right! It looks like Elinor on the left but I meant the blondie on the right - I thought it might be Schnitzmeier but she looks too ''girlie.''



That lovely lady would be Emily Collins!!


----------



## BJH (27 Jan 2013)

We can start by deleting the thread about the new team on this site given the comments on there


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (24 Sep 2013)

Bumpity bump!

Them wot's still interested might find the manifesto page on this site interesting: http://www.letourentier.com/


----------



## totallyfixed (24 Sep 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Bumpity bump!
> 
> Them wot's still interested might find the manifesto page on this site interesting: http://www.letourentier.com/


Thank you for that, I have just signed. Women face the same problem at amateur level with the men's winner getting more prize money than the equivalent woman, there is a ground swell of movement that will hopefully change this and the many other inequalities.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (25 Sep 2013)

It was really disappointing to see that Britain did not have an entry for the Women's ITT at the World Championships yesterday. Surely, someone other than Emma Pooley can TT?


----------



## totallyfixed (25 Sep 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> It was really disappointing to see that Britain did not have an entry for the Women's ITT at the World Championships yesterday. Surely, someone other than Emma Pooley can TT?


Correct, I started another thread on just this yesterday. Our top amateur would have made top ten, as would many others. This weekend I will hopefully be chatting to someone who should have gone so it will be interesting to hear what they think.


----------



## laurence (25 Sep 2013)

have GB had any entries in the junior races and TTs? i couldn't see any.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (26 Sep 2013)

In fact, this whole year, with one or two exceptions, the performance by Britain's top women has been disappointing - and I don't think it's their fault. They have the talent, but with the best will in the world Wiggle-Honda is not Team Sky and the whole women's top level racing this year has been shown up time and again as lacking funding, support and concern from the UCI, with the final straw being the top teams pulling out off Tuscany in the middle of the race - it's enough to put anyone off.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Sep 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> In fact, this whole year, with one or two exceptions, the performance by Britain's top women has been disappointing - and I don't think it's their fault. They have the talent, but with the best will in the world Wiggle-Honda is not Team Sky and the whole women's top level racing this year has been shown up time and again as lacking funding, support and concern from the UCI, with the final straw being the top teams pulling out off Tuscany in the middle of the race - it's enough to put anyone off.


Though, in fairness, the W-H team does only have one season under its belt. Sky didn't become a major team in one year. And their largely British team TT did make 6th in the World's.

As I understand it, W-H's Bronzini ended up being one of the leaders of the (fully justified) rebellion at Tuscany.


----------



## thom (26 Sep 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Though, in fairness, the W-H team does only have one season under its belt. Sky didn't become a major team in one year. And their largely British team TT did make 6th in the World's.
> 
> As I understand it, W-H's Bronzini ended up being one of the leaders of the (fully justified) rebellion at Tuscany.


W-H also has a good number of inexperienced British riders, a good few thinking about moving from being track athletes - it takes time for any team to find its groove and get consistent results so I have expectations they will improve next year.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (26 Sep 2013)

I think both of you are missing my point - I am not blaming Wiggle Honda, far from it, but if you compare the kind of resources they have to the kind of resources Sky has, and then if you compare the investment in men's cycling all the way up, you'll see the same story of a relatively woeful lack of investment in women's cycling in Britain and elsewhere. And there's plenty of discussion of that if you read the rest of the thread...


----------



## lyn1 (26 Sep 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> I think both of you are missing my point - I am not blaming Wiggle Honda, far from it, but if you compare the kind of resources they have to the kind of resources Sky has, and then if you compare the investment in men's cycling all the way up, you'll see the same story of a relatively woeful lack of investment in women's cycling in Britain and elsewhere. And there's plenty of discussion of that if you read the rest of the thread...



Surely the relevant comparison in resource terms is between womens' teams. The Sky issue is irrelevant. Irrespective of whether investment is high or low, or whether it is "woeful" or not, as long as it is relatively even across teams, then its fair to make performance comparisons between womens' teams and seek logical explanations for differences...along the lines suggested above. The level of resourcing is a different issue.


----------



## thom (26 Sep 2013)

I think the points about men vs women comparative funding is no different to last year and has been noted many times in this thread. The aspect of this that I do think is new and particularly relevant to right now, is whether things might change if Brian Cookson is elected president of the UCI this weekend. BC doesn't talk bullishly about promoting women's cycling so it is not clear he will aggressively drive something, but we can be confident he'll be more than happy to allow other people to do so. Sarah Connelly tweets frequently about her concerns on BC.

It has been a quiet year for GB pro-cycling performances but it is worth pointing out Armitstead and Pooley don't race for W-H. And in any case, even if they had done well, it wouldn't have meant there was no underfunding problem for women's cycling. It is true, they might have done better had there been better funding for them, in particular for Pooley. I do not understand how she is/was not a prime target for one of the larger women's teams.

My understanding of GB track cycling is that it is relatively equable between men and women, at least for Olympic program events because British Cycling realised the female successes would be easier to achieve as the relative level of competition was less.

In summary :
1) relatively speaking, this year as last, women's cycling is in under-funded
2) W-H have started funding a women's pro-cycling team that employs a new crop of GB cyclists who should emerge with results in the future
3) In pro-cycling performance terms it feels like a bad year; Pooley had less support and didn't race much, Armitstead had a quiet year, Cooke retired, the Wigglets are learning on the road
4) womens track cycling has had a very good year with a wealth of new talent emerging.

edit : another point maybe worth making - if McQuaid does go and Cookson can clean up the image of the sport, funding for everyone will improve, perhaps only marginally, but I do think the women's world will benefit it sponsors have more confidence that the sport is changing in a good way.


----------



## thom (26 Sep 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> the final straw being the top teams pulling out off Tuscany in the middle of the race - it's enough to put anyone off.


Why do you say it is a final straw by the way? Have I missed something and a camel's back was broken ? It seems to me the Tuscany protest had little meaningful impact beyond maybe the future planning of that event but perhaps I missed a reaction somewhere.


----------



## resal (26 Sep 2013)

thom said:


> Why do you say it is a final straw by the way? Have I missed something and a camel's back was broken ? It seems to me the Tuscany protest had little meaningful impact beyond maybe the future planning of that event but perhaps I missed a reaction somewhere.


I think Flying Monkey was referring to the conclusion any sane long term watcher of the women's road scene would come to but no-one on the scene dare say because it reflects so badly on the unfortunate organisers and athletes who, by no fault of their own find themselves brought to this situation. 

This year was the worst in terms of race availability and depth of field since pre World Cup days. Since in the late 90's both the Women's Tour was 2 weeks and the Giro was10 days, we probably have to go back to the mid to early 90's to find out where the women's scene has regressed to under the careful management of the present UCI Road Commission. 

Those time trial times in Florence were poor. Compare them with the Junior men. 

But don't worry help is at hand. The politician who brought us Team Sky(not) for the GB women when they could put us in the top 3 countries in the World on no support from BC and has so developed the GB talent that in the women's TT we don't have a rider, 15 years into the WCPP and who said "No" to a GB start for the women's Tour twice in the last 6 years, is now an avowed supporter and has on his "to do" list everything he hasn't done for the last few years.


----------



## thom (26 Sep 2013)

resal said:


> I think Flying Monkey was referring to the conclusion any sane long term watcher of the women's road scene would come to but no-one on the scene dare say because it reflects so badly on the unfortunate organisers and athletes who, by no fault of their own find themselves brought to this situation.


Oh, I see the point, that finally the women riders are making a collective protest.
I thought perhaps there was a large consequence already seen. 

I hope it doesn't go unnoticed but it is not clear to me much will come of it in a wider sense unless there is more cohesive and persistent protest from them.


----------



## totallyfixed (26 Sep 2013)

resal said:


> Those time trial times in Florence were poor. Compare them with the Junior men.


This is all that is wrong with men, why would anyone compare a man with a woman on a bike, or indeed any sport that employs muscular activity? I appreciate it is not always done deliberately in the same way that the highlight of the Worlds [and other sporting events] it is always the mens events, why?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Sep 2013)

I know there are no women standing for the UCI election tomorrow but how many women delegates will get the chance to vote?

EDIT: And to answer my own question, it looks like 2 of the 42 delegates are women - Russia's Victoria Lesnikova and Sweden's Yvonne Mattson. Just under 5%


----------



## resal (26 Sep 2013)

totallyfixed said:


> This is all that is wrong with men, why would anyone compare a man with a woman on a bike, or indeed any sport that employs muscular activity? I appreciate it is not always done deliberately in the same way that the highlight of the Worlds [and other sporting events] it is always the mens events, why?


In this case it was the simple fact that the Junior men are the only ones who ride the identical distance course ! 

But to get at what you didn't say, which is to suggest that the women's performance is its own unique sphere. Of course that is a fundamental and well founded argument, but right now it is very sad that there is all the justified focus on improving the women's effort/reward ratio to be closer to that of the men at the time when the scene has gone sub critical and this is so clearly shown in the performances. It would be ironic to improve the rewards of the women cyclists just at the time when the standards of performance are quite so poor.


----------



## thom (27 Sep 2013)

resal said:


> It would be ironic to improve the rewards of the women cyclists just at the time when the standards of performance are quite so poor.


Are you saying this about women cyclists in general or just GB cyclists ?
And either way, what is the factual basis for this statement - what performance measures are you using ?
They're questions of genuine interest.


----------



## Rob3rt (27 Sep 2013)

resal said:


> *In this case it was the simple fact that the Junior men are the only ones who ride the identical distance course ! *
> 
> But to get at what you didn't say, which is to suggest that the women's performance is its own unique sphere. Of course that is a fundamental and well founded argument, but right now it is very sad that there is all the justified focus on improving the women's effort/reward ratio to be closer to that of the men at the time when the scene has gone sub critical and this is so clearly shown in the performances. It would be ironic to improve the rewards of the women cyclists just at the time when the standards of performance are quite so poor.



Even in that case, the comparison still doesn't make sense.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (11 Oct 2013)

The women's Tour of Britain has received 2.1 status - this is good:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/womens-tour-of-britain-receives-2-1-status


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (8 Dec 2013)

Flying_Monkey said:


> The women's Tour of Britain has received 2.1 status - this is good:
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/womens-tour-of-britain-receives-2-1-status


But this is not so good - http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...uphill-climb-to-attract-sponsors-8990848.html Sweetspot have failed to find major sponsors.


----------



## oldroadman (8 Dec 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> But this is not so good - http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...uphill-climb-to-attract-sponsors-8990848.html Sweetspot have failed to find major sponsors.


 Don't they use the multiple sponsor method, then if one pulls out it's not a disaster? The major sponsor route was taken by Milk Race, Kelloggs Tour, PruTour, and look what happened when just one sponsor pulls the plug, years to recover. I think the Sweetspot model is a better and more sustainable one. Besides, they have said what they will do, and from observation, they do generally deliver!


----------



## thom (1 Feb 2014)

Good news of sorts : La Course by La Tour de France

A bike race pour les meufs to finish on the Champs Elysee on the same day as les macs.

Good stuff from ASO - Chrissie Wellington labels this "a game changer"

More info here

To be televised on Eurosport I hope this will incent sponsors to get involved more. It would be good also to run a women's TT before the men's on the penultimate day.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (14 Mar 2014)

I haven't spotted any mention of this on CC - http://road.cc/content/news/113832-bbc-broadcast-highlights-2014-uci-women-road-world-cup-video

Coverage of the 9 Women's World Cup races this year by the BBC could mark something of a major change for women's pro-cycling this year. Add in the *women's ToB* and it looks like it could be a good one


----------



## MisterStan (14 Mar 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> I haven't spotted any mention of this on CC - http://road.cc/content/news/113832-bbc-broadcast-highlights-2014-uci-women-road-world-cup-video
> 
> *Coverage of the 9 Women's World Cup races this year by the BBC* could mark something of a major change for women's pro-cycling this year. Add in the *women's ToB* and it looks like it could be a good one



Amazing really as I feel the BBC's cycling coverage is poor at best. Results usually a day late, if they bother mentioning them.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (16 Mar 2014)

User said:


> it is mentioned on a lot of sites, some to the point of telling people to tune in to the BBC on Saturday evening but can't seem to find it mentioned on the BBC, iplayer or on the red button schedule...


Point taken. I was hoping to catch up on the Netherlands race but I can't even find any mention of coverage on the BBC's website.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (16 Mar 2014)

User said:


> deptfordmarmoset after reading your response to my post, and after rereading mine, i should have worded mine differently my post wasn't meant to counter your post "I haven't spotted any mention of this on CC" that wasn't my intention... apologies


No offence taken, just a shared sense of frustration!


----------



## fimm (23 Apr 2014)

I thought this article was interesting...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/27041315
_"In February, [Emma Pooley] came third at a half-Ironman triathlon of middling repute in the Philippines. That result earned her more prize money than any of the dozens of bike races she has won..... [she said] "it seems strange when the prize money for coming third at a triathlon in the Philippines is more than the prize money I've ever won in a bike race." "_


----------



## totallyfixed (23 Apr 2014)

fimm said:


> I thought this article was interesting...
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/27041315
> _"In February, [Emma Pooley] came third at a half-Ironman triathlon of middling repute in the Philippines. That result earned her more prize money than any of the dozens of bike races she has won..... [she said] "it seems strange when the prize money for coming third at a triathlon in the Philippines is more than the prize money I've ever won in a bike race." "_


I'm afraid this is standard stuff, some TT'ing friends of ours told us of a race where the winning man won a top carbon frame and the winning woman won a pair of shorts. 
Recently, many of the top British female pros have taken to riding in the amateur competitions and mopping up the prize money, little that it is. My better half was considering contesting a particular series that runs throughout the year, but with Jo Rowsell, Katie Archibold and Sarah Storey to name but a few competing, what's the point?
It does all come down to sponsorship, I can't see what the risk is to a big company, providing, and here's the catch, that the various TV stations are willing to air the races. So really it isn't the sponsors, it's the media, and of them all the BBC ought to be leading the way. Complete lack of backbone and I believe discriminatory.


----------



## smutchin (24 Apr 2014)

Yesterday evening, not even the official letour.fr website had full results of the Fleche Wallonne Femmes. The results are up now, but coverage is still scant compared to the men's race. So it's not just the media, it's the race promoters as well.


----------



## The Couch (24 Apr 2014)

smutchin said:


> Yesterday evening, not even the official letour.fr website had full results of the Fleche Wallonne Femmes. The results are up now, but coverage is still scant compared to the men's race. So it's not just the media, it's the race promoters as well.


I do have the feeling that it's better with the "Flanders Classics" races. There is more stuff available (e.g. starting lists, video summery,...) and for example after the Tour of Flanders men's race, Belgian tv followed it with a (10-15 min) race review of the women's race.

For me, Letour (ASO) proves it's lack of commitment by not having a Tour de France for women.


----------



## thom (24 Apr 2014)

smutchin said:


> Yesterday evening, not even the official letour.fr website had full results of the Fleche Wallonne Femmes. The results are up now, but coverage is still scant compared to the men's race. So it's not just the media, it's the race promoters as well.


----------



## User169 (25 Apr 2014)

smutchin said:


> Yesterday evening, not even the official letour.fr website had full results of the Fleche Wallonne Femmes. The results are up now, but coverage is still scant compared to the men's race. So it's not just the media, it's the race promoters as well.


 
Well this forum is bucking the trend - some discussion of the women's race, but absolutely none about the men's!


----------



## smutchin (25 Apr 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> Well this forum is bucking the trend - some discussion of the women's race, but absolutely none about the men's!



I'd rather not talk about the men's Fleche Wallonne.


----------



## User169 (25 Apr 2014)

smutchin said:


> I'd rather not talk about the men's Fleche Wallonne.


 
I did wonder if that might be the case!

Dan Martin seemed to go well though - hopefully he's finding some form to defend LBL.


----------



## smutchin (25 Apr 2014)

I'm actually not that bothered about Valverde - not as bothered as some people round here, no need to mention names - but I'm more keen to make an effort to follow women's cycling and talk about it. I do think we need to do our bit to help promote it, insignificant though we may be in the scheme of things. 

Likewise the discussion that goes on round here of African cycling. I'm sure it all helps in some small way.


----------



## Crackle (25 Apr 2014)

thom said:


>




Lizzie went too soon but Prevot timed it perfectly.


----------



## smutchin (25 Apr 2014)

Prevot really does look like a class act. Didn't realise she's also been junior world champion.


----------



## User169 (11 Jul 2014)

Arguably the biggest women's race of the year on at the moment and not a single comment so far?

Great win for Pooley yesterday. She broke the Rabobank-Liv stranglehold by really taking it to them.

Vos still in control, but good to see her under some pressure when the road seriously goes up.


----------



## MisterStan (11 Jul 2014)

Delftse Post said:


> Arguably the biggest women's race of the year on at the moment and not a single comment so far?
> 
> Great win for Pooley yesterday. She broke the Rabobank-Liv stranglehold by really taking it to them.
> 
> Vos still in control, but good to see her under some pressure when the road seriously goes up.


People are a bit preoccupied arguing over Brailsford's decision to leave Wiggo at home. 

It was a cracking ride for Pooley. She showed good form at the Nationals too.


----------



## laurence (11 Jul 2014)

i was cheering Emma on from the sofa as i watched twitter updates - still, it's an improvement from a few years back where you'd be lucky to get the result within a week.

still not ideal though, watching the videos of the race online and it looks fantastic. maybe a trip there next year as every hotel in Utrecht seems to be full.

there is a women's 2 day race in Essex this weekend - TT and crit on saturday at the Redbridge cycling centre and RR on sunday near Saffron Walden.


----------



## Kins (11 Jul 2014)

I am going to watch The Tour of Britain in September. Stage 3 Definitely. Stage 4 maybe. Looks like they are getting some decent organisation in place for the womens tour in Great Britain.

http://www.tourofbritain.co.uk/stages/index.php


----------



## Buddfox (11 Jul 2014)

Pooley was clearly a bit irked by how hard Rabobank worked to try and chase her down, but a great ride by her


----------



## laurence (11 Jul 2014)

Kins said:


> I am going to watch The Tour of Britain in September. Stage 3 Definitely. Stage 4 maybe. Looks like they are getting some decent organisation in place for the womens tour in Great Britain.
> 
> http://www.tourofbritain.co.uk/stages/index.php



that's the men's tour, you know that, yes? 

the women's tour earlier in the year had better crowds than the men's event has had. the crowd at Welwtn GC was mahoosive


----------



## Kins (11 Jul 2014)

laurence said:


> that's the men's tour, you know that, yes?
> 
> the women's tour earlier in the year had better crowds than the men's event has had. the crowd at Welwtn GC was mahoosive



Really? When was the Womens? Sheesh. Well I will still go watch!


----------



## MisterStan (11 Jul 2014)

Kins said:


> Really? When was the Womens? Sheesh. Well I will still go watch!


May!


----------



## User169 (11 Jul 2014)

Flatter stage today. Vos takes it again in the sprint.


----------



## Dogtrousers (12 Jul 2014)

Interesting blog from Chloe Hosking, riding the Giro Rosa http://chloehosking.wordpress.com/2014/07/11/giro-diary-stage-seven/


----------



## User169 (12 Jul 2014)

The road goes up again and Emma Pooley bags her second stage!


----------



## jarlrmai (12 Jul 2014)

Great ride by Pooley.


----------



## User169 (13 Jul 2014)

Wow. Pooley again!

Vos wins the overall and Rabo-Liv gets all three podium places.

Great stuff as usual from Vos, but good to see her not get it entirely her own way.


----------



## rich p (14 Jul 2014)

Nice to see Pooley back near the top.


----------



## Buddfox (18 Jul 2014)

Couple of good results today - Sarah Storey won Stage 2 of the Tour de Bretagne and lies 3rd in GC, and Lizzie Armitstead second on stage 4 of the 
Thüringen Rundfahrt (Evelyn Stevens leads the overall)


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Jul 2014)

After the (relative) success of the womens' ToB earlier in the year, I wonder whether this isn't an opportunity for the UK to push this to be _"the"_ womens' tour, or at least the unrivalled second to the Giro Rosa. 

Of course if the sponsorship ££ aren't there then it's pie in the sky, but the (men's) ToB is never going to be more than a small sideshow, so it could be seen as an opportunity for the UK to have a premier event, albeit on a smaller scale.

For starters they could try to have a website that isn't absolute pants.


----------



## The Couch (24 Jul 2014)

How to Grow Women's Pro-Cycling?
Well... the women riders suggest tuning in to "La Course" on Sunday (as all of you here know if you signed the petition and received the mail )

Kathryn Bertine is asking for as much people to watch it as support for Women racing


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (24 Jul 2014)

The Couch said:


> How to Grow Women's Pro-Cycling?
> Well... the women riders suggest tuning in to "La Course" on Sunday (as all of you here know if you signed the petition and received the mail )
> 
> Kathryn Bertine is asking for as much people to watch it as support for Women racing


ITV4, Sunday, 2 - 4pm. You don't have to watch it to support women's racing, you can simply watch it as support for cycling.


----------



## fimm (28 Jul 2014)

So I watched it 
Do people think it was a success? I'm afraid that there was so much sport on over the weekend I didn't hang around after it had finished to hear the chat!


----------



## Dogtrousers (28 Jul 2014)

fimm said:


> So I watched it
> Do people think it was a success? I'm afraid that there was so much sport on over the weekend I didn't hang around after it had finished to hear the chat!


 
I'm not so sure. It puts women's cycling in the picture on the finale day of the premier mens event (good), and thus completely overshadows it (maybe not so good).

It's churlish to say that it's a bad thing, but maybe it does smack rather of a token PC gesture. We're a long way from stage races like the Giro Rosa or the Womens ToB appearing on an equal basis like women's track events.

But I'm trying not to be churlish. So chapeau to the amazing Marianne Vos.


----------



## Dogtrousers (28 Jul 2014)

User13710 said:


> I think that's a bit harsh, it didn't seem overshadowed to me. I thought it was a great start, and a great response by cycling to the petition. It was competitive and entertaining; I really enjoyed it. I hope it will grow from here into a women's Tour one day.


 Yes. A bit glass half empty from me there. I enjoyed watching it. (Except for the bit where Armitstead crashed  )


----------



## Flying_Monkey (28 Jul 2014)

A women's Sky team? Brailsford says 'maybe'... http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/28517286

This was my major critique of the whole Sky project - apart from the sponsor, of course - that with all the money, they couldn't find any for a women's team.


----------



## SWSteve (28 Jul 2014)

Flying_Monkey said:


> A women's Sky team? Brailsford says 'maybe'... http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/28517286
> 
> This was my major critique of the whole Sky project - apart from the sponsor, of course - t*hat with all the money, they couldn't find any for a women's team*.



Exactly, there are quite a few sister teams to the mens teams.
Liv (Giant) Shimano
Lotto Belisol
Orica AIS
Astana Be Pink
Rabobank 

And I've probably missed a couple as well. It's surprising that SKY couldn't find the cash for it...


----------



## The Couch (29 Jul 2014)

Dogtrousers said:


> I'm not so sure. It puts women's cycling in the picture on the finale day of the premier mens event (good), and thus completely overshadows it (maybe not so good).


It's a start, now if they could e.g. extend this to having the women ride the last week together with the men
(and have them scheduled to arrive at around the time that you can watch their final during the often slightly more tedious middle bit of a men's race)

Of course... I know in reality the details make this hard to do (what to do with the Tour caravan, have 2 helicopter crews flying around,...), but it's the way forward that has to happen in the coming years


Flying_Monkey said:


> This was my major critique of the whole Sky project - apart from the sponsor, of course - that with all the money, they couldn't find any for a women's team.


The Omega Pharma (or Etixx) owner Marc Coucke has also mentioned he doesn't mind considering it (but needs of course some things to be made right, like finding enough competitive riders for the team, a bit more attention to women cycling, finding other interested sponsors...)


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (29 Jul 2014)

I see Emma Pooley has announced that she's retiring after the CWG.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (29 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> I see Emma Pooley has announced that she's retiring after the CWG.


So it's her last pro race on Sunday? Shame it's not a climber's route.

By the way, earlier today I found myself sitting in the bath listening to Women's Hour on Long Wave (reception's better in the bathroom) and the programme was dedicated to the problems of women's sport. There seemed to be a strong consensus that access to funding, corporate sponsorship, and far better representation on sports boards (because the money gets divvied up by the blokes at the top). 

And then, probably at 10:30, without warning the programme was stopped and coverage shot over to Test Match Special. Voilà, a classic demonstration of attitudes to women's sport. A good discussion about difficulties encountered by women cut short for the men's game. 

And I like cricket but.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04bnd0q


----------



## Flying_Monkey (29 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> I see Emma Pooley has announced that she's retiring after the CWG.



That's really sad. She's could still win an awful lot. But I guess she has other priorities given her qualifications.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (1 Aug 2014)

Nicole Cooke's autobigraphy is out and it looks like it is going to be on the reading lists of anyone who has contributed in this thread (and should be required reading for everyone in the male-dominated upper echelons of cycling). If she had been a man, Cooke would have been celebrated and supported, and would have had teams built around her. As a woman, her fiercely independent, single-minded attitude marked her out as 'difficult' and hard to manage and, like Becky Addlington and many other strong female athletes, she was even attacked for her looks - as if it even matters to an athlete's performance. 

Let's hope that people will pay attention to her undoubtedly serious and workable ideas about that her legacy will mean that fewer girls and women in the future have to put up with the kind of chauvinistic treatment that she did.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (3 Aug 2014)

User said:


> But what a performance to finish on.


Emma won that race for Armistead. Immense effort.


----------



## smutchin (3 Aug 2014)

Brilliant team performance, rounded off perfectly by Armitstead and Pooley. So pleased for the pair of them. Pooley was superb in the last 30km and totally earned that silver.


----------



## Strathlubnaig (3 Aug 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Emma won that race for Armistead. Immense effort.


With a wee bit help from the moto


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (3 Aug 2014)

Fair enough, but I stand by ''immense effort!''


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (30 Aug 2014)

Just a little bump to draw attention to the live screening of the women's road world cup at Plouay today on the UCI channel on youtube.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z45MPP-a9Rk


----------



## G3CWI (30 Aug 2014)

How about a handicap system where a women's race starts part-way along a men's race, giving a catch and a mixed finish.


----------



## andrew_s (9 Sep 2014)

I see that Emma Pooley's new sporting career is off to a good start
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/get-inspired/28800884


----------



## HF2300 (9 Sep 2014)




----------



## smutchin (24 Sep 2014)

I like this -
http://prowomenscycling.com/2014/09/22/equivalenting-2014

...except for comparing Emma Pooley to Tommy bleeding Voeckler!


----------



## fimm (24 Sep 2014)

Boyfriend said: there's going to be a new women's cycling team. Called Giant-Assos. I said: that sounds like something from April 1st. Boyfriend: No, really, but as someone else said, "someone didn't think that through very well"....
No link, sorry, just what b/f said...


----------



## MisterStan (24 Sep 2014)

Rowsell speaking out against the selection policy and lack of entrant in the wome's TT.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/29340672


----------



## rich p (24 Sep 2014)

fimm said:


> Boyfriend said: there's going to be a new women's cycling team. Called Giant-Assos. I said: that sounds like something from April 1st. Boyfriend: No, really, but as someone else said, "someone didn't think that through very well"....
> No link, sorry, just what b/f said...


I don't know if it's different from the Giant men's team but their new sponsor is Alpecin hair products
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alpecin-announced-as-new-sponsor-for-giant-shimano
Well, Marcel Kittel is head and shoulders above the other sprinters


----------



## fimm (24 Sep 2014)

rich p said:


> I don't know if it's different from the Giant men's team but their new sponsor is Alpecin hair products
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/alpecin-announced-as-new-sponsor-for-giant-shimano
> Well, Marcel Kittel is head and shoulders above the other sprinters


 
LOL at Marel Kittel joke.
It is entirely possible that my boyfriend's contact on the internet was talking a load of rubbish (people do this on the internet. Who knew?)


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (3 Oct 2014)

Amaury looking for sponsors for a women's Tour de France:
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/20...-heir-wants-u-s-sponsor-for-women-s-race.html


----------



## User169 (22 Oct 2014)

Found a copy of this on the train last weekend..

http://www.femininmagazine.nl/

A newish sport cycling magazine targetted at women. There were big articles about Ellen van Dijk and about the women's Giro amongst all the usual kit stuff. Suggests that the publishers see rising interest in women's bike sport.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (3 Nov 2014)

Not related to cycling, but just a reminder that just because 'things are like this' doesn't mean that they will stay that way... 

England women's football team outsells the men...


----------



## steveindenmark (3 Nov 2014)

It would be good to see more womens racing, especially a TDF. We can relate to them much easier than the mens teams. Its the same as women golfers. They would still thrash us but not as much as the guys.


----------



## Rob3rt (3 Nov 2014)

steveindenmark said:


> It would be good to see more womens racing, especially a TDF. We can relate to them much easier than the mens teams. Its the same as women golfers. *They would still thrash us but not as much as the guys.*



They might thrash you...

Regardless, I can't say this has any real bearing on my enjoyment of women's racing vs men's racing.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (4 Nov 2014)

The. World Championships this year were an excellent illustration of why women's racing does not have the same status of men's. I've been following women's racing since the days of Mandy Jones, I even recall staying up half the night watching Connie Carpenter win the first women's Olympic RR in 1984, but in all that time 95% of the women's races I've watched have been as dull as ditchwater. The only exceptions that come to mind were Nicole Cooke's Olympic and World's wins. Sorry girls, if you want the same status as the men you need to up your game, considerably.


----------



## fimm (4 Nov 2014)

Why were they dull, and in what way do women need to "up their game"?


----------



## Crackle (4 Nov 2014)

steveindenmark said:


> It would be good to see more womens racing, especially a TDF. We can relate to them much easier than the mens teams. Its the same as women golfers. They would still thrash us but not as much as the guys.





Flick of the Elbow said:


> The. World Championships this year were an excellent illustration of why women's racing does not have the same status of men's. I've been following women's racing since the days of Mandy Jones, I even recall staying up half the night watching Connie Carpenter win the first women's Olympic RR in 1984, but in all that time 95% of the women's races I've watched have been as dull as ditchwater. The only exceptions that come to mind were Nicole Cooke's Olympic and World's wins. Sorry girls, if you want the same status as the men you need to up your game, considerably.



Two of the most patronising posts I've seen on women's cycling, made worse by the fact that neither of you probably think you're being patronising to the lickle girlies trying so hard..... I'll generously assume you've not really thought about what you've said.

And in answer, I can only assume that you don't realize what it takes to get to the top at any level of sport from boy's football to pro cycling etc.. and perhaps if womens cycling had the same level of investment, promotion and coverage it might be more comparable to men's cycling and even then we may not expect the same type of competition. Tactics, race length, season goals, physiology, will all play a part to make the racing different. if you're expecting like for like, you've not really thought about it.


----------



## oldroadman (4 Nov 2014)

Well having seen quite a few women's races the over a long time, I think overall it's much better than it was. There is stronger competition and extending road distances have helped. The UCI need to have a think about the stage race regulations, an average 100km a day could easily go out to 120. The organisers of the Women's Tour in GB got it about right, a parcours not too difficult, if it had been, as some of the top end riders wanted, then the field would have probably been spread all over eastern England. What seems to happen at a World's for instance, is that too many teams are either hanging on for a finish, or wanting to close down for a sprinter (whether they have one or not), and the result is a race where people are not confident in making a telling move, and then trying to make it stick. hence bunch finishes most of the time, preceded by a steady and controlled race. At the moment, there is not enough quality in depth, and that's a major issue. Outside the top 10-20 riders the standard drops off dramatically. It will only improve if money comes in (to encourage full time pro riders of decent ability) and a lot more women start racing. You need a big base to a pyramid to get a larger peak. No quick fix, I'm afraid.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (4 Nov 2014)

Crackle said:


> And in answer, I can only assume that you don't realize what it takes to get to the top at any level of sport from boy's football to pro cycling etc.. and perhaps if womens cycling had the same level of investment, promotion and coverage it might be more comparable to men's cycling and even then we may not expect the same type of competition. Tactics, race length, season goals, physiology, will all play a part to make the racing different. if you're expecting like for like, you've not really thought about it.


What I'm looking for is what you get in men's professional one day races, excitement, spectacle, entertainment. Sadly, women's races currently fall a long way short.


----------



## HF2300 (4 Nov 2014)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> What I'm looking for is what you get in men's professional one day races, excitement, spectacle, entertainment. Sadly, women's races currently fall a long way short.



A lot of the time so do men's races.


----------



## SWSteve (4 Nov 2014)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> What I'm looking for is what you get in men's professional one day races, excitement, spectacle, entertainment. Sadly, women's races currently fall a long way short.



Are all men's one day races exciting?


----------



## User169 (16 Jan 2015)

Women's strade bianchi race announced to take place same day as the men's race..

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/womens-strade-bianche-race-route-revealed


----------



## Flying_Monkey (3 Feb 2015)

Some thoughts from a few top riders here:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features...ers-discuss-the-development-of-womens-cycling


----------



## User169 (5 Feb 2015)

Lizzie Armistead into the lead of Td Qatar! Nice victory in todays stage and classy riding with Ellen v Dijk yesterday.


----------



## User169 (6 Feb 2015)

And Lizzie wins the overall! Good start to the season.


----------



## User169 (11 Mar 2015)

Bike racing Afghan styler...

http://widerimage.reuters.com/story/afghanistans-women-racers


----------



## Aperitif (12 Mar 2015)

Nicole Cooke MBE had some words to say about the reasons for decline in Women's opportunity. The Grauniad.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (12 Mar 2015)

Aperitif said:


> Nicole Cooke MBE had some words to say about the reasons for decline in Women's opportunity. The Grauniad.


She's good, isn't she!


----------



## Aperitif (12 Mar 2015)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> She's good, isn't she!


Cooke cooking Cookson if he doesn't shape up...

Afternoon, Chris.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (12 Mar 2015)

Aperitif said:


> Cooke cooking Cookson if he doesn't shape up...
> 
> Afternoon, Chris.


Good day, good sir!


----------



## Dogtrousers (12 Mar 2015)

Aperitif said:


> Nicole Cooke MBE had some words to say about the reasons for decline in Women's opportunity. The Grauniad.


She's great isn't she? I'll just take this opportunity to big up her book "The Breakaway" which is one of the best sports autobiogs I've read.


----------



## Flying_Monkey (12 Mar 2015)

Cooke would be a great choice to lead British Cycling...


----------



## oldroadman (12 Mar 2015)

Flying_Monkey said:


> Cooke would be a great choice to lead British Cycling...


Wouldn't it be interesting to see what happened if she stood for election? Then you would get a verdict from those who may have/do know her. She might do well. Reading the article it's clear she has an angle on what happened in her day, Over to WCU because as I understand it, to get elected you have to get nominated? I don't think "leading" BC is such an easy job as some people might think, and looking at the handbook all anti-doping work is now entirely in the hands of UKAD, completely independent as it should be, they even run the hearings, so BC have no say in who gets tested and what sanctions are used if someone gets caught doing something stupid. From my perspective, progress is being made, and I feel Mr Cookson has shown his cards clearly with the CIRC report being published. Of course the media will pick up on the "sensational" stuff but there's 220+ pages of it, and I'll bet your average journo has just skimmed it looking for sticks to beat the sport with - incidentally for some of them a sport which is a good part of their living. Funny old world. Bad news sells, no-one interested in good work quietly done?


----------



## HF2300 (13 Mar 2015)

I missed this part of the CIRC report - probably because with all the doping discussions the commentators passed it by...

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/10...ycling-report-doping-depressing-ignored-women


----------



## Flying_Monkey (13 Mar 2015)

The UCI has announced a reorganisation of women's cycling, with a new Women's World Tour from next season. A step forward. 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/womens-news-shorts-uci-to-introduce-womens-worldtour-in-2016


----------



## psmiffy (13 Mar 2015)

User said:


> for me the most important thing for me in growing womens cycling has got to be the ability/availability to watch the racing live be it TV or online and at least decent sameday highlights, the UCI youtube channel would do for a start....



so what percentage of the races are televised at present? and where? are you suggesting the UCI finance television coverage or even become TV company?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (14 Mar 2015)

psmiffy said:


> so what percentage of the races are televised at present? and where? are you suggesting the UCI finance television coverage or even become TV company?


The UCI Youtube Channel is reasonable image quality but tends to rely on links from whichever TV company is filming the race. The commentating is added on, very often by a man with an irritating voice. On the whole, it's amateurish. But it's a service, nevertheless. Static digital cameras, a bit of voiceover - minimal expense that wouldn't make a dent in the UCI's budget - would cover the gap until the money-for-audiences TV companies come on board.


----------



## Bollo (15 Mar 2015)

I don't think this article is particularly well written but it does highlight some of the darker corners of women's cycling and how far it still needs to go to protect vulnerable young cyclists.


----------



## HF2300 (15 Mar 2015)

HF2300 said:


> I missed this part of the CIRC report - probably because with all the doping discussions the commentators passed it by...
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/sport/10...ycling-report-doping-depressing-ignored-women





Bollo said:


> I don't think this article is particularly well written but it does highlight some of the darker corners of women's cycling and how far it still needs to go to protect vulnerable young cyclists.



Seems to be an echo in here... 

You're right though, it is particularly depressing that in this day & age these sort of abuses of power are still happening.


----------



## Bollo (15 Mar 2015)

HF2300 said:


> Seems to be an echo in here...
> 
> You're right though, it is particularly depressing that in this day & age these sort of abuses of power are still happening.


 Sorry HF - a full TMN to you.

I'm normally a stickler for checking if someone has already posted a link, particularly for threads like these, but missed that completely. Flogging myself with a used shredded chamois right away.


----------



## andrew_s (23 Mar 2015)

Ronde van Drenthe (women's world cup) starting in 10 mins on BBC red button


----------



## Dogtrousers (25 Mar 2015)

Giro Rosa route and dates announced http://www.girorosa.it/press-eng.html
_The *26th edition *of the *International Giro d'Italia Women Elite – Giro Rosa* has been unveiled today in Genoa at the *Palace of Regione Liguria*, programmed from 9th to 12th July 2015. It will start with an individual Prologue stage in *Ljubljana* to end after ten days in *San Domenico di Varzo*_


----------

