Could women riders catch the TDF men?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Joshua Plumtree

Approaching perfection from a distance.
In every other speed, power or endurance based sport, men seem to do better, so why should cycling be any different.

As totallyfixed said, comparing the two does a disservice not just to women's cycling but women's sport in general.
 

Foghat

Freight-train-groove-rider
Well, the question is rather naїvely phrased – could women ‘catch’ the TDF men? - but is worth discussion given the simplistic assumptions made by some commentators about how women compare with men in cycling performance.

Yes, some women could, given the right circumstances, but the question is a bit meaningless without understanding how cycle racing works and elaborating on context, or indeed clarifying better what is meant by ‘catch’.

Tour stages are ridden at varying levels of intensity (varying between days, within individual stages, between types of terrain, between rider roles and between breaks/peloton/autobus/stragglers).

So, there is no chance of any woman ever being able to ‘catch’ or stay for long with the men when the intensity is high - even Marianne Vos would find it impossible to stay with the vast majority of the male Tour riders in these situations, such as:
  • riding a col, or probably any significant climb, hard
  • battling crosswinds in hard-riding echelons
  • in any break
  • on the front
  • time-trials
  • descents ridden hard
  • on cobbles
  • fighting to rejoin if dropped
However, the top women on top form could probably ‘catch’ or at least stay with some of the TDF men in certain circumstances, such as:
  • riding with the autobus on a col (a fresh Vos might even be able to go faster given her good power/weight ratio, but bear in mind watts/kg is not the same as the ability to sustain power)
  • while remaining sheltered in the peloton (until the intensity got high, e.g. towards the end of a stage or on a strategic climb)
  • beating the very slowest riders in a time-trial (e.g. those saving energy and simply riding fast enough not to get eliminated on time)
  • maybe beating a heavy non-climber on a long climb (although note that the TDF sprinters can ride the big climbs pretty damned fast if they put their minds to it)
When I was riding Elite/1/2/3, Cat 2/3 and Cat 3/4 races in the 1990s, some of the fastest UK women (including national champions) sometimes entered some of the shorter Cat 3/4 races that I rode. In my experience, they never featured in breaks, never rode at the front, and never animated the race, but would often finish with the main field in less hilly races. There is a considerable gulf between Cat 3/4 races and the TDF and, whilst the recent advent of a developed professional female class has no doubt improved standards since then, this sort of evidence gives an idea of the gap needing to be closed in order to ‘catch’ the TDF men.

So, in answering the ‘catch’ question, one has to at least look at how women would fare if trying to ride at TDF speeds in TDF situations. Therefore, unless the OP is just querying the relative physiological capabilities of men and women in cycling, and whether these could converge at all (in which case why not pose a better question about comparative physiological data/research?), one has to conclude that yes the faster women could possibly ‘catch’ the slowest TDF men in certain circumstances or stay with the race in periods of low intensity, but they would have no chance of actually being competitive in any aspect of the race, or holding a similar length women-only race at similar speeds over similar terrain and distances.

That said, I doubt that it’s impossible that some women could ‘catch’ TDF men in other ways – such as earnings, fame – e.g. if women’s cycling became as popular to watch as men’s (as in tennis).
 

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
It wasn't my question. In the link, you will see that it was the question posed by a reader of the Guardian. The answers that follow are interesting in their levels of detail and open-minded attitude I thought.
I don't know enough about running to know whether it's essentially a sheer power exercise (in which case the commenter who points to the 10% difference has missed the point) or whether there's something else going on in that case.

The comparison with Andy Schleck is an instructive one - take out the pure power stages (sprints, breakaways and TTs) and I would't be surprised to see a woman competing quite well in a cycling event. She's unlikely ever to win a stage, of course, but on the right course she could come reasonably high up the GC. Of course, for those reasons very few women are ever likely to get a chance, because it's the same investment as for a male pro with lower returns.

For what it's worth, within the next 25 years or so I'd expect compulsory sex segregation to be overturned by politicians - so that we have "open" and "female" categories. In some sports where power isn't a determinant that will result in the best women competing against and beating the best men (golf, motorsport, snooker) or in the same teams (cricket) while in other sports (tour cycling) there will only ever be the occasional woman mixing it with the men.
 

Rob3rt

Man or Moose!
Location
Manchester
I am a bit confused by the question and the motivation (seems rather naive to me)...

The women couldn't hang with the men in competition if mixed. Could a women's peleton catch a men's peleton is set off one after the other, way to context based to answer, all else equal (including the dynamics of the race), no they couldn't!

The slightly better posed question below the headline re. how closely would the women's performance match that of the men, well if you take race dynamics of the race out of the question and just pit male vs female performance in terms of speed or power, even W/kg, men will appear to be performing better!

At the end of the day, men go faster in pure speed terms (I beat pro women cyclists in time trials) and put out more power, for longer. BUT, this is not, never has been and never will be relevant to the quality of womens racing!
 
Last edited:

Beebo

Firm and Fruity
Location
Hexleybeef
I In some sports where power isn't a determinant that will result in the best women competing against and beating the best men (golf, motorsport, snooker) or in the same teams (cricket) while in other sports (tour cycling) there will only ever be the occasional woman mixing it with the men.
Steve Davis doesnt think so. Quite a compelling statement about men and women!:laugh:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/snooker/27253279
Davis thinks women lack "that single minded determination in something that must be said is a complete waste of time - trying to put snooker balls into pockets with a pointed stick.
"Men are ideally suited to doing something as absolutely irrelevant in life as that," he said. "They're the ones who have train sets in the loft. They have stamp collections to die for. Right? These are stupid things to do with your life. As is trying to practise eight hours a day to get to World Championship level. "So therefore I think we are also the idiots of the species as well. The male of the species has got a single-minded, obsessional type of brain that I don't think so many females have."
 

swansonj

Guru
I am prepared to believe that men, being more autistic in general than women and more willing to behave like B***ds, are statistically more likely to prosper in some sports. But that of course is only the statistical generality. I happen to know a lady who previously held multiple long-distance running records - the likes of the 48 hours and 24 hours records. Running round a circular track for 48 hours continuously might be thought to be akin to putting balls in pockets with a pointed stick in terms of pointlessness - but she is a remarkably well-adjusted and pleasant lady (with a successful career as a senior civil servant to boot).
 

Flying_Monkey

Recyclist
Location
Odawa
When it is a question of speed and power men will always, on average, be better, however, contrary to what some have said here, as endurance and stamina come more into the picture, i.e. as it becomes more a question of survival, women tend to catch up with and can surpass men... there are lots of articles about ultratunning, in particular, out there but here's just one: http://www.runnersworld.com/trail-running-training/why-women-rule
 

montage

God Almighty
Location
Bethlehem
[QUOTE="Flying_Monkey, post: 3192562, member: 101"]When it is a question of speed and power men will always, on average, be better[/QUOTE]

Is that a Canadian phrase? :tongue:
 

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
Steve Davis doesnt think so. Quite a compelling statement about men and women!:laugh:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/snooker/27253279

The old "men are better because men are worse" argument. When you think about it's teensy bit sexist and doesn't do a great deal other than reinforcing prejudices. If I want moderately dull commentary on snooker I'll go to Steve Davis. If I want an insight into psychology or sociology I think I'll go somewhere else, thanks.
 

jarlrmai

Veteran
It is a naïve question - as I said earlier, it was posed by an anonymous reader of a newspaper, who might not know much/anything about cycling. I liked the fact that commenters took the trouble to go into interesting technical detail as have some responders here. Your answer, to a different question, is a perfect example of what I didn't mean - saying 'no they couldn't' with nothing much to back it up. Thanks for taking the trouble to type something anyhow :smile:.

What is your question exactly?
 
Top Bottom