Equal rights for women

[Elefantino]

It's been a while, but look who's back to covering sports events.

Today, ATOC (ow.ly/l9G5M) and a message from the two winners.

Evie rocked it.

[Louis]

Go Evie !!!

[earlfoss]

Meh

[Louis]

Apparently the women had to share parts of the course with randoms who were out on a charity ride. That tells you exactly how important they were to the race organizers. I suppose some would tell them that they should have been grateful that cars weren't allowed out there too.

[branflakes]

i don't want to sound ungrateful, because i am grateful for women (i have three kids, one of which is a daughter), but i am tired of hearing the bell rang for equality in women's cycling. this may be an unpopular position, but it's how i feel. i AM grateful there are those of you that feel otherwise. you are the kind of supporters women's cycling needs, but don't try to guilt everyone into seeing your perspective by slanting it with the 'equal rights' nonsense.

the equal right is already in place. women have the opportunity to ride in a pro peloton. they also have the equal opportunity to attract fans (as much as cycling can in the states at least). the public, however, cannot be forced to desire to see, and ultimately pay for the development of women's cycling sport.

when professional bike racing began in earnest, i'm sure there were some of the same challenges at hand. a sport in it's infancy, up against other more mainstream sports, doing what is in-effect fairly boring to the average spectator, specifically before radio and television enhanced the coverage. it took years, even generations for cycling to evolve to be self-sustaining. at points even now it's on the verge of not. ultimately cycling became what it is today, a sport for which we on this forum have a passion.

in my opinion, it's a tremendous disservice to the generations of cyclists who helped build this sport to what it is today, and an insult to true gender equality to attempt to manipulate fans into having greater desire to watch women's cycling purely because they're women. coverage, development, sponsorship, and ultimately success in sport is dictated by supply and demand. it's purely economic. given a few generations and passion from fans like yourself, i believe women's cycling can itself become self-sustaining. the more you attempt to force it on people though, the greater i believe the rejection.

congrats to evelyn stevens for her performance, and the sacrifice she's made to do what she loves. someone once told me, 'pioneers have arrows shot in their back.' as a pioneer i'm sure she feels the pain. dedication, time and patience will most likely yield the desired results, both for her and her craft.

[pbarry]

i don't want to sound ungrateful, because i am grateful for women (i have three kids, one of which is a daughter), but i am tired of hearing the bell rang for equality in women's cycling. this may be an unpopular position, but it's how i feel. i AM grateful there are those of you that feel otherwise. you are the kind of supporters women's cycling needs, but don't try to guilt everyone into seeing your perspective by slanting it with the 'equal rights' nonsense.

the equal right is already in place. women have the opportunity to ride in a pro peloton. they also have the equal opportunity to attract fans (as much as cycling can in the states at least). the public, however, cannot be forced to desire to see, and ultimately pay for the development of women's cycling sport.

when professional bike racing began in earnest, i'm sure there were some of the same challenges at hand. a sport in it's infancy, up against other more mainstream sports, doing what is in-effect fairly boring to the average spectator, specifically before radio and television enhanced the coverage. it took years, even generations for cycling to evolve to be self-sustaining. at points even now it's on the verge of not. ultimately cycling became what it is today, a sport for which we on this forum have a passion.

in my opinion, it's a tremendous disservice to the generations of cyclists who helped build this sport to what it is today, and an insult to true gender equality to attempt to manipulate fans into having greater desire to watch women's cycling purely because they're women. coverage, development, sponsorship, and ultimately success in sport is dictated by supply and demand. it's purely economic. given a few generations and passion from fans like yourself, i believe women's cycling can itself become self-sustaining. the more you attempt to force it on people though, the greater i believe the rejection.

congrats to evelyn stevens for her performance, and the sacrifice she's made to do what she loves. someone once told me, 'pioneers have arrows shot in their back.' as a pioneer i'm sure she feels the pain. dedication, time and patience will most likely yield the desired results, both for her and her craft.

In the next life, you may come back as a woman, and aspiring pro bike racer. You'll have heroes like Jeannie Longo and Maria Canins, who would kick your a** today, at least JL would. So, go with the rant above while you can. ;)

[branflakes]

In the next life, you may come back as a woman, and aspiring pro bike racer. You'll have heroes like Jeannie Longo and Maria Canins, who would kick your a** today, at least JL would. So, go with the rant above while you can. ;)
see, this is the follow-up to the request to be allowed to have free choice to either enjoy, or not enjoy, women's pro cycling. if i disagree with your perspective then i am 'ranting'. i'm not ranting. i'm only expressing an opinion. i also made very clear i support the efforts of women's cycling, but will not be told to what extent i should support it.

appreciate that others can disagree, it makes your perspective worthy of the debate.

[false_Aest]

Errr,

Effit. I'm gonna go euro and prendre une douche

[branflakes]

really??? the best retort is to assail me with name calling?

the irony is thick. intolerance (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intolerance?s=t) - look it up.

[pbarry]

see, this is the follow-up to the request to be allowed to have free choice to either enjoy, or not enjoy, women's pro cycling. if i disagree with your perspective then i am 'ranting'. i'm not ranting. i'm only expressing an opinion. i also made very clear i support the efforts of women's cycling, but will not be told to what extent i should support it.

appreciate that other's can disagree, it makes you're perspective worthy of the debate.

Um, of course, you can have your own opinion and express it, [and no one told you how to think or what to support], and then, you can expect a rebuttal to your, [in this case], flawed argument. If you can't weather the idea of a hypothetical future situation, or getting thrashed by JL up any hill, or having your argument called a "rant", then the next life may bring even less than what I suggested above. Make a statement and be prepared to defend it, without being a victim.

[duke]

So, if you don't agree with someone else's opinion you are a douche.....you have pretty much named yourself.

[branflakes]

Fine and good. I get it. But the problem is that you're already assuming that we're trying to "GUILT" you into supporting women's cycling. Mentioning equal rights, equal pay, equal anything is NOT guilting anything.

The problem is that too often women aren't given their fair share (time, respect, $$, primes, etc) and as soon as its mentioned there's a few men who go on the defensive. Don't go on the defensive. That's all.
it's not an assumption of trying to 'guilt'. it's the pure and simple fact that 'equal xxx' is an term meant to invoke an emotional response. given the history of our great nation and the challenge women had to get to vote, or blacks had to simply live as a human being, and the efforts it took to provide them with EQUALITY. these groups were flatly DENIED these things, and the movements to provide them equality righted those wrongs.

so, equality in this instance is already met. with that said, women's cycling deserves more fans. cheerlead for them, spread the message, help the sport reach a critical mass. just don't confuse the movement with what equality really stands for in this country.

[giverdada]

sure. supply and demand. 'simple' economics. but the supply and demand and definitely the economics are all rather complex systems that have been sexist since their onsets.

the grassroots level of our sport is a great place to see the sexism first hand. maybe the fields are smaller (and well maybe not). maybe they have to mix a bunch of levels just to get a peloton on the course. but, on the course, where the no name men and no name women get out there and race their asses off for points and pride and not much in the way of prizes, the results will be awarded differently. check out the prize allocations for no name men vs. no name women. (obviously the publicized pro sports arena is what you're talking about in terms of supply and demand, but i think you may miss the more educational arena in terms of the origin of its systemic drawbacks: amateur racing.) the men go home to day jobs. the women go home to day jobs. the men compete for prizes that are anywhere from 20% - 150% more than the prizes of the women riding the same distance on the same course (often at the same speed). and maybe i miss things in my definitely biased view, but i find both/all events equally 'exciting' (or boring) to spectate, and i have vested interests in both packs.

i dig women's racing. i do not dig the constant condescension it receives locally and on the world stage. and no, we cannot force others to value things they do not value, but i think there is a lot we CAN do to value things that are great and valuable. a little (news coverage) goes a long way (toward making women and girls welcome in the world of athletics (without a rule about how little of their bodies must be covered while they sweat on the court)).

honestly, though, what the hell do i know? i just want my kids to ride bikes and run far and not be a$$holes.

[branflakes]

Um, of course, you can have your own opinion and express it, [and no one told you how to think or what to support], and then, you can expect a rebuttal to your, [in this case], flawed argument. If you can't weather the idea of a hypothetical future situation, or getting thrashed by JL up any hill, or having your argument called a "rant", then the next life may bring even less than what I suggested above. Make a statement and be prepared to defend it, without being a victim.
i'm no victim.....i'm only asking for 'equality' in having a voice.

[pbarry]

sure. supply and demand. 'simple' economics. but the supply and demand and definitely the economics are all rather complex systems that have been sexist since their onsets.

the grassroots level of our sport is a great place to see the sexism first hand. maybe the fields are smaller (and well maybe not). maybe they have to mix a bunch of levels just to get a peloton on the course. but, on the course, where the no name men and no name women get out there and race their asses off for points and pride and not much in the way of prizes, the results will be awarded differently. check out the prize allocations for no name men vs. no name women. (obviously the publicized pro sports arena is what you're talking about in terms of supply and demand, but i think you may miss the more educational arena in terms of the origin of its systemic drawbacks: amateur racing.) the men go home to day jobs. the women go home to day jobs. the men compete for prizes that are anywhere from 20% - 150% more than the prizes of the women riding the same distance on the same course (often at the same speed). and maybe i miss things in my definitely biased view, but i find both/all events equally 'exciting' (or boring) to spectate, and i have vested interests in both packs.

i dig women's racing. i do not dig the constant condescension it receives locally and on the world stage. and no, we cannot force others to value things they do not value, but i think there is a lot we CAN do to value things that are great and valuable. a little (news coverage) goes a long way (toward making women and girls welcome in the world of athletics (without a rule about how little of their bodies must be covered while they sweat on the court)).

honestly, though, what the hell do i know? i just want my kids to ride bikes and run far and not be a$$holes.

Post Of The Day! Thanks for your eloquent perspective. Cheers

[branflakes]

honestly, though, what the hell do i know? i just want my kids to ride bikes and run far and not be a$$holes.
well said! agreed 100%

and thanks for the insight to root causal. i did not know those statistics on amateur racing. i agree the statistics you cite should be on more equal footing.

[CunegoFan]

check out the prize allocations for no name men vs. no name women. (obviously the publicized pro sports arena is what you're talking about in terms of supply and demand, but i think you may miss the more educational arena in terms of the origin of its systemic drawbacks: amateur racing.) the men go home to day jobs. the women go home to day jobs. the men compete for prizes that are anywhere from 20% - 150% more than the prizes of the women riding the same distance on the same course (often at the same speed).


Did you check out the ratio of participants in those events with prizes of 20-150% more?

[aoe]

it's not an assumption of trying to 'guilt'. it's the pure and simple fact that 'equal xxx' is an term meant to invoke an emotional response. given the history of our great nation and the challenge women had to get to vote, or blacks had to simply live as a human being, and the efforts it took to provide them with EQUALITY. these groups were flatly DENIED these things, and the movements to provide them equality righted those wrongs.

so, equality in this instance is already met. with that said, women's cycling deserves more fans. cheerlead for them, spread the message, help the sport reach a critical mass. just don't confuse the movement with what equality really stands for in this country.

Your knowledge of both of these are flawed, making the basis of your argument critically so.

If you are as "tired" as you say in your OP, imagine how Nicole Cooke must feel. Empathy will be your greatest tool if you truly want to understand an opposing view.

[earlfoss]

Nicole Cooke had a good run and then some bad years followed by retirement. She went off on a tirade for a retirement statement blaming everyone but herself for the decline of her pro career. She sounded almost as whiny and unhinged as Emma Pooley.

I have respect for Mara Abbott, Bronzini, and Vos as good pro riders but women's cycling just doesn't do it for me and apparently for the majority of sports fans. It sucks but that's a fact.

It's not a "rights" issue and it's a little insulting to those who fight for legit equal rights causes. Good for races offering equal prize money but that doesn't put more butts on the curb watching the race. If the market is there to support women's cycling then it will flourish and if not you get what we have now or worse.

[branflakes]

Your knowledge of both of these are flawed, making the basis of your argument critically so.

If you are as "tired" as you say in your OP, imagine how Nicole Cooke must feel. Empathy will be your greatest tool if you truly want to understand an opposing view.
the argument is truly futile, as there is always someone else who knows 'better' or 'more'. so someone will always be wrong, particularly when faced against someone with conviction and bias. obviously i'm that person who's wrong. because you told me.

i can imagine how nicole feels. or realistically i can't. just like you probably can't. no one forced her to do what she does. she has the OPPORTUNITY, and chose to pursue the dream. kudos to her for that! she isn't a victim, however. she knew what she was up against. she's a hero to many, and that's powerful. no need to victimize her for greater 'empathy'.

[firerescuefin]

I agreed with pretty much everything you said...clearly, I'm an ignorant douche, who doesn't get it and barely rates to put 2 sentences together. I'm always amused (actually not really) ...when tolerance extends to those who only share a similar opinion to your own. I hope all that were throwing stones are dong everything that that is within your power to make women's racing take off. If you are, then a tip of the hat to you...for real.





i don't want to sound ungrateful, because i am grateful for women (i have three kids, one of which is a daughter), but i am tired of hearing the bell rang for equality in women's cycling. this may be an unpopular position, but it's how i feel. i AM grateful there are those of you that feel otherwise. you are the kind of supporters women's cycling needs, but don't try to guilt everyone into seeing your perspective by slanting it with the 'equal rights' nonsense.

the equal right is already in place. women have the opportunity to ride in a pro peloton. they also have the equal opportunity to attract fans (as much as cycling can in the states at least). the public, however, cannot be forced to desire to see, and ultimately pay for the development of women's cycling sport.

when professional bike racing began in earnest, i'm sure there were some of the same challenges at hand. a sport in it's infancy, up against other more mainstream sports, doing what is in-effect fairly boring to the average spectator, specifically before radio and television enhanced the coverage. it took years, even generations for cycling to evolve to be self-sustaining. at points even now it's on the verge of not. ultimately cycling became what it is today, a sport for which we on this forum have a passion.

in my opinion, it's a tremendous disservice to the generations of cyclists who helped build this sport to what it is today, and an insult to true gender equality to attempt to manipulate fans into having greater desire to watch women's cycling purely because they're women. coverage, development, sponsorship, and ultimately success in sport is dictated by supply and demand. it's purely economic. given a few generations and passion from fans like yourself, i believe women's cycling can itself become self-sustaining. the more you attempt to force it on people though, the greater i believe the rejection.

congrats to evelyn stevens for her performance, and the sacrifice she's made to do what she loves. someone once told me, 'pioneers have arrows shot in their back.' as a pioneer i'm sure she feels the pain. dedication, time and patience will most likely yield the desired results, both for her and her craft.

[chengher87]

Didn't Jeannie Longo's husband just get busted for EPO or something? No wonder she's been able to ride for so long..

[akelman]

.

[chengher87]

Actually, did you see the blatant drafting going with Evelyn Stevens in the time trial. It seemed like they didn't even care about enforcing the rules and just wanted it to be over with. Isn't the rule at least 25 feet back or something?

[firerescuefin]

NBA...I like it

WNBA...unwatchable

Men's tennis...like it

Women's tennis...I like it

Premiership, UEFA Cup, Spanish league....love it

MLS ( mens) unwatchable

Women's World Cup...loved it

[akelman]

Have you ever been to a live MLS game, Geoff? They can be incredibly fun, though I agree that the quality of play pales in comparison to what one sees in the various European and Latin American leagues.

[akelman]

A friend invited me to go to Brazil next year for the World Cup, but I don't think I can justify the time or the money.

[firerescuefin]

Have you ever been to a live MLS game, Geoff? They can be incredibly fun, though I agree that the quality of play pales in comparison to what one sees in the various European and Latin American leagues.

I have been to a couple of MLS games...great bang for the buck (in person)...would consider a ticket package to the Rapids when the kids get a little older. You need to make it to Brasil....just for the event.

A good friend of mine has a daughter (Kristen Williams) who at 15 is a National Champion time trialist and a NC on the track (Omnimium)...and whose goal is to compete for a WC this year on the track. She rides for Exergy's U16 devlopment team. We support her and go to her races when we can. My boys think she is a superstar and I talk to them about her being in the Olympics someday. All that being said, I don't think it is her "right" to pursue professional cycling, and to get paid what a pro tour rider is paid. As others have said...she'll have to weigh the pros and the cons...just like all big boys and girls do when they choose their paths.

This is not a title 9 issue. Cycling at the professional level is entertainment, just like music or hollywood. I'm curious how long the NBA should bankroll the WNBA before people are just allowed to say the WNBA should live/die on it's own merit?

[akelman]

This is not a title 9 issue. Cycling at the professional level is entertainment, just like music or hollywood. I'm curious how long the NBA should bankroll the WNBA before people are just allowed to say the WNBA should live/die on it's own merit?

People use whatever levers they can -- including the rhetoric of equal rights -- to gain a bigger piece of the pie. It's the American way. Having said that, I don't care at all if people like women's cycling or any other sport.

[akelman]

As for the WNBA, I expect that the NBA will bankroll it only so long as doing so seems like a good business decision to Adam Silver and the NBA owners. But of course, there's no such thing as a perfectly free market -- except in economic theory -- and business decisions are almost never entirely rational or transparent. Which is to say, who knows?

[1centaur]

I totally agree with branflakes, who expressed the argument articulately and specifically and deserved better counters than general assertions.

Sticking to logic....

Distance, time and effort mean nothing when it comes to prize money. This is a business, not a pat on the head for trying.

The flaw in the "equality" push is the jump to the end point without working through the intermediate steps. Where we are is that the buying public values men's racing more for whatever reason - I don't really care why and realize we can all imagine and rationalize good and bad reasons, but I think we can agree that the value placed on men's racing by people with money is greater.

If prize money is to be equalized other than as a gift or to pay to shut off the squawking, the people need to value women's racing the way they do men's. That does not happen by paying them equal prize money, it happens by putting on a show that attracts fans and interest to an equal degree. But if the show never gets to be seen, how can women show they are equally valuable? Well, how did men show it? Partly because men like sports more than women in the aggregate and so were more likely to go watch a race and would have a (rational) bias to thinking men in this sport are faster/stronger/more fun to watch than women. That makes building women's cycling up from the ground level a challenge - has any women's version of a traditional men's sport EVER drawn equal interest from men (or as many women as men)? Men have been exposed to women's soccer (very enjoyable IMO) and women's basketball (very much not, IMO) and don't really care. Most of us have seen some women's cycling and like it OK but if we're allocating our viewing hours would pick men's cycling, IMO. We're not sexist (most of us) we just like faster and stronger in our sports. Personally I like NFL football more than college football and NHL hockey more than college hockey and I'd watch pro cycling over college cycling any day of the week, but there are niches (some large) for all those lesser versions. They don't get compensated equally to pros, though, even if their games are just as long and they try really hard....

So women cyclists have two choices: find angels who will give them chances to race, get them TV coverage, pay their living expenses, and hope the public likes what they see enough to grant pay equality, or demand equal pay and hope some kind of guilt reaction works for them. The latter seems more likely to work. That's not equality, but it is more money.

On the margin, I'd like to see the ATOC give more exposure to women's racing. Use the closed roads and the infrastructure to give them a proper venue and demand 30 minutes of coverage from NBCSports as part of the contract. Help seed interest so if the product is worthy it has a chance to catch on. Grab a great story like Evie Stevens and milk it while she's in her prime for the good of the sport. I know it won't be a money maker now but it feels like a small and easy gesture with potentially a strong impact on future women racers. I suspect we all see way more women on the roads today than we did a decade ago and exposure for people like Evie Stevens does not hurt that. Even a sexist can see that having more women feel positively about pro cycling can mean less resistance to watching cycling on TV in the years to come. If equal economic value is earned, actually earned, along the way, that's a major win for the sport's sponsors.

[bluesea]

To stay close to topic, FIFA Women's World Cup stages some pretty exciting games.

[oldpotatoe]

In the next life, you may come back as a woman, and aspiring pro bike racer. You'll have heroes like Jeannie Longo and Maria Canins, who would kick your a** today, at least JL would. So, go with the rant above while you can. ;)

Jeannie Longo? YGBSM.

[FlashUNC]

The argument that "equality has been met" falls apart imo when you consider that the things women's cyclists are asking for now are what the men's side got long about a century ago -- promoters hyping races and paying outsized purses to generate public interest and a depth of competition, media covering the sport religiously and mythologizing heroes that generate further interest, and sponsors who see the value in being part of the spectacle of it all.

Of course no one should be compelled to support or watch women's racing if they don't want to, but what options does the average fan have these days to watch the pro women mix it up? It ain't on TV, and writers following the peloton are few and far between. Perfect example in the U.S.: It was ridiculous trying to find coverage of the Men's Olympic Road Race, but it at least was on somewhere. The completely superior and suitably more, ahem, "epic" women's race was nowhere to be found.

If Marianne Vos, the most dominant cyclist since Eddy Merckx, can't generate interest in women's cycling -- even among avid cyclists and fans of racing -- then something is seriously wrong with the support the sport gets, from the UCI on down.

It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. No one watches because no one can watch, therefore it is considered a failure and why pour money into its development?

So yeah, I was stoked to see both TeeJay and Evelyn speak out. Not to mention Wiggo's comments last year, and putting his money where his mouth is to boot.

[firerescuefin]

The argument that "equality has been met" falls apart imo when you consider that the things women's cyclists are asking for now are what the men's side got long about a century ago -- promoters hyping races and paying outsized purses to generate public interest and a depth of competition, media covering the sport religiously and mythologizing heroes that generate further interest, and sponsors who see the value in being part of the spectacle of it all.

Of course no one should be compelled to support or watch women's racing if they don't want to, but what options does the average fan have these days to watch the pro women mix it up? It ain't on TV, and writers following the peloton are few and far between. Perfect example in the U.S.: It was ridiculous trying to find coverage of the Men's Olympic Road Race, but it at least was on somewhere. The completely superior and suitably more, ahem, "epic" women's race was nowhere to be found.

If Marianne Vos, the most dominant cyclist since Eddy Merckx, can't generate interest in women's cycling -- even among avid cyclists and fans of racing -- then something is seriously wrong with the support the sport gets, from the UCI on down.
It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. No one watches because no one can watch, therefore it is considered a failure and why pour money into its development?

So yeah, I was stoked to see both TeeJay and Evelyn speak out. Not to mention Wiggo's comments last year, and putting his money where his mouth is to boot.

I can't speak for Europe and Asia, but I can for the US. Not enough people want to watch to make it profitable. The "support" provided is what is. It's neither right nor wrong (at the professional level). Seems pretty simple to me. If networks struggle to make money on the big events in an established men's sport, then what are the chances that enough viewers will watch to make it profitable, given that the majority that watch cycling are already men. So now you're looking at mining a percentage of the already anemic percentage that currently watch.

[BdaGhisallo]

So if we're arguing for equality in coverage, pay and attention, I am assuming that we will be equalizing the conditions under which the women compete? Will they now be riding the same distances with similar challenges as the men? Surely they must, no?

Or will we have a situation like tennis where the purses have been equalized but not the rules, with women playing three sets and the men playing five?


I think Branflakes and 1Centaur have this right. For whatever reasons, the women's side of the sport is not as popular as the men's. It's irrefutable. And I don't think that it's because the women's racing is being "kept" from the public by plotting race promoters and broadcasters. If folks wanted to see more of the women's side, it would be there for them to see. And pushing equality from the supply side will not do it. The demand side has to lead. Audiences have to want to see it before it will properly happen.

[pbarry]

Here's the article linked by the OP. Read carefully.

SAN JOSE, Calif. (VN) — Evelyn Stevens (Specialized-lululemon) wants to sound anything but ungrateful. The one-day-a-year spotlight the women racers get at the Amgen Tour of California is wonderful. Just not wonderful enough. Not hardly.

“You know, this is the United States, and women are supposed to be equal, right?” she said after her victory in a difficult time trial that preceded the sixth stage of the men’s eight-day race on a cloudless Friday.

“Don’t get me wrong. I think it’s really great that they have this race and I know we’re all grateful,” she said. “But come on. We put on a good show. Give us another day. That would be great. Three days? Greater.

“Personally? I want all eight.”

There quite likely couldn’t be a better poster rider, or a poster stage, than the one that began at the site where IBM develops its top secrets and ended atop a windy, brown hillside. Stevens started 30 seconds ahead of the last of 15 riders, Alison Powers (NOW-Novartis for MS), and the two played cat-and-mouse for most of the first three-quarters of the 31-kilometer course.

Their exchange, re-exchange, and re-re-exchange of leads over the initial climbs and along the long, crosswind-whipped middle section was interesting but inconsequential, Stevens said. She was paying more attention to her internal clock, the one she, coach Neal Henderson, and Specialized engineer Chris Yu mapped during her several reconnaissance runs in the days leading up to the time trial.

“A lot of thought and process went into it,” she said. “I rode the climb once and other parts maybe three times. I rode the descent maybe eight times. Then we went over analysis of where to save and where to put out the power.”

The location of the latter left little doubt. Powers, already trailing, stopped for a bike change and Stevens bolted up the final 2.5km climb of Metcalf Road to post the fastest time by nearly a minute.

Sadly, video and text coverage on the online Tour Tracker application cut out after third-place finisher Kristin McGrath rolled across the line. There was no video of the climb and no coverage of Stevens’ and Powers’ finishes for those watching from afar. Instead, online coverage switched to the early men’s starters. Equal, right?

After the men’s race, Stevens won again. The top finisher in the men’s stage, overall leader and new father Tejay van Garderen (BMC Racing), made it a point at a post-race news conference to back more women’s racing alongside the men. Van Garderen is married to former professional and organizer of the women’s challenge in Aspen, Jessica van Garderen (Phillips).

“It’s something I’ve always felt strongly about, but especially now that I have a daughter [newborn Rylan, on hand at the finish] who might want to be a bike racer, I think it’s something important that we have to do,” van Garderen said. “Not only is it great for women’s cycling but it’s also great for the spectators. The roads are already closed, so I don’t think it would be too much of an ask to put a women’s stage on probably every stage that we do.”

Stevens’ story is well known. She left a job in the financial industry for the pro peloton and she wants her former colleagues on Wall Street to pay attention.

“I want them to see this,” she said, and, she added, to open their portfolios.

“If I could tell them all something,” she said, “it would be, ‘hey guys, you should back this.’”

[earlfoss]

Evelyn should put on a top tier race in the USA, run the numbers and she might understand why the women's race isn't longer.

The organizers of that race can't be making a ton off of that event I would imagine. With the ebb and flow of sponsorship dollars these days I'm sure that they have to make sure that every dollar spent supports what will draw the most people to the roadside and attention in the media in addition to all of the little logistical details that it takes to actually pull off an event at this level.

Again it's too bad that's the way it is, but that's the way it is.

[1centaur]

I suspect we already had read that article carefully before posting.

Bda: Again, I would hesitate to equate time/effort/distance to value. If men's tennis matches are shortened to best of 3 should women be paid equally? Better to gauge actual fan desire to see the product: price the tickets equally and give the participants a share of the gate. Pay women more than men if more people want to pay to see them. Split the TV money by ratings and demographics after the fact.

On cycling, if Evie Steven wants to put this in Wall Street terms, she needs to make a business case. "Give us 8 days of women's racing and coverage" is not a business case. "We put on a great show" is not a business case. A plan to build word of mouth on personalities and excitement using Twitter and YouTube so that a hundred thousand viewers ask (via Twitter links) ATOC to show women's stages is a business case. "Women are supposed to be equal, right?" is a million miles from a business case. Look at American Idol and The Voice - the country is filled with great talent (Angie Miller - outselling the top 2 on iTunes but not allowed to chart by AI contract) not getting exposure. But now we're seeing artists get record deals after posting their videos on YouTube - the democratization of exposure has never been greater. Put up websites that focus on women's racing and count clicks; get friends with video equipment to tape races and dub in comments. There's a way to get where women want to go IF there is demand for the product, but it's not by asking or demanding to be there already.

[Bikerist]

If women were our athletic equals, they would not require their own division.

[Chris]

Branflakes is completely right on this. It's a real world versus ideal world issue. I have two daughters (my only children) who are athletes, my wife is a woman and even the dog is female. Despite my clear affection for women, I don't see how the case can be made for this type of equity in cycling. Locally, how many races have you been to where the women in the field aren't as deep as the prize-list? And before you say that's irrelevant at the national level, remember that this is where the national depth comes from. There have been some arguments made for equal purses in cross, and I can almost go along with that argument, but for road racing, it's just silly. You can get with me a proportional argument. If you say that the women's field is 1/2 that of the men, then I would say a case could be made for 1/2 the prize list or something along that line. I mean, if we're going to be concerned about equity, how is it fair that a greater percentage of the men's field goes home after a race without having placed in the money compared to the women's field in most races?

And whoever used Jeannie Longo in this debate (not worth scrolling back through the posts),please be serious. On one hand, if she is clean, which is impossible, then the fact that a 50 year-old woman could ride away from most women's fields, clearly speaks to the level of women's cycling at this time. On the other hand, it's been obvious for some time that her performances were suspect at best so her anomalous performances are irrelevant to the argument.

[akelman]

The OP, who is one of the really excellent people here, wrote the article. This thread, then, could have been an opportunity to congratulate him on a nice piece of writing, or even a chance to focus, for the first time in who knows how long, on the accomplishments of women in the sport. But instead, here we are. Yeah, leaving aside the merits of his argument, about which I don't really care. branflakes totally nailed it. I won't lower myself to using an emoticon, but you should all feel free to picture me rolling my eyes.

[EDS]

The argument that "equality has been met" falls apart imo when you consider that the things women's cyclists are asking for now are what the men's side got long about a century ago -- promoters hyping races and paying outsized purses to generate public interest and a depth of competition, media covering the sport religiously and mythologizing heroes that generate further interest, and sponsors who see the value in being part of the spectacle of it all.

Of course no one should be compelled to support or watch women's racing if they don't want to, but what options does the average fan have these days to watch the pro women mix it up? It ain't on TV, and writers following the peloton are few and far between. Perfect example in the U.S.: It was ridiculous trying to find coverage of the Men's Olympic Road Race, but it at least was on somewhere. The completely superior and suitably more, ahem, "epic" women's race was nowhere to be found.

If Marianne Vos, the most dominant cyclist since Eddy Merckx, can't generate interest in women's cycling -- even among avid cyclists and fans of racing -- then something is seriously wrong with the support the sport gets, from the UCI on down.

It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. No one watches because no one can watch, therefore it is considered a failure and why pour money into its development?

So yeah, I was stoked to see both TeeJay and Evelyn speak out. Not to mention Wiggo's comments last year, and putting his money where his mouth is to boot.

I distinctly remember watching the womens road race coverage on TV. I remember being disappointed when the Olds flatted out of the lead group. Perhaps you missed it, but it was definitely on air.

[branflakes]

The OP, who is one of the really excellent people here, wrote the article. This thread, then, could have been an opportunity to congratulate him on a nice piece of writing, or even a chance to focus, for the first time in who knows how long, on the accomplishments of women in the sport. But instead, here we are. Yeah, leaving aside the merits of his argument, about which I don't really care. branflakes totally nailed it. I won't lower myself to using an emoticon, but you should all feel free to picture me rolling my eyes.
i don't care to be 'right' in my analysis! what i want is the latitude to decide how i feel, without the editorialization that if i disagree with the author/OP i am somehow in favor of suppressing women's 'rights'. then, to take it to the next level, those who disagreed with my analysis simply resorted to petty attempts at marginalization.

i respect all members of this forum, regardless of how different their views may be from mine. i appreciate they offer a perspective different than mine, as it educates and informs me on a constant basis.

[Onno]

The situation in women's cycling strikes me as a classic case of chicken and egg, and so I think the side arguing, more or less, that women should take what they can get are missing the bigger picture.

Our society, the world in general, is still largely dominated by men and their interests, and professional sports are a good symbol and symptom of this. Compare the dominance of men in professional sports to NCAA athletics, and the effects of Title IX. (I know that there's no way we can apply Title IX law and action to society, but bear with me.) Insisting on a level playing field for women in college sports has led to large numbers of women participating in those sports in a way that did not occur before. Men were saying then too that women wouldn't be interested, that they couldn't compete, that they basically weren't competitive. But women in sport have flourished in American colleges and universities. At the college where I work, there are equal numbers of men and women athletes, and attendance of spectators has to do with which teams are doing well, not gender. As it happens, our women's teams are now doing better than our men's teams.

I don't think that the experience of Title IX translates well to the world of market-driven sports. Title IX required a form of equality (funding and participation) that one can't simply impose on society and business. But I think an important lesson here is that one can't simply use the status quo as proof that women should just take and be happy with what they can get. (The Olympics are another example of how we can get closer to gender equality with some built in structural support for women's athletics.)

I think that women's cycling should be as inherently watchable as men's cycling. It's the drama that builds in the race that's exciting--relative performances within each group, not some absolute standard of achievement. And smart race organizers and sponsors should start to figure this out soon, and recognize that their support will build women's cycling, drawing women into it, and spectators as well.

[FlashUNC]

I can't speak for Europe and Asia, but I can for the US. Not enough people want to watch to make it profitable. The "support" provided is what is. It's neither right nor wrong (at the professional level). Seems pretty simple to me. If networks struggle to make money on the big events in an established men's sport, then what are the chances that enough viewers will watch to make it profitable, given that the majority that watch cycling are already men. So now you're looking at mining a percentage of the already anemic percentage that currently watch.

Yet I'd argue that's where the growth is. There's more women in this country than men, and if you're starting from ground zero -- where women's cycling effectively is today -- why not actively try to market to that which is the most untapped? Its no different than Desgrange having this hair-brained idea to have a bike race around France to sell newspapers.

Too much of the current attitude around the sport strikes me as "well, this is the way it's always been, and there's no point in trying to change it."

For example, where was USA Cycling's recognition of the recent passing of Audrey McElmury -- the first person, man or woman, to win a World Road Racing Championship for the Stars and Stripes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audrey_McElmury

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1083093/index.htm

[firerescuefin]

I won't lower myself to using an emoticon, but you should all feel free to picture me rolling my eyes.


How I'm picturing you right now.....

:rolleyes:

[akelman]

My mom says I'm cuter than that.

[BCS]

It's the drama that builds in the race that's exciting--relative performances within each group, not some absolute standard of achievement.

Rumor has it that ESPN 8 (The Ocho) is going to be broadcasting the Lakemont "B" ride Sunday morning at 0200. For those of you in Europe, try steephill.tv. I'm the guy on the Parlee sprinting past the husband and wife tandem to win the intermediate sprint at the 7-11. I hope you enjoy the drama.

[akelman]

i don't care to be 'right' in my analysis! what i want is the latitude to decide how i feel, without the editorialization that if i disagree with the author/OP i am somehow in favor of suppressing women's 'rights'. then, to take it to the next level, those who disagreed with my analysis simply resorted to petty attempts at marginalization.

i respect all members of this forum, regardless of how different their views may be from mine. i appreciate they offer a perspective different than mine, as it educates and informs me on a constant basis.

You made it quite clear in your first post that your top priority was sharing your opinion, whether you offended others or not, which is your right. My point is that the substance of your post mattered much less to me than its timing and context. Regardless, I'm sorry people called you names.

[akelman]

My mom says I'm cuter than that.

My mirror, though, says otherwise. Stupid mirror.

[firerescuefin]

Yet I'd argue that's where the growth is. There's more women in this country than men, and if you're starting from ground zero -- where women's cycling effectively is today -- why not actively try to market to that which is the most untapped? Its no different than Desgrange having this hair-brained idea to have a bike race around France to sell newspapers.

Too much of the current attitude around the sport strikes me as "well, this is the way it's always been, and there's no point in trying to change it."

For example, where was USA Cycling's recognition of the recent passing of Audrey McElmury -- the first person, man or woman, to win a World Road Racing Championship for the Stars and Stripes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audrey_McElmury

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1083093/index.htm


This almost reminds me of the Men's Soccer argument....

"Football is the most popular sport in the world. American's just don't get it."

....and maybe they never will.

I am old enough to remember going to MISL and NASL games....both leagues failed....Cue 1994 World Cup.....was going to be this great turning point....MLS comes along, outside of a few markets where there is a large hispanic presence, the league struggles to remain solvent.

FWIW....I love soccer...played it....have kids in it....watch European leagues. I don't think that American's don't "get it"....they don't have the appetite for it, and that's OK.

Lance made cycling cool to the masses. Without him, would we have ever gotten OLN/VS/NBC Sports Network coverage....probably not. He's gone...TJVG and Taylor Phinney are the next great hopes. Who in the hell, outside of the inner circle of cycling has ever heard of these guys. This forum represents the outliers of cycling fans. Most people just enjoy riding their bike. On group rides when I asked (last week) about the Giro...for most of the folks out there, I probably would have been better off asking them about Zimbabwe's fiscal outlook for the next 10 years.

Who should/could/would prop up women's cycling and for how long until we allow it to rise and fall on its own merit. As many have stated on here, men primarily watch sports.....men's cycling is barely making it. As others have noted, when your premier race's queen stage is cut off with 1K to go for a 2nd round NHL pregame show...that's all you need to know. Do you remember how bad the coverage was for last years US Pro Championships. I appreciate that you want it to work. As 1Centaur noted, go drum up the interest and make the business case...I don't think you can, but I wish you luck.

[branflakes]

Rumor has it that ESPN 8 (The Ocho) is going to be broadcasting the Lakemont "B" ride Sunday morning at 0200. For those of you in Europe, try steephill.tv. I'm the guy on the Parlee sprinting past the husband and wife tandem to win the intermediate sprint at the 7-11. I hope you enjoy the drama.
LMAO. may i point you to another thread then....

the lost art of the group ride (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=129788) :p

[FlashUNC]

This almost reminds me of the Men's Soccer argument....

"Football is the most popular sport in the world. American's just don't get it."

....and maybe they never will.

I am old enough to remember going to MISL and NASL games....both leagues failed....Cue 1994 World Cup.....was going to be this great turning point....MLS comes along, outside of a few markets where there is a large hispanic presence, the league struggles to remain solvent.

FWIW....I love soccer...played it....have kids in it....watch European leagues. I don't think that American's don't "get it"....they don't have the appetite for it, and that's OK.

Lance made cycling cool to the masses. Without him, would we have ever gotten OLN/VS/NBC Sports Network coverage....probably not. He's gone...TJVG and Taylor Phinney are the next great hopes. Who in the hell, outside of the inner circle of cycling has ever heard of these guys. This forum represents the outliers of cycling fans. Most people just enjoy riding their bike. On group rides when I asked (last week) about the Giro...for most of the folks out there, I probably would have been better off asking them about Zimbabwe's fiscal outlook for the next 10 years.

Who should/could/would prop up women's cycling and for how long until we allow it to rise and fall on its own merit. As many have stated on here, men primarily watch sports.....men's cycling is barely making it. As others have noted, when your premier race's queen stage is cut off with 1K to go for a 2nd round NHL pregame show...that's all you need. Do you remember how bad the coverage was for last years US Pro Championships. I appreciate that you want it to work. As 1Centaur noted, go drum up the interest and make the business case...I don't think you can, but I wish you luck.

I think soccer is an ideal case for proving my point. Its a slow burn, and it takes time, but we have seen the growth of the sport here. The MLS is a success league and has stuck around now for going on two decades.

NBC decided there's enough interest in soccer -- notably the EPL -- to buy the broadcasting rights as part of a bidding war for $250 million.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/soccer-dirty-tackle/premier-league-taking-over-american-tv-nbc-massive-181033318--sow.html

ESPN was outbid by Fox to the tune of $425 million to broadcast the next two World Cups in this country.
http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/news/_/id/7130785/fox-sports-wins-bid-espn-nbc-televise-world-cup-2018-22

Never mind that the most watched soccer broadcast ever in U.S. history was...yup...the Women's Final from 2011:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/women-s-world-cup-final-212461

Yeah, it hasn't happened overnight and taken longer than the optimists projected, but soccer is slowly seeping into the American sporting landscape. At the very minimum, you can watch Man U take on Chelsea without too much hassle these days.

I'm not saying women's cycling will ever become football, but how is trying to support more racing a bad thing?

[firerescuefin]

I'm not saying women's cycling will ever become football, but how is trying to support more racing a bad thing?

Nothing wrong with supporting it....or not supporting it (at the pro level). I feel different about supporting it at the Junior and Amateur level. (Big Proponent)


Back to men's soccer argument, no more than a handful of MLS teams have ever turned a profit. Most have never come close...and the league is 17 years old.

If you're (media network) making the bet on Women's cycling, how do you make the case for it other than it "feels right".

[BCS]

Never mind that the most watched soccer broadcast ever in U.S. history was...yup...the Women's Final from 2011:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/women-s-world-cup-final-212461



Not quite. That match had the highest rating ever on ESPN.

According to Nielen, The Spain-Netherlands WC final match on 7/11/10 shown on ABC/Univision drew 24.3 million US viewers, about 10 million more than the Women's final cited

[FlashUNC]

Not quite. That match had the highest rating ever on ESPN.

According to Nielen, The Spain-Netherlands WC final match on 7/11/10 shown on ABC/Univision drew 24.3 million US viewers, about 10 million more than the Women's final cited

I stand corrected, but the larger is still valid. Soccer has become a viable sport in this country.

[1centaur]

One of the benefits of a melting pot society is the importation of soccer fans.

For fans of irony, the easy availability of the BPL may hurt MLS by showing how inferior it is. That said, showing US youth what actual world class soccer looks like on a weekly basis, commented on correctly, will only help US league quality in the long run.

[fiamme red]

Grab a great story like Evie Stevens and milk it while she's in her prime for the good of the sport.It's indeed a great story, but also a perfect example of how shallow the field of women's racing is.

She had no background in endurance sports, started riding a bike at age 25 or so, and within a year was winning major local races and within two, international ones. That sort of meteoric rise would be unthinkable in men's cycling, no matter how great one's natural talent and hard work.

[wdbo]

Misogyny and company are a systematic cultural problem. It doesn't have much to do with cycling per se.

[CunegoFan]

I think that women's cycling should be as inherently watchable as men's cycling. It's the drama that builds in the race that's exciting--relative performances within each group, not some absolute standard of achievement. And smart race organizers and sponsors should start to figure this out soon, and recognize that their support will build women's cycling, drawing women into it, and spectators as well.

Probably true, but let's face some facts here.

Men's cycling is not exactly healthy. A couple of years ago the number one team in the world folded because it could not find a sponsor. Half the World Tour teams are essentially national teams or playthings for billionaire backers, sometimes both. The number of true trade teams seems to be shrinking, and those like Garmin still need to be occasionally bailed out by a wealthy backer. Bjarne Riis has been fantastically successful with limited resources, but his team nearly collapses every two or three years. Events are struggling. Some have ended or curtailed their number of race days. With the men fighting for survival, there is not much in the way of resources left to expand the sport for women.

Domestically in the U.S. the pro side of the sport is pretty lame. The "$12K dream" is no joke.

[oldpotatoe]

This almost reminds me of the Men's Soccer argument....

"Football is the most popular sport in the world. American's just don't get it."

....and maybe they never will.

I am old enough to remember going to MISL and NASL games....both leagues failed....Cue 1994 World Cup.....was going to be this great turning point....MLS comes along, outside of a few markets where there is a large hispanic presence, the league struggles to remain solvent.

FWIW....I love soccer...played it....have kids in it....watch European leagues. I don't think that American's don't "get it"....they don't have the appetite for it, and that's OK.

Lance made cycling cool to the masses. Without him, would we have ever gotten OLN/VS/NBC Sports Network coverage....probably not. He's gone...TJVG and Taylor Phinney are the next great hopes. Who in the hell, outside of the inner circle of cycling has ever heard of these guys. This forum represents the outliers of cycling fans. Most people just enjoy riding their bike. On group rides when I asked (last week) about the Giro...for most of the folks out there, I probably would have been better off asking them about Zimbabwe's fiscal outlook for the next 10 years.

Who should/could/would prop up women's cycling and for how long until we allow it to rise and fall on its own merit. As many have stated on here, men primarily watch sports.....men's cycling is barely making it. As others have noted, when your premier race's queen stage is cut off with 1K to go for a 2nd round NHL pregame show...that's all you need to know. Do you remember how bad the coverage was for last years US Pro Championships. I appreciate that you want it to work. As 1Centaur noted, go drum up the interest and make the business case...I don't think you can, but I wish you luck.

What he said..well said..

Reality, what a concept.

It's all about $. Look at some of the pictures at ToC..the racers outnumber the fans most of the time. Some have some crowds but in general, they are at home watching the NBA or NHL playoffs..

[branflakes]

So yeah, I was stoked to see both TeeJay and Evelyn speak out. Not to mention Wiggo's comments last year, and putting his money where his mouth is to boot.
i assume you saw bradley's comments (http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/cycling-wiggins-still-optimistic-tough-giro-first-week-123345536.html) about his descending skills at the giro? i'm sure it's a little foot-mouth syndrome, but it happened.

[FlashUNC]

i assume you saw bradley's comments (http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/cycling-wiggins-still-optimistic-tough-giro-first-week-123345536.html) about his descending skills at the giro? i'm sure it's a little foot-mouth syndrome, but it happened.

Not his finest moment, but Lord knows Sir Wiggo has had a tendency for ready, fire, aim comments.

[93legendti]

Yes, misleading to say this is an "equal rights" issue. Women can become pros. It's what they make of it. If it can support corporate sponsors, great. If not, you can't force people to sponsor Women's Pro Cycling.

There's a disconnect between women being pros and the huge leap to the races and the private sponsorship must be exactly the same as the men's.

I would have like the linked article to discuss why corporations don't support women's cycling like they do men's.

Maybe Yahoo wants to sponsor...

[slidey]

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Go man, go!! I wish I get the chance to make it to one of the WC venues sometime in the near future...ah, the passionate discussion of footballing glory all day long, passionate rivalries and heartbreaks of the game during the night, and everyone joining hands in a gala time during the day...that'd be awesome! Or at least in my dreams :cool:

A friend invited me to go to Brazil next year for the World Cup, but I don't think I can justify the time or the money.

[CunegoFan]

Not his finest moment, but Lord knows Sir Wiggo has had a tendency for ready, fire, aim comments.

Ready. Aim. Shoot himself in the foot.

[cmg]

So is this another unequallity that can be blamed on USA cycling? are they not the governing body at the tour of Califonia? send them the nasty grams. :)