How to Grow Women's Pro-Cycling

[Flying_Monkey]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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