2020...2021 Olympic Women's Road Race, Tokyo, 137 KM

[Samu Cuenca]

Intresting, thanks.

Did Schweinberger know she was there?

I found the right article. The Schweinbergers were apparently injured at the time and not able to ride the race (it was three weeks before the NC)

Kein Tokio-Ticket für Tirols Rad-Jungstar Mitterwallner | Tiroler Tageszeitung Online

Kurz nach dem verpassten Olympia-Startplatz im Mountainbiken muss Tirols Rad-Jungstar Mona Mitterwallner auch den Traum vom Straßenrad-Rennen in Tokio begraben.

www.tt.com

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Cycling decades ago would seem very amateurish compared to today. In fact, that goes for most sports. So that's not a comparison that's particularly relevant here.

It's not so much the boredom in itself that annoys me in the case of women's cycling, it's more the lack of the logic we normally see in cycling.

I 'm of course aware that there is bigger gaps between the various riders in women's cycling than in men's - that's what makes 100 kilometer winning attacks possible - but still.

How many boring men's races with a completely artificial break of the day do we watch, that end in sprints and literally no conceivable alternative result is possible? Those races are just as dull. But the other thing is, there's nothing inherently wrong with taking a look at what men's cycling was in, say, the 70s, to use as the comparison point, because a case can be made that the level of professionalism, difference between the strongest and weakest rider in any given race, and the type of calendar, in the women's side of the game is comparable to where men's cycling was in the 70s and 80s. The high level of parity in the men's calendar has led to the development of a series of formulae for how a race develops and pans out, and there are a lot of cookie cutter races that follow these formulae, often the most memorable ones are the ones that depart from these. For the women's sport it's more of an issue at the Worlds and Olympics races as these are two of the biggest 'hooks' to draw a casual audience, and so many of the elite talents are concentrated into a single team, whereas often at the trade teams level the dominance isn't quite so complete, though the occasional 70s-style superteam does crop up (Rabo circa 2014, Boels-Dolmans circa 2017).

 

[JosefK]

Yep.
It was about counting.

I'm okay with numbers up to two. But when it gets up there at 3 and above, I'm lost.

 

[Cagalitroso]

Cycling decades ago would seem very amateurish compared to today. In fact, that goes for most sports. So that's not a comparison that's particularly relevant here.

That was indeed the case, but the improvements came from better bikes, clothing, sports science, gels, service cars, roads,etc. Women have access to all of that too. The sport lacks because the stark differences in athleticism, aggression and skill. This is something common to all sports. Either you accept women sports for what it is (The same way you dont expect a 50kg dude to snatch 220 kg) or you will live in fantasy-land forever ("In 5-10 years women sport will improve bla bla" ).Many people choose the second option.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

That was indeed the case, but the improvements came from better bikes, clothing, sports science, gels, service cars, roads,etc. Women have access to all of that too. The sport lacks because the stark differences in athleticism, aggression and skill. This is something common to all sports. Either you accept women sports for what it is (The same way you dont expect a 50kg dude to snatch 220 kg) or you will live in fantasy-land forever ("In 5-10 years women sport will improve bla bla" ).Many people choose the second option.

The difference is in professionalism and depth in the péloton, because while they have access to those improvements, while the amount of money in the sport is lower, the elite technology is not available to the full depth of the péloton to the same extent. It is not fantasy-land to think that, with improved visibility and prize money, more women can make a living from the sport, and that with that, the péloton will become deeper as professionalism will increase.

 

[sir fly]

I'm okay with numbers up to two. But when it gets up there at 3 and above, I'm lost.

You must be amused with your fingers...

 

[Armchair cyclist]

I found the right article. The Schweinbergers were apparently injured at the time and not able to ride the race (it was three weeks before the NC)

Kein Tokio-Ticket für Tirols Rad-Jungstar Mitterwallner | Tiroler Tageszeitung Online

Kurz nach dem verpassten Olympia-Startplatz im Mountainbiken muss Tirols Rad-Jungstar Mona Mitterwallner auch den Traum vom Straßenrad-Rennen in Tokio begraben.

www.tt.com

Thanks. Google translate informs me that both Schweinberger twins missed the trial race because of rust.

 

[fbjim]

the organizers shouldn't have to give the riders tactical advice, but then again i'm still mad from that WC race where the organizers reminded the peloton that they would all be eliminated if the breakaway lapped them on the finishing circuit

 

[Carrick-On-Seine]

Maybe they got told there was an Australian still up front and the Dutch did a count of which Aussies were dropped, how many had retired and how many of them were still in the peloton.






Spoiler: all numbers are below 3.

 

[SafeBet]

I'm always amazed by the amount of friends and family yu must have who watch sports / cycling. Maybe because you race yourself? I don't know anyone around me who would watch a cycling race in the early morning.

This isn't strictly about cycling. Most of my friends like sports so they watch the Olympics. And those who don't follow cycling were quite amazed by the race.

 

[Cagalitroso]

The difference is in professionalism and depth in the péloton, because while they have access to those improvements, while the amount of money in the sport is lower, the elite technology is not available to the full depth of the péloton to the same extent. It is not fantasy-land to think that, with improved visibility and prize money, more women can make a living from the sport, and that with that, the péloton will become deeper as professionalism will increase.

More money != Better sport.

You cannot spend away physiological differences. We dont expect the U13 kids (Which BTW would beat the women) to "improve" to the level of the world tour peloton, we accept them for what they are.

 

[fbjim]

each woman's road race is not a referendum on the status of woman's cycling. the peloton screwed up a chase, it happens.

 

[Brullnux]

So that was not 100 kilometers. In one day races in particular, it would be unthinkable.

55km in a trade team race with more flat involved than the 2019 worlds isn't far off at all. The difference obviously is the lack of depth, money, and organisation in the women's peloton makes this possible more often, but it's wrong to say we never see monster solo performances on the men's side.

 

[Brullnux]

More money != Better sport.

You cannot spend away physiological differences. We dont expect the U13 kids (Which BTW would beat the women) to "improve" to the level of the world tour peloton, we accept them for what they are.

Nobody expects the women to beat the men lol, we just expect with more money and more organsiation for there to be more top level cyclists who can compete with the likes of Van Vleuten, and less anomalies. Take track cycling, for example, which has received more professional attention over the past few decades - there is less total dominance, and races are of a similar nature to the men's. Or tennis, where the women's field is actually way more competetive than the men's.

I have a feeling, though, you just dislike women's sports.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Nobody expects the women to beat the men lol, we just expect with more money and more organsiation for there to be more top level cyclists who can compete with the likes of Van Vleuten, and less anomalies. Take track cycling, for example, which has received more professional attention over the past few decades - there is less total dominance, and races are of a similar nature to the men's. Or tennis, where the women's field is actually way more competetive than the men's.

I have a feeling, though, you just dislike women's sports.

I agree with the overall sentiment, but I think that sentence might be contested by some posters

 

[spalco]

Hahaha, what? Who? Seems i missed something today.

Congratulations Anna Kiesenhofer!

 

[Netserk]

the organizers shouldn't have to give the riders tactical advice, but then again i'm still mad from that WC race where the organizers reminded the peloton that they would all be eliminated if the breakaway lapped them on the finishing circuit

It was also the first WC in ages not solely on a circuit (even if it was (re-)introduced in Beijing). Unfortunately, we've only twice had the entire race on the circuit since then.

 

[spalco]

This is absolutely hilarious, i'm sad i couldn't see it live (but had a nice day outside). It's got to be one of the most surprising results of all time. If a completely unknown austrian runner won the 10k race it would be only marginally more surprising.

Also i think the dutch women deserve a little humbling. Vergönnt!

 

[Pirazziattacks]

Who do you reckon should've been the second, out of interest? I mean obviously Deignan is a no-brainer pick, but with Dani Rowe, Pooley and most of the previous generation retiring, there's not as much depth in the options as I thought there was. I'm looking at the next highest-ranked Britons in the rankings and you've got the Barnes sisters (possibilities, Hannah is more experienced, Alice a bit more all-round) and Anna Henderson (no more experienced than Shackley and less suited to the terrain). Shackley hasn't done much racing in the last couple of months either, so her form would be guesswork. I would think, though, that because Shackley did such a great job at Imola they backed her to do a similar job here.

My thought would have been Lizzy Banks, she's solid over all terrain, quite experienced and a strong stagehunter, so she would fit best perhaps?

Looks like they should've brought Banks for the scouting knowledge

https://twitter.com/x/status/1419228632480944132

View: https://twitter.com/ElizzyBanks/status/1419228632480944132

 

[Bolder]

To be honest (and others will certainly disagree), I think women's cycling has serious issues. When Van Vleuten rode alone and won with 100 kilometers to the finish line at the world championships two years ago, I clearly saw it as a weakness in the sport. Such long range adventures would never be succesfull in men's cycling on the highest level. Unless you were a Dutch fan back then, and an Austrian fan yesterday, you were seriously bored at those two occasions. Or maybe just bewildered - where is the professionalism?

P.S.: I do like the surprise of the almost unknown Austrian winning.

The real problem is that an amateur won. If women could earn a living wage as a professional the sport would improve by leaps and bounds, as it should.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

More money != Better sport.

You cannot spend away physiological differences. We dont expect the U13 kids (Which BTW would beat the women) to "improve" to the level of the world tour peloton, we accept them for what they are.

The U13 kids wouldn't beat the women. That's hyperbole. Say the juniors, and then we can talk.

But we're not expecting a standard where Annemiek et al are climbing on a par with Pogačar. We're talking about improving the professionalism so that the gap between the best rider and worst rider in the women's péloton is much narrower and more similar to that in the men's. In most of the sports where the women's game is most developed, people don't tend to compare them to the men so much. We don't make such a deal that Johannes Hosfløt Klæbo can ski faster than Therese Johaug, because we're happy to judge Johaug relative to her competition. As Brullnux says, the aim is to improve the access to the best sports science and technology for more riders so that they can compete with the van Vleutens and van der Breggens of this world, because the more women that can afford to make a living off the sport, the more riders can dedicate themselves full time and the more teams that can provide optimum training and technological opportunities.

The parcours issue also contributes to this because the vast majority of the calendar caters to one particular type of rider, increasing the extent to which a select number of riders of a certain style bogart the prize money, enabling them to dedicate themselves more to their sport, increasing the gulf between them and the weaker riders in the bunch. A more varied calendar that gives opportunities to riders to increase the extent of specialisation into different types of riders would be beneficial because it opens up opportunities for more different riders as well as creating opportunities for riders who don't tend to contest as much because of the lacking opportunities for their type of rider - ironically enough, one such rider is... Anna Kiesenhofer.

each woman's road race is not a referendum on the status of woman's cycling. the peloton screwed up a chase, it happens.

The problem is, because much less women's cycling is broadcast, several races do get treated as like a state of the union address, because if you see a crappy men's race it might be only a day or two until the broadcast of the next great one. There's also a fairly sizable contingent that follow the women only to a very casual extent and only watch things like the Worlds and Olympics, so a race in those events become more significant in the promotion of the sport than in the men's. Plus, a race like today's where something controversial or unusual happens becomes a talking point, and there will always be those that will steer conversation away from the specifics of that particular incident and toward generalisations.

 

[BlueRoads]

As long as there is no money to be made by being a female cyclist unless you're absolute top of the cream of course very few people are willing to spend years of sacrifice and often even a lot of money on a dream that may or may not come true. You must be either an incredible talent or a very obsessive person.
It's a difficult situation, though. I don't agree with some people arguing that female athletes should get the same amount of money because they work just as hard. Many people in many different kind of jobs work incredibly hard and still find it difficult to make a living from that. Especially if you are in the entertainment business, it doesn't matter for instance how good a musician you are if people are just not interested in what you are doing. While Justin Bieber gets millions. Not "fair", but it's just not about fairness, it's about the market. And the truth is there aren't many people who are interested in women's cycling, for many reasons.
Also the men's business model is already very fragile and also wrong in many aspects, from disparity between teams to morally unpleasant sponsors.

There are many circles in this, where you don't know what came first, egg or hen.

Maybe it would be better for women's cycling to not try and follow the men's footsteps but to build their own business models, their own race formats and so on. Try to find interesting formats that make people watch. Maybe mountainbiking, gran fondo, gravel, adventure and endurance riding are even more the way to find new followers first who can than become interested in road races.
Or maybe it's countries like Slovenia and Colombia who have to lead the way here, with maybe more young girls watching races and interested in road cycling there. Because I think in most countries in the world it's pretty uncool, so it's not the best time to promote a "the women should have the same coverage/ prize money" agenda when it's already tough to get sponsors and venues for the men's races.

 

[Alexandre B.]

Worst. Analogy. Ever.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1419271385059319812

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I love how JV always likes to have opinions on professionalism in women's cycling, when the only opinion he had on it when he was actually involved in it was "how much of this funding can I syphon off to my men's team?" as he killed off the most successful and strongest team in the women's péloton in less than a season and used the money he re-allocated from it to hire Thomas Dekker, which worked out great for him as he's managed to successfully kill off at least two men's teams via mergers or sponsor swaps since, so he applied the lessons he learned well.

 

[spalco]

As long as there is no money to be made by being a female cyclist unless you're absolute top of the cream of course very few people are willing to spend years of sacrifice and often even a lot of money on a dream that may or may not come true. You must be either an incredible talent or a very obsessive person.

Especially since you can earn real money as a woman in some other sports. If you're a 12-year-old girl who's an exceptional endurance talent you probably have better options than road cycling if you're interested in money &glory.