Opppptimism! (Yes, with four p's.)
I appreciate your optimism. I'd like to see it come back as I always enjoyed it.
Right now I'm going to hope the new one day race in Maryland works out as a prep race for the 2 Canadian WT races.
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Opppptimism! (Yes, with four p's.)
A Fall race in New England/Upstate NY/PA area post-or-during Vuelta would/could be great.Aesthetically, a race starting in New England and finishing in Pittsburgh area (I'd love to see the pro-riders tackle Canton Avenue!) would be an improvement. Especially if you pass the historical monuments dating back to the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. You don't have the big mountain passes but there are some difficult hills and older routes you could use.
I've been to California a couple of times. It's an amazing experience. But watching the peloton on wide roads in arid areas is monotonous as hell.
A Fall race in New England/Upstate NY/PA area post-or-during Vuelta would/could be great.
California is far from being all broad boulevards and beach boardwalks. We’ve plenty of goat-tracks up here in Wine Country. Same in all the high mountain ranges.
I always held out hope that the ToC could get big enough and secure enough in its spot on the calendar to start taking some Grand-Tour-like liberties with its start cities and venture outside the state. Vegas, Phoenix or Medford to start with, Seattle or Denver being a bit ambitious, and ultimately crazy enough to do Tijuana, Vancouver or Hawaii. Having air transfers and even rest days in a 1-week stage race sounds crazy, but I think there’s a huge geographical (and let’s be direct here, economic) area that is underserved by the “World” Tour.
Amgen should be banned per forum rules .
I live in Virginia and may be biased, but after all there's a history of racing here and a big fan base. Richmond WRRC drew attention, but the real fans are inland. I'm surrounded by riders; four of them riding at 5 am when I was driving to work this morning...in the rain. Week-ends are a bike fest, even one dude with a Ti-Raleigh kit. And the clone of Simon Yates who dropped me on the way back from Rockfish Gap (nice climb, 5 km at 7% or so). Virginia is a Jura-like place, with one big climb, Wintergreen, very AdH in profile (Tour de Trump - no kidding - see YouTube Greg leMond winning there), close to DC/Dulles Airport, less jet lag, why not?
I like the idea of a Fall race in New England/Upstate NY/PA , maybe it could be 1 or 2 one day races before or after the Canadian classics when there's already a strong field in North America.A Fall race in New England/Upstate NY/PA area post-or-during Vuelta would/could be great.
California is far from being all broad boulevards and beach boardwalks. We’ve plenty of goat-tracks up here in Wine Country. Same in all the high mountain ranges.
I always held out hope that the ToC could get big enough and secure enough in its spot on the calendar to start taking some Grand-Tour-like liberties with its start cities and venture outside the state. Vegas, Phoenix or Medford to start with, Seattle or Denver being a bit ambitious, and ultimately crazy enough to do Tijuana, Vancouver or Hawaii. Having air transfers and even rest days in a 1-week stage race sounds crazy, but I think there’s a huge geographical (and let’s be direct here, economic) area that is underserved by the “World” Tour.
It seems to me there are 2 separate issues here that should be considered:
1). Females encroaching on and in and using male sports activities to augment their bit of money and glory;
2). The relatively untalked about issue of males, or physically similar, encroaching on and in and using female sports activities to augment their bit of money and glory.
The issue of males encroaching on female sports may not be a problem much in Europe, but it is getting big in the USA. From high school on into professional sports, it is becoming quite an issue, and is becoming more vocal. And the professional part issue is mostly apparent in bicycling. Now this is not a stated issue with the ToC cancellation announcement, but with the "woke" Californians and all, it won't stay behinds the scene for very long -- it will probably surface as a big issue before the ToC resumes.
So, I say get it all out in the open. If the gender issue is not a big issue and all participants should be considered the same, then let all males and females and other gender composites compete together in the same race. No need to put on 2 separate races, and have two separate prize schedules to fund. Do it all as one. Take the issues out -- of the females that think they are equal and should be paid equal to males, and the males that think they should be allowed to compete as females.
Though, I'm hoping to get these issues resolved, with some separation between males and females, and letting the market dictate the glory and prize schedules.
1). Females encroaching on and in and using male sports activities to augment their bit of money and glory;
There are issues there that I brought up. Rather than posting adhom stuff, why not address those issues.Just what the thread needed, some crank talking about his bigoted hobby horses.
Well, there are still some archaic divides though where sports are competed for by men only or by women only, and true mixed gender games like Korfball are few in number and small in audience. I think one of the last such divides was crossed recently when the previously men-only Nordic Combined opened up to women, though most of its competitors are teenagers at this stage as women's ski jumping is still in its infancy at the pro level. Tara Geraghty-Moats basically annihilates everybody at the moment, since she started out as a biathlete so has plenty of cross-country skills, then became a ski jumper.Uhm… I don't know how to break this to you, but there is no male sport or female sport.
So you want to argue semantics? Is that what you are doing? You don't see any issues there? Exactly how would you deal with female VS male involvement in the same sport?Uhm… I don't know how to break this to you, but there is no male sport or female sport.
Thanks for taking this seriously.Well, there are still some archaic divides though where sports are competed for by men only or by women only, and true mixed gender games like Korfball are few in number and small in audience. I think one of the last such divides was crossed recently when the previously men-only Nordic Combined opened up to women, though most of its competitors are teenagers at this stage as women's ski jumping is still in its infancy at the pro level. Tara Geraghty-Moats basically annihilates everybody at the moment, since she started out as a biathlete so has plenty of cross-country skills, then became a ski jumper.
There are issues there that I brought up. Rather than posting adhom stuff, why not address those issues.
So you want to argue semantics? Is that what you are doing? You don't see any issues there? Exactly how would you deal with female VS male involvement in the same sport?
I say they should be able to have those same races, "as challenging and exciting (and televised) as the men" -- but the market should decide that. If you are saying that they ought to be paid the same -- that they are equal -- with no market considerations -- then why can't the compete with each other?You were the one using the term "male sport".
I'm not talking about competing directly against each other (though other sports technically have that, with mixed doubles and stuff, and I think in some types of sailing the crews can be simply who's good at sailing). I meant that everybody can do every sport.
Not literally, though. I can't do shot putting, believe me; I've tried… but there are females doing it.
Likewise, there are professional female cyclists who are, quite good. Why shouldn't they be allowed to have a race as challenging and exciting (and televised) as the men?
The issue of a separate race and the viability of separate races was brought up previously, in this same thread.Because those issues have nothing to do with the subject of the thread.
I say they should be able to have those same races, "as challenging and exciting (and televised) as the men" -- but the market should decide that. If you are saying that they ought to be paid the same -- that they are equal -- with no market considerations -- then why can't the compete with each other?
There we are at the heart of it. Who will pay for that extra televising? Will the market bear that? If it will, I'm all for it. I don't think the persons doing the televising are going to go out on a limb not knowing if they can make money on it.We are quite a lot of people who'd love to have more women's cycling televised. But the "logic" for not televising it is that "Nobody is watching it."
NO! Of course not. Cause it's not *** televised!
Good points. And BTW, I was being facetious when I said the solution might be to have all genders compete together (not withstanding what Libertine Seguros posted, of which I would like to hear more). I think though an expectation that there should be equal pay/television time for both females and males is unrealistic. But certainly, I want to watch more races regardless, if I don't have to pay more. And I don't expect that to happen.In the US we barely have any men's cycling on TV. This is the entire list of races that are shown on TV (live or tape delayed) are: Paris-Nice, Paris-Roubiax, Fleche Wallonne, LBL, Dauphine, Tour de France, Vuelta a Espana, Worlds. Nothing else is on TV. Now you can eliminate California from the TV list and it will not be replaced with another race.
There are very few women who could attempt to race in the men's peloton and they'd not be able to win. There are a few women who are on women's teams that also have men's teams and they've said they can barely hold on to the wheel when doing TTT practice and can't follow hard attacks.
I was nurturing my post and got out-posted by you.In the US we barely have any men's cycling on TV. This is the entire list of races that are shown on TV (live or tape delayed) are: Paris-Nice, Paris-Roubiax, Fleche Wallonne, LBL, Dauphine, Tour de France, Vuelta a Espana, Worlds. Nothing else is on TV. Now you can eliminate California from the TV list and it will not be replaced with another race.
There are very few women who could attempt to race in the men's peloton and they'd not be able to win. There are a few women who are on women's teams that also have men's teams and they've said they can barely hold on to the wheel when doing TTT practice and can't follow hard attacks.
I guess my main point is that the expectations of the female cyclists wanting exact same pay and television time is out-of-bounds, realistically. Even noting the new sports you mention, i.e. MMA, it didn't happen over night. It took years of marketing and poor attendance to get there. It didn't mature because there were participants in the sport saying they deserved equal pay/attendance to some other sport (for instance NBA). It matured because they had a product that people wanted to buy -- OVER TIME. My whole point is what I said in the first post --let the market decide.Nacho, I don't quite understand what points you are trying to make, but the whole thing smells bad.