- Jan 30, 2010
- 166
- 0
- 0
@LS - all great points.
I did not mean you when I suggested no-one on here tries to start womens racing threads, but rather the people who drop in one-liner's about mysogony and what not and those that haven't offered a decent argument.
Also, I very much agree that women's racing need not be shorter distance (and also the analogy of tennis and other sports). I am being serious when I think men and women should compete together, especially in non-contact sports where it is athlete vs athlete to determine a winner (i.e. running, cycling, tennis, athletics can all be run together). I say non-contact, because in contact sports things are different -tackle a women around the chest or waist - and you've committed sexual harassment...
Finally, I think the best thing to prove that demand and supply is still the issue here is this CN data. Of course, I didn't specify very well, but naturally things like comparing equivalent races such as Mens Giro vx Womens Giro, Mens major classics (Ronde, Fleche etc) vs womens equivalents... that's just the races, but also I think it's worth looking at the actual articles. Especially things such as the 'features' CN does on certain riders/teams... If people on this forum are genuinely telling the truth that they review both categories equally, then those stats in a meaningful comparison should tell us something...
I used the analogy of sponsorship because it is a quasi-estimator of demand.. Different reasons to sponsor, such as personal ambition cloud that measure as you suggested, which is why the date is priority. My original argument was that the supply of womens racing on this website is related to the demand, and i drifted away from that relating it to sponsors dollars..
I did not mean you when I suggested no-one on here tries to start womens racing threads, but rather the people who drop in one-liner's about mysogony and what not and those that haven't offered a decent argument.
Also, I very much agree that women's racing need not be shorter distance (and also the analogy of tennis and other sports). I am being serious when I think men and women should compete together, especially in non-contact sports where it is athlete vs athlete to determine a winner (i.e. running, cycling, tennis, athletics can all be run together). I say non-contact, because in contact sports things are different -tackle a women around the chest or waist - and you've committed sexual harassment...
Finally, I think the best thing to prove that demand and supply is still the issue here is this CN data. Of course, I didn't specify very well, but naturally things like comparing equivalent races such as Mens Giro vx Womens Giro, Mens major classics (Ronde, Fleche etc) vs womens equivalents... that's just the races, but also I think it's worth looking at the actual articles. Especially things such as the 'features' CN does on certain riders/teams... If people on this forum are genuinely telling the truth that they review both categories equally, then those stats in a meaningful comparison should tell us something...
I used the analogy of sponsorship because it is a quasi-estimator of demand.. Different reasons to sponsor, such as personal ambition cloud that measure as you suggested, which is why the date is priority. My original argument was that the supply of womens racing on this website is related to the demand, and i drifted away from that relating it to sponsors dollars..