US Pro Cyclists -Where they live, and why this is important...

[benpounder]

Given that the US Championships start today, and in a fit of insomnia, or perhaps in anticipation of what I think is the toughest stage of this years Giro, I did a bit of number crunching regarding just where the riders participating in the US Road Championship reside.

Not surprising to me, Colorado stands out. The top ten states in terms of rider racing on Monday:

Colorado_______22
California_______18
Utah___________5
Massachusetts___5
Georgia_________5
Idaho__________4
Wisconsin_______4
N Carolina_______4
Texas__________4
Oregon_________3 (S Carolina and Virginia also are sending three)

But what I find truly mundane, and expected, is the leaders in per population statics. Again, Colorado leads the way with 1 per 230k. This ranking is:

CO____1:229,315
ID_____1:393k
UT_____1:554k
VT_____1:630k
OR_____1:1,123k
MA_____1:1,312k
NH_____1:1,321k
WI_____1:1,425k
SC_____1:1,549k (the state where the race is held)
GA_____1:1,946k

Now I admit that there are a handful of US cyclists that are not participating, some because they are racing abroad, some because their professional commitments demand more focused training, and some because the race is beneath them. This obviously will affect the numbers listed above.

The real point of this, to me, is which states have the specific populations that can support a world class stage race. California has shown that they can, and we will see later this year if Colorado can continue to do so. We have seen both Georgia and Missouri folding in this realm. Both Utah and New Mexico host fairly successful second tier stage races. Now I think that a number of states have great roads that would be suitable for a world class stage race, but the question is if have the requisite supportive population. Thoughts?

 

[Clemson Cycling]

Have you ever been to Greenville SC? It has a extremely strong cycling community and continues to grow. Two Pro Tour based cyclists are based in the area and you cannot compare it to the rest of the state.

 

[washedup]

I am more concerned about where they live when the man comes a knocking with a cup to pee in. Can we cross reference connections to the city of Girona and make a prediction for the win?

 

[Clemson Cycling]

I am going to pick Zabriske for the TT and Danny Pate in the road race

 

[benpounder]

Have you ever been to Greenville SC?

No, but my point is not how strong a specific community is (Durango and Boulder have all others beat, hands down BTW), rather how strong a state is. Personally, I would love to see a race in western PA, western NY, and east Ohio, but even though the roads are great, they so not seem to have the requisite base of cycling enthusists. I'm happy that Hindcapie has been successful bringing the US Champioship to Greenville - it seems a great town, and great courses, but until SC hooks up with NC and GA (and possibly TN just for the roads) I dont see the necessary public support to host a sustainable world class stage race.

But I may be wrong.

 

[erik saunders]

How would the tour de trump fit in to your analysis?

 

[BeachBum]

Well, you haven't done anything to prove that your "leaders in per population statics" (sic) metric shows a causal relation between the number American pro bike racers living in a specific state vs how willing a state's population is to support a world class bike race. That may be your hypothesis, but you could come up with any number of other hypotheses from the same data.

For example, I look at your data and form the hypothesis that there is a direct relationship between a state's mean altitude and that state's desirability as a home for American pro bike racers.

I suspect that long term viability of ANY pro sporting event stems from not just a fan base, but equally or more importantly the number of sponsors (and the amount of money that each sponsor is willing to pony up) that the race directors can line up. A lack of funding led to the demise of the Coors Classic, the Tours de Trump and Georgia, and the SF Grand Prix.

On top of that, there are probably political factors at work. Philly was a much bigger deal when it was home of the US pro championships. Would the US Pro ever have moved to SC if George had his US base someplace else?

I'm all for a good pro bike race in Colorado, but if the RD can't find the money year after year the race will be a short-lived one no matter how many pros live there.

 

[Anonymous]

I assumed this was a stalkers thread.

 

[benpounder]

Well, you haven't done anything to prove that your "leaders in per population statics" (sic) metric shows a causal relation between the number American pro bike racers living in a specific state vs how willing a state's population is to support a world class bike race. That may be your hypothesis, but you could come up with any number of other hypotheses from the same data.

It wasn't a hypothesis, just an observation. An observation that I admitted might be faulty.

...I look at your data and form the hypothesis that there is a direct relationship between a state's mean altitude and that state's desirability as a home for American pro bike racers.

Colorado is the highest (pun intended) state in the nation. The mean altitude is higher than many of the cat. 1 climbs of any GT. I live at an altitude that is just 20m less than the top of what I consider the most difficult climb in the TdF (Col de la Madeleine). But it is not primarily the altitude that causes top athletes to reside here, it is the attitude. From the front range west, this state has embraced cycling; and not just casual cycling.

That same attitude is found elsewhere. It is the reason why the TdF, the Giro, the Vuelta (and all other European races), the Tour of the Gila, the Redlands classic, the Sea Otter Classic, and the Tour of Utah have been successful. The populations that hold the race embrace the race.

I suspect that long term viability of ANY pro sporting event stems from not just a fan base, but equally or more importantly the number of sponsors (and the amount of money that each sponsor is willing to pony up) that the race directors can line up. A lack of funding led to the demise of the Coors Classic, the Tours de Trump and Georgia, and the SF Grand Prix.

(my emphasis)
Undoubtedly this is true, yet there is more in consideration for the heavy financial sponsors than just how popular a race may be. For the few years they ran the SF Grand Prix, it was hugely successful, and in a community that was hugely supportive. But the cost of the race, due to the hugely onerous dictates of the city of SF, could not be overcome by the financial where-with-all of the race sponsors. Likewise for the old Coors Classic. And this gets to the point I was attempting to make. The community, be it a city, a state, or a nation, has to be supportive of the accepting the intrusions a major stage race necessarily demands. If it is just a community, say Greenville, or Durango, it is easy (especially if the race is historic, or the lead advocate is monumental). But for a state (or a nation) it requires huge commitments on the part of governing bodies for what many see as meager returns. This is what must be overcome. But to overcome this, a state, or nation must not just support the event (over the necessary disruptions) but embrace the event.

The nuts and bolts of this is not how many pro cyclists reside in any given city/state, rather how willing the hotel owner and restaurateur (for example) are to accept a certain temporary denial of access in the promise/hope for a longer term increase in patronage. But - surveys show - pro cyclists tend to reside in cities, states, and nations that are predisposed to welcome such disruptions knowing that there is a tangible long term benefit.

Thus we are back to my original question: we know that California can host such an event, I hope Colorado can host such an event. Are there other states/regions (and lord knows, there are a bounty of roads available) that can step up to the plate?

 

[Clemson Cycling]

It wasn't a hypothesis, just an observation. An observation that I admitted might be faulty.

Colorado is the highest (pun intended) state in the nation. The mean altitude is higher than many of the cat. 1 climbs of any GT. I live at an altitude that is just 20m less than the top of what I consider the most difficult climb in the TdF (Col de la Madeleine). But it is not primarily the altitude that causes top athletes to reside here, it is the attitude. From the front range west, this state has embraced cycling; and not just casual cycling.

That same attitude is found elsewhere. It is the reason why the TdF, the Giro, the Vuelta (and all other European races), the Tour of the Gila, the Redlands classic, the Sea Otter Classic, and the Tour of Utah have been successful. The populations that hold the race embrace the race.

(my emphasis)
Undoubtedly this is true, yet there is more in consideration for the heavy financial sponsors than just how popular a race may be. For the few years they ran the SF Grand Prix, it was hugely successful, and in a community that was hugely supportive. But the cost of the race, due to the hugely onerous dictates of the city of SF, could not be overcome by the financial where-with-all of the race sponsors. Likewise for the old Coors Classic. And this gets to the point I was attempting to make. The community, be it a city, a state, or a nation, has to be supportive of the accepting the intrusions a major stage race necessarily demands. If it is just a community, say Greenville, or Durango, it is easy (especially if the race is historic, or the lead advocate is monumental). But for a state (or a nation) it requires huge commitments on the part of governing bodies for what many see as meager returns. This is what must be overcome. But to overcome this, a state, or nation must not just support the event (over the necessary disruptions) but embrace the event.

The nuts and bolts of this is not how many pro cyclists reside in any given city/state, rather how willing the hotel owner and restaurateur (for example) are to accept a certain temporary denial of access in the promise/hope for a longer term increase in patronage. But - surveys show - pro cyclists tend to reside in cities, states, and nations that are predisposed to welcome such disruptions knowing that there is a tangible long term benefit.

Thus we are back to my original question: we know that California can host such an event, I hope Colorado can host such an event. Are there other states/regions (and lord knows, there are a bounty of roads available) that can step up to the plate?

Dude you have way too much free time on your hands.