Velo d'Or 2011

[auscyclefan94]

easy on that one sunshine. your lack of rationalism and decency to discuss this or any other subject does not make others "neanderthal". you have no right to say that. do you know the meaning of utopia? that's your world. mine is different.

in my world, men and women are different. As I said, even if the extreme feminists that post here don't agree we me, that's a good thing. Don't get me wrong, maybe both you and libertine need to read better, obviously men and women can be amazing teachers. fact is, they will have different qualities and different paths to achieve that status. women will be naturally better suited to some jobs than men just because they were born women and were created to be women. the opposite is also true.

If i am an employer and i want someone to take care of babies, being women or being men will be very important to my decision. If i am an employer and i want someone to be an F1 mechanic, well... there's a reason for 99.999999% of them being men. If i want a job that it doesn't matter if the employee will be male of female (since their natural advantages against the other will -in this case- be eliminated by their natural disadvantages) and if both have the same capacity i will choose the male one (lack of pregnancy, for example). No employer can judge me, they all do the same ALMOST every time.

there are some times when being women is better. For example, If you have a nice path of living, If you have the required set of abilities and if you try to be president, most likely you will win just because you are women----- right now that makes uninvolved people think that the country is better just because of that, unfortunately for Hillary, Obama is black and the same rules can be applied.

men, just like women, have their intellectual and physical strengths\weaknesses for a reason. Most men in most countries already accept it. as a result, stupid laws\traditions of considering women inferior humans or to private women from any job or education are being removed. That's great. Women can try to be what they want to be and this does not deserve celebration since it should be like that since day 1, but they can't feel marginalized just because men are naturally better in mathematics and engineering just like in sports. that's nature. When women don't agree with nature, usually they stop being women.

What vos did is amazing, but if a man did something similar it has to be considered 100times more amazing. before vos, it was cooke, before cook it was other one. in men, that's impossible. what gilbert did in this specialized era is unbelievable. he deserves it more than anyone.

Oddly, I agreed with quite a few of your points.

 

[El Pistolero]

I can have as much respect for female sport than male sport, but only if it's a competitive sport like tennis for example. Although the level has dropped there in the last few years. But there's still sports like Athletics were it's just as big competition than the male sports.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Sometimes the level of competition is just as high, it's just the depth of field that's lacking - cross-country skiing, for example. Compare that to biathlon where, if anything, the depth of the women's field is stronger than the men's.

But women's sport is between a rock and a hard place. How does it go about increasing that competition level or depth of field, if it never gets any recognition? Some sports (for example golf) have gone to great length to develop the women's game; the other sports where the women's events are on a similar footing to the mens' is when they are coterminous, part of the same event - track and field, swimming, tennis, skiing, biathlon and cross-country skiing, to a lesser extent track cycling. Most of the most successful events in the women's cycling calendar are those events which are appended to the men's events (Flèche Wallonne, Ronde van Vlaanderen, Omloop het Nieuwsblad) or are piggybacking existing or former men's events, giving an obvious point of reference and level of familiarity for the audience (Giro Donne, Emakumeen Bira, Giro del Trentino).

 

[gilbertador]

2011
Veldrijden
Nederlands kampioenschap veldrijden, Sint-Michielsgestel
Wereldkampioenschap veldrijden, Sankt Wendel (Duitsland)
UCI wereldbekerveldrijden Pont-Château
Baan
Scratch WK Apeldoorn
Wegwedstrijd
Nederlands kampioene op de weg
Nederlands kampioene tijdrijden, Veendam
Parkhotel Rooding Classic (1.NE)
1e en 4e etappe Energiewachttour (2.2s)
Ronde van Drenthe (CDM)
Drentse 8 van Dwingeloo (1.1)
Waalse Pijl (CDM)
GP Elsy Jacobs (1.1)
GP Nicolas Frantz (1.1)
GP de Valladolid (CDM)
1e en 4e etappe en eindklassement Emakumeen Bira (2.1WE)
1e en 3e etappe en eindklassement Ster van Zeeland (2.2)
1e, 3e, 6e, 7e en 9e etappe en eindklassement, (roze, groene en de paarse trui) Ronde van Italië 2011 (2.1WE)
1e, 5e en 6e etappe en eindklassement Holland Ladies Tour

Wikipedia disagrees

Sometimes the level of competition is just as high, it's just the depth of field that's lacking - cross-country skiing, for example. Compare that to biathlon where, if anything, the depth of the women's field is stronger than the men's.

But women's sport is between a rock and a hard place. How does it go about increasing that competition level or depth of field, if it never gets any recognition? Some sports (for example golf) have gone to great length to develop the women's game; the other sports where the women's events are on a similar footing to the mens' is when they are coterminous, part of the same event - track and field, swimming, tennis, skiing, biathlon and cross-country skiing, to a lesser extent track cycling. Most of the most successful events in the women's cycling calendar are those events which are appended to the men's events (Flèche Wallonne, Ronde van Vlaanderen, Omloop het Nieuwsblad) or are piggybacking existing or former men's events, giving an obvious point of reference and level of familiarity for the audience (Giro Donne, Emakumeen Bira, Giro del Trentino).

Its no ones fault Libertine seguros is a self righteous feminist, no women has one the velo d or its a mens award as it should be it not being sexist saying they shouldnt win it they shouldnt qualify, they could have there own award, libertine clearly only mentioned it on this board to attempt to very sadly boast of her knowledge of a rather irrelevant part of the sport that we follow, maybe we should create a sub forum on womens cycling specially for her where she can discuss Pooley and Vos to her hearts content rather than hijack threads with nonsence!

 

[The Hitch]

Its Gilbert a mile ahead of Contador who is a further mile ahead of Evans but unfortunately at the Laureus awards the only one that might be named will be Evans and probably for some **** like newcommer of the year.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Its no ones fault Libertine seguros is a self righteous feminist, no women has one the velo d or its a mens award as it should be it not being sexist saying they shouldnt win it they shouldnt qualify, they could have there own award, libertine clearly only mentioned it on this board to attempt to very sadly boast of her knowledge of a rather irrelevant part of the sport that we follow, maybe we should create a sub forum on womens cycling specially for her where she can discuss Pooley and Vos to her hearts content rather than hijack threads with nonsence!

I don't see why it's hi-jacking and I don't see why it's nonsense. Besides, just as no woman has won it to date doesn't necessarily mean no woman CAN win it - I don't actually know whether there is a gender restriction on the Velo d'Or. If there is, I apologise for the irrelevant debate.

You can say "the Velo d'Or is an award for male cyclists, Vos is probably ineligible" as somebody (Waterloo Sunrise?) said on page 1. That seems fair enough to me. Since this is effectively a debate on who the cyclist of the year is, and if we limit it to men's cycling it's pretty much a no-brainer, it isn't hijacking to mention Marianne. Those that responded to me not by pointing in the direction of "probably ineligible, besides I'd still say Gilbert anyway" but by going in the "women's cycling is worthless because only men can do sport" direction, THOSE are the ones doing the hijacking.

To state that women cannot ever achieve equality in any field, and that the world is better that way, THAT is hijacking threads with nonsense.

 

[gilbertador]

I don't see why it's hi-jacking and I don't see why it's nonsense. Besides, just as no woman has won it to date doesn't necessarily mean no woman CAN win it - I don't actually know whether there is a gender restriction on the Velo d'Or. If there is, I apologise for the irrelevant debate.

You can say "the Velo d'Or is an award for male cyclists, Vos is probably ineligible" as somebody (Waterloo Sunrise?) said on page 1. That seems fair enough to me. Since this is effectively a debate on who the cyclist of the year is, and if we limit it to men's cycling it's pretty much a no-brainer, it isn't hijacking to mention Marianne. Those that responded to me not by pointing in the direction of "probably ineligible, besides I'd still say Gilbert anyway" but by going in the "women's cycling is worthless because only men can do sport" direction, THOSE are the ones doing the hijacking.

To state that women cannot ever achieve equality in any field, and that the world is better that way, THAT is hijacking threads with nonsense.

No they simply dont want to hear about Vos and want to debate Mens cycling, you totally change the subject of the thread by making people respond to you like that, ie in an effort to shut you up!

 

[Gingerale]

I don't see why it's hi-jacking and I don't see why it's nonsense. Besides, just as no woman has won it to date doesn't necessarily mean no woman CAN win it - I don't actually know whether there is a gender restriction on the Velo d'Or. If there is, I apologise for the irrelevant debate.

You can say "the Velo d'Or is an award for male cyclists, Vos is probably ineligible" as somebody (Waterloo Sunrise?) said on page 1. That seems fair enough to me. Since this is effectively a debate on who the cyclist of the year is, and if we limit it to men's cycling it's pretty much a no-brainer, it isn't hijacking to mention Marianne. Those that responded to me not by pointing in the direction of "probably ineligible, besides I'd still say Gilbert anyway" but by going in the "women's cycling is worthless because only men can do sport" direction, THOSE are the ones doing the hijacking.

To state that women cannot ever achieve equality in any field, and that the world is better that way, THAT is hijacking threads with nonsense.

but i see ACF isn't jumping to refer those posters (like C&Cfan) to his "gender" thread in the cafe. hi-jacking this thread in a way in which he ideologically agrees apparently is fine however. there's a load of condescending and antiquated double standard written that has nothing to do with the cycling award. i don't have any interest in discussing gender and equality anywhere on a cycling forum. acknowledging ACF's link:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthr...455#post682455

seemed like an interesting poll and topic at the time i posted yesterday.

 

[Tank Engine]

Its no ones fault Libertine seguros is a self righteous feminist, no women has one the velo d or its a mens award as it should be it not being sexist saying they shouldnt win it they shouldnt qualify, they could have there own award, libertine clearly only mentioned it on this board to attempt to very sadly boast of her knowledge of a rather irrelevant part of the sport that we follow, maybe we should create a sub forum on womens cycling specially for her where she can discuss Pooley and Vos to her hearts content rather than hijack threads with nonsence!

Libertine did not hijack the thread. I wondered who had voted for A N Other and asked if it was a serious vote. Libertine said it was her vote and others guessed who it was for. If anything has hijacked this thread it's nonsense like the above.

 

[greenedge]

Its Gilbert a mile ahead of Contador who is a further mile ahead of Evans but unfortunately at the Laureus awards the only one that might be named will be Evans and probably for some **** like newcommer of the year.

Guardini
Sagan
Pinot
Are not that bad.

how does this up and comer award entail/ work. First season or best young person under say 23???

 

[El Pistolero]

Guardini
Sagan
Pinot
Are not that bad.

hat does this up and comer award entail. First season or best young person under say 23???

The price will go to Kittel. First year pro= newcomer

 

[The Hitch]

Guardini
Sagan
Pinot
Are not that bad.

hat does this up and comer award entail. First season or best young person under say 23???

Laurues award is not cycling. Its world sport. Usually it just goes to who is most famous like Bolt winning it when Phelps did something that never will be repeated.

 

[El Pistolero]

Laurues award is not cycling. Its world sport. Usually it just goes to who is most famous like Bolt winning it when Phelps did something that never will be repeated.

Bolt is a prodigy though.
And a very nice guy, had the chance to see him yesterday at Brussels.

 

[Mambo95]

Laurues award is not cycling. Its world sport. Usually it just goes to who is most famous like Bolt winning it when Phelps did something that never will be repeated.

On the other hand, the Laureus Awards are voted for by a selection of truly great sportsmen, so they know what they're talking about.

 

[Mshengu]

My vote goes to Gilbert, no doubt. Contador could have been the one if he continued racing until Lombardia and winning a few more races.

 

[greenedge]

Laurues award is not cycling. Its world sport. Usually it just goes to who is most famous like Bolt winning it when Phelps did something that never will be repeated.

Thx for clearing up the confusion.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

No they simply dont want to hear about Vos and want to debate Mens cycling, you totally change the subject of the thread by making people respond to you like that, ie in an effort to shut you up!

They could have just ignored me then, rather than spewing sexist bile.

I voted based on my opinion. Somebody else asked if the vote was serious, I answered that it was, and it spiralled from there. If you don't want to hear about Vos, then don't make comments open-ended so that women's cycling can be mentioned, or simply ignore the comments about it. Just saying "yes, Vos has had a great year but given the tougher level of competition I'd still give it to Gilbert" is much more likely to "shut me up" than going off on an utterly irrelevant tangent about what jobs women are capable of doing.

I didn't change the subject of the thread. The subject of the thread was, who deserves to win the Velo d'Or? I thought Marianne Vos deserved to win it. Other people have then taken things off-topic with discussion of the relative merit of women's cycling. I answered the question posed in the OP honestly and truthfully.

Sorry that the existence of female sportsmen irks you so.

 

[The Hitch]

On the other hand, the Laureus Awards are voted for by a selection of truly great sportsmen, so they know what they're talking about.

Not really. Athletes are among the dumbest people in the world.

That their bodies performed well does not make them experts. Pele said an African side would win the World Cup by 2000. Merckx continues to make surprisingly stupid remarks. During the WC Adebayor struggled to string 2 words together and his co- "panelists" were laughed at for not even knowing the names of players during games


And thats before we get to total morons like Ian Wright.

 

[jordan5000]

Not really. Athletes are among the dumbest people in the world.

That their bodies performed well does not make them experts. Pele said an African side would win the World Cup by 2000. Merckx continues to make surprisingly stupid remarks. During the WC Adebayor struggled to string 2 words together and his co- "panelists" were laughed at for not even knowing the names of players during games


And thats before we get to total morons like Ian Wright.

Please don't generalize, do you have any idea how many athletes from team sports go on to be successful analysts or coaches?

 

[Marcus135]

Please don't generalize, do you have any idea how many athletes from team sports go on to be successful analysts or coaches?

It's easy for people who have been stars in their particular sport to go on to become an analyst or coach of that because they have a strong knowledge of that particular sport. It does not mean they are smart generally. I would have to agree with Hitch, athletes really are not the smartest breed (there are always exceptions and by athletes i mean all sports not just cycling).

 

[El Pistolero]

Not really. Athletes are among the dumbest people in the world.

That their bodies performed well does not make them experts. Pele said an African side would win the World Cup by 2000. Merckx continues to make surprisingly stupid remarks. During the WC Adebayor struggled to string 2 words together and his co- "panelists" were laughed at for not even knowing the names of players during games


And thats before we get to total morons like Ian Wright.

That really depends. Athletics for example is a very popular university sport and a lot of them have university diplomas.

 

[Marcus135]

That really depends. Athletics for example is a very popular university sport and a lot of them have university diplomas.

That is at a University level of competition. If i am not mistaken i think The Hitch is referring to elite athletes from sports not just general participants of the sport even if they participate at a relatively high level.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

That is at a University level of competition. If i am not mistaken i think The Hitch is referring to elite athletes from sports not just general participants of the sport even if they participate at a relatively high level.

You do nevertheless see many university graduates in professional sport. As a general rule of thumb, the more niche the sport, the less money is in it, and therefore the higher level of participants who have continued with education further in order to have a fall back option; many also use their sports careers to fund their educational one.

 

[Christian]

If it weren't for Gilbert I'd give it to Thomas Voeckler, he had a fantastic season

 

[Christian]

Not really. Athletes are among the dumbest people in the world.

That their bodies performed well does not make them experts. Pele said an African side would win the World Cup by 2000. Merckx continues to make surprisingly stupid remarks. During the WC Adebayor struggled to string 2 words together and his co- "panelists" were laughed at for not even knowing the names of players during games


And thats before we get to total morons like Ian Wright.

There are some counter examples though such as Laurent Didier, technical engineer with a masters degree. I think a lot also has to do with the interviews we see: they are often right after a race/game, when the athlete is completely exhausted and didn't have time to think of something good to say or how to analyze what happened. Add to this completely moronic "questions" from the journalists and it makes the athletes seem dumb. In cycling what bugs me is that it's very often not even a real question, it's just "(rider's name) ... very hard race today." I mean ... what are you supposed to say to that?!