Why Don't Women Ride With Men?

ianwilliams

As the question says...

I don't understand why women can't ride with the men - surely it would help raise the profile of the women's sport.

I realise body strength could be an issue but is it that significant in the legs? I always thought it was more of an upper body thing between genders. Or is that men are too heavy?

Are we seriously saying someone like Marianne Vos or Nicole Cooke couldn't/wouldn't mix it with the men?

No_Ta_Doctor

ianwilliams wrote:

As the question says...

I don't understand why women can't ride with the men - surely it would help raise the profile of the women's sport.

I realise body strength could be an issue but is it that significant in the legs? I always thought it was more of an upper body thing between genders. Or is that men are too heavy?

Are we seriously saying someone like Marianne Vos or Nicole Cooke couldn't/wouldn't mix it with the men?

Please address this question to ddraver.

iainf72

ianwilliams wrote:

Are we seriously saying someone like Marianne Vos or Nicole Cooke couldn't/wouldn't mix it with the men?

Yes

DeadCalm

They do sometimes. Audrey Cordon of the UCI Vienne Futuroscope team recently rode the Circuit du Morbihan which, whilst not exactly World Tour level, can claim Eddy Merckx and Jean Bobet as previous winners.

ianwilliams

iainf72 wrote:

ianwilliams wrote:

Are we seriously saying someone like Marianne Vos or Nicole Cooke couldn't/wouldn't mix it with the men?

Yes

But why? I mean, that's what I'm really asking. What is it, physiologically, that means women clock slower times than men?

And how much of that is down to the difference in prep of a fully-dedicated male pro versus the less-auspicious providings for the female peloton?

jawooga

Should women be able to ride alongside men but in their own competition, much like in the London marathon? I'm sure some pro women (eueooooooh... matron) could climb better than some pro men.

[admit I've not thought any of the above through properly ]

DeadCalm

Footage of the Circuit Du Morbihan featuring Audrey Cordon...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdERJ-eNFVc

greasedscotsman

No tA Doctor wrote:

Please address this question to ddraver.

Don't you mean Biking Bernie?

thomthom

I think the pro females would be on level with the 16-18 year old males. They would have no chance what so ever in any aspect of the sport with the pro males and I don't think you are serious when asking why.

That's said with no disrespect towards women (I better write this or the Bikeradar-police will come after me. They are easily offended by literally everything.)

No_Ta_Doctor

greasedscotsman wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Please address this question to ddraver.

Don't you mean Biking Bernie?

No. I have no desire to read BB on women's cycling again. Once was two times too many.

ddraver has an empirical case study, having been stood up for a ride by a certain "hockeygirl".

DeadCalm

ThomThom wrote:

I think the pro females would be on level with the 16-18 year old males. They would have no chance what so ever in any aspect of the sport with the pro males and I don't think you are serious when asking why.

That's said with no disrespect towards women (I better write this or the Bikeradar-police will come after me. They are easily offended by literally everything.)

Ha. See you've edited this from your original post. I was going to ask which 14 year old you thought could keep up with the Women's pro peloton. I think Marianne Vos would probably be stronger than most 16 year old males but would come across some 18 year olds who would easily give her a run for her money so I'd say, after your re-think, you're not too far out.

aleslie22

Women are not as fast as men on a bike. If you look at pro Ironman race time splits when Men and Women you'll see that Women are only a couple of a percentage of the Men's time in the swim and run but are well off on the bike leg.

RichN95.

ThomThom wrote:

I think the pro females would be on level with the 16-18 year old males. They would have no chance what so ever in any aspect of the sport with the pro males and I don't think you are serious when asking why.

As I have mentioned in these sorts of debates before, in the month or two before the 2008 Olympics the GB women's road team entered a big amateur Cat 2 stage race in Wales. Cooke came around ninth overall and Pooley won a stage, before going on to take gold and silver at the Olympics. So that's the sort of level the top women are at.

Pross

The last two weeks I have seen a female Olympic champion and pro road rider ride with 2nd, 3rd and 4th cat male riders. She held her own in both races and placed in the top 15 in one and just outside in the other (in both cases there were a few riders off the front and then a bunch sprint). However, most of the male riders in those races would get smashed by elite UK based riders let alone those at the male equivalent of her level.

On the flat absolute power is crucial and women just simply don't generate the watts. Women may be on a more level playing field on long climbs where w/kg is more important. Some has previously posted a chart on here with various power outputs of different levels of male cyclists plus that of Vos, it's worth a look if someone can find it.

RichN95.

You have to remember that girls are really, really bad at descending and that makes a big difference.

ianwilliams

RichN95 wrote:

You have to remember that girls are really, really bad at descending and that makes a big difference.

Hah!

No_Ta_Doctor

RichN95 wrote:

You have to remember that girls are really, really bad at descending and that makes a big difference.

Chapeau.

Squaggles

At the top pro level the men are too good , below this level they don't like been beaten by women

rick_chasey

ianwilliams wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

ianwilliams wrote:

Are we seriously saying someone like Marianne Vos or Nicole Cooke couldn't/wouldn't mix it with the men?

Yes

But why? I mean, that's what I'm really asking. What is it, physiologically, that means women clock slower times than men?

And how much of that is down to the difference in prep of a fully-dedicated male pro versus the less-auspicious providings for the female peloton?

Testosterone.

Daz555

ianwilliams wrote:

But why? I mean, that's what I'm really asking. What is it, physiologically, that means women clock slower times than men?

For just about every physiological factor which can influence pure athletic ability, evolution has selected into human males a greater capacity that it has for females. Examples.

Proportionally larger heart and lungs.
Lower % body fat.
Testosterone - vital in how muscle fibers adapt to stress/training.

On average males can pump more oxygen to a body with a better power to weight ratio than on average for a female, and also has greater adaptation to training activity.

alihisgreat

ianwilliams wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

ianwilliams wrote:

Are we seriously saying someone like Marianne Vos or Nicole Cooke couldn't/wouldn't mix it with the men?

Yes

But why? I mean, that's what I'm really asking. What is it, physiologically, that means women clock slower times than men?

And how much of that is down to the difference in prep of a fully-dedicated male pro versus the less-auspicious providings for the female peloton?

Main thing is lower VO2 max.

Sedentary male average is apparently around 42ml/kg/min compared to 30ml/kg/min for sedentry women.

Then for elite athletes you're looking at values into the 80s as the highest levels for men, compared to 70 for women (Marianne Vos has apparently displayed values of 72.8ml/kg/min - Compare this to a value of 86.4 recorded by Boasson Hagen or 97.5 by some 18y/o cyclist from norway :shock: - http://www.topendsports.com/testing/records/vo2max.htm).

Factors contributing to this?

-women have higher body fat %
-women have lower levels of haemoglobin
-women have smaller hearts

http://faculty.washington.edu/crowther/Misc/RBC/gender.shtml - references in that article if you want to read the papers.

Other things to consider?

-Women have lower muscle mass so can't put out the same absolute power, and fatigue more quickly.

jibberjim

It depends hugely on the course and the individual rider. In a TT up Alpe d'Huez a lot of pro women would destroy most 2nd cat men since FTP w/kg is the defining characteristic. But in a UK road race where 1minute power and absolute power are key, 2nd cat men would cause a lot of problem to all but relatively large women with strong sprints. Their larger FTP's don't make a lot of difference.

Women have much flatter power profiles, their w/kg over short durations is considerably less than an average males. The smaller average sizes also disadvantages them considerably.

goonz

jawooga wrote:

Should women be able to ride alongside men but in their own competition, much like in the London marathon? I'm sure some pro women (eueooooooh... matron) could climb better than some pro men.

[admit I've not thought any of the above through properly ]

May also make some men climb better too.....

goonz

Isn't it the same reason women cannot compete with men in any athletics events or any other event?

Women are physically less developed than men and at pro level there is no chance they would be able to keep up. Ocmparing pro women races with cat 2 etc is a little incorrect but there may be some women that could definitely mix it up though.

But as have been mentioned above, muscle mass, testosterone, body shape, weight all play a massive part in it.