Female TdF

alan_a

Looks like ASO are not objecting to the idea.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-22/tour-de-france-open-to-reviving-women-s-race-after-24-years.html

Tour de France Open to Reviving Women’s Race After 24 Years

Tour de France organizer Amaury Sport Organisation is willing to discuss holding a women’s cycling race alongside the men’s event after a 24-year hiatus.

Jean-Etienne Amaury, chairman of the family-owned unit, said executives have discussed the subject after a petition backed by Olympic road-race gold medalist Marianne Vos gathered more than 65,000 signatures in 11 days.

Enlarge image
Cyclists round the Arc de Triomphe during the final stage of the 2013 Tour de France, on July 21, 2013, in Paris. Photographer: John Berry/Getty Images

Britain’s Chris Froome won the centenary edition of the Tour de France yesterday. ASO, formerly known as Societe du Tour, held a parallel event for women from 1984 to 1989, although it didn’t prosper, according to “French Cycling: A Social and Cultural History,” by Hugh Dauncey.

“We need to work out the right economic model, get the media on board and discuss with public authorities about closing the roads,” Amaury said in a phone interview. “All these parameters need to be planned. It’s not likely to happen next year.”

The 1,080-kilometer (671-mile) women’s race won by the U.S.’s Mary-Ann Martin in 1984 used the same finishes as the men, although stages were shorter, according to Dauncey. There were five rest days compared to two for men.

Amaury said ASO hasn’t yet had any contact with the organizers of the petition. He said the previous version of the race in the 1980s failed to garner a “strong following or interest from television.”

Kathryn Bertine, a cyclist and filmmaker in Tucson, Arizona, started the petition July 12 after enlisting support from Vos of the Netherlands, cyclist Emma Pooley and triathlete Chrissie Wellington, both of the U.K.

She said marathon and triathlon races both manage to accommodate men and women on the same course.

Same Stages

“We’re not trying to race the men,” Bertine, 38, said in a phone interview. “Women are 10 to 12 minutes behind the men in the marathon but that doesn’t mean their times are any less valid.”

Pooley, a two-time runnerup at the eight-day women’s Giro d’Italia cycling race, said she would like to see women tackling the same stages as men.

A parallel event for women would tap the presence of spectators and media at the race to increase the profile of women’s cycling, Pooley, 30, said. Some 12 million spectators lined the route of the 2012 Tour.

To contact the reporters on this story: Alex Duff at the Tour de France on aduff4@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Christopher Elser at celser@bloomberg.net

mfin

They should have one, it can only be good, whilst women's football is truly awful, women's cycling is completely watchable and great, the sooner a female TDF gets started, the sooner it can be built up to be the pinnacle of the women's racing calendar.

Turfle

I have no idea about logistics, financing, sponsorship, all I know is I'd watch it.

cynicalrider

Keyser__Soze wrote:

EPO Delivery Man wrote:

It doesnt matter what they come up with, the only way it would get on TV is if the Wiggle girls all rode nude and one of the teams was sponsored by Ann Summers.

Not entirely true. The women have been getting a fair bit of exposure on the ITV4 Tour Series when they have raced on the same day as the blokes and there seemed to be a lot more interest in the women's race at the Nocturne than the men's. The women's road and track races were popular with viewers at the Olympics with lots of posters on here commenting that the women's Oly RR was much more interesting than the men's. Companies such as Wiggle are realising this interest and sponsoring teams. There're some nonsensical UCI rules limiting the length of women's road races (alleged to be related to 'comfort breaks') which would prevent them doing entire stages but I'd like to see them be given at least the opportunity to make a go of it and do the last 2/3s or 3/4s of each stage, even if only for two of the three weeks.

Just a few points - the women's tour series is a UK-centric event. It receives little/no coverage in Europe, where the demographic majority of cycling fans are based. This is where the vast majority of major races take place, and where most of the title sponsors of World Tour teams are based. When the level of interest in covering a potential women's tour is considered, the major fan bases need to be taken into account. Whilst significant in the context of this forum, cycling as a professional sport (rather than a leisure activity) receives very little interest even the UK, and very very little outside the Tour.

Judging the potential demand for coverage on the basis of one race (i.e. the Olympics) is folly. If we judged women's road racing on the 2011 World Championships, there would be no demand whatsoever. The Olympics is an anomaly during which a lot of people watch sports they never would, and probably never will until the next Olympics. The 2012 edition was a further anomaly since it was in London, so the interest in the UK was enormous. In most European countries the coverage was far less, and European audiences are the key factor in deciding whether there is demand for coverage.

Wiggle as an example is difficult - their input costs are relatively small as the riders already receive national funding, and the costs of running the team are much less relative to a Pro Tour Team. As a relatively isolated example theirs doesn't demonstrate a sea change in the view held by potential sponsors - and this is a key point. For the race to expand, there will need to be a massive base of interest among potential sponsors, as Pooley herself has alluded to. Given that recent years have shown fewer men's races, sponsors withdrawing from the sport, and significant reductions in top-flite racing in the UK and Europe, this doesn't really seem to be a climate supportive of such developments.

Looking at the wider question of a women's tour, the suggestion in the petition, at this stage, is plainly unrealistic. It calls for a separate race, with exactly the same stages for women as for men. Quite apart from the logistical concerns, the practicalities from a performance point of view are unrealistic.

The longest women's stage race this year was the Giro Donne, 8 days, 780km, time of winner 20h30, av speed of winner 38kph, longest stage 137km, av stage length 97km

The 2013 tour was 21 days, 3403km, time of winner 83h56, av speed of winner 40.5kph, longest stage 242km, av stage length 162km.

It is totally unrealistic to expect that, in a year, riders of either sex would be able to make this jump up in distance. The vast majority of women's races are around 120km, whereas even at an interclub level men are racing over 180km and doing it a great deal faster. Parity in competition is a good idea in principle, but when the practicalities of implementing the petition in its current guise are considered, its plainly unrealistic.

keyser__soze

The reason the races are shorter is due to the UCI rules. Plenty of girls want to race longer but they're not allowed. 2.5kph speed difference (albeit over a different parcours and fewer days racing) is pretty small - we're not talking women's stages taking two or three hours longer than the men. I don't think the petitioners are demanding 'we want to do every km of every stage or nothing' so I could foresee 2/3rd length stages over 2 of the three weeks as a starting point.

Sure the Tour Series is only a domestic event (so why on earth would you expect it to be shown on foreign TV?) but even without the cachet of the 'Tour de France' name (which as you state arouses public interest) and 'headline' riders such as Armitstead/Trott/Rowsell/King etc on the women's side it still gets decent TV coverage. Sponsorship is a bit chicken-and-egg really, plus the women's side of the sport isn't anything like as tainted in the eyes of the public as the men's in terms of doping etc.

I'd like to see them be given the chance to give it a go and see how they get on. The novelty factor should help provide some sponsorship to cover costs for the initial couple of years. If it proves unpopular it'll die a death.

cynicalrider

I understand the reason for the differences in distances - my point is more that it is unrealistic to expect a jump up to being competitive over stages 100-150% longer than those a rider is used to, in the space of a year. A 2.5kph speed difference is notable, but when you consider the differences in distance and parcours, its massive. I do agree that your solution of a slimmed down event is more viable, but the problem with the petition is that it will be easy to dismiss as it seeks the full caboodle;

From the petition - "We seek not to race against the men, but to have our own professional field running in conjunction with the men's event, at the same time, over the same distances, on the same days, with modifications in start/finish times so neither gender's race interferes with the other."

My point about coverage is that there must be demand for it in Europe, and there is virtually nothing to indicate that this exists - using the Tour Series as an example of successful exposure bears little relation to the potential coverage of a women's Tour de France, as does the interest in the Tour perennially in the UK. There must be significant potential interest in Europe for sponsors to be willing to fund such an event.

" The Tour of Flanders and Flèche Wallonne hold similar top ranked men's and women's races on the same day, with great success." - This quote points to my approach - when there are similar levels of interest and coverage for these races (as there are in the mens), and those others than already exist, that might be the time for developing a women's Tour, though necessarily in the exact same guise as the main event.

"Hopefully 30 years from now, we will see 2014 as the year that opened people's eyes to true equality in the sport of cycling." - this is the key mistake the petitioners make, they see equality as being achieved by the women having exactly the same event as the men, but equality does not necessarily mean the mirror image.

awavey

using the Tour Series as the example actually highlights the problem a womens TdF faces though, as the womens races are shorter distances,they dont really get the same media coverage, it was at most 1/4tr of the highlights given to the mens races on ITV4 which was more than last year when it was like 1/5th but still, and it never gets that much coverage in dispatches in the cycling press.

Theres far far less sponsorship available for the teams, and actually the crowds attending were often that bit notably smaller, which could be due to the timing most of the womens races kicked off early evening, whilst the mens race was that bit later you had time to collect the kids from school or finish work, have some tea. but exactly timing is a big factor, and this is in one of the set of races where the women are treated more equally to start with

the London Nocturne was different IMO because of the Trott/Olympic factor, there certainly wasnt as much media interest in last years womens race (which IIRC was almost canned wasnt it due to the perceived lack of interest and entries) and how many of the media forming a queue to interview the Wigglettes, interviewed Hannah Barnes or Lucy Garner before this years race.

Id far rather see a more organised UCI Womens tour put together, where they get paid more than £500 for winning the premier race on the calendar, so they dont have to sleep 4 to a room built for 2,or even in tents I think some have had to do this year, they actually get paid by their teams, where far more was being done to fix the kinds of issues Nicole raised in her retirement salvo.

having a womens TdF doesnt fix any of that, and why has no-one said hold on we have a Tour of Britain for the men, wheres the Tour of Britain for the women...and the we'd say well funny you should mention that because last week, Sweetspot (who organise the ToB/TourSeries currently at least) announced that very kind of thing was going to happen in May 2014, so how many of those same media outlets covering the Womens TdF story even covered that announcement.

rayjay

Why not just start the womans race a day later. Everything will already be in place and they could ride the same distance as the men. I could see an issue with the length and time it may take for some stages but that would seem to be easiest way IMO. I don't think they should start together. We already have a nervous peleton. And I doubt the women would be able to keep pace for much of the time and some of the faster woman could use the men to wheel suck away. It would be really good to see the ladies race get some TV coverage and see some exciting racing up the cols.

Yellow Peril

rayjay wrote:

Why not just start the womans race a day later. Everything will already be in place and they could ride the same distance as the men. I could see an issue with the length and time it may take for some stages but that would seem to be easiest way IMO. I don't think they should start together. We already have a nervous peloton. And I doubt the women would be able to keep pace for much of the time and some of the faster woman could use the men to wheel suck away. It would be really good to see the ladies race get some TV coverage and see some exciting racing up the cols.

that creates an issue with 2 days of road closures, man power etc... and people may not turn out. I think start X kilometres in say 60,80 or 100 depending on the length of the stage and perhaps an hour or so earlier and Joe public get to see two races on the same day

dougzz

rayjay wrote:

Why not just start the womans race a day later. Everything will already be in place and they could ride the same distance as the men. I could see an issue with the length and time it may take for some stages but that would seem to be easiest way IMO. I don't think they should start together. We already have a nervous peloton. And I doubt the women would be able to keep pace for much of the time and some of the faster woman could use the men to wheel suck away. It would be really good to see the ladies race get some TV coverage and see some exciting racing up the cols.

It's not in place, it's all packed up and moved onto the next stage. Any idea like this requires a huge amount of additional logistics. Have you ever seen the kit at a TdF stage, the miles and miles of barriers, the area needed to park hundreds of huge trucks and buses, it's an enormous operation. I don't see anyway this works as a main TdF spin-off. Cycling is all about the commercial possibilities, it's not sport for the sake of it, women's cycling will only work if enough people think they can make money out of it.

ademort

On Dutch TV Marianne Vos was delighted that the top women have been invited to sit down at the table with TDF bosses to discuss a possible womens TDF maybe as early as 2015. In my opinion the only way i could see it working is to let the women ride the same course on the same day as the men but make the course shorter with the finish line the same for both men and women. Logistically this is the only sensible option .
Crowds would then see two races, the women would also be able to experience the TDF for what it is i,m sure Marianne and the rest would love it.Have no idea how they would work the TV coverage but hey who cares.

Pross

Looks like Britain will beat France with a women's ToB looking on the cards. If so maybe it can become the major women's stage race?

ademort

According to sporza in a report i,ve just read Christian Prudhomme says that if it,s upto him there will never be a womens TDF. He say,s that the TDF is an enormous machine that they just cannot make any bigger it,s impossible.He stands open for any womens road races but the TDF for women is just not possible.
He also criticises the way in which riders like Vos and Pooley have gone about trying to get the ball rolling for a womens TDF by writing an open letter instead of directly approaching the tour organisation.

RichN95.

ademort wrote:

According to sporza in a report i,ve just read Christian Prudhomme says that if it,s upto him there will never be a womens TDF. He say,s that the TDF is an enormous machine that they just cannot make any bigger it,s impossible.He stands open for any womens road races but the TDF for women is just not possible.
He also criticises the way in which riders like Vos and Pooley have gone about trying to get the ball rolling for a womens TDF by writing an open letter instead of directly approaching the tour organisation.

http://www1.skysports.com/cycling/news/ ... ns-edition

squired

To jump straight into running a female Tour de France is probably too much. Is the standard of female cycling even good enough to participate in a 21 day Tour, or would it be a slimmed down version? They certainly wouldn't be doing the same distances.

I actually feel sorry for the ASO. In the end they are a private organisation that is in business to make money. If there is money to be made in female racing they will no doubt look to do something, even if it is something smaller (how about starting with a female Paris-Nice, Paris-Roubaix or Dauphine?). However, should they be setting up a massive race (which would require thousands of man hours to organise) that would potentially crush their balance sheet?

As I see it, efforts should be made to improve the female calendar first, with a focus on one day races and 7-10 day tours. The Tour de France may be the most well known race to the general public, but with the right organisation and tv deals a race in another country could actually become the female equivalent. Maybe it could even be the female Tour of Britain equivalent. Or, a country like the US, where far more women seem to follow sports, could step up to the plate. A female Tour of California could easily become female cycling's TDF equivalent, with the added advantage that it could be on tv at prime time in European countries due to the time difference (and therefore no clash with any big male races that are on at the same time).

joelsim

I think it's a great idea.

And as long as the race was a mirror image of the men's starting at exactly the same time, then they could piggy-back the greater financing of the men's. All of the broadcasting will be there already etc etc.

Win, win.

Just need to make sure no-one parks a bus on the finish line.

sherer

it's not just a matter of starting ealie though. All the support staff would then have to work longer shifts, which in some cases would be illegal. If they needed double the support staff for police, admin, timing, race officials etc then that would be double the extra staff who would also need paying and somewhere to stay. That can't just be done overnight, it's not a case of it's already there to start with.

Also there is the matter of paying for it all, do Credit Lyonais want to sponsor a women's tour, do all the other companies.

Also as pointed out already i'm not sure women's cycling is mature enough to have a women's tour yet, they need to build up to that point. They need a backer first who can partner with ASO and get them to show 30 min highlights as part of the men's major races so they can get the product out there, that would need a major backer to pay for all of that though.

In sport these days money talks, even the first tour was to promote a paper and not for sport

Tusher

My tuppence worth-

1. The solution lies with the UCI. All Pat et al have to do is write it into their rules that any male cycling team MUST have women's team. No ifs, not buts. The momentum of starting this ball rolling would make it unable to stop.

2. Marathons manage it. Yes, the caravane is huge, but if they ran the women's race AFTER the mens, then I think it would work. Yup, there may be occasions when the autobus or the Lanterne would be swallowed up by Marianne Vos and Emma Pooley, but just think of the delight these rare occasions would bring to journalists. And after the women's race there could be a sportive.

3. Like the marathon comparison, I used to think that the women should race the same route as the men, but now I suspect that this may encourage doping. BUT women are notoriously magnificent at endurance and our pain threshold is in a different galaxy to men anyway.

4. I have no answer to the bladder problem. Placing portaloos every 10-20 k might help, but how you would keep spectators out of them I don't know. And loosing 6 minutes on a stage because there was a queue just isn't on. I know they do manage it during the Worlds and the Olympics, but there are few enough empty roadsides for the men to go during the Tour, never mind the women.

iainf72

Tusher wrote:

My tuppence worth-

1. The solution lies with the UCI. All Pat et al have to do is write it into their rules that any male cycling team MUST have women's team. No ifs, not buts. The momentum of starting this ball rolling would make it unable to stop.

I suspect if you did that, 75% of sponsors would bail out.

tailwindhome

Are there enough female professionals capable of a 21 day tour to have a viable race?

Would there be a requirement or expectation to have prize money parity?

joelsim

sherer wrote:

it's not just a matter of starting ealie though. All the support staff would then have to work longer shifts, which in some cases would be illegal. If they needed double the support staff for police, admin, timing, race officials etc then that would be double the extra staff who would also need paying and somewhere to stay. That can't just be done overnight, it's not a case of it's already there to start with.

Also there is the matter of paying for it all, do Credit Lyonais want to sponsor a women's tour, do all the other companies.

Also as pointed out already i'm not sure women's cycling is mature enough to have a women's tour yet, they need to build up to that point. They need a backer first who can partner with ASO and get them to show 30 min highlights as part of the men's major races so they can get the product out there, that would need a major backer to pay for all of that though.

In sport these days money talks, even the first tour was to promote a paper and not for sport

They would, but it would still be an awful lot cheaper to put on.

morstar

It's a bit chicken and egg isn't it?
Throw loads of money at women's cycling so that there are loads of events and big contracts for top riders and you could possibly see a snowball effect where more riders pursue pro careers, races get more and more competitive with the increased strength and depth and the sport grows. However, this is a massive gamble. Grid iron football and superleague ice hockey in the UK are two examples of that method failing.

Alternatively, nobody does anything proactive while waiting for the sport to grow organically at which point it will naturally generate increased interest and the revenue that naturally follows. I think it's pretty obvious that with this approach, the growth will never actually happen.

It absolutely has to come from the UCI to come up with a strategy and work with sponsors to devise and deliver it. Not ASOs problem to sort but they can be part of a solution. Money alone won't make women's cycling big but without it and a whole load of coherent plans, the current situation won't either.

I do think it's quite unfair to try and make it ASOs problem when women's cycling has so little to offer race organisers and sponsors in it's present state other than potential for growth. Far too adversarial an approach. Conversely, women's cycling has every reason to go all guns a blazing at the UCI.

dougzz

All this seems quite artificial to me. Essentially is based on a set of individuals desiring to increase their earnings. Personally I'd like to be paid like a premier league footballer for what I do, but it isn't going to happen.
Apart from Tennis is there another sport where the women's version approaches the popularity (perhaps the wrong word, but I mean audience, earning power of participants) of the men? UK, Football, Rugby, Cricket, no. Golf no, USA, Football, Baseball, Basketball, Hockey, no no no no. Why expect a relatively low money high logistical cost sport like cycling to be able to buck the trend? If the UCI have the money to invest then I'd like to see it in youth development of cycling for boys and girls, not creating an opportunity for a very small number of professional women cyclists to earn more.
As an aside, the exception - Tennis, isn't it right that there are quite separate governing bodies, ATP for men and WTA for women, and the WTA was established in the 70s by women to achieve what the cycling women want to do, so maybe some women need to stop looking to the UCI and the ASO and act themselves if they think they have such a marketable product.

RichN95.

dougzz wrote:

As an aside, the exception - Tennis, isn't it right that there are quite separate governing bodies, ATP for men and WTA for women, and the WTA was established in the 70s by women to achieve what the cycling women want to do, so maybe some women need to stop looking to the UCI and the ASO and act themselves if they think they have such a marketable product.

Golf is also successful. Golf also has a separate governing body. There seems to be a theme.

As someone involved in a low income-high participation sport, it annoys me when they demand equality without really bringing anything to the table. No-one owes you a living for doing your hobby.

At the moment the pitch from the women's side seems to me "Gimme, gimme, gimme. Sexist, sexist, sexist, Gimme, gimme, gimme"

Alitogata

EPO Delivery Man wrote:

It doesnt matter what they come up with, the only way it would get on TV is if the Wiggle girls all rode nude and one of the teams was sponsored by Ann Summers.

It doesnt come round to how long the women can ride, are they capable blah blah...it comes round purely to wether marketing people at big companies want to invest millions of their companies money sponsoring it and they will only do that if its on TV and people are watching it, but the facts are, hardly anybody watches womens road racing. So until that changes nothing will. You might think putting it before the mens race means people watch it, but would you? would you get in, deal with the Mrs, put the kids to bed, shower, eat then sit down and watch over an hours worth of highlights from ITV4 on the womens race and then another hours worth on the mens? im betting most people will simply watch the mens.

Its chicken and the egg.

In other words female TdF races don't exist because marketing people think that it doesn't worth the investment of money to organize such races.
But:
People wouldn't watch male TdF if this wasn't available in the first place to be watched. And sponsors wouldn't support the teams if the above didn't already happened. And the organizers wouldn't organize such an hyper-production, if they didn't know that they'll get back their money.

It is well known that people consumes what it is served, depending the way this something is served.

Marketing people don't do it because they wrongly assume that women are not a big target group for selling cycling products, people will not be interested to watch the races ( but the people IS already there), and there would be no sponsors for that, though the sponsors are already there TOO anyway. So if the organizers decided to include women races in TdF other more specialized on women's products sponsors would joined too.

By the time that the concept brings the people to races and this concept already exists I think that a female version of TdF could and should be organized.

morstar

Thinking about this more and isn't the fundamental issue here the lack of participation by women at all levels?
Both women's marathon running and tennis get mentioned repeatedly. Casual observation by me would suggest that these sports are participated in by a significant number of women. I.e. if I see somebody jogging or playing tennis there is probably a 40+% chance they'll be female. I live on the doorstep of a hugely popular cycling area and can easily spot 100+ cyclists on a ride. It is quite possible not one will be female.

This takes me back to my ice hockey and grid iron examples. If the grass roots isn't there, a load of money and fancy events won't create it. Having been involved in ice hockey the UK development debate rages perpetually on UK forums like the doping debate on cycling ones. One of the views that consistently comes up that is difficult to argue with is that it is neither the job of the top flight of sport to develop the grass roots or that big jazzy events will achieve this outcome.
Without strength in depth, elite sport has a very difficult job to look elite. In turn, this turns an audience off.

Alitogata

morstar wrote:

Thinking about this more and isn't the fundamental issue here the lack of participation by women at all levels?
Both women's marathon running and tennis get mentioned repeatedly. Casual observation by me would suggest that these sports are participated in by a significant number of women. I.e. if I see somebody jogging or playing tennis there is probably a 40+% chance they'll be female. I live on the doorstep of a hugely popular cycling area and can easily spot 100+ cyclists on a ride. It is quite possible not one will be female.
[...]

How can we talk about lack of participation of women, on female races that don't even exist yet?
And sorry but what you say about not seeing enough female cyclist is not so accurate. Locally made observations say nothing. Here in Athens f.e women cyclists are more than men cyclists, and that because Greek men still have some issues with their cars and how much these enhance their masculinity . But again.. this doesn't apply to all areas, neither all age groups.

Anyway.. I think that if a female TdF be organized then there'll be lot of participations even from athletes that don't even think it now. L'appétit vient en mangeant. ( as French say!! )

TONY.M

There would be a women's TDF already in place if sponsors and organisers thought that there was money to be made - this is the one and only reason that the women's race does not currently exist END OF STORY. How some people can try to tell sponsors how to do their jobs shows a great deal of ignorance I'm afraid to say.

I am not for a second saying that a women's TDF can not be successful at some stage and believe me it will happen when it is commercially viable, I have no doubt that it is a topic which sponsors and potential organisers are thinking a great deal about currently looking at but it can't happen in their eyes yet and in reality they likely do know best. It will cost more money to run than what it will return is what they see and they will have done their homework and are almost certainly right.

RichN95 wrote:

At the moment the pitch from the women's side seems to me "Gimme, gimme, gimme. Sexist, sexist, sexist, Gimme, gimme, gimme"

I would not use that wording as I value my own life too much but I can see where you are coming from.

davidof

In France, at least, women tend to watch men's cycling. I'm not sure they are a big demographic for watching/marketing women's cycling.

There were huge issues even staging the 3 day Tour du Limousin. Part of the problem is at federation/UCI level esp. McQuaid who is anti-women's cycling. Address these issues, getting a better women's calendar seem to be more realistic aims. The old women's Tour de France died because there was little coverage and little interest.

Tom Butcher

Fair points made on both sides. I disagree with the post that the women need to stop looking to the UCI to help solve this problem though - the UCI is the governing body for the sport - not the male version of the sport - they are exactly who should be looking to grow competitive cycling amongst women at all levels.

Yes there does need to be growth at the amateur level - I don't know about seniors but there are plenty of young women coming through road, track and cross at youth and junior age groups. I did a 3/4 race the other week which had a national women's race on the same circuit, I don't know if it was a full field but it looked like there were decent numbers anyway and the women were certainly taking it more seriously than the lower cat men with warming up on rollers and the like.