Tour of Yorkshire prize money

TheBigBean

Interesting attempt to buy prestige for the women's race. Could well be successful and will no doubt attract the top riders (or were they all going anyway?). Much greater chance of creating a new monument in women's cycling than in men's.

Slightly reminds me of Allen Stanford though.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/35883294

Richmond Racer 2

Well if Gary Verity appears at the race, flirting with Phil Deignan and other partners of the riders, we'll be sure to let you know

Lanterne_Rogue

Glad to see UK races thinking big in this regard - why shouldn't we have the most prestigious women's races here?

gsk82

this is a joke. gary verity once again putting his own ego above all else.

RichN95.

gsk82 wrote:

this is a joke. gary verity once again putting his own ego above all else.

It's not, it's clever. He's got his event and sponsor lots of publicity and most likely ensured a top quality women's field for an Asda assistant manager's salary. And with a homegrown World Champion present the race will most likely get as much domestic coverage as the men's race.

It's a business decision and a very good one. It's something that many demanding pay parity in sports could learn from, where too often the equality of what they want out is not matched by the equality of what they bring in.

And let's face the obvious - outside the Grand Tours prize money in men's cycling is the icing not the cake. Peter Sagan outearns Lizzie Armitstead by 50-100 times. Phil Deignan probably outearns her quite comfortably.

dish_dash

Excellent news. It baffles me that anyone could object to this.

rick_chasey

Some threads over at cake stop might give a clue...

TheBigBean

dish_dash wrote:

Excellent news. It baffles me that anyone could object to this.

This is the internet. Someone will object to just about anything. I could see an objection if you are a passionate believer in equal prize money in sports.

There is always the iainf strategy to end the discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13015396

TheBigBean

I've just visited the Cake Stop. I was thinking that we seem to get along much better on Pro Race although on reflection it has been 8 months since the tour, so my memory has faded.

hanshotfirst

TheBigBean wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

Excellent news. It baffles me that anyone could object to this.

This is the internet. Someone will object to just about anything. I could see an objection if you are a passionate believer in equal prize money in sports.

There is always the iainf strategy to end the discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=13015396

I object to the claim that people will object to anything just because it is posted on the internet!

ddraver

TheBigBean wrote:

I've just visited the Cake Stop. I was thinking that we seem to get along much better on Pro Race although on reflection it has been 8 months since the tour, so my memory has faded.

CS is very peculiar at the moment...

Credit to Rick for at least holding up some standards of sanity

dish_dash

Interestingly, Armitstead appears to be on IanF's wavelength...

Asked about the race's massive increase in prize money primarily as a result of sponsorship from supermarket chain Asda, the Boels-Dolmans rider admitted she finds the focus on prize money strange. "As a cyclist it's never even entered my consciousness," revealing that she thought her winnings for the recent Strade Bianche, a Women's WorldTour event, amounted to €800.

"We have a girl who runs the prize money in the team. She figures out what prize money we've won in races and sends us a cheque at the end of the year. It might be two grand each. So it's not something that I'm hanging on for or thinking about going into races," she said.

Pressed for her thoughts on the ongoing debate in the tennis world about men and women competing for equal prize money, Armitstead said she sees the situation as very different in cycling. "I would much rather have the ability to do the equivalent to the Amstel Gold Race and win no prize money," she explained. "There are so many things we need before we have equal prize money. I'd rather have the opportunity to race up the Cauberg. I think those steps should come first in women's cycling."

No_Ta_Doctor

TheBigBean wrote:

I've just visited the Cake Stop. I was thinking that we seem to get along much better on Pro Race although on reflection it has been 8 months since the tour, so my memory has faded.

I just popped my head in. Horrible. Good work from the lad Chasey there, though possibly a little tactically naive to allow himself to be drawn into name calling and bad language, however deserved it is (I comment as someone with over a decade as Admin on a football forum, where I ended up not being able to take action re. one of the most foul and abusive posters as it was perceived to have become "personal" and "6 of one, half a dozen of the other").

TheBigBean

dish_dash wrote:

Interestingly, Armitstead appears to be on IanF's wavelength...

For what it is worth, my friend who is an ultra-runner always runs the Comrades marathon because it is potentially the biggest pay day by a country mile. The winner gets £18k. This is a material amount of money in the context of annual salary and sponsorship. It seems to me to be the most competitive and prestigious ultra race in the world, and whilst it is a bit chicken and egg, I'm sure the prize money has helped it achieve this status.

Cycling is a bit different because there is a fairly lucrative men's market already in existence, so Armistead clearly would prefer to ride the big events than receive the prize money. This is either because she doesn't care about the money or feels that more would flow from the increased publicity.

No_Ta_Doctor

Chicken and egg is the right description.

Armitstead wants more and better races, as this will provide a better sport and better pay and conditions for all, but also for the stars, who can gain more lucrative personal endorsements with greater exposure.

It's worth noting that the TdY women's race will be televised, which in itself is a bit of a rarity in women's cycling. While the prize money itself won't make much difference to women's cycling overall, it may allow the TdY to get in early as a big race on the calendar in a hopefully growing sport. At the very least it hopefully challenges other race organisers to think about how & what they're doing.

stagehopper

There was an Amstel Gold race for women from 2001 to 2003 - last winner Nicole Cooke when it was part of the Road World Cup.

"The race started in Maastricht 30 minutes after the men's, and was run over 114 km, taking in nine climbs (Maasberg, Adsteeg, Lange Raarberg, Bergseweg, Sibbergrubbe, Cauberg, Bemelerberg, Keutenberg) and similarly finishing on the Cauberg."

kleinstroker

This is good news, not sure what angle you have to look at this from to think anything else?

No_Ta_Doctor

kleinstroker wrote:

This is good news, not sure what angle you have to look at this from to think anything else?

Well the misogynists won't be happy.

Anonymous

But who watches women's cycling? Where will this money come from

^ Like that, right?

awavey

TheBigBean wrote:

dish_dash wrote:

Interestingly, Armitstead appears to be on IanF's wavelength...

For what it is worth, my friend who is an ultra-runner always runs the Comrades marathon because it is potentially the biggest pay day by a country mile. The winner gets £18k. This is a material amount of money in the context of annual salary and sponsorship. It seems to me to be the most competitive and prestigious ultra race in the world, and whilst it is a bit chicken and egg, I'm sure the prize money has helped it achieve this status.

Cycling is a bit different because there is a fairly lucrative men's market already in existence, so Armistead clearly would prefer to ride the big events than receive the prize money. This is either because she doesn't care about the money or feels that more would flow from the increased publicity.

well yes obviously she wants to ride the big events, who wouldnt ? I mean Lizzie described last years Womens TdY which was effectively a crit wasnt it, as a race for juniors so she wasnt impressed at all by it and obviously theyve worked together since then,to expand it,pick a route, start in Otley, and give a distance etc, that at least interests her enough to get involved

though shes not riding with Boels for it as it clashes with the Elsy Jacobs womens festival race, which maybe why the teams list looks a bit odd, with Team GB represented twice, and even Sarah Storeys team has her main team and the "development" squad team, so it looks all a bit "bits and pieces" really theres a fair scope Id have thought for the field to be completely blown apart if one or two of the pro womens team riders take the race on, because there will be that much gap between the whole field of riders.

I take it the money was announced after the entries had been taken in, so whilst its obviously a good thing, its difficult to see yet what impact it will have on the race yet, did they say it was a multi year deal, or is it a one off ?

thefog

The whole prize money publicity has somewhat hidden the fact that the womens race starts at 8:15am on the Saturday, with a finish before the men's race has even started. Little spectator numbers for it likely as a result and only a short live section of the race on TV.

Even Lizzie's team didn't enter the race, she is riding for the British team. The prize money is purely a publicity campaign for the event.

Richmond Racer 2

TheFog wrote:

The whole prize money publicity has somewhat hidden the fact that the womens race starts at 8:15am on the Saturday, with a finish before the men's race has even started. Little spectator numbers for it likely as a result and only a short live section of the race on TV.

Even Lizzie's team didn't enter the race, she is riding for the British team. The prize money is purely a publicity campaign for the event.

You know what?

1. It's got acres of media coverage of the announcement and launch

2. There will be people turning out roadside whether it's 1000 or 1200. They will not be racing on spectator-less roads from start to finish

3. Think it's safe to say the riders and teams who get a share of that prize money won't be throwing it away in disgust

4. Lizzie will be a big draw, irrespective of whether she's riding with Boels-Dolmans or GB

dish_dash

I rode the sportive ahead of the men's race last year, in lashing rain and wind. I was astonished at how many spectators (poncho-ed up) there were all over the course cheering us on. Even though the pros weren't coming through for several hours there were people standing on the fells and Gran's in their dressing gowns standing in their doorways. Was absolutely amazing. Yorkshire seems to love its cycling. So have no doubt that the crowds will be out for the women's race...

andytee87

Ride London Classique announcing €100000 prize pool for womens race, matching the men's Ride London Surrey Classic.

I'm all for equality in prizes, would just be nice to see the race grow to more than a crit in the future if they're going to throw the biggest prize fund in the world at it.

ddraver

The thing about these prize pots is that they shame the other races into doing the same. That US shop that bought up the money for the women's kopperberg cross last year basically made every other race look so obviously sexist by comparison that they had no choice to step up.

Richmond Racer 2

I'm not wild about those who grumbling about the principle of big prize pots for women's races (which I know you're not, andytee87)

But it's a fair point that this one's a 1 hour crit, and the riders themselves would like this to be developed to a road race as per the men's race

andytee87

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

I'm not wild about those who grumbling about the principle of big prize pots for women's races (which I know you're not, andytee87)

But it's a fair point that this one's a 1 hour crit, and the riders themselves would like this to be developed to a road race as per the men's race

Yeh my ideal scenario here would be to keep prize pot the same for men and women, use part of the men's course for the elite women and get a competitive field. Then to get the thrill for roadside viewing, you could easily run national level (ie continental or below field) crits for men AND women either pre start or just after the main event starts.

Trim the prizes slightly and promote a bigger event.

Richmond Racer 2

andytee87 wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

I'm not wild about those who grumbling about the principle of big prize pots for women's races (which I know you're not, andytee87)

But it's a fair point that this one's a 1 hour crit, and the riders themselves would like this to be developed to a road race as per the men's race

Yeh my ideal scenario here would be to keep prize pot the same for men and women, use part of the men's course for the elite women and get a competitive field. Then to get the thrill for roadside viewing, you could easily run national level (ie continental or below field) crits for men AND women either pre start or just after the main event starts.

Trim the prizes slightly and promote a bigger event.

Thing is....the sportive. And that's a huge part of the entire Ride London thing. It's run on the Sun also, with the first waves off after 6am, and part of the attraction is that its closed roads as per the pros.

And there is no way they can move the sportive to the Sat, meaning bike events and road closures through the entire weekend. Uproar. Would never get approved, costs would also go sky high as you'd be doubling up on everything. Plus it would blunt the attraction for the amateurs in riding the route before the pros come through later on - and that's also part of the package for the sponsor.

squired

Not bad - same prize pot for an hour's work, whereas the men have to race all day. I can imagine a few pros grumbling about that.

In my view this could be a smart move. Given where women's cycling is right now a race could very quickly make itself into the female version of the Tour de France or a Monument and be a main event race for the next few decades. That would bring everything that comes with running a world class event. So, if this is part of a long game and helps make the UK a top destination for female pro cycling that's great. If this is just a bit of political correctness and these races don't exist 10 years from now that will be a real shame. Personally I think it would be better for female cycling to have different main races to the men. There is no reason for their number one Tour to be the Tour de France for example, despite people often looking in that direction. By having its own standalone races it will stand on its own two feet, rather than just being seen as an appetizer, which is what it often is right now.

awavey

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

andytee87 wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

I'm not wild about those who grumbling about the principle of big prize pots for women's races (which I know you're not, andytee87)

But it's a fair point that this one's a 1 hour crit, and the riders themselves would like this to be developed to a road race as per the men's race

Yeh my ideal scenario here would be to keep prize pot the same for men and women, use part of the men's course for the elite women and get a competitive field. Then to get the thrill for roadside viewing, you could easily run national level (ie continental or below field) crits for men AND women either pre start or just after the main event starts.

Trim the prizes slightly and promote a bigger event.

Thing is....the sportive. And that's a huge part of the entire Ride London thing. It's run on the Sun also, with the first waves off after 6am, and part of the attraction is that its closed roads as per the pros.

And there is no way they can move the sportive to the Sat, meaning bike events and road closures through the entire weekend. Uproar. Would never get approved, costs would also go sky high as you'd be doubling up on everything. Plus it would blunt the attraction for the amateurs in riding the route before the pros come through later on - and that's also part of the package for the sponsor.

but the day long road closures are really just for the sportive riders, the pros could just have rolling road blocks like what they have to cope with for every other top level race they enter in this country.

so ok have to accept you cant overload the Sunday with two races and near all day sportive(s), but why cant there be a proper womens road race on the Saturday on part of the full course if it has to stay within UCI length limits, with rolling road blocks as part of this London festival of cycling.

its just I dont care whether they call it a Classique instead of a Grand Prix, its still a crit, and its still a really rubbish crit course,theres no possibility of any breaks or attacks succeeding unless they crash like they did last year, and instead of looping round St James park, it will just be adding an extended hairpin loop upto Constitution hill, looping round St James park and then over to the Strand and another hairpin loop back again taking in the usual tourist (Westminster/Trafalgar Sq) sights on the way, its a course designed to look nice on TV IMO not to race on.

worth remembering too Ride London is only a week before the Olympic road race has been scheduled, and 11 days before the track cycling starts, youd have thought anyone involved in those events with an eye on getting decent results, would not be stuck in Europe by then at all regardless of whats on offer money wise.