# Cross Vegas should be ashamed



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

hasn't been one of these treads yet this year... so here it goes. 

Just read this on KFC's twitter.

The 1st place in the men's race gets ~$1000 more than the entire women's field. 

I'm all for the men's race paying more spots in depth. But, I personally feel at a national level race they need to pay equal amounts per place. 

Even if you aren't on that side of the fence... it's pretty hard to not find this disgusting. 

http://tiny.cc/f2pr9


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)




----------



## d2p (Jul 29, 2006)

the women's 2nd lap sprint prize is $300 for 1st. $34 more than 1st place for the race. WTF?


----------



## Todd_H (Nov 20, 2009)

I saw this too and couldn't believe it. Katie could race the mens, place 10th and get paid more than winning the womens. $266 barely covers airfare. Who here thinks the mens race is 10x as entertaining than the women elites???


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

I've talked to the race promoter about it. They say they just couldn't come up with the money. I feel the pain there.... but if so many more races are are able to do it, one would think in Las Vegas... at Interbike.... something could be done. 

They did say they were working on some kind of "Bonus" for the top 3 women overall to help with the difference. 

All these events fall back on the UCI pay minimum as an excuse. That's what really has to change. I really don't think they fields have to pay as deep... but the money should be similar. Not even half the money for 1st... it's a joke. 

We were going to attend, but a have limited budget (like everyone else!). We've chosen to support races/promoters who are making an effort to even the pay gap by attending those events whenever possible. It's an "if you build it, they will come" situation.


----------



## fatroadie (May 5, 2002)

agreed, that's pretty ridiculous, but it also looks like equitable payouts is something the UCI needs to embrace as well.


----------



## JPHcross (Aug 15, 2006)

I organize some races and really struggle with the payout for men versus women. My personal opinion is that it should be X number of $ per entry. Typical numbers for us in BC is 100 men and 20 women so the prize payout for men should be 5 times more per position. But we have a minimum payout as long as the minimum registration is reached. So we can have 100 men and only 10 women with equal payout for the top 5 positions.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Alas, field sizes play a large role in this.


----------



## backinthesaddle (Nov 22, 2006)

Todd_H said:


> I saw this too and couldn't believe it. Katie could race the mens, place 10th and get paid more than winning the womens. $266 barely covers airfare. Who here thinks the mens race is 10x as entertaining than the women elites???



I do! 
There are about 5 women that have ANY shot at winning the race. 
In the men, there are 25 or so.

Sure, it's not equitable, but then again, no one is showing up to see some Cat2 woman from Fresno get lapped twice.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Actually in this case field size has little to do with it for this event. I spoke with the organizer and they stated it was only because of sponsorship dollars not being there for the women's race. They are expecting a large women's field. Race entry fees do not contribute to the prize money for most UCI CX events in the USA. A bit self fulfilling.... you give out pi$$ poor prize money because of small fields... no one will show up. 

The races around the country that have stepped up and found the sponsorship money for decent women's purses have been rewarded with great turnouts. The Madison race did this even before they became part of the USGP. If the field is smaller, they shouldn't pay as deep. But there is no reason the 1st place money shouldn't be the same.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

backinthesaddle said:


> I do!
> There are about 5 women that have ANY shot at winning the race.
> In the men, there are 25 or so.
> 
> Sure, it's not equitable, but then again, no one is showing up to see some Cat2 woman from Fresno get lapped twice.



You honestly think there are 25 people who could win in the men's race? That's laughable. maybe 10... prolly closer to 7.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

oh goody, we haven't had a women's payout thread in a while


----------



## backinthesaddle (Nov 22, 2006)

Corndog said:


> You honestly think there are 25 people who could win in the men's race? That's laughable. maybe 10... prolly closer to 7.


At Vegas...yep...
A lot of roadies who are extremely fit show up and the course is a little more roadie-ish...

And the field is huge.


----------



## more mud (Oct 8, 2002)

it is probably not PC to say this but the men's race will be at least 10x as exciting as the women's race. But if there was no women's race the crowd would still be there. If there was no men's race the place would be empty..... I am not saying the girls don't train as hard and don't deserve as much but we want to see the fastest in the world...


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

more mud said:


> am not saying the girls don't train as hard and don't deserve as much but *we want to see the fastest in the world*...


Well, then you shouldn't be watching the men's race. There will be maybe one or two people there how could get into the top 10 in a World Cup (assuming only US/Canadian guys are there). If you watch the women's race, you will see arguably the fastest in the world and some others that are right in there as well (depending on who shows up). Maybe it isn't as fun to see someone totally crush the women's field, but it is just as impressive. 

The men's race will be fun as well, I'm not saying otherwise or detracting from their talent. But to make the argument that you want to see the "fastest in the world" is nonsensical. 


It would be sweet if Katie did the men's race.... placed high enough in the money to get more than she would for winning the women's event, then take the check and throw it in the face of the promoter  At least it would get some good media coverage for Georgia and her work to get even pay per place. Of course, she won't and women will still show up, despite the pay discrepancy because this is a C1 event and has as good of point distribution as any domestic race.


----------



## pacificaslim (Sep 10, 2008)

Here's the thing: Katie is allowed to try that isn't she? Isn't the "men's" race really the "open" race available to all who can otherwise qualify, regardless of gender? (I would assume that by law this would have to be true in the usa and in europe as well). 

As long as that is true, then the prize money available to women is actually more than is available to men (since they aren't allowed in the women's races). And I see no legitimacy to the argument that women's prize money "must" be increased. After all, women are free to either race in the top class that pays the most or go ahead and organize their own exclusive racing series that excludes all the fastest riders, and then try to find someone to pay them as much as they can find. Surely in this day and age women aren't arguing that they need men's help in doing this, are they?


----------



## CycloCross (Feb 26, 2004)

First off, there is no way katie would finish in the top 10 or even the top 30. Don't fool yourselves she is fast (for a woman) but its a whole didn't speed in the mens. I would say she would be luck to not get lapped. I am pretty tired of this egaul prize money pay out bullshit, if you want change do something about it. Quit *****ing and race the races that do and not the races that don't easy as that.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

Since it's in Vegas then they should have chocolate pudding pits for gals and must dress in appropriate Vegas attire. 

Probably make more money that way.


----------



## pacificaslim (Sep 10, 2008)

She might indeed get lapped, but probably on the last lap of the race. I remembered a thing about lap times in Cyclocross magazine so I went and looked and at the 2008 World's, she set fastest lap in the women's race at 6:43. In the mens' race, Albert set fastest lap at 6:02.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Creakyknees said:


> oh goody, we haven't had a women's payout thread in a while


And this thread keeps people from arguing about disc brakes for a few days.


----------



## adimiro (Jun 28, 2007)

CycloCross said:


> . I am pretty tired of this egaul prize money pay out bullshit, if you want change do something about it.



Not sure why you would consider this 'equal' prize money BS. It is quite an unfair practice against women that is sadly, widespread in many areas beyond bike racing.

Furthermore, there is also an inherent Catch-22 regarding women's participation...without incentives such as equal pay or other perks such as not lumping all sub-pro categories into the same group, there is little reason for more women to participate. I certainly speak from direct experience over many bike racing disciplines over many years.

I have written countless letters to race promotors and either received no response at all (definitely scratched off future events) or the same old field depth argument. 

That there are still women who race under these unfair circumstances, is just a testimony that they love what they do regardless of (lack of) prize money.


----------



## CycloCross (Feb 26, 2004)

How do you consider equal prize money for a race that is on 40-45min long for the women and 60-70 for the men? Arent the women doing less work for more money? Equal work for equal pay is one thing in normal working society, but sorry this is top sport. What if men complained in a sport where women make more money? What would you think of that then.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

I always hear women complaining about the lower prize money.....yet a woman could put on a race that offers equal or even triple prize money for the womens race....but I have yet to see it happen.
I guess it easier to curse the darkness than to light a candle.


----------



## adimiro (Jun 28, 2007)

the mayor said:


> ...yet a woman could put on a race that offers equal or even triple prize money for the womens race....but I have yet to see it happen.
> .



That's 'cause women are naturally more intelligent, fair-minded and have no need to display their superiority


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

adimiro said:


> That's 'cause women are naturally more intelligent, fair-minded and have no need to display their superiority


I absolutely agree on everything you say in this statement. Yet, women complain about the inequality of prize list ...but choose to do nothing more than complain.

Here in New England, women make the same complaints. Yet when a promoter...usually some one with a Y chromosome...offers equal prize money...the same small field of aforementioned intelligent, fair-minded creatures show up.

I have often had more checks than women to hand them to at UCI cross races.

On several similar emails on New England forums complaining about the injustice of unequal prize lists...I have offered my full free service to any woman or group of women who want to put on a race that will help end this atrocity. To date...no one has taken the offer.

That which we manifest is before us.


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

um...even before prize money was an issue...remember the days of trophies and medals because of the restrictions on amateurs winning prize money, the women fields were a ton smaller. Others have pointed out that without the men the audience wouldn't be there. Unfortunately the women's fields are typically also-rans. I say appreciate the opportunity to race and then go home and put on a race of your own that addresses the slights you feel. Otherwise, you're just one more person complaining to someone who is actually doing something for the sport by promoting a race, however unfair you may think it is being done, and if you think that the only complaint this guy has to contend with is the prize money for the women, then you are kidding yourself.


----------



## Todd_H (Nov 20, 2009)

chrdur said:


> however unfair you may think it is being done, and if you think that the only complaint this guy has to contend with is the prize money for the women, then you are kidding yourself.


 

It's not 1955 buddy. I hate it when something is obviously inequitable and someone says something to the effect of "appreciate the opportunity", etc. You may have missed it but women are racing the same courses the guys are and they're fast. NACT recognized this. Who cares about the promoter and the complaints he's getting - he's getting his $$$.


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

Todd_H said:


> It's not 1955 buddy. I hate it when something is obviously inequitable and someone says something to the effect of "appreciate the opportunity", etc. You may have missed it but women are racing the same courses the guys are and they're fast. NACT recognized this. Who cares about the promoter and the complaints he's getting - he's getting his $$$.


It isn't 1995 but not much has changed. You've obviously never put on a race. If you had you would know that most promoters aren't making any money. I've put on dozens of races and never made a dime. Most promoters lose money in the process. 

Things are inequitable because the fields are inequitable, the quality of racing is inequitable and the draw of the crowds is inequitable. When those things become equal, then womens fields deserve equal prize money. Until then, people like you get to keep complaining on forums without doing much out there to make it different. Of course if the races that you promote have an equal prize list, then I stand corrected.

It's not something that is great and I don't think people are happy about it, but it's reality and the majority of the people who complain about it have never tried to do something about it through efforts of anything other than complaining. I personally think that the most equitable way to go about it is to have the purse be some percentage of entry fee payback, but as someone pointed out earlier, that is not always possible.

It isn't just cycling. Look around. Should WNBA players be paid the same as NBA players? And on and on and on.


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

CycloCross said:


> First off, there is no way katie would finish in the top 10 or even the top 30. Don't fool yourselves she is fast (for a woman) but its a whole didn't speed in the mens. I would say she would be luck to not get lapped. I am pretty tired of this egaul prize money pay out bullshit, if you want change do something about it. Quit *****ing and race the races that do and not the races that don't easy as that.



English ?!?!?!?


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

chrdur said:


> . I personally think that the most equitable way to go about it is to have the purse be some percentage of entry fee payback,



Yes :thumbsup:


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

CycloCross said:


> and race the races that do and not the races that don't easy as that.


That is exactly what we are doing (and other members of our team.... most of which are male. Cheers!


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

the mayor said:


> I always hear women complaining about the lower prize money.....y*et a woman could put on a race that offers equal* or even triple prize money for the womens race....but I have yet to see it happen.
> I guess it easier to curse the darkness than to light a candle.


Guess you haven't heard about the USGP in Madison then? They stepped up to the plate even before they were in the USGP (but still UCI) oh and the race promoter is a woman.


----------



## wunlap togo (Oct 1, 2004)

backinthesaddle said:


> At Vegas...yep...
> A lot of roadies who are extremely fit show up and the course is a little more roadie-ish...
> 
> And the field is huge.


LOL! Are you kidding? There are 5-7 guys who can win. 

The guys with a chance will be in the first 2 rows on the grid. The other guys will hope for a good finish, and a spot in the first 2 rows later in the season with the points a good finish will earn them. Just like in the women's race.

Just because you THINK Lance might win doesn't mean he's even close to being a contender.


----------



## wunlap togo (Oct 1, 2004)

The women go slower. That doesn't mean the race is any less exciting to watch (unless you're an absolute newb to cycle racing, and can't understand the nuances of the game... which sounds like it may be the case for several participants in this conversation). Lap times are only one small part of cyclocross- What actually makes up the "quality" of the racing is closely matched racers forced to use their brains and their legs in a chess match on wheels. It's the same for either sex, and anyone trying to say that the racing isn't as "good" amongst the women doesn't understand the game and just wants to see people go fast.

Any argument against equal prize money that mentions "quality of racing" is utter bullshit.


----------



## CycloCross (Feb 26, 2004)

Sorry, but the womens racing is boring. Racing is about going fast and taking risk. That statement was like saying watching a really good cat. 5 race is just as exciting is watching the elite race. People want to see people go fast and do things they cannot. For the most part that isn't the women elite race.


----------



## iktome (Aug 29, 2003)

Corndog said:


> Guess you haven't heard about the USGP in Madison then? They stepped up to the plate even before they were in the USGP (but still UCI) oh and the race promoter is a woman.


You might check the prize list for the Madison USGP. It was equal before it was a USGP. It's not equal anymore.

Are you going to boycott it now?


----------



## d2p (Jul 29, 2006)

equal? no -
but with $9,414/30places for men and $5,223/15 places for women on sat & 
$2,234/25 for men and $1,773/15 on sunday alot more equitable than $9414/30 and $1460/15 in LV


----------



## wunlap togo (Oct 1, 2004)

CycloCross said:


> Sorry, but the womens racing is boring. Racing is about going fast and taking risk. That statement was like saying watching a really good cat. 5 race is just as exciting is watching the elite race. People want to see people go fast and do things they cannot. For the most part that isn't the women elite race.


Well, I guess you've established yourself as one of the inexperienced newbs with little understanding of racing tactics or the game of cyclocross... It's boring to you because you don't understand bike racing.

Your analogy of comparing pro women's cross to a cat 5 crit purely because the speed is lower shows what little knowledge of bike racing you have, and that you've probably only have a vague concept of what it takes to win a cyclocross.

The physical speed of the race is all but irrelevant, as long as the riders racing for the win are pretty evenly matched. The drama that comes from a group of fit, experienced, intelligent athletes using all their strength to achieve a tactical win is what constitutes "quality racing" in my book. I don't want to see the race decided by muscle or pure speed. I want to watch the riders think, test each other, play their cards as they see fit and have the winner determined by a combination of strength and cunning.

Do you see this in a cat 5 crit? No, you do not. You see a bunch of inexperienced racers making mistake after mistake, and you see the race won by the guy who ignored all the idiots, didn't crash and came out of the last corner first. I can't think of a dumber analogy than cat5=pro women's cyclocross.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

wunlap togo said:


> Do you see this in a cat 5 crit? No, you do not. You see a bunch of inexperienced racers making mistake after mistake, and you see the race won by the guy who ignored all the idiots, didn't crash and came out of the last corner first. I can't think of a dumber analogy than cat5=pro women's cyclocross.


I think I just heard a Unicorn cry


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

I'm not trying to stir the pot here. I think that most people would like to see women's racing better supported. I certainly would, but when you look at the logistics of it and then think about it from a promoter's perspective, I think the discrepency makes more sense. I can't remember who said something about who cares about the promoter earlier in this thread, but if it weren't for people going through the extreme hassle of putting these races on, there wouldn't be races in which to compete.

If you are putting on a race and you are trying to determine where to allocate your resources, hands down, you want to put as much money in the elite men's race as you can. If some guy can stay put and make close to the same money in New England that weekend, what's the incentive of flying across country to do a race? So, the fields get thinned out if there isn't a lot of money in the big race. It only makes sense then, that you put as much as you can in the elite purse, so that you have 5 or 10 guys scrambling over each other hoping to win and another 50 or 60 guys hoping to come away saying that they stayed on the same lap or made it in the money. When you look at what women you might attract with a 50% larger purse, the reality is that you aren't going to gain that much more. The 3-5 girls who can win that race are probably going to be there anyway.


----------



## d2p (Jul 29, 2006)

Cross Vegas is on a Wednesday. At Interbike. A tradeshow. Spotlight on the action. Focus of sponsors and advertisers. Not another weekend race.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

d2p said:


> Cross Vegas is on a Wednesday. At Interbike. A tradeshow. Spotlight on the action. Focus of sponsors and advertisers. Not another weekend race.


It's Vegas on a Wednesday night.....bigger things are happening at the Black Jack tables around town.
Just a bunch of industry folks standing around in a park...trying to Welsh free beer while a goofy race goes on.


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

d2p said:


> Cross Vegas is on a Wednesday. At Interbike. A tradeshow. Spotlight on the action. Focus of sponsors and advertisers. Not another weekend race.


Exactly. And the majority of the sponsors are involved in men's racing. Do you know the troubles Katie Compton (the single best woman cross racer in the United States and in the world on her good days) has had securing sponsorship at a living wage here in the U.S.?


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

chrdur said:


> Do you know the troubles Katie Compton (the single best woman cross racer in the United States and in the world on her good days) has had securing sponsorship at a living wage here in the U.S.?


If you actually knew anything about CX racing or the situation, you would easily know that Katie's sponsorship issues had/have very little to do with a lack of interest in women's racing. There are a lot of teams that should could race for in a heartbeat. 

Her needs/desires from sponsors are a bit unique, and I'll just leave it at that. But, she is in a position to make it work the way she wants, so good for her!


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

I'm well aware of some of the specifics of her situation, but the fact remains that she is the most talented rider out there, and as far as U.S. racers are concerned is far and away the most well-paid. Yet, even she struggles with obtaining sponsorship dollars. Who else? Amy? Georgia? None of the girls in cross and maybe only 2 of the guys are making the bulk of their salaries racing cross.

You can lash out all you want and try to make it like everyone else doesn't know quite as much as you, but I'll put my experience and knowledge up against most on this topic anytime. Regardless of who knows more about nothing the fact remains that you are talking about a niche sport within a niche sport and trying to raise sponsorship dollars to pay for more than the bare minimums is next to impossible. Promoters try to put on an event that will draw the athletes for the big audience events. That's their goal. It isn't to offer enough money to pay a living wage, or even transportation expenses, to the winner of every category.

Look, I have a wife who is interested in the sport and I have two daughters who are just starting to want to participate in cycling. No one wants equity across the genders more than I do, but I, as do you, have to face the reality of the situation.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

No one is lashing out... except perhaps you. Your posts keep showing your overall ignorance. There are people on here who differ in opinion and have rational ideas and personal experience to back up what they think. I and others can respect those (even if we don't agree) and can discuss from there. 

The reality is there are races around the country who are doing what they can to promote women's racing. The USGP in Madison pays women above the minimum, the 3 day UCI event in Cincinnati pays equal per place, etc. Heck even our local races pay equal and because of that we have a good (and growing) population of female racers.

So, the reality is the money is out there and it can be done. 

Crossvegas knows and admits it's a problem that is embarrassing and they are working to get extra cash for the top 3 women as a means of helping the gap some. As others have pointed out the primes pay more than the overall.... so something was obviously off there. 

We should all support the races that are putting in the work to get the women's UCI elite racers better prize money. The sport will be better off for it! Plus who doesn't like to see some amazing women riding around in tight clothes? 

If you want to help the situation, for your wife and children, get involved,.. sponsor a women's race, donate money towards the prize pool, etc. It's amazing how little it takes sometimes to get the ball rolling.


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

How many races have you promoted? How long have you been around promoting events? Every point I have made is the result of several years trying to grow the sport and having to deal with some of the harsh realities. Let's hear about the event you yourself are putting on and I will send a check to contribute to the women's purse. You're killing me with your lack of insight. It's not even worth having the conversation anymore. I'll spell it out in simpler terms so you can understand it better and then you can go off and continue to tilt at windmills. 

I doubt that I fall in the ignorant category that you would like to lump me in. This year, my weekly race series that I put on by myself will have 10 events and will offer equal money for men's and women's fields. It's a local race so I can do that. If I were trying to draw an elite field that would have to change. I've put on literally dozens of both road, mountain bike and cross races in the over 25 years that I have been in the sport. I've been involved from the local club level to actually being the director of a domestic pro cycling team as well as having been a staff member of a woman's professional team. I currently assist with one of the largest and longest running cross races in the country. I don't know what else I could have on my resume to counter your claims of ignorance, but it clearly shows your preference to jump to conclusions about issues and speak in hyperbole rather than address the points made. So, since we're down to unit measuring...let's see your resume.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

chrdur said:


> How many races have you promoted? How long have you been around promoting events? Every point I have made is the result of several years trying to grow the sport and having to deal with some of the harsh realities. Let's hear about the event you yourself are putting on and I will send a check to contribute to the women's purse. You're killing me with your lack of insight. It's not even worth having the conversation anymore. I'll spell it out in simpler terms so you can understand it better and then you can go off and continue to tilt at windmills.
> 
> I doubt that I fall in the ignorant category that you would like to lump me in. This year, my weekly race series that I put on by myself will have 10 events and will offer equal money for men's and women's fields. It's a local race so I can do that. If I were trying to draw an elite field that would have to change. I've put on literally dozens of both road, mountain bike and cross races in the over 25 years that I have been in the sport. I've been involved from the local club level to actually being the director of a domestic pro cycling team as well as having been a staff member of a woman's professional team. I currently assist with one of the largest and longest running cross races in the country. I don't know what else I could have on my resume to counter your claims of ignorance, but it clearly shows your preference to jump to conclusions about issues and speak in hyperbole rather than address the points made. So, since we're down to unit measuring...let's see your resume.


That was a long winded way to say: I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
We're talking about unicorns, of course.


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

the mayor said:


> That was a long winded way to say: I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
> We're talking about unicorns, of course.


That was my point. Unfortunately instead of talking about the points being raised it came down to having to deal with accusations of being ignorant or not knowing anything about the sport. Put up or shut up so to speak. A ri ri riduculous way to address a situation that deserves a good conversation, but it is what it is.

I love the unicorns.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

No one is making this personal except you. You're the one flying off the handle and striving to prove your worth to everyone here. "I've done this, this, this, this, and this, so whatever I say is true"..... Sorry I hurt your feelings. 

All I was commenting on was your assertion that Katie has difficulty with sponsors because she's a woman... and that is simply incorrect. By that line of though, Jonathan Page would be a woman as well... since he's had a bit of rocky ride here and there as well. 

Katie and her husband clearly want certain things and are willing to work on the side and do what it takes to make it happen. So good for them for being able to pull it together. But, katie would be able to race for a number of teams if she was willing to accept some compromises. No one in the USA is earning the living solely from racing CX (even JP does some other stuff on the road and MTB now that he isn't on a European team). Even Katie has been racing MTB World Cup races. 

Quite frankly, I think it is great that you've put on races but that doesn't prove anything one way or the other. I've been involved in helping our local races for a number of years and I contribute money to others when I can. This includes UCI events. 

I haven't been involved in cycling for nearly as long as you, that's true. But I do what I can and like to think that is makes a difference. 

All I am suggesting is that it can be done and that we as racers should do what we can to support those events that are doing the (admittedly) hard work to bring the women's pay per place up to at least somewhat fair levels. 

When other places dramatically drop the ball, there is nothing wrong with brining attention to the situation. I'm sorry if you feel different. 

I think most of what you said was totally fine. Though, I don't agree with your comments of the quality of women's racing being poor. This goes along with cyclocross's comments that women's racing is boring. I think that anyone who sees a national level UCI women's race to be boing are on crack. The races are often just as exciting as the men's race.... the pain and suffering that we all know and love at still here. 

Heck at some of Wolrd Cup CX and MTB races the women's races have been way more entertaining and exciting than the mens. I was in Offenberg and it was simply amazing. 

The niche sport inside a niche sport is well taken. But, it is also the fastest growing type of racing in the USA. This is a great opportunity to expand the number of women racers (and all racers!) in the country. 

CX is low pressure and has a fun atmosphere. I've found women much more willing to come out and do a 30 minute beginner CX race than a road race or even a MTB event. We've had a large uptick in women racers in all disciplines after doing more aggressive advertising to CX racing for women. CX is a great way to get them hooked.... most of the CX gals have gone on to start road and/or MTB racing as a result of the introduction. 

This has been possible because our local promoters have really promoted Cat4 women's road races the following spring. That's really changed how many people feel comfortable with getting out and dipping their toes into the road scene after the cross intro. 

Of course this is all likely best talked about in another thread anyhow and little of this actually pertains to the topic at hand. So let's leave it at that. 

That said, none of this changes that fact that <$300 is a joke for a national C1 UCI event when the men's 1st place gets over $2K. The top racers are still going to go... because they need the points. The prize money in the USA in general is so low that it isn't a large factor for those traveling any significant distance. But it is still a slap in the face any way you slice it.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

the mayor said:


> That was a long winded way to say: I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
> .



 I love how you can just boil things down. 

Cheers


----------



## chrdur (Aug 1, 2010)

Corndog said:


> Sorry I hurt your feelings.


You didn't hurt my feelings, and I went out of my way to avoid saying what I have done personally and keep the conversation directed at the issue at hand, but as you continued to explain to me how I don't know anything about CX or how I am ignorant to the situation, I didn't see much choice other than pointing out that, in fact, I do have some history and insight into how things work.

Your points about the inequities are valid, and it's disturbing how low the payout is in Vegas. I only asked that people not jump all over the promoters because once those folks get burned out, you can be on the losing end of some great events. Adam Myerson has put on the longest running race in the US. He's added another race this year. I can tell you that he has never made any money doing it, and this year I know that he got beat up a lot about the purse for women, so he tried to do something about it. We'll see how it works out for him. If he eventually throws up his hands in frustration, American cross will be a ton worse off.

I can tell you from experience (as much as you may hate hearing from that perspective  )that nine times out of ten, someone emails me a complaint about how they want something changed, but it is so so rare that someone says "I noticed this in your race, could I help you change it?" I was being serious about contributing to the women's purse in your race. I want nothing more than for these things to succeed, and I think this is a great thread. We may have banged heads a little, but the conversation generated is good stuff. I think that the key is to be proactive. Race everywhere you can because that brings awareness of the sport to the public and bigger fields bring more awareness, improve competition and ultimately the quality of racing in the U.S. If you or your team has a limited budget, then you have to support the races that best meet your needs. I personally am opposed to boycotts of events or trashing promoters because it divides an already fractioned community. Cross is on the cusp of something big here I think. But if we start too much infighting it could slow things down. That doesn't mean be satisfied with the status quo, just be thoughtful in your approach to change.

I'm stepping off the soapbox. I didn't mean to be pedantic. I'm pretty enthusiastic about this stuff and it's easy to get carried away. Peace out.


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

chrdur said:


> I'm stepping off the soapbox. I didn't mean to be pedantic. I'm pretty enthusiastic about this stuff and it's easy to get carried away. Peace out.



Me too, cheers!


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Corndog said:


> Me too, cheers!


I love happy endings....
Now let's all be quiet as to not wake the unicorns


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Unicorns...... What about Sasquatch?


----------



## d2p (Jul 29, 2006)

dont forget you cant spell unicorn without U - C - I.


----------



## mudge (May 15, 2010)

Todd_H said:


> I saw this too and couldn't believe it. Katie could race the mens, place 10th and get paid more than winning the womens. $266 barely covers airfare. Who here thinks the mens race is 10x as entertaining than the women elites???


Tell you what, Sparky, you put on a race for just the men, and another one for just the women, and see how much you can raise in sponsorship $$$ for each, and how many tickets you can sell for each, and then see why the prize money is different for the men's vs the women's races.


----------



## mudge (May 15, 2010)

fatroadie said:


> agreed, that's pretty ridiculous, but it also looks like equitable payouts is something the UCI needs to embrace as well.


Put all your ideas about 'social justice' and 'equity' aside for a moment and realize that promoting pro-level races is a business, and equity and justice and fairness can't be dictated when it comes to who's willing to pay to watch others participate in the top events. 

I imagine you think WNBA players should be payed as much as NBA players, too???


----------



## pacificaslim (Sep 10, 2008)

Isn't this a perfect case of equity of opportunity? I mean, anyone with the appropriate skills, regardless of sex, can line up and race the elite race, and the winner gets paid.

Then the women have another race, where they fix the results by excluding a lot of fast racers who are of the wrong sex. Seems kind of odd to expect that kind of event to pay as well as the event that is open to everyone, doesn't it?


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Alright!
I thought we had a happy ending and all would be quiet.
But no! You guys kept yacking and the unicorns didn't get any sleep.
So now I have to deal with tired and grumpy unicorns all friggin day!
Great ....just great!
Hey...how come Masters don't get equal prize money?( not that I'm ever close enough to the front to see it)


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

the mayor said:


> Alright!
> I thought we had a happy ending and all would be quiet.
> But no! You guys kept yacking and the unicorns didn't get any sleep.
> So now I have to deal with tired and grumpy unicorns all friggin day!
> ...


Because we are rolling in da phat cash yo! 
/doesn't need prizes to race
//happy winning wool socks


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Coolhand said:


> Because we are rolling in da phat cash yo!
> /doesn't need prizes to race
> //happy winning wool socks


But how are supposed to pay for our carbon wheels and carbon frames?
Age discrimination...that's what it is!
AARP should look into this!


----------



## TannerCX (Aug 24, 2010)

*Maybe Better?*

For those of you ladies interested in a race that will pay out more....nor equal, but a bit better balance! 

www.rutsandguts.com


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

the mayor said:


> But how are supposed to pay for our carbon wheels and carbon frames?
> Age discrimination...that's what it is!
> AARP should look into this!


Indeed, our fields are full too!


----------



## adimiro (Jun 28, 2007)

Excerpt from a letter I wrote to Laird Knight, Granny Gear 24 hour Mountain bike race promoter re: 2007 24 Hr of Moab, the last race I ever did for this promoter after I did not as much as receive a 2 word reply:



"Another matter I feel compelled to mention was the discrepancy in cash pay-out between the male and female solo racers. I understand that cash prizes are often calculated based on the number of entries, which almost always guarantees that women will get a lower payout. However, I was shocked that the 2nd and 3rd place women's solo prizes would not even have covered the gasoline driving expenses let alone entry fees, food, equipment, etc. for this demanding race. The discrepancy was even more blatant this year since both the male and female solo winners did the exact number of laps. Be gone the past differences in gender prizes in favor of a more equitable system. One suggestion is to award according to the number of laps completed, say for example $200/lap. Male solo winner=14 laps, $2,800 Female solo winner=14 laps, $2,800. More laps=more money, simple!"


From Mtbr.com:


The mother of all prize inequities for 2007.......24 Hours of Moab solo category:


1st Place Men solo....................Chris Eatough..............14 laps............$3250.00

1st Place Womens solo..............Jari Kirkland................14 laps............$ 612.00


Agree that prize money alone is not the answer, but this can hardly inspire any budding female racers to train for endless hours, endure riding 210 continuous miles without sleep, and take a probable monitary loss between entry fees, equipment, food, transportation


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Yea, Granny Gear is just about the single worst race promotion company in the history of the world. I think everyone is pretty much done with them after the crank they've pulled in the last 14 months or so. 

At least 24-9 still happened up in WI this year (under much better organization), when some local clubs/people stepped in to make sure it would still go on after Granny Gear tried to screw everyone.


----------



## backinthesaddle (Nov 22, 2006)

Here's link to Myerson's next race. Equal money 15 deep in both elite races. NO WOMEN HAVE EVEN REGISTERED!!!!!


http://www.cycle-smart.com/events/noreaster


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

Wake up!
Adam Meyerson is putting on the Nor'easter...a UCI race in NH( run with a music/extreme sports festival at a mountain resort).
Top 15 men and WOMEN get equal pay!
Yet....not one woman has signed up.


----------



## empty_set (Nov 1, 2006)

Saw this on CN this morning: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/crossvegas-moves-to-close-womens-prize-money-gap

_CrossVegas moves to close women’s prize money gap_


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

If we lived about 2000 miles close we'd consider going  Of course, this is the same weekend as the 1st USGP race (which also pays well to the women), where most people will likely be heading.

Sometimes I think there are too many UCI events.... when two bigger events (especially if they are good ones) get put up against each other, sometimes both suffer. Then people complain about low turnout, etc. But of course the other side is that not everyone can travel as far and it's nice to have some points available semi-locally. Tough situation for sure. Hopefully the population on the east coast can still ensure a good turnout for the Nor'easter Cross. 


And I've seen even the USGP races have no women signed up until a few days before hand. If people have points, they don't feel so obligated to get in on the mad rush of staying up until the wee hours of the morning to get a good starting place, like the rest of us hacks


----------



## d2p (Jul 29, 2006)

Thank you Brooks Watts! 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/crossvegas-moves-to-close-womens-prize-money-gap


----------



## Corndog (Jan 18, 2006)

Yep, Brooks told me in an email a few days ago they were working on getting some extra bonus cash to the top three, glad that came through for them. It was clear they were not happy with the situation either.


----------



## Todd_H (Nov 20, 2009)

Well there you have it!!! 

http://www.crossvegas.com/site/inde...ticle&id=47:womens-podium-bonus-added&catid=2


----------



## StevenG (Nov 19, 2005)

I demand equal pay for Cat 3s too. These elite mens races might have 40-50 rider fields and women 20 while the lower cats are already filling up around the country months in advance, hoping to get a water bottle or some socks nobody would ever buy as prizes. J/K


----------



## Doctor Who (Feb 22, 2005)

backinthesaddle said:


> Here's link to Myerson's next race. Equal money 15 deep in both elite races. NO WOMEN HAVE EVEN REGISTERED!!!!!
> 
> 
> http://www.cycle-smart.com/events/noreaster


Four now vs. seven in the men's. 

Women don't pre-reg to the extant men do. Very rarely do women's races fill, whereas we all know how quickly a popular Cat. 4/5 race can fill. Women usually have the luxury of having to pre-reg months in advance -- they usually can do it two days before the race when they know their fitness and schedule will make it happen. 

Anyway, I'll all for prize parity between the genders. Professional women cyclists deserve to be able to make a living at the sport as men do. I understand the issue that not nearly as many women enter races as men -- then just follow Myerson's example and only go a certain number deep, like 10 for men, 5 for women. 

There are solutions out there, but I hope we never have to see prize schedules like the original CrossVegas one. That was shameful.


----------



## mudge (May 15, 2010)

Doctor Who said:


> Anyway, I'll all for prize parity between the genders. Professional women cyclists deserve to be able to make a living at the sport as men do.


No one "deserves" to make a living at a sport, per se. People, male or female, get paid for their efforts based on providing a service to the folks who're ponying up the money. 

Female racers aren't driving sales to the extent that male racers do, and they aren't selling tickets to 'cross races, either. This whole issue would be a lot clearer if we were talking about a sport where salaries and ticket sales were more defined, and less emphasis was placed on prize lists. But, imagine the NBA vs WNBA... the female basketball players just flat don't generate revenues for the team owners like male players do for their team owners, and therefore it would be ludicrous to conclude that the female players deserve the same salaries as the male players. Female athletes as a whole don't drive incremental sales increases for sponsors, and therefore do not command the sort of endorsement contracts that their male counterparts do. Yes, there are exceptions, but...

It is NOT about how long the races are, or how many racers there are, or whether the races are aggressive or competitive enough, it is all about who generates the revenues for the sponsors/promoters. I have no doubt whatsoever that if a sponsor thought they were getting a bigger bang for their buck from the female racers, they'd insist on more equitable prize lists, and they'd offer better endorsement packages to the females. 

Don't believe that to be the case?? Then explain how the very best female 'cross racer in the country, and arguably one of the very best in the world, has to scrimp by? Because for as good as she is, for as much press as she gets, she can not drive incremental sales. It's just business, it's not personal.


----------



## adimiro (Jun 28, 2007)

mudge said:


> Then explain how the very best female 'cross racer in the country, and arguably one of the very best in the world, has to scrimp by?



Because of prevailing assumptions and misconceptions on the 'inferiority' of women's professional sports compared to their male counterparts as your post so eloquently exemplifies.


----------



## mudge (May 15, 2010)

adimiro said:


> Because of prevailing assumptions and misconceptions on the 'inferiority' of women's professional sports compared to their male counterparts as your post so eloquently exemplifies.


What part of my post had anything to do with an assumption or misconception? Are you suggesting that female athletes, especially female cyclists, can actually drive incremental sales in any meaningful way?


----------



## gobes (Sep 12, 2006)

mudge said:


> No one "deserves" to make a living at a sport, per se. People, male or female, get paid for their efforts based on providing a service to the folks who're ponying up the money.
> 
> Female racers aren't driving sales to the extent that male racers do, and they aren't selling tickets to 'cross races, either. This whole issue would be a lot clearer if we were talking about a sport where salaries and ticket sales were more defined, and less emphasis was placed on prize lists. But, imagine the NBA vs WNBA... the female basketball players just flat don't generate revenues for the team owners like male players do for their team owners, and therefore it would be ludicrous to conclude that the female players deserve the same salaries as the male players. Female athletes as a whole don't drive incremental sales increases for sponsors, and therefore do not command the sort of endorsement contracts that their male counterparts do. Yes, there are exceptions, but...
> 
> ...


+1
mudge gets it atmo


----------



## pacificaslim (Sep 10, 2008)

adimiro said:


> Because of prevailing assumptions and misconceptions on the 'inferiority' of women's professional sports compared to their male counterparts as your post so eloquently exemplifies.



If only there was a way to clear up any assumptions and misconceptions once and for all...hmm...like maybe a contest of some kind. How about, say, a bike race. First one across the line wins and gets the money. What could be more fair and inclusive than that? Someone say "Go".


----------



## estone2 (Sep 25, 2005)

more mud said:


> it is probably not PC to say this but the men's race will be at least 10x as exciting as the women's race. But if there was no women's race the crowd would still be there. If there was no men's race the place would be empty..... I am not saying the girls don't train as hard and don't deserve as much but we want to see the fastest in the world...


2009, Hoogerheide World CX Championships.

Women's race - attack from the gun. American off the front. 2 woman chase group. Women catch her - American immediately reattacks. 2 women catch her again. They all sit together. More attacks. American off the back of 2 woman group. American chasing back on (Katie Compton, I believe). Etc etc. It was one of the most exciting races I've ever watched - I screamed myself hoarse. The belgians were going nuts, too.

The men's race? The contenders were all spread out about 2-3 seconds behind one another. They did a time trial. Nobody got any closer or further. They just went around in circles. It was one of the most unbelievably boring races I've ever watched. The crowd? Pretty damn quiet...

My buddy and I were talking about the race for weeks afterwards... the women's race. The men's race? The only time we brought it up was to mention that after the incredible women's race, the men's race was a huge waste of time, and really just boring.

Women's racing can be just as good as men's racing. It's slower, sure, but it can be just as exciting.


----------



## Andrea138 (Mar 10, 2008)

I'll 2nd what Estone said. The absolute speed of the women is slower, but my gawd, they are intense. In the couple of UCI-level races I've done, they are out for blood. Not only will they attack relentlessly like what's described above, they also won't hesitate to get physical with an elbow or bike if they need to make a pass or want to "discourage" you from passing. (Same with top level criterium racing) They'd roll over you if you fell in a mud pit if they thought it'd get them around the course faster. 

Luckily, now I've mostly switched to MTB racing, where they do a much better job of getting the women's payout equal or close to that of the men (albeit not as deep, which is totally understandable given the difference in field size). Maybe the promoters who are giving all these excuses could go talk to the MTB race promoters that seem to have "somehow" managed to work out all those horrible problems.


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

chrdur said:


> the fact remains that you are talking about a niche sport within a niche sport .


Best quote EVER :thumbsup:


----------



## BikeFixer (May 19, 2009)

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/news/newsDetail/4473.html

Personally I think Brook is doing a CYA after all the negativity going on about it.
It will be interesting to see how many people show up when they have to pay to get in.....:yikes:


----------



## Echo (Mar 2, 2009)

Wait, so I have to pay to get in and watch even if I am attending IB?

I don't remember paying last year...


----------

