# Women Pro Crit rider pay?



## vette (Feb 1, 2009)

What does the womans domestic team racers make, say teams like UHC,Colavita,Pep. Palace,seems like they race for a short amount of time .


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

Not much, at all. See here, and here. It appears there's no sign it's going to change anytime soon.


----------



## vette (Feb 1, 2009)

Didn't think it would be much,that's a sad pay,definitely have to have another primary source of income,also the reality of younger- faster talent putting you to pasture.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

It a sad reality of most women's pro sports. All of the pro stuff is really a commercial endeavor, and women's sport just haven't generated the following and revenues that men's sports have. The women's TdF has been canceled in the past due to lack of sponsorship. Some examples:

- Total prize money for the PGA tour, $256 million, is more than five times that of the LPGA tour, $50 million.

- For a WNBA player in the 2005 season, the minimum salary was $31,200, the maximum salary was $89,000, and the team salary cap was $673,000. For NBA players in the 2004-2005 season, the minimum salary was $385,277, the maximum salary was $15.355 million, and the team salary cap was $46 million. 

- For finishing in third place in the 2003 Women's World Cup, each U.S. women's national soccer team member was awarded $25,000. They would have received $58,000 if they had won the Cup. For reaching the quarterfinal of the World Cup in 2002, the U.S. men's national soccer team members received $200,000 each.​
Source: Pay Inequity in Athletics | Women's Sports Foundation


----------



## obed (Jan 12, 2014)

the truth is none of these events are sports at all... they are business...
the people paying for the event are in it to make money... if the money is not there, the sponsors will not be there...they see sports as an investment...thinking of it in terms of inequity or equal treatment will never give satisfactory results...profit is not about fair. If women's sports brought in the money men's sports did, the pay would be the same.


----------



## deviousalex (Aug 18, 2010)

I know a few women pros that race for various teams. When I asked a few of them on two different teams what they make they said there was no salary. Only things while traveling were comped and equipment. One mentioned they don't even get health insurance.

Obviously, I'm not going to name the teams. But they are actual UCI licensed teams not "pro" teams that have a bunch of 1/2s and pretend they are a pro team on social media.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

deviousalex said:


> I know a few women pros that race for various teams. When I asked a few of them on two different teams what they make they said there was no salary. Only things while traveling were comped and equipment. One mentioned they don't even get health insurance.
> 
> Obviously, I'm not going to name the teams. But they are actual UCI licensed teams not "pro" teams that have a bunch of 1/2s and pretend they are a pro team on social media.


Pretty terrible that they don't even get health insurance.


----------



## BCSaltchucker (Jul 20, 2011)

it's not just a business, pro sports is show business. It is purely for entertainment, and the actors have to put on a show. In women's tennis, in women's alpine skiing, women's figure skating, they surely do put on a show, and their pay is very high. In women's cycling ... it just hasn't matured enough to be rivetting like the pro mens circuit. But you'll note that in tennis female stars make more than male cycling stars. And there are a hundred pro mens sports where men make close to nothing also - not matured into being major entertainment.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

deviousalex said:


> I know a few women pros that race for various teams. When I asked a few of them on two different teams what they make they said there was no salary. Only things while traveling were comped and equipment. One mentioned they don't even get health insurance.
> 
> Obviously, I'm not going to name the teams. But they are actual UCI licensed teams not "pro" teams that have a bunch of 1/2s and pretend they are a pro team on social media.


100% true. 

I know a number of them that have stated the same. 

Only the REALLY BIG folks get a salary. And some of the winningest female racers in US history barely pull down enough to be above poverty line.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

BCSaltchucker said:


> it's not just a business, pro sports is show business. It is purely for entertainment, and the actors have to put on a show. In women's tennis, in women's alpine skiing, women's figure skating, they surely do put on a show, and their pay is very high. In women's cycling ... it just hasn't matured enough to be rivetting like the pro mens circuit. But you'll note that in tennis female stars make more than male cycling stars. And there are a hundred pro mens sports where men make close to nothing also - not matured into being major entertainment.


You talk about entertainment, which I agree with....but then you say "like the pro mens circuit"...

UCI ProTour racing has got to be some of the most boring _unriveting _sporting _non_-entertainment there is. A break gets up the road and is allowed to stay there so long as the fish in it are small fries, and the peloton do a group training ride for 5 hours before catching them at 30km to go (10km if it is a really "exciting" stage). As such it is no small wonder that sponsors aren't sticking around very long in UCI men's ProTour racing. In the men's races, 95% of the time the "racers" aren't "racing"...they're soft-pedaling and not wanting to work. This of course gets dubbed "smart" and "good tactics" by commentators... There's good reason why most people new to cycling watch a bike race and say "wow that is boring, how can you watch this", because frankly aside from video-tourism-of-scenery and pithy commentators displaying their wit....men's ProTour racing is ungodly boring and poor entertainment almost all of the time. This BTW is why of a 200km men's stage only the last 60km (maybe 100km for important events) ever sees airtime, because even the broadcasters tacitly admit it is ungodly boring most of the time and there's no point showing it all.


Women's races are often more exciting than the men's IMHO. A crit follows the stereotypical script set by the men, and the women afterwards are bemoaning that the race "wasn't hard enough" not patting each other on the back for "good" "tactics". Women's racing is more mature than men's in that regard, there tends to be much more actual racing and more entertainment value. It doesn't get the dollars because _reasons _it seems


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Marc said:


> You talk about entertainment, which I agree with....but then you say "like the pro mens circuit"...
> 
> UCI ProTour racing has got to be some of the most boring _unriveting _sporting _non_-entertainment there is. A break gets up the road and is allowed to stay there so long as the fish in it are small fries, and the peloton do a group training ride for 5 hours before catching them at 30km to go (10km if it is a really "exciting" stage). As such it is no small wonder that sponsors aren't sticking around very long in UCI men's ProTour racing. In the men's races, 95% of the time the "racers" aren't "racing"...they're soft-pedaling and not wanting to work. This of course gets dubbed "smart" and "good tactics" by commentators... There's good reason why most people new to cycling watch a bike race and say "wow that is boring, how can you watch this", because frankly aside from video-tourism-of-scenery and pithy commentators displaying their wit....men's ProTour racing is ungodly boring and poor entertainment almost all of the time. This BTW is why of a 200km men's stage only the last 60km (maybe 100km for important events) ever sees airtime, because even the broadcasters tacitly admit it is ungodly boring most of the time and there's no point showing it all.
> 
> ...


There's some truth to this. 

Just got back from the Philly Cycling classic, and while it's always an exciting race from both perspectives, it's typically the women's race that has more excitement. This year, the mens race was actually pretty entertaining (what I was able to see of it during staging) and the women's race was a little more dull than previous years. 

It seems the longer the race and the more prestigious the teams, the duller the race gets. This was UCI Women's World Cup, so it was mostly UCI Women's teams. The women put one break up the road and it lasted a lap before getting reeled in and it calmed down until things started happening on the last lap, so it was kind of boring. The men were pro continental outfits and some continental outfits. Guys were out for glory most of the day (even that idiot Chris Horner), and it seemed more lively than previous years.


----------

