Woman Cyclist has to slow down before she catches Men

[WelshBloke]

This is an organisational fail not a sexism fail (if you agree with separate male and female races).

The men and women run different routes after the start so she couldn't just fall in with the mens race.
Theres no way she would keep up that pace on her own out front.
There absolutely is a safety issue if you have two different races, following different routes getting mixed up with safety and support cars from both races getting fouled up together.

 

[WelshBloke]

If you did that, there would be almost no women.

Also, your assumption that the best women are better than the worst men is generally wrong. Maybe at low levels it could be true.

Look at female world records in the Olympics, and then look at the worst men.

Theres usually a few women in the top of the iron man results. It's mostly blokes but some of the women can hang with the best of the men. Plus the attitude that if you aren't going to win theres no point in being there is missing the point a lot.

 

[realibrad]

Theres usually a few women in the top of the iron man results. It's mostly blokes but some of the women can hang with the best of the men. Plus the attitude that if you aren't going to win theres no point in being there is missing the point a lot.

Oh, there are some hard core women that are just amazing. But, if you did a Group A and B, and did not split them by sex, then you are going to see almost no women in either group. When it comes to physical activity, men have natural advantages. There is variation among people, so sometimes a few women can compete at the top, but, generally its men that have the natural advantage. If you let men compete against women, women are going to lose very often. That means the number of women would be reduced.

Think of it like this. Lets say the NBA starts to allow women. There are a handful that could compete in the league. But, if you also opened up the WNBA to men, you would see it get flooded. The net effect would be a reduction in females in the sport.

What I would be okay with, is the NBA going unrestricted, and then leaving the WNBA restricted to women. If someone can compete at the highest level, then let them play. I watch to see competition, not to see men or women.

 

[dasherHampton]

I didn't read the story, only saw the headline.

Isn't it possible that she sprinted flat out to try to catch the male peloton which was most likely pacing itself? If she caught it she may have been able to hang with it. The back of a peloton is a very comfortable place to ride.

Good plan, but violates the spirit of the competition a bit, no?

 

[WelshBloke]

Good plan, but violates the sprint of the competition a bit, no?

As they are separate races it more than violates the spirit! Going on a lone sprint at the start of a race is not a winning tactic!

 

[WelshBloke]

Oh, there are some hard core women that are just amazing. But, if you did a Group A and B, and did not split them by sex, then you are going to see almost no women in either group. When it comes to physical activity, men have natural advantages. There is variation among people, so sometimes a few women can compete at the top, but, generally its men that have the natural advantage. If you let men compete against women, women are going to lose very often. That means the number of women would be reduced.

So just have numbers on how many men and women qualify for the race.

 

[realibrad]

So just have numbers on how many men and women qualify for the race.

A quota of how many women are allowed to be in the race in class A, and how many men in class B?

The problem there is first, what should the number be? The men in either group are likely to dominate.

Lets say that the number of men in group B is determined on how many women qualify for group A. You are still going to see men dominate in both groups and so a woman winning is going to be reduced drastically. Its already had enough for females in sports, and now they would have to compete against men. What you are going to see is a big reduction in women competing when the top and middle of those groups are almost always going to be men.

 

[jackstar7]

A quota of how many women are allowed to be in the race in class A, and how many men in class B?

The problem there is first, what should the number be? The men in either group are likely to dominate.

Lets say that the number of men in group B is determined on how many women qualify for group A. You are still going to see men dominate in both groups and so a woman winning is going to be reduced drastically. Its already had enough for females in sports, and now they would have to compete against men. What you are going to see is a big reduction in women competing when the top and middle of those groups are almost always going to be men.

Do you know any strong women?

 

[realibrad]

Do you know any strong women?

Yes. Not just stronger than I am, but strong in terms of the average human.

Why do you ask?

 

[WelshBloke]

A quota of how many women are allowed to be in the race in class A, and how many men in class B?

The problem there is first, what should the number be? The men in either group are likely to dominate.

Lets say that the number of men in group B is determined on how many women qualify for group A. You are still going to see men dominate in both groups and so a woman winning is going to be reduced drastically. Its already had enough for females in sports, and now they would have to compete against men. What you are going to see is a big reduction in women competing when the top and middle of those groups are almost always going to be men.

I'm still not seeing the problem. Give enough numbers that you get a good spread of people entering. You dont have to do it for every event. You seem to be trying to make this an insurmountable issue when it's just about managing numbers of people who want to enter.

 

[jackstar7]

Yes. Not just stronger than I am, but strong in terms of the average human.

Why do you ask?

Thank you for answering.

 

[realibrad]

I'm still not seeing the problem. Give enough numbers that you get a good spread of people entering. You dont have to do it for every event. You seem to be trying to make this an insurmountable issue when it's just about managing numbers of people who want to enter.

The problem is the net reduction in women getting to compete in events. If you have room for 200 in A, and 200 in B, and you allow men and women in both, you are going to have a split of something like 10 in each. Right now women get to be 100% group B, and that means 200 get to compete. When you have limited space and there is qualification to get in, the men will out compete most of the women.

Events cannot let in everyone that wants to compete because resources are not unlimited. So, you cant get back to that 200 women without ballooning the event numbers. Further, competitors want to have a chance to win, and by making them compete against men you are making it statistically drastically harder.

 

[realibrad]

Thank you for answering.

Again, why do you ask? You must have had a point, so why not just state it? Or are you just looking for something?

 

[WelshBloke]

The problem is the net reduction in women getting to compete in events. If you have room for 200 in A, and 200 in B, and you allow men and women in both, you are going to have a split of something like 10 in each. Right now women get to be 100% group B, and that means 200 get to compete. When you have limited space and there is qualification to get in, the men will out compete most of the women.

Events cannot let in everyone that wants to compete because resources are not unlimited. So, you cant get back to that 200 women without ballooning the event numbers. Further, competitors want to have a chance to win, and by making them compete against men you are making it statistically drastically harder.

Eh. You have a limited number of places however you slice it. Theres no difference if you have a mans race and a womans race or two mixed sex races.

 

[realibrad]

Eh. You have a limited number of places however you slice it. Theres no difference if you have a mans race and a womans race or two mixed sex races.

Who gets to enter the race? If you have open first come first serve, then sure. But, if you have any sort of qualification in terms of ability, women get excluded almost completely.

But again, I want to stress that people want to compete. How many amateurs would have fun playing against pros? Almost none because the gap in ability is so large. So, why would women at a disadvantage not be the same given that is how people are and women are people.

 

[WelshBloke]

Who gets to enter the race? If you have open first come first serve, then sure. But, if you have any sort of qualification in terms of ability, women get excluded almost completely.

You dont have to have the same qualification requirements for men and women in the same way you dont for pros and amateurs.

But again, I want to stress that people want to compete. How many amateurs would have fun playing against pros? Almost none because the gap in ability is so large. So, why would women at a disadvantage not be the same given that is how people are and women are people.

When you enter a competition why do you do it? I'm assuming that you arent an elite level athlete that's expecting to have a chance of winning everything you enter?
All the people I know enter to beat themselves.

 

[realibrad]

You dont have to have the same qualification requirements for men and women in the same way you dont for pros and amateurs.

But this event was not for amateurs right?

When you enter a competition why do you do it? I'm assuming that you arent an elite level athlete that's expecting to have a chance of winning everything you enter?
All the people I know enter to beat themselves.

I enter into competition where the peers I am competing against are at or around my skill level. I don't want to play against people that are much worse than me, or much better as the point is to be challenged.

If all the people you know enter to beat themselves, then you don't know a lot of people, or, you know only liars. A quick way to tell if those people care about beating others is to see if they have a sports team that they care about. Seeing your name, I think its likely you like Soccer (the real name). Do you care if your team wins or loses?

 

[WelshBloke]

But this event was not for amateurs right?

I assumed that we were talking in general but the point still stands that you dont have to have the same entry requirements for women and men.

I enter into competition where the peers I am competing against are at or around my skill level. I don't want to play against people that are much worse than me, or much better as the point is to be challenged.

Well I'm not seeing that being a problem just because there's women involved! Unless your competitions only have 5 people in them!

If all the people you know enter to beat themselves, then you don't know a lot of people, or, you know only liars. A quick way to tell if those people care about beating others is to see if they have a sports team that they care about. Seeing your name, I think its likely you like Soccer (the real name). Do you care if your team wins or loses?

Or that the fact everyone cares more about personal bests rather than positions!

Also rugby.

And I'm not seeing how me wanting Wales to beat Scotland on Saturday says anything about my feelings about my personal performance!

 

[realibrad]

I assumed that we were talking in general but the point still stands that you dont have to have the same entry requirements for women and men.

So you want to have the entry requirements to be less for women? Why not just have the female league then?

Well I'm not seeing that being a problem just because there's women involved! Unless your competitions only have 5 people in them!



Or that the fact everyone cares more about personal bests rather than positions!

Also rugby.

And I'm not seeing how me wanting Wales to beat Scotland on Saturday says anything about my feelings about my personal performance!

Why do you care who wins so long as everyone did their personal best? The reason is that you like when your team and thus you win.

 

[WelshBloke]

So you want to have the entry requirements to be less for women? Why not just have the female league then?

I dont mind either way. I was just pointing out that combined sex competitions can work.

Why do you care who wins so long as everyone did their personal best? The reason is that you like when your team and thus you win.

Because that's how watching team sports works. How the Welsh team does doesn't reflect on how my performance! Me getting a personal best in a cycle race is my achievement enjoying Wales beating England in the rugby is a different thing.

 

[jackstar7]

Again, why do you ask? You must have had a point, so why not just state it? Or are you just looking for something?

I'm keeping my reasons to myself because I don't wish to state them. I was looking for your answer to the question and you provided it. All good as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Zorba]

Doesn't sound as if it's "the men are too slow and the women too fast". Sounds more as if "the fastest of the women is a bit faster than the slowest of the men, at least on the initial part, though likely not over the whole race".

And the logical solution is to have a much bigger gap between the two starts. It does not seem to me to be a gender politics issue.

(Racing remains an intrinsically pointless activity, though. The lot of them ought to find something more constructive to do. Like campaigning for safer cycle routes and for restrictions on cars!)

The sport like of biking does make recreational biking more popular, which makes bike commuting more popular.

 

[pmv]

The sport like of biking does make recreational biking more popular, which makes bike commuting more popular.

I don't in truth care very much if people want to engage in sports, but I do get weary of the amount of _attention_ sport gets, including all its endless scandals and dilemmas that we are all told we have to have an opinion about.

But I don't agree that sport cycling does much for utility cycling. On the contrary, sports cycling seems to give people the impression that it's only for super-fit young people, that you have to wear a helmet, go fast, and, also, probably, take performance-enhancing drugs.

Sports cycling has a pretty bad image currently, thanks to its huge scandals with doping (I suspect unfairly as it's most likely that other sports have simply covered it up better).

 

[WelshBloke]

On the contrary, sports cycling seems to give people the impression that it's only for super-fit young people, that you have to wear a helmet...

Wear a helmet anyway! Get used to it and you won't notice it's there!
Now it's not going to save you if a car doing 60 hits you but it'll help you if you fall off.
My wife was cycling this winter and hit a patch of ice, slid sideways and her head hit the tarmac pretty hard. Walked away with a bruised hip and no damage.

 

[Lanyap]

Those would be SIWs.

ISWYDT