Login to VeloClub|Not a member?  Sign up now.
  • Craig

    Excellent! Fantastic news about RVV too! Thanks for an important piece, Loren. :-) (And I’m happy to report that I do all 4!)

  • Lisa Eriksson

    Thank you!! Great tips!

  • Dan Hustwayte

    This is great news about RVV being live, however is it just me that feels that Women’s Cycling is making a mistake by relentlessly pursuing racing the same courses as the men’s sport on the same day? Surely trying to create women’s cycling as a separate entity to the men’s sport would remove the unwinnable competition for air time, and accelerate the growth of the sport.
    There seems to be many reasons to pursue an independent women’s sport.
    Firstly there is the direct competition problem. How often do we hear the pundit on men’s cycling coverage talk about how the most interesting part of the race is often the opening stages after the neutral zone, where the racing actually happens. It seems to me that if broadcasters are going to air a greater volume of cycling on TV they are going to opt to show more of the ‘main event’ rather than broadcast the side show that women’s cycling has made it self by tagging along with the men.
    We’ve already seen in the last year alone that when women’s cycling is it’s own stand alone event it is an awesome sporting product. The most exciting race of last year was without doubt the women’s Olympic road race, it had everything, and more often than not women’s races are far more exciting and unpredictable than men’s (Strade Bianche). Most importantly this race was held on a separate day to the men’s race meaning that broadcasters were not offered the opportunity to make the lazy choice and pick the ‘household names’ of men’s cycling instead. This is can be further proved by the success of the Women’s Tour in Britain both as an event and it’s TV viewing figures. This event shows that creating a stand alone women’s event with very limited connections to the men’s sport offers a far better platform to promote a fantastic sport than if it were tagged along with the Tour of Britain in September. The only thing holding this event back from becoming the centre piece of women’s cycling seems to be British Cycling’s complete lack on interest in women’s cycling outside of the four riders chosen to ride the team pursuit.
    Again this website alone proves that there is a huge amount of interest in women’s cycling, from both sexes and it is clear that if it is marketed right it sells. You just have to look at the fantastic articles about the women involved in this great sport. To me it seems that women’s cycling’s biggest appeal is the depth of character to its main protagonists. And as the above article states these women shouldn’t be afraid to share their incredibly interesting views and beliefs to get their sport to the position it truly deserves. Look at the success of the work that Rochelle Gilmore and Marianne Vos have done to create teams run by women for women independent from a men’s team showing that it can be done.
    So perhaps then it is time for Women’s Cycling to change course. Take a risk and set it’s sights on breaking free from the shadow of its big brother and go its own way. Not giving broadcasters the same set of old choices and force them to change perspective.

  • ummm…

    They should take the same tactic that other womens sport does. Make those uniforms skimpy. Something really tight and tiny…….oh wait.

  • DaveRides

    5. Go out of your way to spend money with companies which advertise on existing coverage, and let them know why.

    This would be a far better subject to tweet about than mindless repetition of hashtags.

  • Anon N + 1

    “we went from NO coverage to LIVE coverage, which certainly begs the question.” Aristotle would disagree.
    If the organisers were to say “Neither we nor anyone else provides live coverage; therefore there is no live coverage,” Aristotle would say the organisers beg the question.


Pin It on Pinterest

May 29, 2017
May 28, 2017
May 27, 2017
May 26, 2017
May 25, 2017