AMASHOVA LADIES PRIZE GIVING??

[scotty]

This has nothing to do with the event sponsor. It's got to do with a shoddy prize giving and lack of respect for the riders who make the race. 

 

Sorry to burst your bubble Owen but it isn?t the winners that "make" the race....<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

It is the masses coming in after the top riders that make the race viable/profitable and the masses really don?t care who won and who got how much in price money.  They just interested in the how much is the entry fee' date=' is there road closure and is the goodie bag nice??

[/quote']

True, and the winning time compared to theirs as this affects their seeding

[pastapouch]

Mmmmm I can see Cervelo does clearly not have kids !!!

I don't, but cycling is the only sport that I know off that pays price money to that young an age. shouldn't children that age still be racing for the "fun of it" or has the age to become an adult been changed to 16 without me knowing it? Remembering some young racer who stopped racing because some races didn't offer price money and sent a letter about it to ride magazine....

[Little1]

 

Interesting points...

 

this is also going around on our local club email. One of our members raised it with the organisers who as noted said they were asked to only recognise the top 10 ladies...

 

I would like to know who asked them? and what was the justification. Surely an under 16 girl should get recognition and not ignored, that's no way to encourage her to stay in the sport. Added to that an older women who doesn't have a sponsor, works full time, trains when she can and runs a household, should get some recognition for her ability. It also inspires her kids and helps "reward" her for what she may have given up to reach that level.

 

The women raced the 106km route, the men raced the same 106km where did the difference come in?

 

Little12009-10-20 07:56:32

[Owen]

This has nothing to do with the event sponsor. It's got to do with a shoddy prize giving and lack of respect for the riders who make the race. 

 

Sorry to burst your bubble Owen but it isn?t the winners that "make" the race....<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

It is the masses coming in after the top riders that make the race viable/profitable and the masses really don?t care who won and who got how much in price money.  They just interested in the how much is the entry fee' date=' is there road closure and is the goodie bag nice??

[/quote']

True, and the winning time compared to theirs as this affects their seeding

 

I think you guys are misreading me. I am all for the masses. The younger riders normally have parents who also take part. I want all age cats to be rewarded.

[Nix M2]

Prize money and recognition for woman's sport has always been an issue.

However the prize money does not encourage woman to enter and race, nor does the recognition.

Examples that prove this are:

1.They offered to set up a Vets Woman's League in the Western Cape if they could get 20 entrants, i think there are 21 woman in total who entered league? there was prize money offered, but there weren't people interested.

2. WP champs, they awarded medals to all age categories (all racing in one group) and they only awarded positions acording to number of entrants in that age group, not where you came overall. So (for instance) they only awarded Gold and Silver in Elite, even though the 3rd Elite who came in was 4th overall and actually made more sense to award that position than to the only (can't remember which cat) person to race in that group???

I'm by no means saying that they mustn't reward the positions, i'm just saying that it's not a sure way to get the people to race.

 

i wish that they awarded age categories, or made sure the woman raced separetly, or enforced the rules more stricktly, or just that there were more woman interested in racing. coming first out of 3 doesn't mean as much as coming first out of 200.

It's something that we'll be fighting for til the end of time no doubt.

 

 

[Clayton Blackler]

I Think the whole bunch of you are being pathetic...  U16 girls of which there most probably were only 5 or 6 should do this as part of their experience they should not be chasing money, on the other hand i do feel it should be the same for U16 boys.  These are children they should not be racing for money, you cant work until you are over 16 legally..  They should be maybe incentivised with prizes or vouchers for instance but they should not be trying to milk the cash cow at their young age!  Thats why by the time they are 18 they are running around being skanks and the passion for cycling is gone because there really was never one, they just wanted the money and it made riding a bike worth it even with the parental pressure.

[Alida]

Prize money and recognition for woman's sport has always been an issue.

However the prize money does not encourage woman to enter and race' date=' nor does the recognition.

Examples that prove this are:

1.They offered to set up a Vets Woman's League in the Western Cape if they could get 20 entrants, i think there are 21 woman in total who entered league? there was prize money offered, but there weren't people interested.

2. WP champs, they awarded medals to all age categories (all racing in one group) and they only awarded positions acording to number of entrants in that age group, not where you came overall. So (for instance) they only awarded Gold and Silver in Elite, even though the 3rd Elite who came in was 4th overall and actually made more sense to award that position than to the only (can't remember which cat) person to race in that group???

I'm by no means saying that they mustn't reward the positions, i'm just saying that it's not a sure way to get the people to race.

 

i wish that they awarded age categories, or made sure the woman raced separetly, or enforced the rules more stricktly, or just that there were more woman interested in racing. coming first out of 3 doesn't mean as much as coming first out of 200.

It's something that we'll be fighting for til the end of time no doubt.

[/quote']

 

One of my friends has done a couple of licensed races and isn't interested until she gets to start in her own age cat.  She's over 40 and would prefer not to have to start with the elites (having to start with the elites myself I don't blame her )

 

Would it be a train smash to maybe split the ladies into elites, 30-39, 40-49 etc etc start groups?  And if there aren't enough entrants that elected to ride licensed then seed in a similar way to the Argus - top 50 in each age cat - just to generate some interest initially?

Alida2009-10-20 08:36:26

[Nix M2]

Prize money and recognition for woman's sport has always been an issue.

However the prize money does not encourage woman to enter and race' date=' nor does the recognition.

Examples that prove this are:

1.They offered to set up a Vets Woman's League in the Western Cape if they could get 20 entrants, i think there are 21 woman in total who entered league? there was prize money offered, but there weren't people interested.

2. WP champs, they awarded medals to all age categories (all racing in one group) and they only awarded positions acording to number of entrants in that age group, not where you came overall. So (for instance) they only awarded Gold and Silver in Elite, even though the 3rd Elite who came in was 4th overall and actually made more sense to award that position than to the only (can't remember which cat) person to race in that group???

I'm by no means saying that they mustn't reward the positions, i'm just saying that it's not a sure way to get the people to race.

 

i wish that they awarded age categories, or made sure the woman raced separetly, or enforced the rules more stricktly, or just that there were more woman interested in racing. coming first out of 3 doesn't mean as much as coming first out of 200.

It's something that we'll be fighting for til the end of time no doubt.

[/quote']

 

One of my friends has done a couple of licensed races and isn't interested until she gets to start in her own age cat.  She's over 40 and would prefer not to have to start with the elites (having to start with the elites myself I don't blame her )

 

Would it be a train smash to maybe split the ladies into elites, 30-39, 40-49 etc etc start groups?  And if there aren't enough entrants that elected to ride licensed then seed in a similar way to the Argus - top 50 in each age cat - just to generate some interest initially?

 

I think the Herald was done like that - split the licenced ladies into 3 groups. works well, if you have enough!

[Pickles]

Please can someone explain this to me...

 

In the U16 boys the prize money was in the 4 figure range' date=' yet in the U16 girls there was nothing.

 

[/quote']

 

Why must U16s get price money anyway. They're not PROS and they do have parents who provide the money.

 

Geez! You sound bitter and twisted. Did someone nick your sweeties? It is very very hard to win any age category in cycling. So, if the succesful boys are acknowledged, so should the girls be acknowledged! Who cares who provides their equipment? That is not the point here! The child's performance, and the (lack of) acknowledgement thereof that is under scrutiny here.

By the way, just about EVERY spare cent I have, I spend on my son's equipment (and his extra maths etc etc). He is passionate about this sport, and I'd rather have him doing well at THIS than trawling the malls and getting p**sed or high for entertainment. I know exactly where he is at night. Fast asleep, thoroughly exhausted! From racing the bike that costs me an arm and a leg!

[Pickles]

I Think the whole bunch of you are being pathetic...  U16 girls of which there most probably were only 5 or 6 should do this as part of their experience they should not be chasing money' date=' on the other hand i do feel it should be the same for U16 boys.  These are children they should not be racing for money, you cant work until you are over 16 legally..  They should be maybe incentivised with prizes or vouchers for instance but they should not be trying to milk the cash cow at their young age!  Thats why by the time they are 18 they are running around being skanks and the passion for cycling is gone because there really was never one, they just wanted the money and it made riding a bike worth it even with the parental pressure.[/quote']

 

Not a penny changed hands here! It would take me more space than is available here, to explain the absolute joy this "Podium" gave this kid. All the money in the world couldn't buy the thrill this gave him!

[Clayton Blackler]

My Point exactly!  I have been there and raced at the top ranks as a U16, Junior and U23 and recognition cannot have a price put on it.

[Nettie R]

Please can someone explain this to me...

 

In the U16 boys the prize money was in the 4 figure range' date=' yet in the U16 girls there was nothing.

 

[/quote']

 

Why must U16s get price money anyway. They're not PROS and they do have parents who provide the money.

 

The child's performance, and the (lack of) acknowledgement thereof that is under scrutiny here.

In most races, only a handful u/16 girls race. What's the point to hand out 1st,2nd,3rd places if in most cases, only 3 (lost city), 3 (ride for sight) and sometimes none race U/16. Where's the motivation to try harder if you're going to get a prize anyway? I heard that a certain dad 'rides' undercover to help his daughter in the race. Now this girl wants a reward afterwards? No thanks.