2012 - Louisville Criterium

Racing: 

81 Comments

Louisville Criterium On-Site Reg INFO

It's time to kick off the 2012 season this Saturday! So far the weather looks amazing and the course is primed for some fast paced action. Please see the notes below on registration & chip placement. With the USAC Reintegration there's some new items to remember when registering on site.

REGISTRATION INFO

USAC: Bring your USAC License and ACA Membership Card. If you do not have a USAC License you can buy a 1-day, but men must race Cat 5 and women Cat 4 with a 1-day license. If you forget your USAC License, find a smart phone and pull up a copy of your license to show our reg staff. If you can't find a smart phone and don't have your license then you'll be forced to race SM5 and SW4,
NO EXCEPTIONS!

ACA Memebership: If you're not an ACA Member there's still time to get your 2012 membership card before Saturday. If you're not a member you'll have to pay a $5 non-member fee when you register. If you're a SM5 or SW4 buying a 1-day USAC license then that ACA Member fee is waived.

PRE-REGISTERED CYCLISTS: When you arrive, just hop in the speedy pre-registration line. 1) Simply show up and hop in the pre-reg line (no forms to fill out) 2) Hand your license to the registration staff 3) They'll hand you your number, license back, and you'll sign a release. That's it, quick and easy. Pre-registration closes tomorrow night (Thursday) at midnight

RENTAL CHIPS: If you don't own a timing chip there's still time to get one from the ACA, contact the ACA directly. If you'd like a result you'll need a rental chip. Cost is $10 and just tell the registration staff. You'll also need to leave your drivers license as collateral.

CHIP PLACEMENT:See pics 303 posted a few days ago. Improper chip placement will cause your result to register as an "error" in the system. The side bars of your chip should go vertically. Do no mount your chip on the stem facing the ground, mount your chip facing forward on the head tube or steering column above your headset.

Think you're out of luck if

Think you're out of luck if you can't find a smart phone and forget your license: if you race a category that's not on your license, that's considered fraudulent entry and it would suck to get suspended so early in the season.

long arms

Pat McQuaid has really long arms that reach from Aigle? BTW it is high time the ladies stage a strike on the start line. Utterly bogus. It is the same idiocy that syas the "women can only run X laps" at P1-2. What's next; a case of the vapors? Oh brother.

Local amateur racing in the

Local amateur racing in the States, particularly women's racing, has NO ROI for sponsors. None, nada, zilch. The only reason there's prize money at all is to entice people to show up. Since there are almost no elite women racers, there's no point to offering them equal prize money as it would be like pouring money down a rat hole. At least when they offer prize money to the elite men, especially if they offer a lot of money, a lot of men will show up. If you have enough money to pay 20 deep in the women's races, DFL gets her entry fee back. That's just wrong.

Increasing the women's prize

Increasing the women's prize purse has been shown to increase attendance in mountain biking. Checkout the whiskey off-road. They offer equal prize money to women, and it has resulted in one of the largest women's field in the country (although still much smaller than the men's field). There's no reason it wouldn't work for road racing as well.

Srsly?

It's annoying to hear people say that women don't deserve equal prize lists just because their numbers are lower. I'm pretty sure none of these "anonymous" people who commented above ride with, or personally know any of the women in the pro 1, 2 pack. If they personally knew what these women do on a daily basis to make it in the sport, I feel the discussion would be about how awesome Cat Johnson's break attempt was, or how Alison Powers' countered at just the right time to make her break stick.

Both men's and women's cycling require training, discipline, passion and rigor, so why devalue one's achievements just because there are less numbers? Why should my hard work be devalued just because no one else even made it to the line?

Aside from the fact that the announcer in Louisville kept calling us "girls" and then noted that "these girls lack the motivation to attack" while my husband pointed out that we had just as many attacks as the previous race, you gotta wonder why do women even bother? Not to mention when people don't think we "deserve" the same money because our races must be "easier" to win because there are less of us. Yeah, it's easier to sit in a pack of 10 up a hill rather than starting at the font of a pack of 40 guys up a hill and still having guys to draft after you've dropped 20 places the top. C'mon now, there is no "sitting in" in a women's pack.

I know for a fact that the women in the Pro, 1, 2 categories work hard and love the sport with all their heart. I myself train hard, and still I was nothing more than pack fodder on Saturday. I looked around at the start line and said to myself (well, out loud), "There is no one here that sucks." And, I got dropped. It felt bad.

And for the comment on "no ROI", marketing 101--marketing to women is vastly different than marketing to men, so stop plastering stickers on a sign post and saying that you aren't getting any ROI from the women. Look at athletic brands that cater to women without demeaning them (offering little versions of mens things) in the process. In 2012, there are lots of examples of successful ROI for women's sports brands.

How would you say any

How would you say any competitor, male or female, "deserves" prize money? Is the amount one deserves based on how hard you train, or the quality and depth of the competition, or some other metric?

if you feel you are being

if you feel you are being mis-treated, then why participate? if the money isn't enough, then why participate? if you don't like the way brands cater to women, then why participate?

as is said to the men every time they complain about the quality of a course or the prize money, if you don't like it, then promote a race yourself.

So, women should assemble and work to put on more women-focused events. Go for it! No one's stopping you. Put on a race with 10 separate women's categories and 1 or 2 men's categories. Flip the cards.

the perpetual whining is really annoying. every year someone complains about women's prize money, about how there are not enough women participating, etc. Yet other sports like running and triathlon are bursting at the seams with women. Time to take a look at yourselves.

Haters will hate

Wow, is this really a topic worth hating on? While you may not agree with the big comment post why hate on it? Maybe the women's integration into this sport are limited because of haters like you.

I don't hate women at all.

I don't hate women at all. If there was a women's focused race with 1 men's category, I'd definitely support it. But it doesn't exist. To be honest, if women want more participation, then they need to step up. not complain on a message board.

From what my wife and sister have told me, they've participated in some women's group rides and team events and were totally disgusted at how exclusive and elitist the women were. Totally turned them off to cycling as a sport. Both of them love to go out and ride, but in no way were interested in the attitudes of other female cyclists.

sometimes the truth hurts.

There Are Elite Women Who ARE Making Change

Hi guys (I'm saying guys because all these posts appear to be from guys). I'm a woman and I'm a cat 1 and have been for 3 years. I'm also in marketing. Trust me, I totally get ROI and asking why do women deserve payout if the numbers aren't equivalent to men. I understand business, I understand bottom-line. I also know what it is like to be a woman racing at the top-level for her entire gender and to be told you have no value and even if you win, you can't get an entry fee back. Competitive athletic women are fewer in numbers compared to their achievement-athletic women counterparts (many women who participate in running, triathlon). That's the way society has raised women and to a large extent with a more nuturing demeanor, that's how we're wired. That doesn't mean there aren't a lot of competitive women out there who work their asses off despite facing a larger number of barriers than the average equivalently competitive male.

I started racing from riding with the guys on my collegiate team at UT-Austin back in 2007. In 2 years, I was racing NRC races with a men and women's U23 travel team. I've been racing mostly NRC races since then. We all know racing is expensive. Arguably, many men at that level are able to get decent sponsorship- usually bikes, race equipment, maybe a travel stipend. Some also get a lot more. If you go and look at the fields of women at those races (usually 80-100 women), whether pro or not, you'll find the women, on average, in a much less glamorous situation (Yes there are some women on "pro teams" but only a tiny handful make liveable wages). The women in the field come in many colors but all hard working: many mothers, tons of Masters and PhD students, women with 2-3 jobs just so they can save enough to get themselves to the next race....and all with the prospect of (in 99% of cases), a much lower payout and virtually no prospect of a magical contract that can let them race and not have to have another job or two (if single)...even at the top level. What this means is, women often have to go where the money is in order to make feasible to do what they love.

Some people who have commented asked why women bother to participate if they feel they are being mistreated. Well, let me get all Rosa Parks on you for a minute. Women have, particularly in the last two years, begun to speak out and begun to make changes. Take for example, the Aspen Women's Pro Race, which is expanding this year. Take the Exergy Women's Tour this month. It all takes time. Women are taking action, but we are a minority and can't magically become 50% of the racing population and influence overnight. It takes time. We're growing, our influence is growing on the sport and in the cycling industry. When I started racing just a few years ago, Specialized only made a women's touring-style road bike, now they have multiple women's road bikes. Yes women will complain about the top level available to them being treated as less than 2nd class citizens, but many of them also take action. I, for one, can't stand seeing cat 3 men (middle category racers) getting more prize money than the top women, because I know I can more than hang with the cat 3s (and do). When I couldn't find the support to do what I wanted this year from a team, instead of sitting back and just racing locally, I've formed an elite women's program with incredible support from tons of sponsors WHO VALUE WOMEN'S RACING. Without them I probably couldn't do what I love as much as I love. The support is overwhelming and only growing month after month which means the program and it's influence will only expand (and hoping to extending this to more races next year).

Yeah I know some say that women's racing is boring, but you likely overestimate the excitement of your own race. There are plenty of races where the women's races are just as active, if not more active than the men's races. I'm not advocating equivalent payouts between men and women or saying all women's races are super fun to watch (although, personally, I'm an instigator of active races because its fun). I'm advocating fair payouts between the top level of one gender versus the other. I don't get to race a lot locally because despite a 7-5pm entry-level job and sponsorship through my team (which in itself takes a massive amount of effort and time), there is often not a chance of return so I can afford to race nationally where I have greater chance of return and progressing my program and its mission. It's a choice and ultimately, I have to support events that support me.

Women are taking action and there are tons of us who work harder to achieve less than many men have handed to them. If women never said anything and didn't do anything, then nothing would change. Open your eyes and your ears and see all the changes that ARE currently happening around your male-self. And if you ever want to come out to the Oval Ride, I'll be the woman pulling through and then handing your ass to you.

joke...

this is a total joke right...

there are very few women who are stronger than the top cat 3 racers. all you have to do is check the hill climb results. find a hill climb where the cat 3 winner was not faster than the women's winner.

please let me us know the last hill climb or tt where you handed the cat 3 winner their ass...

people want to see people go faster, go harder...we don't want to watch car races at 50 miles per hour no matter how many crashes, attacks or the human interest story associated if there is a car race where the cars go 100 mph that we can watch instead.

i imagine this is why the national basketball league and soccer leagues around the world pay millions to men and nowhere near the equivalent to women.

on the other hand sports like golf/tennis/running pay very equal amounts to men and women. this is because the talent pool is much higher and the women in these sports are far better then the average male/female.

don't you find it very interesting that it only took you 2 years to be racing the nrc? this is the highest level of competition in the us. do you think you could rise to the top level of tennis in 2 years? golf? running? no because the talent pool is much higher. if you think you could do this...why not take 2 years and become an elite tennis player and make millions, then you could support a whole women's cycling team or even a whole women's cycling league.

the talent pool in women's cycling is a joke. jeanie longo is a great example...name a men's sport where a 50+ athlete can participate and win at the elite level.

there is no reason there should be equal prize money. there should be equal opportunity.

if any group of cyclists should get more prize money it should be the sm4s, the sm35+4, the sm45+4s. these are the people who show up to races, buy bikes, buy the clothes, and have money to spend.

just because you are good at something or work hard at something that doesn't warrant anyone paying you to do it unless it has value to some one else.

advertisers and marketers seem pretty smart, smart enough to get people to do incredibly stupid things like smoke cigarettes and more, i imagine if they thought there was value in supporting women's cycling they would do it.

It seems the jokes on you -

It seems the jokes on you - "advertisers and marketers...i imagine if they thought there was value in supporting women's cycling they would do it."

Teams and their sponsors:
Tibco: http://www.teamtibco.com/partners-sponsors
Tough Girl: http://toughgirlcycling.com/sponsors.html
Velo Bella: http://www.velobella.org/blog/sponsors/
Naked/Tribella: http://www.tribellaracing.com/category/sponsor-shoutout/

Should I go on? I could name 20 more teams with hundreds more sponsors. Sponsors are on board, race promoters are the ones out of touch.

I've been racing since I was

I've been racing since I was 8 years old, I'm over 40 now and I think I'm on the right side of this argument. Here are a couple examples that inform my opinion.

#1
Brook Watts (Cross Vegas): "Crank Brothers stepped in as a sponsor of the women's race Lady Lucx, which has allowed us to pay the top five women for CrossVegas...It is our goal to work toward complete equality on the prize list. Last year we had equal prize money for the podium places and this year it is the top five. We will phase it in and work with other promoters and the UCI 'Cross Commission. Over the course of three years we want to get to the point where the prize lists are completely equal. It's a start."

CV is more popular than ever and even gets attention from European racers. Euro's and many pro's come because of the UCI points and don't give a rip about $. More women come because of the pay, and the good vibe enhanced by equal payouts.

#2
I promoted and organized a race a couple years ago that gave equal pay. We made money, the race was successful and we had one the biggest SW Open turnouts for a non-UCI race. Several local, but national level pro women showed up to our little non-Boulder race. The field was smaller than SM Open, but not by much. Many women and girls bumped up categories to do the Open race. The feedback we received was positive from racers and sponsors.

yes...

yes...there are tons of sponsors for women's cycling teams, so why is it hard to get prize money for women at races?

it seems like it should be as simple as the women on these teams calling their sponsors and saying we are doing such and such race and we need more prize money.

or these team's could put on a race and make sure there is tons of prize money for women.

from what i am hearing the solution is simple and the sponsors are lining up...so why don't you go and get it done.

the sponsors are there to support women's cycling, the talent is rich...i guess there are no women who want to step up and make it happen in cycling.

obviously there is something happening/not happening in women's cycling that is not happening in other women's sports like tennis/ironman/running/golf...what is it?

on another note...

tell me one good reason why the women p12 field deserves more prize money than the sm4s, the sm4+35, the sm4+45. a good reason is one that exemplifies why sw12 as a group provides more than the other groups in some form to the general community or to the racing community or for the communities best interest.

every week, the sm4s and masters sm4/+35+45 category racers show up and support the races and the race community.

most of them will never ever win a dollar from racing.

these are the racers that week in and week out support the racing community.

Yep you ladies really "got it

Yep you ladies really "got it done" last night at the crit. You had FREE entry and 4 of you showed up!!! FOUR!!! P/1/2/3 had to pay $20 to enter and 38 riders showed up. If we fold in the free entry for the Cat 4 ladies we still only get to 14 ladies participating in a FREE CRIT! If I were a promoter I'd dump a ton of money on you guys. Way to show us what you mean. Also to go with your argument Whitney about how you are as strong as any Cat 3 man at Louisville, did you notice those guys had $100 on offer between the top 3 places? Did you take note of the fact that 55 guys started that race paying the same thing you would have to compete? Again, as a promoter I have to ask why is the breakout for prizes not fair for ladies? Remember it was a lady who started this train of thought not a promoter saying I should do less. I appreciate you starting your own "team" two people, but the reason the guys have what they have is because others looked around and said we need xyz in bike racing and they facilitated it by getting that funding for a team of 5, 10, 20 riders, however big that team is. They facilitated that growth for others. You facilitated that growth for you. There is the difference, how many ladies have you helped get better funding?

What crit? Had I known about

What crit? Had I known about free racing I would have gone! And I would have dragged my teammates with me. How about spending energy on spreading the word about free racing vs. getting your panties in a wad?

uh. the race flyer was

uh. the race flyer was posted on this site as well as the aca site as well as listed on facebook if you "like" 303cycling or aca. not to mention the ACA race calendar. that is a pretty lame excuse if I ever heard one.

why don't you post your phone # and email. I'll be sure to contact you every time there's a race.

I could name 20 more women's

I could name 20 more women's teams over the last two years that had a life span of 1-2 years tops. Male team title sponsors have a short half life (3-4 years), women's teams are even smaller. Like someone said before, when women's fields grow the prize purse will grow accordingly. How do you honestly justify paying 5 deep to an 80 rider male field and 5 deep to a 22 rider women's field and say the promoter is out of touch, that's ludicrous.

Many men only local teams

Many men only local teams don't last. Your 3-4 year estimate isn't correct unless you're using coed teams.

What's ludicrous is expecting turnout to be the same when the stakes are not. Are promoters even asking sponsors to pony-up for equal pay? For most promoters, not all, it's an afterthought. I've mentioned this exact topic to major race sponsors and it's always a no-brainer. It's like you offended them for bringing it up.

We've got so many amazingly fast women in this State, it's a shame we can't do more to support them. Putting a couple hundred bucks on the women side of the ledger to equal things out isn't going to make anybody go bust.

Because more men race. By

Because more men race. By your logic the 35+4 should get more and better prizes because it's the biggest field. Ha! That's a good one. Two pairs of socks, stickers and a $1.00 off coupon to Chipotle - 5 deep!

I'm not suggesting the exact amount of money and number deep for both fields at every race. What I'm against is when there is a gross disparity between sexes. Men's fields should be paid deeper when there are WAY more racers, but the top three should be the same amount of money.

that's not at all what i'm

that's not at all what i'm saying. what you said is

"What's ludicrous is expecting turnout to be the same when the stakes are not."

what i'm saying is that the stakes are the same for the cat 4 men as they are for the cat 4 women. however, the turnout is not the same. your argument does not hold water.

unless you are 100% covered

unless you are 100% covered with your sponsors - free gear and/or expenses paid, that's not much to brag about.

we've discussed this before. sponsors are using all of us as loyalty buyers. who better to sponsor than people who spend a good chunk of their disposable income on their products.

pretty much no one is spectating at these races that isn't already affiliated with a team. Your sponsors are marketing to other sponsored riders. Woo Hoo!

Do you really think that any non-sponsored cyclist or family member decided to head out and watch the Louisville Crit on Saturday?

I'm not sure what your point

I'm not sure what your point is with this post.

I was at Louisville Crit and one thing that stuck out was the number of women sitting in the grass with their kids. I'd guess 10 of them, with 1-3 kids each. I imagine that given different circumstances they might be racing, rather than just supporting their racing husbands.

my point is that sponsorship

my point is that sponsorship is very easy to come by and doesn't really mean all that much UNLESS it covers all of your costs.

BCS sponsors a bunch of teams and gives them great service and deals. BUT in return they basically purchased a very loyal set of customers. That's a great investment. I can't imagine BCS actually believes that the teams they sponsor will promote the shop and actually drive in new customers. But I bet they do expect to get a LOT of business from the members of teams they sponsor.

I get what your saying now,

I get what your saying now, you make a good point. However, BCS does ask sponsored teams to support the shop in a number of ways - Twitter, Facebook, blogs and word of mouth to name a few. I don't know how well it works, but I can say that my 500+ followers (not bragging, just saying) on Twitter endure constant supporting Tweets about my mechanic and team sponsors. Tweets turned me on to the mechanic I use. Greg Keller's blog must bring in a lot of business to BCS. Personally I've bought Clement tires, Ridley CX bike, Vermarc stuff, and many other things at BCS based on Greg's recommendation. Frites En Mayo's blog has turned me onto RLW and others stuff. When I'm in Whole Foods I buy Naked instead of Odwalla, Bob's Red Mill instead of Quaker and so forth. Maybe I'm a special case but I support cycling supporting companies because I am thoroughly addicted to cycling. :)

ditto, joke is on you

I'm not talking about a hill climb race. That still doesn't mean I am not competitive in a men's 3 crit, or in a men's field in general because I have been in the past and am currently ;) I found success in cycling because I had a very good background for it not because no women do it.

Have you ever been to an NRC race? The women's field are extremely similar sizes to the mens (and so are the crowds)! Women peak in athletic ability much, much later than men...that doesn't really make Jens Voigt a spring-chicken... In my whole post, it never said equal prize money, it said fair payout for a top-level race versus another top-level race...to create equal opportunity. I fully acknowledge locally the fields are smaller than men's and a little smaller than men's on average at a national level (see previous post).

Women have had to make their way into every sport, take Kathrine Switzer the first women to do the Boston Marathon for example, with push-back and lack of support (not even talking monetarily, I'm talking about the passion for the sport that makes you want to encourage others, disregarding gender entirely). It's all the men and women that do support women's cycling that do enable it to grow and see benefits from that happening (there are even some examples in other posts here!).

There are tons of sponsors for women's racing and many who find return. There is also a great percentage of the total women that are involved in race promotion & teams (women-only and co-ed). No, they will never go as fast as the fastest men's category, but that doesn't mean there isn't any value, or that there aren't a lot of top-level women that can beat men.

I hope people like you are blessed with only highly competitive athletic daughters and you have to experience first-hand the unique challenges they face.

I think the issue that

I think the issue that started with the first comment is that somehow an equal prize list equates to support. Why isn't opportunity for racing enough? Why isn't a scaled prize list enough? It really comes down to odds. If you have a 1 in 50 chance of making $100, then when the odds go to 1 in 25, you should scale back the reward to $50. There's inherently less risk and fewer factors keeping you from winning so the reward cannot be equal.

As the numbers go up so the payoffs, prices, salaries, etc. that is life.

build the sport and the dollars will come. you don't put the dollars out there and expect people to start racing. that again goes to the countless examples of men showing up, paying money, just to ride their bikes in a circle, and spend their disposable income on all things cycling related. where were the women last night? they raced free. I paid my $20 to ride in a circle for 60 minutes last night. i wanted to support a great race and opportunity to ride with other great local racers. where were you?

It's really a chicken and a

It's really a chicken and a egg argument. If you up the prize purse will more women race or if more women race will the prize purse go up? Louisville did up the prize purse for women from 2011, pulling from the 35+1-2's, but you'll argue that it's not equal to the men. No one is saying these women don't work as hard or their race is any less demanding than the men's. However, when a promoter pulls money from the entry fees to fund a prize purse he's well justified pulling more from the 80 guys who started ($500) than the 22 women who started ($200). If anything one could argue that based on total gross that the split favored the women in this race. I know of some races that only pay out 10% based on field size. In this case the men would have paid 8 deep and the women 2 deep, yet they paid 5 deep on both sides, 25% of the women came away with a paycheck which is pretty impressive. ROI is based on numbers and names, while both races had some very strong names the men's race have 4x the field size. Don't look at ROI as gender biased and cry title 9, but number biased. You're spot on that women's specific markets offer new sponsorship opportunities, but once again it's based on numbers. All womens triathlons host 1,000-2,000 women which is in a different league than a crit with 80 total women.

Race For Fun

Why have prize money for men or women at non-pro races???
Pretty silly to be giving any cash to a bunch of amateurs at an amateur race.

Pages