Tour de France: No Women Ever?

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Elisa Francesca, Jul 8, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Slider2699

    Slider2699 Guest

    "Kevan Smith" <[email protected]/\/\> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 23:18:54 GMT, "Slider2699" <[email protected]> from RoadRunner - Tampa
    > Bay wrote:
    >
    > >Only a tiny percentage of the toughest, most fit men can pass SEAL training, and I would imagine
    > >the same is true for the Tour. Any woman
    who
    > >could be competitive with the best men in the world would need to be
    tested
    > >for steroids ASAP.
    >
    > With the SEALS (and any special forces), the physical training is very
    tough.
    > But that's not what weeds people out. It's the mental part that does it. I
    think
    > women are just as strong mentally as men in terms of handling pain and
    abuse.
    >
    I agree that women can handle pain and abuse--after all, they give birth. But elite military
    training is very physically demanding, "Hell Week" being a perfect example. Yes, it is mentally
    challenging, but the physical stresses placed upon the candidates are unreal. No sleep, non-stop
    exercise, physical discomfort, and even more exercise? I was in the military, not a difficult
    branch(Air Force) and saw women dropping left and right when asked to perform at the same level as
    male troops. Maybe I served with a bunch of wimpy women, but my personal experience is that most
    women cannot keep up with men of their approximate fitness level.
     


  2. David Kerber

    David Kerber Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, jkpoulos7 @cs.com says...
    > >Is it true that the race has never included women? and if so, does anyone have any idea why?
    >
    > Women are not as strong. Even marathons, where no bashing and brute strength is required show men
    > finishing significantly faster than women. Women cyclists also cannot compete with world class
    > male cyclists. Even golf (hardly a sport) has men doing much better.

    Largely because of the driving distance, which is based on the speed to which you can accelerate the
    club head, which in turn depends on how strong you are.

    --
    Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

    REAL programmers write self-modifying code.
     
  3. Pete

    Pete Guest

    "Kevan Smith" <[email protected]/\/\> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 23:18:54 GMT, "Slider2699" <[email protected]> from RoadRunner - Tampa
    > Bay wrote:
    >
    > >Only a tiny percentage of the toughest, most fit men can pass SEAL training, and I would imagine
    > >the same is true for the Tour. Any woman
    who
    > >could be competitive with the best men in the world would need to be
    tested
    > >for steroids ASAP.
    >
    > With the SEALS (and any special forces), the physical training is very
    tough.
    > But that's not what weeds people out. It's the mental part that does it. I
    think
    > women are just as strong mentally as men in terms of handling pain and
    abuse.

    It's both. Physical and mental. The non physical guys never apply, and the physically tough, but
    mentally weak ones get washed out.

    I worked with a many women in my days in aircraft armament. Only a very few could do the physical
    part as well as the average guy could.

    Pete
     
  4. Mike Kruger

    Mike Kruger Guest

    "Slider2699" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >

    > But it's not just about endurance. It's about power and strength---areas
    in
    > which men have the genetic advantage. I don't think any women are going to outsprint McEwen.
    > Nor do I think many women are going to beat Lance or Virenque to the top of Alpe d'Huez. I
    > would be interested to see what the men's and women's times for the RAAM were. That's a true
    > endurance event,
    I
    > guess.
    >
    >
    According to http://www.raceacrossamerica.org/raam2003/2003racemain.htm there were 17 male and 1
    female solo entrants in 2003. Four of the males, and 1 of the females, did not finish.

    The all-time RAAM records from http://www.raceacrossamerica.org/raaminformation/raaminfomain.htm
    SOLO RAAM RECORDS: Men: Rob Kish (1992) 8d:03hrs:11mins [Avg. Speed: 14.91mph] Women: Seana Hogan
    (1995) 9d:04hrs:02mins [Avg. Speed:13.23 mph] Men's 50+: Tom Davies, Jr. (1995) 10d:06hrs:14mins
    [Avg.Speed: 11.83 mph] Women's 50+: Bonnie Allison (1992) 14d:07hrs:27mins [Avg.Speed: 8.48 mph]
    Team Records: Men: Kern Wheelmen (1996) 5d: 06hrs: 04mins Women: Team Florida RAAM (1996) 6d:
    12hrs: 28mins

    The men's records are clearly lower, although this at least in part reflects the much higher number
    of men participating.
     
  5. David Kerber wrote:
    > Largely because of the driving distance, which is based on the speed to which you can accelerate
    > the club head, which in turn depends on how strong you are.

    Some of the women are hitting it far enough (not many though and those few are only keeping up with
    the shortest hitting men on the PGA). They still have to be accurate and putt well to do well and
    Annika Sorenstam couldn't quite do either recently when she went against the men. Lack of power is
    not what caused her to miss the cut. On a lot of other courses, power might have come into play.
    Colonial (where she played the men) is a tough course for the big hitters to hit big. There's just
    not a lot of room for the driver. There's too many trees and dog legs that don't leave you room to
    get closer with the driver. If she'd been at Torrey Pines or some other long wide open and mostly
    straight course, her lack of power might have been more of a disadvantage and she still wouldn't be
    able to putt well.

    Some people are mentioning the ultra marathoners and I think part of that is that the speed goes
    down. Those ultra marathoners are not doing the 5 minute miles that the top regular marathoners are
    doing. The women can match the men because the speed is more in their realm of ability and it's all
    about just enduring it.

    --Bill Davidson
     
  6. David Kerber

    David Kerber Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    > David Kerber wrote:
    > > Largely because of the driving distance, which is based on the speed to which you can accelerate
    > > the club head, which in turn depends on how strong you are.
    >
    > Some of the women are hitting it far enough (not many though and those few are only keeping up
    > with the shortest hitting men on the PGA). They still have to be accurate and putt well to do well
    > and Annika Sorenstam couldn't quite do either recently when she went against the men. Lack of
    > power is

    IIRC (and I'm NOT a big golf fan) on the first day, she did very well with her short game; better
    than many of the men, but on the 2nd day she seemed to fall apart. Not being able to consistently
    drive as long as most of the men puts more pressure on her short game, and any problem there is
    going to hurt her more than it might a longer hitter.

    ...

    > Some people are mentioning the ultra marathoners and I think part of that is that the speed goes
    > down. Those ultra marathoners are not doing the 5 minute miles that the top regular marathoners
    > are doing. The women can match the men because the speed is more in their realm of ability and
    > it's all about just enduring it.

    Yes. A few years ago, I was looking into this, and in the case of the very long races (24 hrs,
    badwater 142, etc), the women's times were approaching the men's times much more closely than they
    were at shorter distances.

    --
    Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

    REAL programmers write self-modifying code.
     
  7. Robin Hubert

    Robin Hubert Guest

    "Slider2699" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "F. Golightly" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > >
    > > "Jkpoulos7" <[email protected]>
    > > > Even golf (hardly a sport) has men doing much better.
    > >
    > > Ever competed at golf? Ever entered any state or regional
    championships?
    > > Ever try to qualify for the PGA tour? Ever taken someone on... "one on
    > one"
    > > ...in a 36 hole final?
    > >
    > > Huh?
    > >
    > Golf is a game, not a sport. I'm not saying it's not difficult, but so is bowling. Not a sport.
    > What's the old definition----if you can drink beer while doing it, it's not a sport. :)

    I guess my average 60-100 mile ride is not a sport then! I must have at least one beer on
    such a ride.

    --
    Robin Hubert <[email protected]
     
  8. David Kerber wrote:
    > IIRC (and I'm NOT a big golf fan) on the first day, she did very well with her short game; better
    > than many of the men, but on the 2nd day she seemed to fall apart. Not being able to consistently
    > drive as long as most of the men puts more pressure on her short game, and any problem there is
    > going to hurt her more than it might a longer hitter.

    Yes, the pressure was on her short game. The men were beating her at the short game and only the
    short game. Keep in mind that this was a very tight course and being able to hit the ball far is not
    much of an advantage there.

    She was +1 for the first day. Her short game was not really good on that day but other than putting
    it was rarely tested. On the first day her ball striking was very good though. She was ranked with
    the top men for fairways hit and greens hit in regulation. She still couldn't putt. I think her
    average final putt distance was around 3 feet. The top men were more like 7-8 feet and they were
    making birdies, which she was not. Making green in regulation means you get at least one putt for
    birdie. She only missed the green four times all day. She made one birdie putt (on a par 3). That
    means she missed 13 birdie putts. That doesn't work in the PGA.

    The second day, she started missing the fairways and the greens. She needed to shoot par that day to
    make the cut (one stroke better than the first day). Instead she was four strokes over par (+5
    total) and she finished near the bottom of the field, tied for 96 out of 111 who finished two
    rounds. She did do O.K. on the chipping and made all of her sand saves the second day but that's
    just saving par and it doesn't help you make birdies and she still couldn't putt when she did hit
    the green.

    http://www.pgatour.com/players/02/70/58/sc/2003,r021.html

    If she could putt as well as Tiger or Nick Price or Justin Leonard or any of the other top putters,
    she could be a contender on the tighter courses because of her usually excellent ball striking.
     
  9. Golightly F.

    Golightly F. Guest

    "Fabrizio Mazzoleni" <[email protected]>
    > Any fatty can play golf.

    An ignorant statement from an ignorant... loser ...Ms. Mozzarella.

    Your bigotry has shown... now your stupidity.

    fwiw
     
  10. Mark Weaver

    Mark Weaver Guest

    "Bill Davidson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    > Some people are mentioning the ultra marathoners and I think part of that is that the speed goes
    > down. Those ultra marathoners are not doing the 5 minute miles that the top regular marathoners
    > are doing.
    >

    The difference between the male and female world records has gotten to be quite small. The male
    record is 2:05:38 and the female record now stands at
    2:15:25. Paula Radcliff's average pace during her recent record run was
    2:16:

    http://www.insidetri.com/news/fea/1479.0.html

    Mark
     
  11. "Bill Davidson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >Some people are mentioning the ultra marathoners and I think part of that is that the speed goes
    >down. Those ultra marathoners are not doing the 5 minute miles that the top regular marathoners
    >are doing.

    Mark Weaver wrote:
    >The difference between the male and female world records has gotten to be quite small. The male
    >record is 2:05:38 and the female record now stands at
    >2:15:25. Paula Radcliff's average pace during her recent record run was
    >5:10:

    As with any sport where it's about speed, one finds that the faster one goes, the harder it is to
    get that next little increment of speed. These are the fastest marathoners in the world. They are at
    the maximum already. At this level 10 minutes is actually quite a lot; 22-23 seconds per mile at a
    roughly 5 minute pace. That's 11.6 mph (5:10/mile) vs 12.5 mph (4:48/mile). How many times has the
    men's record been broken since it was around 2:15 and how long ago was that?

    Also, how does this compare with the pace of ultra-marathoners?

    --Bill Davidson
     
  12. Seecyd

    Seecyd New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2003
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    Women compete in marathons, triathlons, duathlons, and ironman distances... I suppose the Tour has just always been reserved as a man's sporting event. If more women were to show interest, a women's version of the Tour would be resurrected, I'm sure. If a woman were able to take part in the 'tour, and not be left in the dust, would they disallow her to take part in it?

     
  13. France, like most of Europe, is.

    Downright un-American of them, dammit.
     
  14. > Hmmm. I wonder. Women are already competitive head-to-head in ultramarathon running events. For
    > example, if you'll check the results of last year's Leadville 100 (100 mile trail run in the
    > Colorado Rockies), you'll find a woman finished 5th overall. How different are the physical
    > demands of an event like that than the TDF? It strikes me that they are pretty similar. How
    > different are top bikers bodies from top distance runners?

    Not so sure if it's differences in the bodies of cyclists vs distance runners that's the issue here,
    but rather how those bodies are used. In cycling, you need a combination of both extreme power for
    short periods of time (sprinting) as well as an ability to quickly recover from those bursts. In
    endurance running, you don't have the issue of pack riding and dealing with what happens if you get
    dropped (increased effort because you can no longer draft). So I'd say you cannot draw a direct
    analogy between normal bike racing and endurance running. You could perhaps make a better case for
    something like the Race Across America though.

    Another issue is simply body fat. Women's bodies simply try to keep body fat (as a percentage) at a
    higher level than men, and this absolutely has a negative impact on climbing. For a woman to force
    body fat down to the level of a top-class male racer causes significant changes in the way her body
    normally works.

    > Paradoxically, it seems to me that if, physically women cannot yet compete nearly equally in the
    > TDF, things could be evened up by making it an even *more* gruelling endurance event. The more an
    > event emphasizes maximum endurance and efficiency over peak power, the more likely that top women
    can
    > compete with top men.

    You're not talking about a more gruelling event, but rather a different type of "gruel." As I
    mentioned previously, we already have such events as Race Across America, in which peak power is
    irrelevant, and endurance & efficiency (and an ability to deprive yourself of sleep) are key. But
    that might be carrying things too far; could be that the sleep deprivation bit might cater more to
    males than females (I have no idea if that is true or not). There are, however, events like the
    Furnace Creek 508 (508 miles) that would seem an ideal venue for women to show their ability to
    compete with men (based on the idea that women do better at events that are longer and don't stress
    peak power).

    There's yet another issue to deal with- perhaps women are less willing to subject themselves to
    performance-enhancing drugs & therapies as men are?

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com

    "Mark Weaver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Hunrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    > > >Elisa Francesca Roselli
    > >
    > > wrote in part:
    > >
    > > >Is it true that the race has never included women? and if so, does anyone have any idea why?
    > >
    > > Yes it's true and the reason is simply that like in many sports men have
    a
    > > genetic advantage. It's not chauvinism. It's simply a fact. That's why
    > there
    > > are tests for steroids. They aren't looking for abnormally high levels
    of
    > > estrogen. ;-) That's not to say that a fit female cyclist can't outride a less than
    fit
    > male.
    > > She can but at similiar levels of fitness the male will win almost every
    > time.
    > >
    >
    > Hmmm. I wonder. Women are already competitive head-to-head in ultramarathon running events. For
    > example, if you'll check the results of last year's Leadville 100 (100 mile trail run in the
    > Colorado Rockies), you'll find a woman finished 5th overall. How different are the physical
    > demands of an event like that than the TDF? It strikes me that they are pretty similar. How
    > different are top bikers bodies from top distance runners?
    >
    > Paradoxically, it seems to me that if, physically women cannot yet compete nearly equally in the
    > TDF, things could be evened up by making it an even *more* gruelling endurance event. The more an
    > event emphasizes maximum endurance and efficiency over peak power, the more likely that top women
    can
    > compete with top men.
    >
    > Mark Weaver
    >
     
  15. In article <[email protected]>,
    Seecyd <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Ryan Cousineau wrote:

    > > Among male cyclists, the Tour only takes 200, and it's a fair bet that even the worst
    > > domestique on FDJeux is one of the 1000 best riders in the world, and probably more like top
    > > 300. All of the great GC riders in the world are at the tour (Cipo is good, but he's no GC
    > > rider, and I don't see giving a tour spot to a guy who has repeatedly ridden the tour only
    > > until it pointed uphill), and even so most of them don't have a hope of winning this event,
    > > and of the rest, 2 (Lance and your pick of the others) have a straight chance of victory, and
    > > probably 3 others will have a shot if the favourites falter.

    > Women compete in marathons, triathlons, duathlons, and ironman distances... I suppose the Tour has
    > just always been reserved as a man's sporting event. If more women were to show interest, a
    > women's version of the Tour would be resurrected, I'm sure. If a woman were able to take part in
    > the 'tour, and not be left in the dust, would they disallow her to take part in it?

    Women compete in all these events, and they routinely are slower than men. There is a Tour for
    women, the Tour de Feminin. If a woman was fast enough to take part in the tour, they would probably
    allow it (I'm

    will be no competitive women in the Tour in my lifetime. And I'm still pretty young.

    --
    Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
     
  16. On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:59:19 -0700, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

    > I'm also

    >will be no competitive women in the Tour in my lifetime.

    I prayed about this, and learned that it won't happen in God's lifetime, either.
     
  17. Robin Hubert

    Robin Hubert Guest

    "Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > > Hmmm. I wonder. Women are already competitive head-to-head in ultramarathon running events. For
    > > example, if you'll check the results
    of
    > > last year's Leadville 100 (100 mile trail run in the Colorado Rockies), you'll find a woman
    > > finished 5th overall. How different are the
    physical
    > > demands of an event like that than the TDF? It strikes me that they
    are
    > > pretty similar. How different are top bikers bodies from top distance runners?
    >
    > Not so sure if it's differences in the bodies of cyclists vs distance runners that's the issue
    > here, but rather how those bodies are used. In cycling, you need a combination of both extreme
    > power for short periods of time (sprinting) as well as an ability to quickly recover from those
    bursts.
    > In endurance running, you don't have the issue of pack riding and dealing with what happens if
    > you get dropped (increased effort because you can no longer draft). So I'd say you cannot draw
    > a direct analogy between normal bike racing and endurance running. You could perhaps make a
    > better case
    for
    > something like the Race Across America though.
    >
    > Another issue is simply body fat. Women's bodies simply try to keep body fat (as a percentage) at
    > a higher level than men, and this absolutely has
    a
    > negative impact on climbing. For a woman to force body fat down to the level of a top-class male
    > racer causes significant changes in the way her body normally works.
    >
    > > Paradoxically, it seems to me that if, physically women cannot yet
    compete
    > > nearly equally in the TDF, things could be evened up by making it an
    even
    > > *more* gruelling endurance event. The more an event emphasizes maximum endurance and efficiency
    > > over peak power, the more likely that top women
    > can
    > > compete with top men.
    >
    > You're not talking about a more gruelling event, but rather a different
    type
    > of "gruel." As I mentioned previously, we already have such events as
    Race
    > Across America, in which peak power is irrelevant, and endurance & efficiency (and an ability to
    > deprive yourself of sleep) are key. But
    that
    > might be carrying things too far; could be that the sleep deprivation bit might cater more to
    > males than females (I have no idea if that is true or not). There are, however, events like the
    > Furnace Creek 508 (508 miles) that would seem an ideal venue for women to show their ability to
    > compete with men (based on the idea that women do better at events that are longer and don't
    > stress peak power).
    >
    > There's yet another issue to deal with- perhaps women are less willing to subject themselves to
    > performance-enhancing drugs & therapies as men are?
    >

    You haven't watched the World's Strongest Woman contest have you?

    --
    Robin Hubert <[email protected]
     
  18. Mark Weaver

    Mark Weaver Guest

    "Zippy the Pinhead" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > France, like most of Europe, is.
    >

    Yeah -- what's up with kissy kissy from the podium bimbos handing out the jerseys? What do they
    think this is...NASCAR?

    Mark
     
  19. Tom Keats

    Tom Keats Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Zippy the Pinhead <[email protected]> writes:
    > On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:59:19 -0700, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> I'm also

    >>will be no competitive women in the Tour in my lifetime.
    >
    > I prayed about this, and learned that it won't happen in God's lifetime, either.

    It might be closer than you think. Michelle Dumaresq:
    http://www.peak.sfu.ca/the-peak/2003-1/issue4/fe-xrossing.html

    cheers, Tom

    --
    -- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn
    [point] bc [point] ca
     
  20. In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Tom Keats) wrote:

    > In article <[email protected]>, Zippy the Pinhead
    > <[email protected]> writes:
    > > On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:59:19 -0700, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >> I'm also

    > >>will be no competitive women in the Tour in my lifetime.
    > >
    > > I prayed about this, and learned that it won't happen in God's lifetime, either.
    >
    > It might be closer than you think. Michelle Dumaresq:
    > http://www.peak.sfu.ca/the-peak/2003-1/issue4/fe-xrossing.html

    Aw crap. The problem with tranny pros is that it just isn't fair. Michelle or Michael, s/he has a
    man's physique trapped in a transvestite body. It's pretty unfair competition for all those women
    who started life as women.

    I think that at the International level Michelle is not welcome in the women's races. You want to
    race, fine, go race in the men's race, just don't go playing stupid games like being a pro-quality
    "female" racer. It belies the whole purpose of a women's race.

    are allowed universally, and start to routinely dominate women's racing. What then, three classes
    of racing?

    --
    Ryan Cousineau, [email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...