TheKillerPenguin

I've always skipped Harlem because of its crashy reputation. That said, it is really weird seeing their prereg so low this year.

Harlan

We did it last year. I laid too much out during the TT and was sucking wind for the crit which equalled getting squeezed every.single.lap on the uphill. The RR isn't super challenging. Overall a well run event and a fun weekend. We are signed up again this year.

mike868y

thanks for the info harlan!

i'm not saying this is the reason harlem has low pre reg numbers but i am saying it might be a contributing factor...

Why I'm Not Racing Harlem Skyscraper This Sunday ? Pretty Damned Fast

TheKillerPenguin

I had no idea that was going on!

ShutUpLegs

If anyone is looking for some good races this weekend, you can come to Lancaster, PA and race both Grandview Grand Prix (Saturday) and Race Avenue Crit (Sunday). Both great races.

globecanvas

Harlem got 144 by pre-reg close. 42 in P12, 45 in 3/4, 20 in 5, 23 in 35+, 14 in W123. Still that can't cover more than 20% of their costs so either they have lots of sponsor money or they're losing money.

Matt2.8NJ

I can appreciate her moral outrage, but the economic realities of bike racing promotion dictate that giving massive prize money to tiny fields has little return to a cash strapped event.

globecanvas

@mike868y, Cielo:

TT is tough and doing well requires willingness to descend on the sticks. Also you need to balance burying yourself vs saving something for the crit the same afternoon.

I've done the crit course so many times I could tell you where every crack in the pavement is. It's a fast fun course, but not at all technical, arguably more of a short circuit race than a crit. There are only 2 corners, and the 2nd one goes immediately into a fairly steep 8-10 second hill, which is about 40 seconds from the finish.

The road race is generally flat and boring with only three turns per lap. There is a 1-minute? hill at the start of each lap where stuff happens sometimes. The finish is a 1-2 minute fast downhill into about a 10 second uphill sprint.

The main appeal of the event is that it's very low-key. The club that runs it is friendly and mellow.

topflightpro

On Facebook, Elspeth Huyett has written a response to the woman who is boycotting Harlem. There are several big names that have commented on her post. I don't know how to link directly to a FB post, or else I would.

globecanvas

https://www.facebook.com/elspeth.huye...09416033505911

topflightpro

Thank you.

mike868y

it's not that hard:
1) decide how much money you can afford/are willing to give away as prizes
2) divide equally between genders
3) done.

prize money has never been and shouldn't be about giving the most back to the largest field, otherwise at most races the cat 4/5 would have the largest payouts.

FFJ

Equality aside, it takes chutzpah to complain about a $2500 purse for a field of 14 AMATEUR bicycle racers. Total entry fees of $560.

Also, if the ask is for equality, why not also point out that this guy is charging men P/1/2s a $10 higher entry fee than women.

Matt2.8NJ

Thanks for expressing that better than I did above. This /\ /\ is what I was trying to get across, Mike. More to do with revenue per field leading to more prize money per field. Unless someone could well and truly make a business case that attracting elite racers leads to more entries into the rest of the fields you typically find at an event.

nycphotography

It kinda does. To a point.

Most of the "big races" are big races because of the field sizes and turnouts, and the "eliteness" of the event.

Especially in cross, where the northeast UCI races are a pretty big deal, but also think: Red Hook, GMSR, Killington, the old Battenkill... they all have big pro turnouts.

But who can say which is he chicken and which is the egg? Pros make elite, or elite draws pros? I'd guess, barring some well known organizer with a big promotion push or big name, they have to evolve together. And these days the big names are all investing in Fondo$.

mike868y

it's not the money, it's the principle.

last year when payout was the same, reg fee was also the same.

https://www.bikereg.com/31099

FFJ

But businesses survive on profits not principles. If races have to take a loss to host women's races, they are going to just stop offering those races.

mike868y

It's no that simple though and I would argue that at least in new england (or more specifically the boston crowd) the market forces overwhelmingly support equal payout. you're fooling yourself if you think the prize money debate hasn't hurt nutmegs numbers the past few years or if moving to equal payout hasn't helped quabbin the past few years. maybe not all racing scenes are like this, but I certainly think having equal payouts helps races turnouts in all fields. and i certainly don't think lowering the men's payouts to pay the women more HURTS turnouts.

grolby

Good.


LOLing at earlier comments that I must think equal payouts are easy because I don't care about bike racing and haven't thought it through. Yeah. That must be it. It's not like there are zillions of examples of races that do the right thing and haven't gone under instantly.

This is still nothing but excuses. Putting on a bike race without losing money is hard, but it has literally nothing to do with whether or not your prizes are equal. Offer a smaller prize purse if you have to - I promise you, if your event is well-run, people will still show up and give you their money.

Stop with the mealy-mouthed excuses about how you can't afford it. You can. You're not running the Tour de France, here. Stop with the crap about how you have a better idea to help women's racing than what the thunderous chorus of active women racers are telling you, which is to treat them with fairness, respect and equality.

Doing the right thing is actually really easy, but it means you have to put aside all your "yes, buts" and DO IT. Believe me, the time when unequal payouts were acceptable has passed. People *will* start leaving your events for the ones that treat everyone better. Not just the women, but the men as well. Better to get on board now.

mike868y

errr greg i think by "those races" he meant the women's races in particular not the event as a whole.

FFJ

Did you read Elspeth's post and the replies to it from women racers? I'm not sure how you can interpret that as a "thunderous chorus" advocating for equal payouts across the board. The issue is more nuanced than you want to give it credit.

Also, payouts for amateur racers are stupid and should go away.

hubcyclist

FYI, not sure how well publicized this is yet, but NEBC has worked to apparently reopen a velodrome up in NH, some details here https://www.bikereg.com/northeast-velodrome-membership

aaronmcd

Do you guys really believe it's "the right thing" to hand out thousands in charity simply based on gender? I mean, if someone wants to hand out cash, whatever. But to actually believe it's somehow deserved? Take out the desire to force things to be equal based on political-correctness, and how would one argue for $5000 to a 14 person field of ANY gender?

I bet hell will freeze over before one of you opens your wallet and hands someone 5 grand simply because she is a woman. This has absolutely nothing to do with gender inequality - I'd bet good money the same thing would happen to the men's purse if the fields were that low.

Of course I have this crazy philosophy where I don't think people "deserve" anyone else's resources.


*Edited to remove some steam from my post.

PepeM

I think you've gone off the deep end there.

aaronmcd

Maybe it could be considered a tad "P&R" I guess (though I think it's more of an underlying philosophy thing), but I'm not the one bashing someone for NOT giving handouts to minuscule fields.

Really I shouldn't have dared venture into this thread in the first place lol