Originally Posted by
surak
The more you post your armchair hot takes on how to fix women's pro cycling, the more you demonstrate that not only do you not understand the economics of the sport, but that you hardly watch any of it and
don't know what you're watching.
I don't think I've posted any fixes for how to fix cycling. I know that I don't have all the understanding of the many things involved. You just seem to take my statements and obvious opinions of what my preferences are as such.
The health of the sport depends on actual interest leading to race organizers and sponsors getting ROI, not charity.
You literally said that pro teams should pick up more riders who can climb faster on longer stage races. Where's that money coming from, and where are they going to find those riders who are training as much as Annemiek Van Vleuten without being paid to do so?
There's not even enough money in men's pro cycling.
I literally did not say that. I suggested that they might get riders that have the ability. Do they have the budget to do that? Well yes if they get rid of someone else. And along with the fact that once others know that someone else can do something they can't, that they might train harder toward getting better in that area.
Also the health of the sport depends on fans and spectators at the events and viewers for the networks if they want the big dollar money. Sponsors won't sponsor with large amounts if no one is watching.
Despite what you think, I'm impressed with all but the first few stages. Instead of ostracizing me, you should be laying out your arguments why it's better to have shorter race with no time gaps.