SWoo wrote:A small note - I thought at the awards banquet last year Bob claimed that was the first year that Kern did not *lose* money for him.

I think turnout may have been dampened at Alameda by the extremely dangerous weather forecast for the venue - 25-35 mph winds with gusts of 55 mph and thunderstorms. Fortunately the thunderstorm part was wrong and I am glad I went.

Robert thought that Kern broke even last year but but as expenses have gone up over the years his break even point has also increased. After recalculating expenses vs revenues he found out Kern still hasn't made any money or even broke even yet.

A small note - I thought at the awards banquet last year Bob claimed that was the first year that Kern did not *lose* money for him.

I think turnout may have been dampened at Alameda by the extremely dangerous weather forecast for the venue - 25-35 mph winds with gusts of 55 mph and thunderstorms. Fortunately the thunderstorm part was wrong and I am glad I went.

sabine wrote:casey wrote:
This past Sunday at the Alameda Criterium Cat 3 women had a chance to have their own separate race. The Cat 3s were not combined with the 4s or the 1/2s. They were offered a $300 prize list which was equal to or greater than any other category at this race except the Cat 3 men. THe problem is since no Cat 3 women bothered to show up the race for Cat 3 women was cancelled. Do you think this race promoter will bother to offer a separate racing opportunity for Cat 3 women next year? I don't know the answer for sure but since this race drew a full field of Cat 5s and Masters 35+ 4/5s maybe the promoter will offer a second category for one of these two groups since they were the ones who came out and supported his event.
.

Bad timing. With over 80 cat 3/4 women participating at McClane Pacific, there were just not enough racers left to consider Alameda. I do support women 3 categories only whenever I can by entering and encouraging others to enter. But I do not think that the lack of field in Alameda can be identified as a typical response since it conflicted with one of the most popular races in the area for Cat 3 women.

Sabine I realize that the turnout at Alameda was affected by the McLane race. But it also goes to prove my point. There are enough Cat 3 men to support a full field at Mclane and still have a reasonable turnout at Alameda. There aren't enough Cat 3 women to support a large field of 3/4 women at Mclane and also a reasonable turnout at Alameda.

Maybe a better example is the Kern County Women's Stage race. This race has never turned a profit due to low rider turnouts. Most years the conflicting local race have avoided having women's fields to help support the Kern race. Yes Kern is a long way from the Bay Area and yes races farther away tend to draw smaller fields. If Kern was promoted by anyone else other than Velo Promo this race would have died many years ago.

Quote:This already exists
http://www.bawcycling.com/series.html

Damn y'all are quick! Looks like a great series. Talk it up!

JoeRacer wrote:An idea might be for Women's Teams get together to make a "Women's Premier Cup" or something. Have one or two races a month with 4 separate women's categories at them. This could show case the Women's Only (Majority) Clubs that promote races and get some full women’s fields in at least a few races a month. The Cup might have to start off on less expensive courses until a critical mass is reached.
Just an idea...
Good Luck…
If racing was easy...

This already exists
http://www.bawcycling.com/series.html

and the chosen races are:
May 20: Kern County Road Race #1, Bakersfield, CA
June 3: ICCC Dash for Cash, Pleasanton, CA
June 24: Pescadero Road Race, Pescadero, CA
July 22: Livermore Hills Road Race, Livermore, CA
August 6: Timpani Criterium, Santa Clara, CA
September 9: San Rafael Cycling Classic, San Rafael, CA

casey wrote:
This past Sunday at the Alameda Criterium Cat 3 women had a chance to have their own separate race. The Cat 3s were not combined with the 4s or the 1/2s. They were offered a $300 prize list which was equal to or greater than any other category at this race except the Cat 3 men. THe problem is since no Cat 3 women bothered to show up the race for Cat 3 women was cancelled. Do you think this race promoter will bother to offer a separate racing opportunity for Cat 3 women next year? I don't know the answer for sure but since this race drew a full field of Cat 5s and Masters 35+ 4/5s maybe the promoter will offer a second category for one of these two groups since they were the ones who came out and supported his event.
.

Bad timing. With over 80 cat 3/4 women participating at McClane Pacific, there were just not enough racers left to consider Alameda. I do support women 3 categories only whenever I can by entering and encouraging others to enter. But I do not think that the lack of field in Alameda can be identified as a typical response since it conflicted with one of the most popular races in the area for Cat 3 women.

Elis wrote:For the record, I contacted the head official and he told me that SportsBase online (my apologies for the original typo) was responsible for the finish equipment and recording results, and that they did have problems across the board.

I do want to note, though, that I am trying to bring up a particular example of an issue that is bigger than this one race but that people often ignore. While I understand everyone's frustration with mixed-up results, all of the men's fields in the crit (except perhaps the coed juniors) had a functional camera set up, while half of the two women's fields did not. In the same token, all but one of the men's fields in the road race had some results posted today while half of the women's fields did not. This disparity (to say nothing of the fact that there are many, many more race options available to men than to women at every race!) sends a clear message that women's racing is not valued equally.

Please, before anyone flames me, think of the last race you went to. Count the number of races there were for men's categories and the number of races for women's categories. Think of which categories normally gets the early-morning spots on the race and the low (if any) purse value. Think of whose races are shortened and/or combined if the race runs behind schedule. Try to imagine yourself in that position race after race after race and then let me know whether you would feel as though you were as valued by the community as other categories.

Elis, I feel for you as I have long been disappointed and dissatisfied by the offerings that women get in roadie racing. That being said, I have to agree with Casey on this one. Numbers and money dictate the promotion of an event and not sexism. In fact, most male roadies I kown VERY much appreciate the relatively large women's presence in NorCal compared to other districts. Personally, I don't know anyone who doesn't want women's racing to grow and flourish, and i've been an advocate and proponent of said growth for a long, long time.

To that end, I'd like to throw this out there..... Squadra Ovest and the California Road Club will be attending the practice sprints at the Golden Gate Park beginning Thursday, April 6th. Although there are some male citizen riders that already participate, this will be a weekly event specifically for the women. We invite all women from every team to come out every Thursday at 6pm to participate. The meeting location is on JFK drive near the polo fields (just north of the buffalo). The group will do 5 laps plus one warmup, and each lap features two sprint points. This is not a "practice crit" where the goal is to cross a finishline first, and reintegration is encouraged after a sprint. Finally, this is a completely unofficial, alleycat style event. There are no permits, there is no insurance, etc. If you want to come, please picture yourself happening upon a group of fast women roadies who want to joust. In other words, neither team is "hosting" this gathering.

Finally, our club is co-sponsoring the Monterey Circuit race this weekend. There will be a Cat 3/4 women's race, but the placing are taken separately. Otherwise, the fields would be too small, and time is almost ALWAYS an issue when a promoter is considering fields.

An idea might be for Women's Teams get together to make a "Women's Premier Cup" or something. Have one or two races a month with 4 separate women's categories at them. This could show case the Women's Only (Majority) Clubs that promote races and get some full women’s fields in at least a few races a month. The Cup might have to start off on less expensive courses until a critical mass is reached.
Just an idea...
Good Luck…
If racing was easy...

I think the lack of racing categories for women has more to do with the simple numbers and any kind of disrespect. AS of last Friday women make up 15.3% of the racing population here in Nor Cal. For USCF as a whole women only represent 11.6% of the racing population. Juniors only make up 5% of the Nor Cal racing population and they have even fewer racing opportunities than women.

This past Sunday at the Alameda Criterium Cat 3 women had a chance to have their own separate race. The Cat 3s were not combined with the 4s or the 1/2s. They were offered a $300 prize list which was equal to or greater than any other category at this race except the Cat 3 men. THe problem is since no Cat 3 women bothered to show up the race for Cat 3 women was cancelled. Do you think this race promoter will bother to offer a separate racing opportunity for Cat 3 women next year? I don't know the answer for sure but since this race drew a full field of Cat 5s and Masters 35+ 4/5s maybe the promoter will offer a second category for one of these two groups since they were the ones who came out and supported his event.

When race schedules fall behind for what ever reason I have seen officials reduce race lengths for all categories equally. I can't remember a case of two women's categories being combined, when they were advertised as being separate events, for time considerations. The only combinations of women's fields I can remember were due to small fields, just like is also done occasionally for men's groups. AS the number of women racers have been growing so have the racing opportunities with more races adding separate races for either the women 4s and or the women 3s.

For the record, I contacted the head official and he told me that SportsBase online (my apologies for the original typo) was responsible for the finish equipment and recording results, and that they did have problems across the board.

I do want to note, though, that I am trying to bring up a particular example of an issue that is bigger than this one race but that people often ignore. While I understand everyone's frustration with mixed-up results, all of the men's fields in the crit (except perhaps the coed juniors) had a functional camera set up, while half of the two women's fields did not. In the same token, all but one of the men's fields in the road race had some results posted today while half of the women's fields did not. This disparity (to say nothing of the fact that there are many, many more race options available to men than to women at every race!) sends a clear message that women's racing is not valued equally.

Please, before anyone flames me, think of the last race you went to. Count the number of races there were for men's categories and the number of races for women's categories. Think of which categories normally gets the early-morning spots on the race and the low (if any) purse value. Think of whose races are shortened and/or combined if the race runs behind schedule. Try to imagine yourself in that position race after race after race and then let me know whether you would feel as though you were as valued by the community as other categories.

It's "Sports BASE Online" not Basement. Totally different company.
Did they do results or just online registration??? Good to find out first.
SEE FAQ
https://www.sportsbaseonline.com/Content.aspx?id=9

Talk to the PROMOTER.

I can understand your frustation, but remeber, no where on the flyer does it say that is will place all riders. Very bad that they didn't get riders in "the money" at the crit.
See another thread that said the 45+ where screwed up also.

Sportsbase didn't discrminate against women. The posted results from some other fields were wrong, and the lower placings not shown for other groups too.