Female racers prize money not the same as the mens? AFAIK regular XC mtb races are (as in some other sports) shorter than the blokes version. I seem to remember in the wimbledon prize money issue people were moaning that women get paid the same but they play less games per match and less matches.
So what does everyone think of pro rata prize money? (not an option on the poll)
Anyone who answered "Not at all, they're just a sideshow" need not comment.
give ember both a quid a mile
its just Chipps trolling, he's bored cos he's on top of this months print etc etc..
I need not comment.
I think the prize money is related to the interest of the punter isn't it. I think more people turn out to watch the men's version of any sport, therefore its worth more to the sponsors. Getting all equitable about it kind of negates the whole point of competitive sport..
I think more people turn out to watch the men's version of any sportBeach volleyball?
Getting all equitable about it kind of negates the whole point of competitive sport.I thought the point was to find out who was best?
Yes beach volley ball excepted. Exactly that's the point who is best, well men on average are better than women at physical activity, so the prize money goes in their direction.
Edit: Maybe you don't understand what equitable means?
i fully believe that prize money should be rewarded equally but there has to be a joint level in what is being played. Wimbledon is a great case, sure pay wimen the same as men, but make them play the same potential amount of games as the men. There fit enough to do this. I dont see the ladies marathon being 20 miles compared to the mens 26 miles.
If we're talking about equality, should there be mens and womens events at all? 
That'd sort out the prize money issue 
Yeah but the men are quicker at the marathon aren't they. The question was about MTB races wasn't it? I still maintain they men are a bigger draw, hence they get the prize money. Simple economics. If you bring socialism into it, then the sponsors will likely walk away.
I think they should get the same, sport isn't about volume production/piece work is it? Or am I missing something. The problem is where the money comes from. At events like Wimbledon or in cycling races where the womens and mens events are linked such as a world cup/national level event. Generally this means that the sponsors will be paying a sum of money for the whole weekend/fortnight/whatever. Therefore it is easy to split the prizes equally. However with events such as a female Tour of Flanders it is possible this will be run at a totally different time to the men's version. This will likely mean that there will be different and possibly less sponsors and possibly less or no TV coverage. Ipso facto less cash so how can the racers be paid the same as the men?
As with many things it is the sort of subject that I/we would like to be black and white but in effect are grey.
Edit: Maybe you don't understand what equitable means?
I just wasn't "getting" how you were applying it, men = faster than women, fair point.
Andituk - MemberIf we're talking about equality, should there be mens and womens events at all?
That'd sort out the prize money issue
Exactly, if you did that it would be much more interesting..
I just wasn't "getting" how you were applying it, men = faster than women, fair point.
Ok fair enough..
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
