hueyhoolihan

don't like women's contact sports. skill sports i watch.

oh... i make an exception for Roller Derby. i think it's something about the skates...

gregf83 

Nonsense. Think about why anyone watches or follows cycing (I'm just using that as an example). There's nothing exiting about watching someone climb a hill at any speed without some context. Without knowing the background of the cyclists and what's at stake for them the actual racing is boring.

No solutions, just comments. I enjoy watching women's tennis as much as men's. I think the problem for cycling is that it's a fringe sport for men and even more so for women. There are very few junior women racing bicycles. If there were more at the grassroots level I think you'd see more interest in watching the senior women.

Lazyass

To me and millions of others there is. If you don't find crushing attacks exciting I don't know why you watch the sport.

gregf83 

It's because you have some context of what's going on and who the players are. There are crushing attacks every weekend in your local Cat 1,2,3 races but no one cares. There's nothing inherently different about an attack by the pros. If you didn't know who was racing and they all wore green t-shirts it wouldn't be nearly as interesting.

rms13

Williams sisters and Sharpova are good. But Federer, Agassi, Sampras all have made more money than Serena and Nadal and Djokovic both have made more than Sharapova/Venus. As for entertainment as a very very casual tennis viewer (not fan) I would say it's one of the few sports where I can equally enjoy male or female games. But even in tennis I would say there generally is a higher degree of athleticism in the men's game. I also have close to zero interest in golf as a spectator sport but I have zero interest in Wie or women's game at all. As for Vonn, as others said, I would have no idea she existed if it weren't for her private/tabloid life and that may be more of a statement on skiing than her because I could not name another skier male or female

CNC2204

I watch womens sports for the articles ...

Williams sista's look more masculine than feminine.

D1andonlyDman

See I actually follow skiing, and Vonn is more famous than any male or female skier in the world. That's been far more the case since she got together with Tiger, but she was as famous as any male skier even before that.

As for Tennis, all of the players you mention have made massive amounts of wealth through the game and their endorsements. And Li Na made more than all of them through her Chinese endorsements. But all of those players have earned multiple tens of millions of dollars, more than $100 millions in the case of Li Na, Sharapova, and Serena, as well as the current top 3 male plyers, So there's no need to cry over any of them. If anything, I find woman's tennis more interesting than men's, because it's slower and one can appreciate the strategy, whereas the men's game is just too fast for normal folks to relate to.

Lazyass

There's always context in a mountain stage. I've watched womens cycling, I've watched them climbing. I actually like watching them but no, it's not as exciting.

dtrain

“I’ll admit it. I’m turned on by powerful women. Michelle Obama, Oprah, Condolezza Rice, Serena Williams…..wait a minute.” - Phil Dunphy

datlas 

Hi!

What's this thread about?

Lazyass

The War On Women.

gregf83 

I enjoy watching cycling but I think you'd have trouble describing it as 'exciting'. Interesting, yes but exciting? In the final few km of a sprint stage and the occasional mountain finish but mostly it's like watching golf.

BillyD

Millions?

PiLigand

Ahh, okay, I got it. I'll address your second point first, because I think it will make more sense. Acknowledging the differences is totally necessary. I don't believe people who don't. I'd lend no weight to the argument that all sports should be mixed-gender. That wouldn't make any sense. I just think that for some reason as a culture we have in our heads that women are not exciting to see compete, while the opposite is true. As to be explained:

At this time last year, I doubt the vast majority of people could have told you who Floyd Mayweather or Manny Pacquiano were, but now they're household names because of the marketing and the capital investment. Of course, that boxing match is a lot simpler than the entire sport of Women's cycling, but it's the same general idea. With the promotion and the market attention, I don't see why we wouldn't find it at least almost as interesting as Men's cycling. Economics 101 is "supply & demand." Economics 102 is "marketing makes demand."

As for the physiological differences: yeah, you're totally right. Very few (if any) professional women (I assume) could keep with a male peloton, BUT, it wouldn't really matter when racing against other women. It's more the time between riders that I find exciting. And frankly, both leagues would be way faster than me anyways.
So while women wouldn't be setting world records, I think the race would still be great. Unfortunately, we're just caught in this feedback loop where nothing gets the chance to catch on. Does that make sense?

seymour1910

I actually agree with this. As I sat and watched Sagan on stage 7 of the Tour of California I noticed I had never been so excited about watching a mountain stage. He knew there were seconds at stake so watching a bigger guy fight like that was good stuff.

StanSeven

You provided a very rational, logical, and emotion free response. That last is very difficult here ar BF

There is only so much marketing can do for any sport. Soccer in the US is a perfect example. Even after hosting the World Cup and the peak, interest is very small.

Interest in women sports just isn't there for man reasons. Men's basketball at the college level often packs in at 20,000. The same female teams draw 400!

One problem with cycling, male or female, is the majority of people don't care. That's why TV coverage in the US is so poor. Why would a woman's race attract anyone? You're right in that it's a question of supply snd demand. The demand for many women's sports just isn't there. Maybe more marketing might increase interest but marketing cost money and there needs to be a potential payoff. The payoff isn't there either.

kc0bbq

Unless you like 1950s style basketball, you aren't going to be a fan of women's basketball. It's like being that small minority of baseball fans that like to watch a low scoring, defense heavy game.

Women's pro cycling is slower with shorter distances, which makes it less exciting, and therefore less marketable.

There's some local coverage of the local stage race for both the men and women, mainly the final crit, because the 20% grade hill on the course is exciting because it leads to a 70% DNF rate. But not many really care much about the continental men's squads either except when they're mixed with the UCI teams like at Amgen ToC.

If you force coverage despite causing network showing it bleeding money out of pity you're not really helping the situation. Once you're out of the world of Title IX you have to be marketable. The real world can be a harsh place, unfortunately. I like old fashioned basketball and defensive baseball.