The women’s Tour de France is over. Was it a success? The project is on the brink

But who won was not so important this time. What was the race like? Is it a project that has a chance to survive and continue to develop? Can it one day be like the women’s Wimbledon, watched by millions of fans around the world, its female players waging nerve-wracking battles and taking the same rewards as the men?

These are some of the many questions cycling fans at all levels ask themselves. And it’s not black and white at all. Not everyone is enthusiastic about the women’s Tour de France. And far from all critics have only stupid arguments like: “The Women’s Tour is simply not the Tour and therefore has no business here.”

Indeed, the week-long race proved to be incomparable to the men’s Tour. Certainly not less combative. It had everything, rough falls, sprints to the finish line, escapes, great emotions, long climbs… Nevertheless, it was somehow less exciting, less dramatic. Or rather in a different tense and dramatic way than we are used to with men.

But that’s the way it is, the women’s Tour can’t be the same as the men’s. Moreover, when it is only at the very beginning.

Even great skeptics had to be surprised by the audience scene, for example. In practically all stages there was cheering along the track almost as in the “big” Tour. It remains to be seen whether it was similar with television ratings. These will be important numbers for the future of the project.

Race director Christian Prudhomme, who has extensive experience in organizing the men’s Tour, emphasized a certain skepticism from the beginning as to whether the women’s version would be profitable or profitable. He was immediately criticized for it. “There is no need to look for obstacles, but solutions,” his opponents claimed.

“Women have the right to their Tour,” Eurosport commentator, cycling expert Štěpán Straka told Seznam Zprávám. “It’s good that it’s going, but people need to realize that this is the beginning of something. Even men’s cycling was not so attractive and perfect from the beginning. The women’s peloton has top competitors, but the mass is not of such quality. Yet. And that’s why you need to push it a little.”

The magpie emphasizes that the women’s race cannot be the same as the men’s race. It cannot be compared with men’s cycling. There can’t be such a team concept yet, we won’t see as many women sprinting as men. But there can also be positive elements in this. Races often do not have a clear favorite. Women are also not as specialized as men. Even small things can make a difference, and the race can be interesting until the end.

According to Straka, it is a question whether the attractiveness of both sports will one day become equal, as it is with tennis. It is necessary to give it time. “It’s good that something like this has started, but now women are on the edge of being accepted by the public. It has to be taken with a grain of salt.”

Previous attempts to organize some sort of women’s Tour were not exactly successful. There were various reasons for this. It was stuck with too hot a needle, not very well prepared, not the right time. Now the new look of the women’s Tour could have a better chance.

“What is positive for women is that they have better conditions, they have more sponsors, they also have more professional teams. And of course, the whole thing is riding on the wave of gender balance,” argues Eurosport’s expert.

The editor-in-chief of Kondice magazine, Michaela Bučková, an enthusiastic cyclist herself, is happy about the new project. “I would like women’s cycling to receive the same support as men’s cycling in the future. I know from the Czech women competitors what kind of budgets they work with compared to the top men,” she told Seznam Zprávám.

Are the current form (weekly stage) and the timing of the race (right after the Grand Tour) correct?

Štěpán Straka agrees. “I think the week is ideal. And it should live on from the TdF legacy, it’s the only way to increase the popularity of women’s cycling. The Belgian Flanders Classics also have a similar model. Women there are also benefiting from the popularity of men’s races. It is also a greater motivation for female competitors and also for sponsors and spectators. It is right and a good way to further popularize cycling,” he says.

According to him, the route is also well chosen, although it was certainly not easy to put together. “It was varied, something for everyone. Flat stages, sections on gravel, hard climbs and finish at the top. And it wasn’t extreme, which was important because there are much bigger performance differences in the peloton than in the men,” says the Eurosport expert.

First impressions of the Women’s Tour do not look bad so far. The audience was beautiful, the media coverage significant. Each stage was transmitted live, which, according to Straka, is key to the survival of the project. Not only specialist cycling websites wrote about the event, but also large media such as the BBC. The race had a quality presentation, it was highly professional.

But now the counting begins and the hard economic numbers will come. The women’s peloton already rode its first Tour de France many years ago. It started with glory in 1984, when the American Marianne Martin won. But after six years, the big show ended.

“In my opinion, you have to put aside the idea of ​​equality between men and women,” Christian Prudhomme, the director of both the men’s and women’s Tour already mentioned, expressed the controversial idea in an interview with The Guardian some time ago. Why? “Because there was a reason why the first women’s Tour de France only lasted six years. It was a lack of economic balance. We want to create a race that stays the course, that stands the test of time. But that means he can’t lose money or face another cancellation,” Prudhomme said.

The French head of the ASO organization, which organizes many cycling races, takes a hard materialistic view of the whole problem. During the men’s Tour, for example, representatives of the municipalities come to him and like to buy space for a lot of money in order to get into the program. In the women’s Tour, on the other hand, ASO representatives had to go around the villages themselves.

Prudhomme went even further in his arguments. “Today, all the women’s races we organize are losing money. Nevertheless, we organized the Walloon Arrow, Liège–Bastogne–Liège, La Course by Le Tour, Tour of Yorkshire and Tour de Qatar Feminin, Paris–Roubaix. If the Tour makes money now, that will be great, but it must not lose it or it will end up like the Tour in the 1980s and die.”

Of course, this doesn’t sit well with activists pushing for the existence of a women’s Tour. Former professional cyclist Kathryn Bertine, campaigning for a comparison between men’s and women’s cycling, called Prudhomme’s arguments sexist, crazy, ignorant and also false.

“Women’s racing makes money. TV and streaming viewership statistics prove that the demand is there. I know this because we had access to the stats through Universal Sports in 2014 when I raced at La Course. It was a huge success. The money was there and it is there… ASO needs to start promoting women’s events in the media as much as they promote men. It’s not rocket science,” argued Bertine.

Flanders Classics CEO Tomas Van Den Spiegel also joined the discussion on profitability, but emphasized the importance of a long-term investment strategy as a condition for women’s events. “I believe in women’s cycling, so instead of calling it a waste of money, I call it more of an investment. We are almost at the tipping point where broadcasters and sponsors want to get involved in women’s cycling,” he said. Flanders Classics has also built a four-year plan called Closing the Gap, which includes offering live broadcasts and achieving parity in prize payouts.

However, Štěpán Straka understands the ASO’s arguments. “It’s a financial burden and a step into the unknown. I believe what Prudhomme says. I think the current form of the Women’s Tour is the maximum of what the organization is capable of tightening.”

There are other problems as well. The rapid expansion of the women’s top racing calendar may soon slow down. “We are almost at the maximum number of competition days we can still add to the Women’s World Tour calendar,” said the president of the International Cycling Union (UCI), David Lappartient, according to Cyclingnews.com. “Many new, good competitions have been added in recent years, such as this year’s Tour de France Femmes. More and more organizers are being encouraged by local authorities to organize a women’s competition as well. That’s nice, but the question is whether there are enough female riders for all the new races.”

There is an imbalance between the number of riders or teams and the current calendar of competitions. The women’s peloton at the top level is not yet big enough. For men, there are about nine hundred riders at the two highest levels, while for women it is less than four hundred. So it is not possible to offer women the same program as men.

There is also a large gap between mandated winnings and salaries, although a number of race organizers have decided to equalize the money and salaries are increasing. Next year, the minimum in the women’s World Tour competition should be equal to the men’s UCI ProTeams.

Compiling the rewards was also difficult for the women’s Tour that just ended. 250,000 euros went to the best-honored women’s race in history, and the winning Dutch woman alone took home 50,000 euros (1.25 million crowns). But the winner of the Men’s Tour, Jonas Vingegaard, won 500,000 euros for first place in the overall standings (without bonuses for winning stages and days in the dotted jersey of the best climber or in the race leader’s jersey).

The budget of the women’s Tour is a tenth of that of the men’s, which amounts to almost two and a half million euros. So the organizers caught it again. Critics argue the disparity – the one-week race should have a third of the budget compared to the men’s three-week race. On the other hand, it is probably clear that the disparity will be higher for a project that is just starting and has not yet been properly tested.

It’s still just the beginning or a new beginning. Just the past week will show what potential the project has. And with at least three years to go, there’s a grace period and the Women’s Tour may not show gains right away.

In the end, Straka also answers the question of whether right now was the right time for the Women’s Tour. “Not long ago, I spoke in Prague with the former famous cyclist Andy Schleck. He said that right now is a great time, that women’s cycling is on the right way up.’