Should pro prize money be the same for both men & women?

If you've got the $sponsorship$ then I say go for it. Pay the top 3 in each.

But you have to ask yourself, what's your goal? Are you trying to develop pro caliber events, or something that will appeal to amatuers?

If the latter was the case (lets face it, as a rider base and revenue source, amatuers highly outweigh pros) turn some of that pro prize money into more/better amatuer prizes. Not saying don't pay the pros - but identify who your bread and butter is. I think this will grow your events quicker - then you can start dishing out the coins to pros.

If I heard that WF was running a race with $10K in amatuer prizes (merchandise or even cash) I would be a lot more interested than hearing about a $10K pro purse and a plaque for me. Just my .02

I'm pretty psyched about coming up to WF in 2007! Glad to hear that you guys are thinking about this stuff.

pay deeper in mens pro and get experts better prizes. pay to the top woman only

Pay the guys more because more guys are racing.....

....no need to pay a woman $250 when she didnt beat anyone, thats absurd....

maybe it would attract more women that dont usaully race or only go to certain races...at snowshoe this year we saw some women come out of retirement to step it up a notch for the others...it is a competition..

My opinion would be no. My 2 cents is there simply aren't enough women who race to justify that much of a payout. You could potentially be paying a 3rd place pro woman $250 for nursing a flat tire all the way down the course only because there were only 3 women pros. Yes I am a woman but even I don't see that as fair.

A better way to encourage more women to race would be to put the extra money that you are proposing to pay the women pros and give that money to beginner and sport women by offering free race entry. Given the number of pro women racers out there and your location you may get 1 or 2 more pros show up by offering more money but by offering free race entry to new ametuer women you could easily get 5-8 more women sign up and be encouraging more women to compete.

VT Mtbkr said:

A better way to encourage more women to race would be to put the extra money that you are proposing to pay the women pros and give that money to beginner and sport women by offering free race entry. Given the number of pro women racers out there and your location you may get 1 or 2 more pros show up by offering more money but by offering free race entry to new ametuer women you could easily get 5-8 more women sign up and be encouraging more women to compete.

Click to expand...

that is a great idea. Hell id plop my girlfriend on a bike and send her down if it were free entry for her to try it.
Having a top 10 mens payout is great, considering its usually the same few guys that are up on the podium it gives other hard working pro's a bit more of push to get closer and have a good goal to meet.

Snowshoe provided free entry to all Am women at their series last year and I think it over very well.

profro said:

Snowshoe provided free entry to all Am women at their series last year and I think it over very well.

Click to expand...

Yep not my idea....Snowshoe got it right! Pro women paid 1st through 3rd place and paid half of what the men top 3 men got. All the other women's categories except for Pro got free race entry and prizes for placement. Thanks guys!

My feeling is that each winner should get the same amount. Deeper for the fella's. Smaller amount for women placing 2nd & 3rd than what you're paying the 2nd/3rd place men.

More complicated idea, but I've occasionally wondered about the possibility of making final decisions on the amount paid to top three pro women based on how many enter the race. Seems it might help generate an interest in the pro women to find ways themselves to garner the interest of more women to race.

Even MORE complicated: I've also wondered about a timing decision. If the winning pro female finishes within a minute (or so, depending on the length of the course) she gets equal pay as winning pro male, otherwise it might be 3/4 the pay or half. And/or if the top three betties come within a set time of the top three dudes, there could be a payout calculated on that. Those are rough ideas and likely unwise to toss out on a highly critical male-dominated forum such as this one....but there it is.

Thank you for paying the women and caring enough to inquire about the balance between the payout for both. It's a sticky wicket indeed. Wishing you good luck in your final decision and a successful 2007 season.

VT Mtbkr said:

My opinion would be no. My 2 cents is there simply aren't enough women who race to justify that much of a payout. You could potentially be paying a 3rd place pro woman $250 for nursing a flat tire all the way down the course only because there were only 3 women pros. Yes I am a woman but even I don't see that as fair.

A better way to encourage more women to race would be to put the extra money that you are proposing to pay the women pros and give that money to beginner and sport women by offering free race entry. Given the number of pro women racers out there and your location you may get 1 or 2 more pros show up by offering more money but by offering free race entry to new ametuer women you could easily get 5-8 more women sign up and be encouraging more women to compete.

Click to expand...

Yes indeed, some damn good ideas in there! I never would have raced if Bootleg Canyon didn't offer free entry back in the day. After that first race I was hooked and would have gladly paid from then on. I always made a point to give a donation of some sort, either cash or volunteer work (photos, write-ups, promotion, etc).

On your first note about there not being enough entrants in the pro betty field thus vote no for equal pay, I'm curious what your thoughts are about the fact that some work as hard, if not harder than some of the fella's that podium? And that it is not necessarily their fault more women don't race at their level?

This is usually the no touch subject,

But I have long thought that you offer the same purse for both,

But just lower the amount for both purses then what you normally pay.

So if you offer a 3000 purse for both classes then cut it to 2000 then you take a portion or
all of the entry money and put it back into the purse to reflect the payback versus the rider count.

You’re still giving both classes equal money and rewarding the larger classes.

Haha, did George get deleted?

I like BC's idea a lot. (And not just because it's kinda similar to one of the ones I threw out there )

Yep deleted again. jeeesh I was just kidding.
Anyway it brought smiles to the right people.

I seriously think letting Am Women race for free is a great idea and 100% payback for Pro Women seems fair until class sizes increase.

actually I like the "free entry for AM women" idea quite a bit. anything to encourage more women is a good thing.

...free shots.

:biggrin:

But to be on topic: I think the pay-scale should be equal for both the Ladies and the guys.

some kind of sliding scale based on the # of entrants. sorry, but i just do not equate a stacked pro men field with 3 women seperated by 20 seconds each. there is a big difference having to race full speed knowing that a small mistake will cost you 5 places and knowing that you can just show up, make it down the hill, and get paid. though i know this is not what the pro women do--they race too--they don't race under the same pressure and have the luxury to make the kind of mistakes that pro men cannot. it must be nice showing up to a race knowing you are guaranteed to leave with at least $250.


also, i'm not even sure if the "but they've worked just as hard to be pro" arguement works either, as the # of women in all classes is so small that the level of competition in the Am. classes is far less. a male racer who is 40-50 seconds behind the local-pro winner would not be able to race pro. this is not uncommon in the pro women class.

i'm all for paying the women the same as men, but in the past few years their #'s have gotten so small it's harder to justify the expense. or, pay the winner the same and require other money winners to finish within a certain # of seconds of the winner's time? i.e. you get a flat/major crash=no money(that's fair).

maybe pay less, but set the prize money equal to the men if a certain # of women show up to warrent real competition. use the extra entries to pay the difference?

large purses attract more racers. . . . just not women it seems.

this is definitely the no-touch subject on a lot of peoples' minds. fair and equal are not synonymous. fair may not be equal; what's equal is not universally fair.

the women's class is neither as competitive or as deep. Nor as "good" (fast or whatever you wanna say). Paying out more to men is going to have a much greater effect without a doubt, so do that. It's all about encouraging the sport and growing it. Paying all 3 of 4 women in a class doesn't do anything to help grow the sport. But giving a little bit of money for gas and accomidations and entrance fees to some top male pros, and entrance fee's to AM women does.

BC VAN said:

This is usually the no touch subject,

But I have long thought that you offer the same purse for both,

But just lower the amount for both purses then what you normally pay.

So if you offer a 3000 purse for both classes then cut it to 2000 then you take a portion or
all of the entry money and put it back into the purse to reflect the payback versus the rider count.

You’re still giving both classes equal money and rewarding the larger classes.

Click to expand...

thats a pretty good solution.

i have been in that situation and actually i have to think about this for next year too, and i most definitely feel there is no real reason other than misunderstood gender equality, for paying both men and women the same. i mean, its not like you are discriminating women, juniors and vets dont complain and they dont get paid the same as elite or jr women either.

i think some proportional system should be the ticket, for instance you could do one very simple thing, that is, to pay for how many you beat, equally for men and women. if the pro womens field is the same size as the mens, then the winning woman would get the same paycheck as the winning male. pretty simple.

as for encouraging entrants, free entry, swag for all entrants, whatever, thats much more focused and effective than money for the winner.

tmx said:

Even MORE complicated: I've also wondered about a timing decision. If the winning pro female finishes within a minute (or so, depending on the length of the course) she gets equal pay as winning pro male, otherwise it might be 3/4 the pay or half. And/or if the top three betties come within a set time of the top three dudes, there could be a payout calculated on that. Those are rough ideas and likely unwise to toss out on a highly critical male-dominated forum such as this one....but there it is.

Click to expand...

I think that would be a great idea. It should somehow be based upon the feild size in each class. At our local races, we often have 15-20 pro men and 1-2 pro women, so the purse for the men should go deeper, but if the top women is within say 20% of the men's podium, then both 1st place people should get the same.

TMX--Wake Up Call misses you.....

There have been a lot of good points here as to what is both socially correct and financially prudent. When Go-Ride did a private sponsorship of the Norba National series we paid the same amounts to the top 3 Men & Women, but then paid 5 deep in the men’s field due to the much larger field of competition. The option I like most is a 100% Pro pay back that goes 20% or 30% deep. So if 3 Pro Women each pay $100 to race then the winner gets $300. If 10 Pro women sign up at $100 each then 1st Gets $500, 2nd Gets $300 and 3rd gets $200. I think this format encourages Pro racers to get their Pro friends to sign up in both the Men’s and Women’s field.

i would say have the payback be proportional.

so as to say if 20 pro men competed and 3 women.. you could put it up as for each person entered $10 goes into the prize purse, meaning 200 purse for the men, 30 for the women.and then only pay out to the top 3.

that sounds fair to me. the more people you beat, the higher the reward

that almost always guarantees that women will recieve less, even with a legitimate field.

amount of money for 1st, 2nd, etc. should be the same for each class, but the actual number of racers who get any $$ should be dependant on entries. it used to be 5 to 10 deep men, 3 deep women and that was fine until only 3 women started showing up. paying back to a % of the entries might address this trend and keep it "fair."

So wait a second, you want women to get free entry fees and STILL get the same prizing? Thats just bull**** in reverse.

Earn what you win. Fewer women enter, prizing gets smaller. I don't see kids getting free entry fees, and hate to broach the obvious, but kids are much more important to the future of the sport then women will ever be. Like it or not, this is a male dominated sport, and ALWAYS WILL BE. I am all for encouraging women to join, more then 99% of you will ever find out. But free entry fees is an insult to everybody else racing and paying.

How about getting women specific prizing?


Let the flaming begin.

dropmachine.com said:

So wait a second, you want women to get free entry fees and STILL get the same prizing? Thats just bull**** in reverse.

Click to expand...

I think the point was free AM women registration, not pro.

speaking of a kids race, that is something that I've wondered why no one has tried to do. At the Reading Urban DH race they put on a short little loop of a race for the kids right before the awards (while everyone was waiting around anyways) and everyone was cheering for the little guys.
It would take next to no time to set up a small loop, or a short little slalom/DH run for the kids to race for a few minutes. Then you may attract local families with kids who will come watch the race and have their kids race after.
Just food for thought.

downhill mike said:

IThat was the advice of our timer (a women) we hired.
Downhill Mike

Click to expand...

That timer was a women ??

I think same payout for the same position, but how deep depends on how big the field is.

The idea of making some race entry fees paid for to attract women is a pretty good idea, it would definately encourage a lot more women to try racing that are maybe on the fence about it I think.