Brian Roe | Cycle of boom or bust

The organisers of the Stan Siejka Cycling Classic have been forced to cancel their women’s event in 2018 - simply because not enough female riders wanted to take part.

And this is an organising committee that offers a fine event and with equal prize money for men and women.

There’s lots of postulating these days that, whatever the situation might be, the girls should be entitled to compete for the same rewards as the boys.

But this is a prime example where the theory is not matched by reality.

It also provides evidence that even if equal prize money is offered, that in itself will not draw a sufficient number of entries.

The Classic organisers have done the right thing – twice over in fact.

They offered equal incentive in the first place and then made the right decision to call the event off when their love was not reciprocated.

Next year it seems that the situation could be different with the Classic following rather than preceding the Tour of Tasmania.

This year the Tour has a women’s race which doesn’t start until the Friday after the Classic so it’s not economical for riders to do both.

In 2019 it’s planned that both the men’s and women’s Tours will finish on Saturday with the Classic the day after. That makes it very workable and financially sound for riders.

With the planets aligning, if the women don’t support an equal prize money event then questions should really be asked.

But it also raises the bigger question of whether Cycling Australia as the national governing body ought to be intervening more to create a calendar that protects quality events and offers the best competition for riders of all levels.

Some will argue that controlling bodies should interfere less often, but when the opportunities decrease it’s essential that they get involved.

Cycling, road races in particular, enjoyed a boom period as the Grand Tours became must-sees on our television screens and a swathe of events in Australia emerged or grew.

Gerry Ryan invested in Australia’s first fully funded world tour teams.

Michael Drapac, Tasmania’s Andrew Christie Johnson and others were already on the same path at national and continental level. The AIS and state institutes also played their roles.

The number of Australian riders on world tour team squads expanded rapidly while the Christie Johnson-type operations provided countless opportunities for those on the rise.

But the cycling economy never grew quite enough to make the sport even semi-professional for the vast majority of riders.

In response in Australia, the number of one-day and tour races has waned in recent years.

Criterium racing became the in-thing around the nation – the Big Bash of cycling that offered an accessible and exciting public event all over in an hour or so.

While there were plenty of big names, there were plenty of races.

It was the names that drew the crowds much more than the quality of the racing which was nonetheless often pretty good.

Now there’s neither loads of big names nor an excess of quality events.

Which is all the more reason why whoever’s in charge should be protecting those who deliver well-organised and promoted events.

And if there aren’t enough riders of either gender to support a race then say so up front – so that hard-working voluntary committees are not operating under some delusion.

It may also mean that the men and women making the decisions at the top of any sport have to make some hard decisions about how many and which events get sanctioned.

More and more events are being staged by professional operators. 

But plenty are organised by committed volunteers and if they prove they can produce great events, they surely ought to get the most special of considerations