I see a lot more complaining about those things here than I do from the pros
I don’t watch too much of this type of stuff but I do enjoy Kerry Werner’s vlogs and race recaps. I’ve ridden with him some and he’s a solid dude, easy to root for. He’s usually pretty detailed with the power data, although it sounds like his PM conked out for Sea Otter. It’s his first season doing the LTGP and first time doing many of the gravel races, so I’m looking forward to the rest of the year.
at least at unbound there definitely was complaining from pros about aero bars. It gets brought up every year hence the rule change for them. And of course the issue with female pros having male domestiques.
I hate to say it… but many companies pay more for social media presence than results. For example, photos of your sponsors bike, energy drink, gels, tires, components, etc. is advertising for that company. If you have enough followers “product placement” (photos in your Strava feed, Instagram, etc.) could bring in income and exposure for the company. Crazy but pros these days need to put as much energy into their social media “influence” as much they do in training.
For example… Wharf to Wharf is a huge local race in Santa Cruz area. It is capped at 16,000 runners and prior to Covid would sell out in minutes. They never had prize money (Santa Cruz was all about local) and one year they offered a prize purse with 10k for first and descending pay outs. Locals were pissed and threw a fit. This “local” event (of 16,000) was now “global” and the community didn’t want that. After removing the prize structure it eventually came back in a smaller amount of 3k for first (now 4k). It was enough to still attract some top African talent that did the road race circuit.
Wharf to Wharf is a non-profit that gives tons to local sports programs. They resurface tracks, donate tons of money to local schools, etc. I hope that never goes away, though I am glad this local event brings in elite runners. Makes the fun funner. 
Just curious - why do you hate to say it? Paying for exposure is what sponsorship is all about. No sponsors are paying for results, they are paying for their brand name to be present in the discussion and media coverage.
That can be from results or controversy or being in the breakaway for the first three hours of a Grand Tour stage
If you’re getting individual sponsorships you have to have a big enough reach to justify whatever the sponsor provides - that can come by winning races or by taking strava KOMs or by producing controversial youtube or instagram posts…
What you ‘hate to say’ is the very nature of sponsorship
One pro complains and we have to read 50 posts a week with people complaining about pros complaining.
True… I guess the “hate to say it” comes from the realization that people who are mediocre make more money from social media than those at the panicle of the sport. But as you said… its a business and if you can market yourself good for you! I guess the pros need to be better.
I mean just look at what Jake Paul has done.
Yes. When there was no money involved attracting pros to a well established popular event like unbound there was far less discussion about amateur complaints.
Gravel does not (and likely never will) have the same business model that UCI cycling has. It’s a participation sport just like triathlon. It’s not as dramatic because it’s not as high-octane as road racing. You don’t (usually) get huge pelotons with team dynamics. It’s just… not very exciting to watch. So, like triathlon, it will likely never attract big sponsorships, and thus will likely never pay very well to the pros.
Exactly, and that’s one reason I think they need to value their time beyond social media.
The races are already becoming properly professional and the fields are beginning to get real depth. The payment of proper prize money to race winners, and placegetters changes nothing for the “masses” or to the feel of the event.
The size and depth of the field are meaningless if there are no sponsor’s providing big cash - and they only do that if they get a return on their investment. I don’t see how Gravel can figure out how to provide that. Ironman has tried for years to televise their races, and it just doesn’t work. People don’t like watching 8-hour time trials.
That’s an interesting take. I actually think the most boring part of road cycling is the peloton and team dynamics (other than the final sprint) and it’s the reason so many people record the race and watch the last hour or the climb in the middle. I hate that one or two teams control everything because they have bigger budgets. I would much rather watch individuals climb a mountain and descend like demons than watch the group roll along together. I would also far rather watch a mtb race or a gravel breakaway for the same reasons. I think the peloton and team dynamic is the worst part of watching cycling.
Ironman have proper prize purses though.
I honestly think the IG coverage during and recap after is the perfect way.
The Ironman recap that came out six months later with the voice of the guy from dirty jobs were highlights of my year. I spent many hours on the trainer rewatching those.
Ironman’s prize purses are propped up by the exorbitant entry fees for the Age Groupers. Most Ironman races have entry fees over $500. The NYC Ironman entry was $900. The sport is supported by the participants - not sponsorships. I see gravel going in the same direction with rising fees and huge mass starts.
I hear you on this one. I like watching the one on one battles as well. But that’s because I’m an amateur athlete and derive a lot of motivation from that. But we are a small demographic. UCI cycling appeals to the masses in Europe. Most people lining the roads in Belgium or on Alpe d’Huez don’t ride bikes. They watch those races because it’s a cultural pastime, and they want their hero to win, just like Americans watch Football.
Believe me, I wish Cycling would be more popular in the US. It would probably make more people think twice about making unsafe passes on the road, and fewer truck drivers would roll coal. But that’s not the culture in the US. If culture doesn’t support it, sponsors will take their money elsewhere.
Exactly. Gravel is Ironman, and Ironman is Gravel.
The parallels in the development of these two sub-sports is immense.
Somewhere on the internet, there is a debate about a longstanding Ironman event that has gravel roads and a new race that popped up in the last 4 years as “the first Gravel Ironman”.
Gravel events have always seemed like they have connections to how an Ironman is run rather than traditional cycling. I’d be shocked if some Lifetime event isn’t connected to an Ironman/triathlon in the next few years.
Maybe. But Ironman had/has a Holy Grail that Triathletes chase: Kona. The pursuit of a Kona slot made people do crazy things and pay rediculous entry fees to get there. The Gravel World might need to design it’s own equivalent, otherwise people will balk at rising entry fees.
Agree… but race prices are already going way up but the prize purses are not. Why the disconnect? 