I was curious about this, so I figured I’d just compare the 2024 Summer Olympics men and women’s races. Well, bad news upfront, the men’s race was 273km long, and the women’s race was only 157km long. Not a great sign out of the gate, but maybe that’s for dumb reasons.
The man who won gold finished 273km in 6 hours and 19 minutes, and the woman who won gold finished 157km in 3 hours and 59 minutes. A little tricky to compare…
So I figured I’d compare average speed across the whole race. Obviously this isn’t an ideal metric, because presumably a racer could go faster if they were racing a shorter distance, and so the women with the shorter race should be able to go faster than if they had to save more energy for a longer one. But I figure despite that, it would be at least the start of a comparison.
So the man who won gold had an average pace of 43.22 kmph over nearly 6.5h, and the woman who won gold had an average pace of 39.41 kmph over about 4 hours. So 43 kmph and 39 kmph aren’t that far off, but again over 6 hours that 4 kmph difference equates to 24 km of difference, and feels like a pretty big difference. And again, this is with the woman having the advantage of a shorter race.
Okay, not looking great. But that’s gold to gold. If we make some leaps and assume that the woman could sustain that same pace for the duration of the male race, or that the men’s race ended early but somehow they had the same average pace anyway, where would a woman with that pace rank in the rankings, if not gold?
Well, I can’t be sure, because at 77th place Charles Kagimu of Uganda went 273km in 6 hours and 50 minutes, which is 39.95 kmph, still faster than her 39.41. Everyone slower than 77th place seems to have gotten a Did Not Finish and thus no time was recorded.
So despite the fact that the women’s race is substantially shorter than the men’s, the gold medalist for the women’s race was slower than 77th place in average pace during her shorter race, and may not have even finished the race due to being too slow. So I don’t think it worked out.
Great analysis! I think it overall shows there is a big difference between male and female cyclists. That said, I think it’s a bit unfair against the women’s race winner. Cycling the fastest is way harder than the slowest: if she were to attempt to join the men’s race, she would have a faster peloton to join and ride the race out. Also she would have to lead the peloton way less, and didn’t need to break off it and have to win other flights which are all draining. That said, this wouldn’t be the strategy to get gold, but at least I expect her to not get a DNF.
You can also look up last year’s Unbound 200 mile and compare the Elite men VS Elite women results. It’s the same course but they start with offset times. The top men finish about 1.5 hours faster than the women. But the fastest women definitely finish faster than some of the men and overtake them during the race.
That said, I’ve also listened to interviews with the female cyclists who prefer the separate start. I believe this race series used to be combined genders. What they prefer is that they can actually start the race knowing their rivals and setting pace accordingly. In a larger group for an endurance race, it’s possible to misjudge your opponents and burn out faster than you’d like or chase the wrong targets. The women’s field gives everyone a better idea of how to set pace since there is a natural separation throughout the course.
Even if women have better stamina, the power output is not the same which results in a different pace on average.
I was curious about this, so I figured I’d just compare the 2024 Summer Olympics men and women’s races. Well, bad news upfront, the men’s race was 273km long, and the women’s race was only 157km long. Not a great sign out of the gate, but maybe that’s for dumb reasons.
The man who won gold finished 273km in 6 hours and 19 minutes, and the woman who won gold finished 157km in 3 hours and 59 minutes. A little tricky to compare…
So I figured I’d compare average speed across the whole race. Obviously this isn’t an ideal metric, because presumably a racer could go faster if they were racing a shorter distance, and so the women with the shorter race should be able to go faster than if they had to save more energy for a longer one. But I figure despite that, it would be at least the start of a comparison.
So the man who won gold had an average pace of 43.22 kmph over nearly 6.5h, and the woman who won gold had an average pace of 39.41 kmph over about 4 hours. So 43 kmph and 39 kmph aren’t that far off, but again over 6 hours that 4 kmph difference equates to 24 km of difference, and feels like a pretty big difference. And again, this is with the woman having the advantage of a shorter race.
Okay, not looking great. But that’s gold to gold. If we make some leaps and assume that the woman could sustain that same pace for the duration of the male race, or that the men’s race ended early but somehow they had the same average pace anyway, where would a woman with that pace rank in the rankings, if not gold?
Well, I can’t be sure, because at 77th place Charles Kagimu of Uganda went 273km in 6 hours and 50 minutes, which is 39.95 kmph, still faster than her 39.41. Everyone slower than 77th place seems to have gotten a Did Not Finish and thus no time was recorded.
So despite the fact that the women’s race is substantially shorter than the men’s, the gold medalist for the women’s race was slower than 77th place in average pace during her shorter race, and may not have even finished the race due to being too slow. So I don’t think it worked out.
Results I’m comparing: Men’s Race Women’s Race
Great analysis! I think it overall shows there is a big difference between male and female cyclists. That said, I think it’s a bit unfair against the women’s race winner. Cycling the fastest is way harder than the slowest: if she were to attempt to join the men’s race, she would have a faster peloton to join and ride the race out. Also she would have to lead the peloton way less, and didn’t need to break off it and have to win other flights which are all draining. That said, this wouldn’t be the strategy to get gold, but at least I expect her to not get a DNF.
You can also look up last year’s Unbound 200 mile and compare the Elite men VS Elite women results. It’s the same course but they start with offset times. The top men finish about 1.5 hours faster than the women. But the fastest women definitely finish faster than some of the men and overtake them during the race.
That said, I’ve also listened to interviews with the female cyclists who prefer the separate start. I believe this race series used to be combined genders. What they prefer is that they can actually start the race knowing their rivals and setting pace accordingly. In a larger group for an endurance race, it’s possible to misjudge your opponents and burn out faster than you’d like or chase the wrong targets. The women’s field gives everyone a better idea of how to set pace since there is a natural separation throughout the course.
Even if women have better stamina, the power output is not the same which results in a different pace on average.
Ah, true, all fair points! It really is pretty apples to oranges comparing different lengths and averages and making up what might have happened.