Pinkbike Poll: Who Will Win the 2016 DH World Champs?
This is it: The World Cup season is a wrap, no need to play it safe for overall glory. One run, all on the line. One monstrous bike and body bashing mountain to tame. I'm voting with my pictures:
Junior Women
![Samantha Kingshill second fastest women on the hill with a time of 04 08.3]()
Junior Men
![With no points for qualifying in juniors 3rd place for Gaetan Vige today won t affect his chances of snatching the title from Iles... Having said that he is still a whopping 9 seconds adrift.]()
Women
![Rachel Atherton has had an injured back this week and dialed it back a touch today. She qualified third today.]()
Men
![Danny Hart has been winning in practice and we think he could easily take another win tomorrow.]()
My vote: Samantha Kingshill, the only American female competing in Val Di Sole and the highest placed junior in the UCI rankings.
My vote: Gaetan Vige, the French have a track record when it comes to one-run wonders and this young man has gathered momentum and confidence during the season.
My vote: Rachel Atherton, a perfect season, eight wins in a row and likely the need for a bigger cabinet at HQ. She has already taken to the top step four times in the valley of the sun, including a World Championship gold in 2008.
My vote: Danny Hart for another gold medal, four incredible victories in a row and a perfect end to the season of dreams.
Author Info:
Member since Aug 23, 2009
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
(I wish we could tick "Sam Hill" even though he's not racing...)
I did hear shes going to kneel for the national anthem though.
(awaits massive amounts of downvotes)
Still hard to argue with the first ever perfect season.
A.C.C. is an incredible rider and so many disciplines. Still the one to beat. It's amazing she is so humble with that much to brag about.
Being a chauvinistic dick is easy and something you can lay claim too.
Come on, ladies, let's all go back to the kitchen where we belong and let King Poozank preach from his mighty throne of condescension.
The issue we are taking is not the fact that there are less female downhill racers; this is true. There are less; as I already pointed out this is partly due to opinions like yours.
It is your extremely distasteful comparison of WC racers to minor league baseball players that is the problem. The best female racers in the world are still the best females racers in the world. They aren't in the minor leagues, they aren't going down the kiddie hill and oh yeah, let's look at times through the last two speed traps. Vaea Verbeeck and Rachel Atherton were both hitting top 10 speeds for either gender.
And believe it not, I doubt any female downhill racer is interested in "walking around like [they] have a huge dick."
I never said anything about the number of female racers. I was talking about competitiveness or how close the racers are and how hard it is to consistently win. Winning consistently is more difficult in the men's field not because the number of racers but because they are so close that one mistake means you sacrifice the win, not to memotion the higher speeds and higher consequence.
They ride the same tracks just slower, again this is why I compared this to the WNBA va the NBA. One is more exciting and you aren't a sexist ass for acknowledging that. The point of racing is speed. If we are being pedantic Rachel would finish in 80th something place regardless of the speed trap.
My big dick comment was referring to Rachel Atherton firing off on Instagram about a perceived slight from an on the fly commentary, if you look back through the front page you'll find some references to it.
I understand that's not fair but that's part of being a sexually diamorphic species. Also you can value women regardless of how they do in sports, it's entertainment and it doesn't define a persons worth and not once throughout this discussion have I claimed otherwise.
In the long run, you're just another internet pig who simply compares body strength to body strength and field size to field size without considering any of the many other factors that influence these. I doubt you can even grasp the full picture of the advantages of having women on a WC squad (or any other elite team) and, unfortunately, your ignorant opinion is shared by small-minded dinosaurs throughout cycling, which is why we see so few women with full factory support or up-and-coming groms.
There is, however, a reckoning coming for folks like you (thank god). There are badass chicks like Sam Kingshill on the rise, and women are the fastest growing buying group in the outdoor industry. Women will control most of the global wealth in ten years, we're living longer than men, and per capita, we're more educated.
So you go right ahead and hold onto your archaic belief systems about how and why women's sports are less interesting and why they matter less than the men... It'll be a lot of fun to watch your teeth get kicked in by the newest generation of women who refuse to entertain your bullshit.
Nowhere in your vitriolic rant did you take the time to attempt to understand my point. I have never once claimed that a persons worth comes from their sporting prowess, rather have been evaluating things from a competition and entertainment standpoint. Your comment about US women's soccer demonstrates your lack of comprehension. Dominating in a less competitive field does not equal overall superiority or entertainment this has been the crux of the past 20 posts.
Try responding with logic and a well reasoned argument rather than emotional diarrhea.
There's no denying the facts. You can continue to live in a dreamworld where Rachel Atherton and Arron Gwin are on the same level but the clock says otherwise. That dirty evil lying sexist clock.
Gymnastics is a great example of a women's sport with a high level of competitiveness, where scores are incredibly tight and "one mistake means you sacrifice the win," as you so eloquently defined competition. There is a high demand from Olympic television viewers for female gymnastics coverage. There is then more money in gymnastics. This creates a much larger field; there are more female gymnasts than male gymnasts, even. This creates the high level of competition.
Is my point getting across? By mentioning minor league sports, by trying to downplay the accomplishments of the top female athletes, but continuing this attitude that the female downhill racers aren't as competitive, as good, however you want to word it, you are continuing to diminish interest in the sport. You are bringing down the demand, which brings down the money, the field size and ultimately the sport itself.
the size of the field is irelavant. It doesn't matter if there was 1000 racers, if one of them is significantly better and rest aren't close to that level the field is not competitive and not as entertaining because the winner is easily predicted and the game easily won. Versus a field of 10 people of equal skill. Under those conditions it is very difficult to predict the winner and consequently more entertaining.
I stand by what I said with the minor vs major league comparison. For example, let's say Gwin got down a track in 3:20 and Rachel did it in 4:50, what is the more impressive feat? What is more entertaining to watch?
Women don't decide not to participate in A sport because they read an opinion they don't like on the Internet to think otherwise is an insult to women. If you want to be in a sport do it for yourself and have fun your worth is not determined by your number plate. The entertainment value of sports is another matter and that's what I was discussing previously you shouldn't feel personally attacked because by and large people, men and women alike see men's sports as more entertaining for the most part.
It doesn't even matter anyways, not one person in this comment chain has said "women are shitty because they aren't as fast on a bike" yet the female commenters are acting like that's the case. It's not, entertainment factor has been the discussion.
You are entitled to decide what you find entertaining and I can respect that without calling you a misandrist for not preferring men's sports. The inverse has happened many times through this comment chain.
Yes men are faster. Is it better entertainment? That is complete hearsay. It is relative. Men, for now, might provide a bigger entertainment value than women but if the woman's field grew, Id argue different. For everything you said in relation to WNBA vs NBA and Minor leagues vs Major leagues there is still entertainment factor in all. The market just isn't as big in one as it is the other. I still would say minor league baseball's entertainment value is similar to MLB just without major stars, and most teams are in locales that don't have an MLB team so they do pack the stadium. So that argument I think is kinda mute. Most women sports have not been around as much as men, so the competition hasn't grown compared to the men's but it will in due time thus increasing your so called entertainment value scale to competition.
Now back to entertainment value, yeah Rachel might have been a minute slower but hell to watch a woman go down that same course where you or I would probably not be as fast is pretty entertaining. I usually watch the top ten men and top five women in every DH race. I bet a majority of real fans do too and still see the entertainment value in that.
I think your post began in the competition point where men have a larger field that coincides with entertainment value. I hope I have conveyed some similarities and disagreements with your thinking. It is a process, which women have been in a lot less and thus the women here are arguing to stop hindering that fact.
Side note: I remember when Gwinn first started appearing atop the podium. He was winning every race it seemed and by large margins that haven't been seen. What happened? The guys started training harder just as Gwinn trained. Gwinn made a huge impact in the amount of work you put towards racing DH. Rachel is doing that same thing and she is encouraging women to become as fast as her if not faster. Its evolution.
If Gwin got down a track in 3:20 and Rachel got down it in 4:50 and a 12 year old got down it in 5:20 and an amputee with a prosthesis got down it in 6:10...what is the more impressive feat? What is more entertaining to watch? What has higher value? Is your opinion influenced by who you are? Does who you are make your opinion more valid?
Women definitely don't decide to participate in a sport because of your opinion on the internet! You got that right! But when an opinion becomes pervasive it has impacts on the sport. You clearly aren't able to grasp these cause and effects, but basically exposure is important to a sport. When a sport (male or female) gets media coverage it grows. When a sport does not get media coverage it does not grow.
Case in point: dual slalom! I was at USA national championships for dual slalom. Even in the men's category, there was a poor showing. There was not as much competition as there should be; in fact, there aren't even athletes who specialize in dual slalom, just downhill racers who enjoy racing dual at Nationals and Sea Otter. If dual slalom got more exposure you would start to see athletes who specialized in the sport. You would see more participation. You would see the level of competition rise.
Again this is part of the self fulfilling prophesy. Women's downhill has less entertainment value because it's been decided that it has less entertainment value. Were women's downhill given more exposure, you cannot say that the level of competition and subsequently entertainment value wouldn't increase. I don't know how to help you understand this any better...
I was wondering if there was a way to prove 'competitiveness' with data but I can't on the computer I'm on. All I know is that at Vallnord recently the woman who was 10% behind Rachel's time came 9th. The man who was 10% behind Danny's time came 63rd. The women's podium spanned 16 seconds and the men's 5.5. Make of that what you will. To me it shows there aren't enough women racing.
Would anyone be interested in a class for skinny asthmatic unfit 33 year old white men with green eyes, brown hair and freckles? Why? Because that's the only way to make it fair for me. I want to win too. I work just as hard as all the top pros... I'm just shit on a bike. I still deserve the same recognition as the pro men.
Anyone who says otherwise is prejudiced.
It's not about how fast you are, it's about how hard you try.
@brian_cookson give this man a chance to earn the adulation he deserves.
That being said, your original point would have been better taken if you used some tact, like @iamamodel. I get what you're saying; compare womens road or xc to womens dh. That just means more girls need to race dh, and I think that's what you will see soon. Half the females on podiums in the US at gravity events seem to be under 20, maybe even 18.
The Don said last week on the Dirt Shed Show that about 30 blokes make enough to live off. That means riding and training full time. Access to trainers, dieticians, masseurs, the best physios and doctors.
That's what Rachel gets. Of course she's good. It's her job. She's making money, certainly enough to live on.
Give those men from 30-80 that package and see their times tumble.
I've nothing against her personally. She's definitely faster than me, but then I have to work a full time job and look after my two small children when I'm not at work.
I'm a little tired of hearing the slanted and frankly sexist view that the girls are as good as the boys. They are not. Do they train as hard? Quite possibly. Do they provide the same entertainment value? Definitely not.
People tune in to see the best. That means the pro men.
Saying the girls are as committed and entertaining as the boys is a slight on the boys. If you're better, you deserve the credit. Not just the sexist "Of course you're faster. You're a man."
Stop the sexist gender classes please, UCI.
There is no room for any kind of discrimination based on gender or race. Everyone should be equal in sport.
However, having a female category is like having a junior category - and this next part could be "sexist" - because the advantages of being a fully developed male in a sport that necessitates raw muscular power, among other things, makes it much harder for an equally motivated, hard working, junior or female to compete. Sorry, but being a 120lb girl is never going to be as advantageous as being a 170lb dude in DH racing. There are sports and sects of sports where the size and flexibility of being a female comes in handier than being a male, and sports where it doesn't really matter as much (driving and base jumping for instance). I just don't see why we can't just accept that a) Womens racing is great, and depending on the event it's just as competitive as the mens field b) DH is not one of those events c) gender is a reasonable thing to "discriminate", as well as age, when it comes to sports events
also, @jaame, I believe "factory rider" simply means you are on a factory team of some sort, meaning you, at minimum, get things for free from your sponsors and have your racing paid for. Salaries and anything else are reserved for the top guys. I'm not trying to parse words, I'm just clarifying what I meant. Rachel would still be nicely sponsored competing as a male.... especially if she was the only chick doing that... and here we go with the "sexism" again haha
However this is untrue for the women's race :-)
One bet on "the fastest guy down the hill" please
eg. van Niekerk = national hero (deservedly so of course) but...
Minnaar GOAT = Who's that?
I'm leaning toward him or Gwin for this race. Gonna be a burner!!
"Stay on your bike Danny" "How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?" "Look at the whip"
The world needs another Viral Danny Hart run!
Redbull, release the rear Rob Warner
Come on Danny !
1.Pinkbike just boosts it's ratings
2.Pinkbike wants to sell the poll results to a guy like Martin Whiteley so he can see who people root for, so he can chose the most popular rider and then get great deals on sponsor money.
3.Pinkbike sells the results to a company like SRAM so they know who to sponsor next year.
4.PB sells results to the Athertons so they know how to adjust their self-marketing
5.PB sells results to Redbull TV so they know how to cheat times on the fly, so everything becomes a better spectacle
Whatever happens we lose.
If Rachel has 2 perfect seasons could she be considered GOAT?
You have to admit that the super 'safe' run down last week was pretty boring? I don't know I just find him kind of dull (obv superficially he might be super nice rad guy in person) unless hes bike is broken then he fires up.
I think we have crossed wires I don't find Gwinn boring as such I just find his racing strategy boring to watch like for me he is too clinical and serous, I'm I explaining myself a bit better? Maybe it's me I preferred it when the racing was less serious when the likes of palmer, peat, cedric, warner looked like they were having fun and smiling. It all seems a little serious for me these days, like its a job rather than people having fun and by consequence they are professionals. You know what I mean?