Talk:UCI Track Cycling World Championships

Separate events/championships??

In the olden days, events were held separately for amateurs and professionals. I cannot find a decent reference, but I'm of the impression that sometimes, if not always, these were held as separate championships. My reason for thinking this is that the events are recorded to have taken place in different places. Does anyone know if this was the case? Severo^TC 22:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, championships have sometimes been held in different places. The first woman's road race should have been in Holland, for instance, but the Dutch didn't agree with women's racing and the event was held in Belgium instead.

Generally, though, championships for amateurs and professionals were held in the same city. There have been exceptions such as the the 1902 motor-pace for professionals, which was in Berlin while the rest of the championships were in Rome, but I suspect that was because the track wasn't suitable or something like that.

In 1908, the amateur sprint was held in Leipzig and the professional in Berlin. In 1913, the arrangement was reversed.

Apart from that, though, the sprints were held in the same city every year from their beginnings until 1913. It'd take a long time to check every individual championship but I think the same would hold true.

Does that help?

happy days

Les woodland (talk) 15:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)les woodland

Hi

Hope this reaches you.

My apologies for the delmay. I keep going away cycling and wantonly enjoying myself!

You're right that the amateur chamionships weren't held in Olympic years. I don't recall, though, that the Olympic champion was ever treated as the world champion. I can't find fact and figure for that but I don't recall Olympic champions wearing rainbow jerseys (although I do know one or two devised Olympic jerseys of their own, which seems to confirm the no-rainbow business). In a way it would be illogical. If the UCI bowed to the Olympics, it acknowledged that the Olympics were superior to its own championships. It would be very unlikely that the ICO would ever tolerate anybody else muscling in on the Games, which leaves the question of where and when any UCI jersey and medal would have been presented. I can't see they were just sent out through the post, can you?

Curiously, although the UCI bowed to the IOC, Olympic cycling was seen of little importance. Cycling was a professional sport and to be an amateur meant you hadn't made the grade, that you weren't yet old or good enough to make the grade, or that you came from an eastern European country which didn't have professionals anyway.

In an odd way, I preferred it when there were still amateurs and professionals, illogical though it was. Eastern Europeans were paid by the state, western Europeans were paid under the table by bike companies or lived on unemployment pay (making them similar if poorer to the easterners), and nobody else mattered. There seemed something plucky and honest about the amateurs, even though they were neither!

Now the Olympics is just another fixture on the professional calendar... although not quite as cynically as it seems to be in tennis!

happy days

Les woodland (talk) 04:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)les woodland

Participants in 1899 World Championships in Montreal

I have created an article about Arthur Edward George, a British cyclist who is said to have represented South Africa at the 1899 Monteal World Championships, and would like to find out (a) whether he indeed took part and if so, (b) how he got on. Any suggestions of where to look online would be much appreciated. It seems that he didn't make the top three places in any of the events. He went on to become a pioneer aviator and racing driver. It would be useful to find out about his cyclist prowess. Thanks. --TraceyR (talk) 13:06, 17 June 2010 (UTC)