Great performances by Nicole Cooke and Rebecca Adlington in the first few days of the Olympics. The Cooke victory was particularly impressive and gritty. But, will these Golds do anything to increase female participation in cycling and walkking? History suggests not.
David Conn is one of the few sports journalists who has attmepted to cover the relationship between elite performance and funding and grassroots/general public participation. A recent article of his said 'No previous Olympic Games or other major tournament has ever led directly to an increase in people taking part in sport. If anything, the opposite seems to happen: Sport England research has shown that ordinary mortals watching, from their sofas, "models of perfection" performing on the elite stage can actually be put off trying to do more exercise'.
The two Golds have come in sports, cycling and walking, that could not be any more accessible or suitable for delivering the much trumpeted health benefits that sport can offer. Will we see a surge in female cycling and walking as a result or even a Wimbledon-like two week surge? Do such role models make a difference?
Cycling is an interesting sport, because it can be done for a purpose beyond enjoyment/exercise, whereas very few people can swim to work or the shops. Whether commuter cyclists start off as leisure riders and vice versa is not clear, but it seems logical that riding a bike to school is not a bad potential starting point for the next Nicole Cooke.
There is some hope for cycling exploting the opportunity a Gold's publicity offer, as British Cycling have proved to be uniquely strategic in achieving success in delivering success at all levels of cycling, for all ages and both genders ... but however good they are it's not within their remit to ensure roads are safe enough for parents to allow their children to use their bikes on.
Click here for for more on cycling on Cadence's website.
your comments
Write a comment
- Required fields are marked with *.
