Originally Posted by CoogansBluff
Just saying that IMO it would take a person much longer to become an above-average recreational tennis player than to become an above-average recreational cyclist (group or distance rider).
Originally Posted by
OBoile
No you are still misunderstanding. First, there was no mention of racing by the OP.
Second, his whole point is you don't need to reach an equivalent level of competency in cycling. In cycling you can participate, without detracting from the experience for others, with only a base level of competency and that base is attained fairly quickly. This is not the case in many other sports.
I'm only going by what he wrote when he
clarified his position. Are you now saying that cycling at an above-average level is not the equivalent level of competency as playing tennis at an above average level? In that case, you're defining "above average" differently for two sports.
What would be more frustrating for you, a group ride with 3 cyclists like you and one that has only been doing group rides for 2 years, or a doubles match where three of the players are at your level and one has only been playing for 2 years?
It would be about the same, actually. I have the same reaction to riders who are erratic and can't pull smoothly in a pace line, as I do to tennis players that are erratic and have poor shot selection. To be honest, however, lower level tennis players rarely scare me as much as lower level cyclists.