An underrated aspect of cycling as a sport is ...
#51
Senior Member
I've played competitive tennis (NTRP 5.0) my whole life and cycled (CAT 3) my whole life. I think the time needed to reach an equivalent level of competency in the two sports is about the same.
To answer the original question: An underrated aspect of cycling as a sport is ... just how tough those skinny little pro cyclists are.
To answer the original question: An underrated aspect of cycling as a sport is ... just how tough those skinny little pro cyclists are.
#52
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lebanon (Liberty Hill), CT
Posts: 8,758
Bikes: CAAD 12, MASI Gran Criterium S, Colnago World Cup CX & Guru steel
Liked 1,429 Times
in
835 Posts
Based on my experience and the wisdom of friends who have raced/cycled for years........a 6 yr. old rides a bike. An adult who is new to bicycles rides a bike. A cyclist pays attention to the protocols of cycling in a group and/or appropriate and safe handling of a bike on the road/trails. It's kind of a mindset thing. The resulting perspective informs how one rides. That's just my (and others) opinion.
#53
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lebanon (Liberty Hill), CT
Posts: 8,758
Bikes: CAAD 12, MASI Gran Criterium S, Colnago World Cup CX & Guru steel
Liked 1,429 Times
in
835 Posts
As someone who has seen people come and go in my bike club for the past 15 years, I assure you this is not true.
Likes For bruce19:
#54
Senior Member
Last Saturday a small (~12) group of us did a 50 mile ride at a moderate pace so everyone could stay together. A guy who's been riding with us for 10 years took a three mile pull around mile 40 and as soon as he was done fell off the back and was crawling the rest of the ride. Being the type of ride it was, that forced the rest of us to slow down and nurse him back to the finish. So I agree, some people can ride for years and never learn the basics of group cycling.
#55
Newbie racer
The OP's lead in used the word "sport". Sport implies competition. Not commuting to work. Not the group ride. That's transportation or fitness. Not sport.
So, something under-rated about cycling as sport/competition?
I'll address the OP's assertion on less skill development first. I take that to mean "motor skills" as it relates to hand eye coordination and reacting to external stimuli or your environment.
I couldn't disagree more. We said "sport", which means competition. I'll take the easiest example I can think of if I had to justify the development of similar hand eye coordination and repetitive skills development.............cyclocross. I choose it both because it's a clear outlier in the road world AND I have selfish motivation as I've recently attempted it for the first time.
It takes a lot of repetitive skills development, particularly analyzing your environment, reacting, adjusting, to compete in that arena.
I'd claim the same for MTB. Though I don't ride MTB. I hear trackies also claim there's a huge and long term learning curve to becoming a competent track racer. I could see that.
Now, an under-rated aspect of cycling as a sport for me:
First, longevity. Kids can race balance bikes by the time they can swing their legs over one all the way to advanced age masters competitors. Like golf, you can compete in golf your entire life. Soccer, football, basketball, it's just not the same.
Other sports have longevity also. But it's one that cycling can claim also.
Second, kit. Everyone in cycling loves kit. There's not much out there in physical sport (to get motor racing out of the way) that has an equal cool or geek factor on the equipment used in the sport. Carbon bikes. Aero this, lightweight that. There's technology, elegance.
Lastly, one thing that actually bugs me about cycling is the whole "Team" but not a team aspect. Tom Brady didn't win the Superbowl, the New England Patriots did. Brady still gets paid the most, or close to the most. He still wins a personal prize of MVP of the superbowl. I wish cycling would push winning team prize part more than it does. At least elevate it to the general classification level of winning. It's super staunch and classical the way it is, so that probably comes across like a lead balloon. But, just an idea.
So, something under-rated about cycling as sport/competition?
I'll address the OP's assertion on less skill development first. I take that to mean "motor skills" as it relates to hand eye coordination and reacting to external stimuli or your environment.
I couldn't disagree more. We said "sport", which means competition. I'll take the easiest example I can think of if I had to justify the development of similar hand eye coordination and repetitive skills development.............cyclocross. I choose it both because it's a clear outlier in the road world AND I have selfish motivation as I've recently attempted it for the first time.
It takes a lot of repetitive skills development, particularly analyzing your environment, reacting, adjusting, to compete in that arena.
I'd claim the same for MTB. Though I don't ride MTB. I hear trackies also claim there's a huge and long term learning curve to becoming a competent track racer. I could see that.
Now, an under-rated aspect of cycling as a sport for me:
First, longevity. Kids can race balance bikes by the time they can swing their legs over one all the way to advanced age masters competitors. Like golf, you can compete in golf your entire life. Soccer, football, basketball, it's just not the same.
Other sports have longevity also. But it's one that cycling can claim also.
Second, kit. Everyone in cycling loves kit. There's not much out there in physical sport (to get motor racing out of the way) that has an equal cool or geek factor on the equipment used in the sport. Carbon bikes. Aero this, lightweight that. There's technology, elegance.
Lastly, one thing that actually bugs me about cycling is the whole "Team" but not a team aspect. Tom Brady didn't win the Superbowl, the New England Patriots did. Brady still gets paid the most, or close to the most. He still wins a personal prize of MVP of the superbowl. I wish cycling would push winning team prize part more than it does. At least elevate it to the general classification level of winning. It's super staunch and classical the way it is, so that probably comes across like a lead balloon. But, just an idea.
#56
On the other hand, my other avocation definitely has a steeper learning curve: Playing jazz on the double bass. Learning it as an adult is virtually prohibitive. Of course I try to make it look easy.
#57
Senior Member
#58
Full Member
Thread Starter
I appreciate that you've reached a high level of both sports, as that does give you a good perspective. I've played tennis near the level you're speaking about. As for cycling, people are right to call me a newbie (on the road, group rides, etc.) and so the assertion by some here that I'm naive might have merit. Time will tell.
It just seems to me that cycling allowed me to ride in the company of what I consider to be pretty good riders (still better than me) quicker than tennis did. In cycling, I feel that I can catch up by out-working people. In tennis, it took longer for the hard work to pay off. Once I reached a higher level, I didn't have to work as hard as cyclists must do to maintain it, either. That's my guess, any way. But in the end, at the highest levels of any sport with comparable participation numbers, it takes comparable dedication, and none would be harder or easier than the other.
Likes For Spinay70:
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lebanon (Liberty Hill), CT
Posts: 8,758
Bikes: CAAD 12, MASI Gran Criterium S, Colnago World Cup CX & Guru steel
Liked 1,429 Times
in
835 Posts
I disagree. Perhaps we have a different definition of "competent" but I was being conservative when I said 1 year. Usually it's much less than that. It certainly doesn't take a year to learn the skills necessary to *participate* in a "wide range of group rides" reasonably safely and in a manor that isn't repeatedly disruptive to the group.
#61
Senior Member
One problem with more technical sports like tennis or ice hockey is that it's tough to put in the same number of training hours as cycling. I've been cycling 500 hrs/yr for over 10 yrs. I started playing ice hockey in my 20s but only played at most 2 games/wk during the winter. I don't know how many hrs/wk a competitive masters tennis play needs to play but I'm guessing it's less than 10 hrs/wk.
Likes For gregf83:
#62
Senior Member
I understand your point. But, you have to want to learn. Not enough people do. And, if new riders ride with new riders, not a lot of collected expertise is passed on. In the past my club rides were led by people who had years of experience and knew the finer points. I always learned from them.This year there are a lot of 1-yr riders who are leading rides. They know little. I avoid those rides. One of my riding friends was a very good local racer. He has also spent his life in the bicycle industry. I always say to him, "If you don't listen to me when we talk about football (I was a college QB) you are an idiot. And, if I don't listen to you about cycling, then I'm the idiot." I want people like him in my group. And, I want the people who appreciate his wisdom and want to learn in my group. I'm not interested in being around people who know how to pedal and want to burn calories and that's about it. Just my opinion.
Someone who has played tennis 15 or 20 or even 50 times will still be terrible. Were they to play with an experienced player, they would ruin the experience.
The whole point that the OP is making (correctly IMO) is that road cycling is an activity where one can, fairly quickly, develop a base level of competence. Even moderate differences in fitness can be accounted for through drafting. For many other sports/activities that isn't the case. Even within cycling, we see differences, as people have correctly pointed out that it takes far longer to learn how to race or ride a mountain bike decently.
Likes For OBoile:
#63
For The Fun of It
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 5,910
Bikes: Lynskey GR300, Lynskey Backroad, Litespeed T6, Lynskey MT29, Burley Duet
Liked 1,746 Times
in
864 Posts
While there must be a competitive element for me to consider an activity a sport, that alone doesn't take an activity to the level of a sport. 1/4 mile drag racing is a competitive activity, but not a sport in my view. Fishing tournaments are a competitive activity. If that is a sport, then these are athletes.
It must be a competitive activity involving 2 or more people (see what I did there Strava stars) in which some combination of strength, speed, agility and stamina are required to win.
*please don't take this post overly seriously.
#64
Senior Member
On last point before I dump out of yet another BF thread that has disintegrated into useless, passive aggressive name calling, internet tough guys, deliberate inability to try to understand what someone else has said, taking things way out of proportion and putting words in other people's mouths:
Guys: posting declarative statements that are properly caveated as opinions is not "getting your chamois in a twist". It is not an indication of a fragile "bruised ego" or snobbishness. Disagreement does not mean someone has taken offense and is seeking to prove someone else wrong. Debate and sharing of opinion is kind of the whole point here. Cycling means different things to different people. Just because your experiences have led you to certain beliefs does not mean you are 100% right and anyone who disagrees is 100% an arrogant jerk who is wrong, wrong, wrong. It's more an indication that their experiences have led them to different beliefs.
Guys: posting declarative statements that are properly caveated as opinions is not "getting your chamois in a twist". It is not an indication of a fragile "bruised ego" or snobbishness. Disagreement does not mean someone has taken offense and is seeking to prove someone else wrong. Debate and sharing of opinion is kind of the whole point here. Cycling means different things to different people. Just because your experiences have led you to certain beliefs does not mean you are 100% right and anyone who disagrees is 100% an arrogant jerk who is wrong, wrong, wrong. It's more an indication that their experiences have led them to different beliefs.
Likes For Hiro11:
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,496
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Liked 8,298 Times
in
3,298 Posts
Originally Posted by Tomato Coupe
I think the time needed to reach an equivalent level of competency in the two sports is about the same.
#66
If your primary responce to anything anyone says on a forum starts with "Yeah, but..." then you might need to re-educate yourself on the fine art of communicating.
Proving Someone Wrong As A Sport?
Spinay70
Proving Someone Wrong As A Sport?
Spinay70
#68
Senior Member
I'm not sure what it means to be a good cyclist. I assume that in most contexts the word really refers to fitness because somehow riding fast is associated with being good. I'm 71 and have been cycling since my twenties. I ride leisurely along at 14 or 15 mph, sometimes I tackle big hills, sometimes I go as fast as I can go, I usually ride alone but sometimes with my wife. If there is a local cycling event I sometimes participate. I know how to handle and fix my bike, and through experience I am familiar with various road and riding conditions and no how to handle myself in them. Am I a good or a skilled rider? The questions do not appear relevant.
Is cycling even a sport? If you compete, it is. But what if you just ride for pleasure or for fitness? I'm a hiker as well as a cyclist. I'm familiar with wilderness travel through lots of experience. I hike between 2 and 3 miles an hour, I know what gear to carry, and I know how to handle myself in various wilderness and weather conditions. Am I a skilled hiker or a good one?
I think this sort of thinking was what the OP was getting at. For me, cycling is a pastime, with no negative connotations attached to that word. I have all the gear, I have a keen interest in it, and I do it frequently. I'm not sure what that makes me, but I like bike riding.
Is cycling even a sport? If you compete, it is. But what if you just ride for pleasure or for fitness? I'm a hiker as well as a cyclist. I'm familiar with wilderness travel through lots of experience. I hike between 2 and 3 miles an hour, I know what gear to carry, and I know how to handle myself in various wilderness and weather conditions. Am I a skilled hiker or a good one?
I think this sort of thinking was what the OP was getting at. For me, cycling is a pastime, with no negative connotations attached to that word. I have all the gear, I have a keen interest in it, and I do it frequently. I'm not sure what that makes me, but I like bike riding.
Likes For jackb:
#69
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,863
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Liked 3,111 Times
in
1,418 Posts
Fitness is only part of it. A fairly small part, in my experience.
#70
Senior Member
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.
For instance: I can golf with my friend who is a scratch golfer while I rarely break 100. We can have fun together because my crappy play doesn't affect him.
It is annoying for me to play basketball (and I'm nothing special at it) with new (say less than 3 years experience) players because they have no idea what they are doing and generally just get in the way.
Jogging, assuming one can keep up, is even easier to learn than cycling. That doesn't make it a bad, or inferior, sport, it's just easy to learn the basics quickly.
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?
I'd estimate that I've played tennis 100 times in my life. I doubt I've been on 100 group rides. But, next week I'm going vacation which is really just an excuse to go riding with a Cat 1 racer and I'm not the least bit worried about having insufficient skill (though he is, no doubt, more skilled than I am). The trip was his idea and we'll both have a good time. Conversely, I'd never suggest playing with a serious tennis player. I'd just embarrass myself and waste his time.
#71
Newbie racer
noun
- 1.an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.
To compete you have to have rules, winners, losers, and outcomes. Group rides don't have outcomes. There's no timing mat or photo finish on the county line sprint. Even super hard make you puke bike workouts, are workouts. Not sport.
I only participate in the sport of cycling maybe 3 to 4 times a year. That's it. My hammer ride heroics are just a fun activity and exercise. It's great fun to talk about, but it ain't sport.
Oddly enough, an after work crew of guys and gals playing pickup soccer are playing a sport. They've got rules, probably a company logo shirt, and there's a winner and a loser. It's competition. Sadly, the hammer ride and group ride ain't sport.
I'm A-OK with re-defining the discussion of this to "cycling as an activity". If you just want to call it an activity, all the stuff everyone is talking about is perfectly fine.
Also, it's all good debate. No reason to get offended one way or another. People bring some interesting perspectives.
The whole world of sport in cycling got turned on its head with Zwift. Oh the pissy arguments that came up then! So much bum hurt! Talk about a disruptive technology. It got debate going.
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,496
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Liked 8,298 Times
in
3,298 Posts
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).
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.
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.
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?
#73
Senior Member
Sport
To compete you have to have rules, winners, losers, and outcomes. Group rides don't have outcomes. There's no timing mat or photo finish on the county line sprint. Even super hard make you puke bike workouts, are workouts. Not sport.
I only participate in the sport of cycling maybe 3 to 4 times a year. That's it. My hammer ride heroics are just a fun activity and exercise. It's great fun to talk about, but it ain't sport.
Oddly enough, an after work crew of guys and gals playing pickup soccer are playing a sport. They've got rules, probably a company logo shirt, and there's a winner and a loser. It's competition. Sadly, the hammer ride and group ride ain't sport.
I'm A-OK with re-defining the discussion of this to "cycling as an activity". If you just want to call it an activity, all the stuff everyone is talking about is perfectly fine.
Also, it's all good debate. No reason to get offended one way or another. People bring some interesting perspectives.
The whole world of sport in cycling got turned on its head with Zwift. Oh the pissy arguments that came up then! So much bum hurt! Talk about a disruptive technology. It got debate going.
noun
- 1.an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.
To compete you have to have rules, winners, losers, and outcomes. Group rides don't have outcomes. There's no timing mat or photo finish on the county line sprint. Even super hard make you puke bike workouts, are workouts. Not sport.
I only participate in the sport of cycling maybe 3 to 4 times a year. That's it. My hammer ride heroics are just a fun activity and exercise. It's great fun to talk about, but it ain't sport.
Oddly enough, an after work crew of guys and gals playing pickup soccer are playing a sport. They've got rules, probably a company logo shirt, and there's a winner and a loser. It's competition. Sadly, the hammer ride and group ride ain't sport.
I'm A-OK with re-defining the discussion of this to "cycling as an activity". If you just want to call it an activity, all the stuff everyone is talking about is perfectly fine.
Also, it's all good debate. No reason to get offended one way or another. People bring some interesting perspectives.
The whole world of sport in cycling got turned on its head with Zwift. Oh the pissy arguments that came up then! So much bum hurt! Talk about a disruptive technology. It got debate going.
Furthermore, based on your definition, any ride where there is a race up a hill, or simply a contest to see who can avoid getting dropped, meets the definition of "sport". It involves physical exertion and people are competing against one another. Nowhere does it say it needs to be a formal competition. Strava KOMs would also count as "sport" based on the definition you gave here.
#74
Passista
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,783
Bikes: 1998 Pinarello Asolo, 1992 KHS Montaņa pro, 1980 Raleigh DL-1, IGH Hybrid, IGH Utility
Liked 825 Times
in
458 Posts
I don't know about tennis (I'm terrible at most sports) but I've seen many beginner cyclists being able to ride at a good pace with a group in 1 year or less, providing they weren't too overweight to start with and were keen to train and learn.
Likes For Reynolds:
#75
Senior Member
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.
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.
I don't get why this is so difficult for some people to grasp. Some sports have a steeper learning curve than others. Mike Woods became a pro cyclist a couple of years after he started riding and was on the World Tour a couple years after that. He could do this because his w/kg mattered far more than his lack of skill. He certainly wouldn't have been able to succeed as an elite mountain biker so quickly. A track star can become a good wide receiver pretty quickly, he can't become a quarterback. No golfer ever was able to be a pro after only a couple of years. High skill sports take years to develop. Road cycling is not a high skill sport. It just isn't.