Road Cycling · Public discussion

Another clueless writer

Ed Stevens · 2004-03-05T00:46:58+00:00

Check out this column published on the front page of the sports section in Monday's edition of The Tennessean (Nashville, TN) And my reply, which I emailed to Larry Woody and also posted on my club's web site at http://mborobike.com/discind.htm Comments My response to Larry Woody, emailed to [email hidden]: It was with some interest that I read your column in Monday's paper ("NASCAR overlooked in list of 'Ten Toughest Athletes.'") I've never been a great fan of NASCAR nor have I followed it very closely, though as a child in the 50's and 60's I enjoyed being able to go to the local dirt-track races in Oklahoma City. Until I read your column, I was totally ignorant of what some NASCAR drivers put themselves through. It is that ignorance of NASCAR that prevents me from making public comment on the relative "toughness" of NASCAR drivers. And it is that same ignorance of bicycle racing that should have prevented you from commenting on the "toughness" of professional cyclists, especially Lance Armstrong. If you think that a cyclist is just "peddling his bike uphill" then I invite you to come join the Murfreesboro Bicycle Club on any of their 20 to 60 mile rides through the relative flat terrain of Rutherford County. We have any number of over 50 (over 60, over 70) men -- and women -- who will be happy to hold back and help pull your manly self over the first "hill." After you've recovered from that stroll through the countryside, consider what professional bicycle racing is like. Imagine riding a bicyle - no, not just riding, RACING - from Gatlinburg over Newfound Gap into Cherokee, NC. Four times. In less than seven hours. Then do it again the next day. And the next. For three weeks straight. Not tough enough for your? Now, think about doing that (while supporting your body weight over the handle bars) after having broken a collarbone on the first day. That is what Tyler Hamilton did in the Tour De France 2003. As for Lance Armstrong, I'm sure you as a sports writer are aware that he has done the above better than anyone for five years running. And that after being given less than a ten-percent chance of even surviving testicular cancer that had spread to his lungs and brain. No, Lance Armstrong, Tyler Hamilton, and other cyclists wouldn't last a single round with Mike Tyson. But then, Tyson wouldn't last a mile on a bike with even the slowest rider in the pro peloton. Tough? Mike Tyson is just a stree thug who isn't fit to carry Lance Armstrong's water bottle. If I were a sports writer I wouln't waste a single column-inch on Mike Tyson. I realize you have to write for your readership, and I realize that readership is overwhelmingly more interested in NASCAR than pro cycling. However, there is a line between informing and educating (the role of a journalist) and pandering to the mob. I leave it to you to figure out which side of that line your column fell on.

Started by Ed Stevens · 5 March 2004 · Last activity 14 March 2004 · 38 posts · 2,168 views

← Back to Road Cycling

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postAnother clueless writerEd Stevens · 5 Mar 2004 02 / This pagePosts 1–20Page 1 of 2 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #38Chris Neary · 14 Mar 2004

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section: Road Cycling
Published: 5 March 2004
Last activity: 14 March 2004
Original author: Ed Stevens
Posts: 38
Discussion status: Public discussion
Total views: 2,168
Views / 30 days: 0
Topics: Classics racing Crit racing Cycling clothing Heart rate training Single-speed and fixed-gear Titanium frames Track cycling Lance Armstrong

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Original post
Ed Stevens
Archived post

5 March 2004, 00:46 UTC #1

Check out this column published on the front page of the sports section in Monday's edition of The
Tennessean (Nashville, TN)
And my reply, which I emailed to Larry Woody and also posted on my club's web site at
mborobike.comdiscind.htm
Comments
My response to Larry Woody, emailed to [email hidden]:
It was with some interest that I read your column in Monday's paper ("NASCAR overlooked in list of
'Ten Toughest Athletes.'"😉
I've never been a great fan of NASCAR nor have I followed it very closely, though as a child in the
50's and 60's I enjoyed being able to go to the local dirt-track races in Oklahoma City. Until I
read your column, I was totally ignorant of what some NASCAR drivers put themselves through. It is
that ignorance of NASCAR that prevents me from making public comment on the relative "toughness" of
NASCAR drivers.
And it is that same ignorance of bicycle racing that should have prevented you from commenting on
the "toughness" of professional cyclists, especially Lance Armstrong.
If you think that a cyclist is just "peddling his bike uphill" then I invite you to come join the
Murfreesboro Bicycle Club on any of their 20 to 60 mile rides through the relative flat terrain of
Rutherford County. We have any number of over 50 (over 60, over 70) men -- and women -- who will be
happy to hold back and help pull your manly self over the first "hill."
After you've recovered from that stroll through the countryside, consider what professional bicycle
racing is like. Imagine riding a bicyle - no, not just riding, RACING - from Gatlinburg over
Newfound Gap into Cherokee, NC.
Four times.
In less than seven hours.
Then do it again the next day.
And the next.
For three weeks straight.
Not tough enough for your?
Now, think about doing that (while supporting your body weight over the handle bars) after having
broken a collarbone on the first day. That is what Tyler Hamilton did in the Tour De France 2003.
As for Lance Armstrong, I'm sure you as a sports writer are aware that he has done the above better
than anyone for five years running. And that after being given less than a ten-percent chance of
even surviving testicular cancer that had spread to his lungs and brain.
No, Lance Armstrong, Tyler Hamilton, and other cyclists wouldn't last a single round with Mike
Tyson. But then, Tyson wouldn't last a mile on a bike with even the slowest rider in the pro
peloton. Tough? Mike Tyson is just a stree thug who isn't fit to carry Lance Armstrong's water
bottle. If I were a sports writer I wouln't waste a single column-inch on Mike Tyson.
I realize you have to write for your readership, and I realize that readership is overwhelmingly
more interested in NASCAR than pro cycling. However, there is a line between informing and educating
(the role of a journalist) and pandering to the mob. I leave it to you to figure out which side of
that line your column fell on.

Report
Patrick O'Grady
Archived post

5 March 2004, 01:17 UTC #2

In article <[email hidden]>, Ed Stevens
Quoted message said:
Check out this column published on the front page of the sports section in Monday's edition of The
Tennessean (Nashville, TN)
And my reply, which I emailed to Larry Woody and also posted on my club's web site at
mborobike.comdiscind.htm
Ed,
Speaking as a writer whose editors relish hate mail (it lets them know that people are reading), I
recommend ignoring clumsy little digs like this one from Larry Woody
(tennessean.comwoody). Besides, anyone who writes for money and
doesn't know the difference between "peddling" and "pedaling" is too dim to argue with. Bantering
with nitwits like this is hardly sporting, on a par with shooting puppies at the pound.
BTW, Woody also forgot to mention that Hemingway was mad for bike racing and wrote admiringly of the
sport. In "The End of an Avocation," in "A Moveable Feast," Hemingway wrote: "I have started many
stories about bicycle racing but have never written one that is as good as the races are both on the
indoor and outdoor tracks and on the roads."
Cheers,
Patrick O'Grady Mad Dog Media maddogmedia.commaddogmedia.com

Report
Bob
Archived post

5 March 2004, 04:31 UTC #3

I think he misses the point. Perhaps the USA Today author doesn't consider NASCAR driver
athletes. Certainly there is a difference between an activity that requires a motor and one that
does not. Just because a sport has "an estimated 75 million race fans" does not make its
participants athletes.
-Bob

Report
Luigi De Guzman
Archived post

5 March 2004, 05:17 UTC #4

Bob said:
I think he misses the point. Perhaps the USA Today author doesn't consider NASCAR driver athletes.
Certainly there is a difference between an activity that requires a motor and one that does not.
Just because a sport has "an estimated 75 million race fans" does not make its participants
athletes.
Auto-racing boosters would point to the extreme loads and stresses which are placed on the human
body , as well as the risk of catastrophic, flaming, ratings-producing death.
For what it's worth, NASCAR is terrible. Those cars resemble a "stock" car like a Kentucky Derby
winner resembles a pack mule; there's zero basis in reality in them anymore, other than erzatz
fiberglass bodies. If it I *must* admit to an interest in any motorsport, it's the World Rally Championship--nearly-
production cars, driven on real roads. They turn left. They turn right. They climb, they descend,
they break down, they get going again.
Cycling is neat though. For not much money (compared to, say WRC or NASCAR!) you can ride what your
pro hero rides. On the street.
(whether that's a good idea or not for *you* is an ENTIRELY different question!)
-Luigi

Report
Eric S. Sande
Archived post

5 March 2004, 05:17 UTC #5

Quoted message said:
Cycling is neat though. For not much money (compared to, say WRC or NASCAR!) you can ride what your
pro hero rides. On the street.
But a stripped road bike might not be appropriate under street conditions, I'd say go with fenders
and wider tires, at least in the winter.
NASCAR is for spectators.
--
_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________ ------------------"Buddy Holly,
the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>[email hidden]__________

Report
Luigi De Guzman
Archived post

5 March 2004, 05:17 UTC #6

On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:04:43 -0500, "Eric S. Sande" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Cycling is neat though. For not much money (compared to, say WRC or NASCAR!) you can ride what
your pro hero rides. On the street.
But a stripped road bike might not be appropriate under street conditions, I'd say go with fenders
and wider tires, at least in the winter.
Hence: "wheter or not that's a good idea for *you* is another question ENTIRELY!".
I never pay attention. don't they ride wider tires at Paris-Roubaix? like 28mm?
-Luigi

Report
Eric S. Sande
Archived post

5 March 2004, 05:17 UTC #7

Quoted message said:
I never pay attention. don't they ride wider tires at Paris-Roubaix? like 28mm?
Well, at PBP they ride all kinds of weird stuff.
--
_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________ ------------------"Buddy Holly,
the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>[email hidden]__________

Report
Luigi De Guzman
Archived post

5 March 2004, 05:17 UTC #8

On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:12:51 -0500, "Eric S. Sande" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
I never pay attention. don't they ride wider tires at Paris-Roubaix? like 28mm?
Well, at PBP they ride all kinds of weird stuff.
Those crazy cyclists. what won't they think of next?
-Luigi

Report
Eric S. Sande
Archived post

5 March 2004, 05:46 UTC #9

Quoted message said:
There is a lot more difference between a NASCAR "stock" car and a real car that you could drive on
the street than fenders and racing tires.
All cars look the same to me.
--
_______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY MIND_______________________ ------------------"Buddy Holly,
the Texas Elvis"------------------
__________306.350.357.38>>[email hidden]__________

Report
Kevan Smith
Archived post

5 March 2004, 06:16 UTC #10

On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:14:33 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[email hidden]> from
Cox Communications said:
Eric S. Sande said:
Quoted message said:
I never pay attention. don't they ride wider tires at Paris-Roubaix? like 28mm?
Well, at PBP they ride all kinds of weird stuff.
Those crazy cyclists. what won't they think of next?
The Furnace Creek 508 in the fixed gear category. Ouch.
--
[email hidden]
Do something boring.
109

Report
Bob
Archived post

5 March 2004, 13:57 UTC #11

"Luigi" wrote ...
Quoted message said:
Auto-racing boosters would point to the extreme loads and stresses which are placed on the human
body , as well as the risk of catastrophic, flaming, ratings-producing death.
Yes, but again... that doesn't make the driver an athlete any more than someone who takes off in in
the space shuttle or flies an F-15 is an athlete.
-Bob

Report
Steven Goodridg
Archived post

5 March 2004, 15:38 UTC #12

"Bob" <[email hidden]> wrote :
Quoted message said:
Perhaps the USA Today author doesn't consider NASCAR driver athletes.
The un-official expansion of the NASCAR acronym is:
Non-Athletic Sports Centered Around Rednecks
-Steve Goodridge (who prefers Formula 1)

Report
Terry Morse
Archived post

5 March 2004, 15:48 UTC #13

Steven Goodridge said:
The un-official expansion of the NASCAR acronym is:
Non-Athletic Sports Centered Around Rednecks
See (actually hear, it's audio) the following for some insight into the mind of a NASCAR fan:
orock1059.comprank711.swf
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA terrymorse.combike

Report
Mark Hickey
Archived post

5 March 2004, 16:32 UTC #14

Bob said:
"Luigi" wrote ...
Quoted message said:
Auto-racing boosters would point to the extreme loads and stresses which are placed on the human
body , as well as the risk of catastrophic, flaming, ratings-producing death.
Yes, but again... that doesn't make the driver an athlete any more than someone who takes off in in
the space shuttle or flies an F-15 is an athlete.
I think the confusion stems from the fact that to do any of the above (NASCAR, astronaut, fighter
pilot), you have to be in really very good shape - what most people would consider "athletic".
That doesn't mean that the average NASCAR driver would last two laps in a criterium - or that
they wouldn't for that matter. Some of them ARE in really, really great shape. All of them are in
what most folks would consider very good shape, but not necessarily what we would consider "very
good shape".
Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles habcycles.comhabcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

Report
Chris Neary
Archived post

5 March 2004, 17:46 UTC #15

Quoted message said:
I think the confusion stems from the fact that to do any of the above (NASCAR, astronaut, fighter
pilot), you have to be in really very good shape - what most people would consider "athletic".
I was fortunate in that my father was the liaison to his firm's sponsored NASCAR drivers. As a
result we followed the Winston Cup circuit for a couple of summers and I got to meet many of the
drivers (Richard Petty would shower in our Winnebago after races).
Very talented people with exceptional skill, but I have a hard time thinking of the typical NASCAR
driver as being "really very good shape".
Chris Neary [email hidden]
"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the
elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

Report
DiabloScott
Archived post

5 March 2004, 18:37 UTC #16

Quoted post said:
Originally posted by Chris Neary
>I think the confusion stems from the fact that to do any of the above (NASCAR, astronaut, fighter
Quoted message said:
pilot), you have to be in really very good shape - what most people would consider "athletic".

I was fortunate in that my father was the liaison to his firm's sponsored NASCAR drivers. As a
result we followed the Winston Cup circuit for a couple of summers and I got to meet many of the
drivers (Richard Petty would shower in our Winnebago after races).

Very talented people with exceptional skill, but I have a hard time thinking of the typical NASCAR
driver as being "really very good shape".

Chris Neary [email hidden]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the
elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh
Mr. O'Grady is right though about the response letter. I've seen dozens of this kind of column written and the ensuing barrage of whiney poorly written rebuttals; they never have the desired effect. OP’s letter is only slightly better (sorry).
I might have written something like this:
“Of course Larry Woody is correct; NASCAR drivers deserve to be on the revered list of toughest athletes. But I fear he has completely overlooked the sport of <choose from darts, bocce ball, ping-pong> whose athletes must endure <insert specious list of grueling physical demands>.

Report
Amh
Archived post

5 March 2004, 18:46 UTC #17

"Eric S. Sande" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Cycling is neat though. For not much money (compared to, say WRC or NASCAR!) you can ride what
your pro hero rides. On the street.
But a stripped road bike might not be appropriate under street conditions, I'd say go with fenders
and wider tires, at least in the winter.
Don't tell that to all the bike messengers in NYC riding fixed gear track bikes. Other than a
front brake and a whole lotta design and fitting they aren't much different from what Marth
Notstein is riding.
Quoted message said:

NASCAR is for spectators.
I'll bet there are more than a few small track racers in the grandstands. But you are mostly right
about that.
Andy

Report
Max
Archived post

5 March 2004, 18:46 UTC #18

NASCAR drivers endure heat stress! And noise!
wowie wow wow!
.max i spent a few years in the engineroom of a nuculer submarine. way hotter, noisier and
dangersouser. WHERE'S MY WHEATIES CONTRACT?
--
the part of <[email hidden]> was played by maxwell monningh 8-p

Report
Luigi De Guzman
Archived post

5 March 2004, 19:16 UTC #19

DiabloScott said:
Mr. O'Grady is right though about the response letter. I've seen dozens of this kind of column
written and the ensuing barrage of whiney poorly written rebuttals; they never have the desired
effect. OP’s letter is only slightly better (sorry).
I might have written something like this:
“Of course Larry Woody is correct; NASCAR drivers deserve to be on the revered list of toughest
athletes. But I fear he has completely overlooked the sport of <choose from darts, bocce ball, ping-
pong> whose athletes must endure <insert specious list of grueling physical demands>.
Hey, table-tennis is hardcore. Olympic table-tennis players strike balls as fast or faster than
their lawn-tennis compatriots can in their game. It's a fiercely physical contest--more so than
NASCAR by a long shot.
-Luigi

Report
Tom Keats
Archived post

5 March 2004, 21:01 UTC #20

In article <[email hidden]>,
Eric S. Sande said:
NASCAR is for spectators.
Just about any sort of sponsored racing seems to be largely for advertisers. Then the local
economies where the races are held supposedly gets a boost, and then the spectators get some
satisfaction. Maybe it's a prime example of trickle-down economics?
I prefer watching races sponsored by purveyors of wristwatches, to any sponsored by Skoal or oil
corporations. I don't actually have a Tissot watch, though.
Maybe it would be interesting to look for correlations between advertisers' products and the
(athletic?) natures of the events they sponsor. But who's go the time to kill for that?
cheers, Tom
--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn
[point] bc [point] ca

Report

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 1 guest ·0 bots ·1 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.

Jump through the discussion

What we know about this thread

Continue through CyclingForums

Active in this thread