Too late?

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (MortDubois)

Quoted message said:

Sorry, but I'll stand by my original statement. Compared to most
sports, very little skill or technique involved in cycling. You and
the following posters have identified some of the more difficult
moments in a bike race, but c'mon - 98% of the sport is turning the
pedals. That's one of the best things about cycling. You can start
at any age and enjoy it, and if you have the proper genetics and
training you will be competitive with your age cohort. In almost all
other sports that simply isn't true, because the techniques need
constant practice and many of them are difficult to master. I would
say that for soccer, basketball, tennis, football, baseball, and many
more, starting early is a big advantage. Not necessary for cycling,
running, perhaps swimming, and the other aerobic oriented sports.

And if you don't believe me, watch a group of cyclists try to play a
pickup basketball game.

Skill and technique, eh?

*Soccer players spend 98% of the game time running up and down a grassy field,
occasionally kicking a large white ball.
*Basketball players spend 98% of the game time running up and down a hardwood
court while throwing a large orange ball back and forth.
*Tennis players spend 30% of the game time throwing a small yellow ball up in
the air and smacking it with a racket, 30% of the game time failing to smack
that ball back at their opponent, and 38% of the game time arguing with the
line judges.
*Football players spend 80% of the game time standing around talking and 18% of
the game time trying to knock each other down.
*Baseball players spend 90% of the game time standing around just waiting for
something to happen and 8% of the game time trying to hit a little white ball
with a stick. The rest of the time they spend spitting, scratching, and arguing
with umpires.

Ever seen an NFL lineman or NBA power forward try to ride a bicycle in a group?
I have. It is scary.

Regards,
Bob Hunt
[All the above percentages were arrived at the same way Mort determined his
numbers- I made them up.]

Hunrobe said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (MortDubois)

Skill and technique, eh?

*Soccer players spend 98% of the game time running up and down a grassy
field,
occasionally kicking a large white ball.

Have you EVER played soccer? The running, stopping, changing direction,
and running full speed back and forth all day puts even bicycling to
Shame. The exertion level will kick your lycrad ass.
I used to play soccer and got more tired in a few hours than all day
riding.

Quoted message said:

*Basketball players spend 98% of the game time running up and down a
hardwood
court while throwing a large orange ball back and forth.

Not as hard as soccer but still hard to do for a full game.

Quoted message said:

Regards,
Bob Hunt
[All the above percentages were arrived at the same way Mort determined
his
numbers- I made them up.]

Yeah I didn't put numbers in there, just facts.
Bob, go try to survive soccer with a bunch of high school kids sometime.
You won't last five minutes, no matter how good a cyclist you think you
are.
I like to run in addition to riding and I won't try it.
Bill Baka

--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Ryan Cousineau said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

David Reuteler said:

you vastly underestimate this aspect of golf. to watch an "informal"
saturday morning round of golf between the consulting company ceo and a
fortune 500 cto is to witness a master tactician at work. often quite
breathtaking in its subtlety.

Hee hee! The consultant must be terribly skilled to make sure that when
they throw the game, nobody notices.

ding!

Quoted message said:

But seriously, that's more of a frame narrative than a part of the game.

actually, you've got it all wrong. golf is the frame and schmoozing is the
game. a few people play golf for the sport but i don't think i've ever
met any.

Quoted message said:

It's like saying that Simeoni's feud with Armstrong was part of the Tour
de France.

well, perhaps if simeoni were shooting for a contract renewal.
--
david reuteler
[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Did you ever watch the TV shows where pro atheltes compete in events
not their own. Most are pretty funny looking. These are great athletes
in great shape and they can not transiton to the "new" sports.

Guys, guys - read my original post. I said IN COMPARISON to other
sports that the skill level involved in cycling ISN'T AS IMPORTANT. I
never said there wasn't any skill involved. I never said that cycling
was inferior to team sports. I never said that pro team athletes
could wake up on Monday, jump on a bike, and race competitively. What
I said was that athletes with the coordination required to play pro
team sports are blessed with sufficient coordination to learn every
skill required to ride the bike competitively. I DID NOT say that
they would therefore automatically have sufficient aerobic fitness or
would ever get it. Jobst seems to confuse tactics with skills - these
are actually different things, as any team sport player would tell
you. If all of you rabid cyclists really need to feel that cycling is
superior to all other sports, take heart that a player of team sports
need not be extremely fit to be an effective player - skills can make
up for a lack of fitness. Cycling is not so forgiving. If you aren't
in the lead group at the end, it doesn't matter what skills or tactic
you apply - you will not win. In that respect, cycling and running
are the least forgiving of sports. If you aren't fit, you won't win.
And don't start yammering about how in a race it's not necessarily the
most fit guy who wins. Yes, I have raced and I know that. But I will
guarantee you that the winner will be quite close to the other
contenders in fitness. And let's just leave the effects of luck out
of this, as that's an entirely different discussion and irrelevant to
the point I was making.

Quoted message said:

[email hidden]

wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

I think you just don't understand.
Every sport has specific skills that must be mastered to be
successfull. Good genes and conditioning may get you on the field but
won't get you on the podium. Cycling has real skills that take time to
master.

Exactly.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

[email hidden] (MortDubois) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think "no" special coordination or technique is a slight misstatement
(witness Ullrich's disappearing act in the last few Tours; by this, I mean
where he ran off the road or almost ran off the road). I also agree that
mountain biking takes more technique, and that genetics (plus
determinatio) is what's necessary.

Sorry, but I'll stand by my original statement. Compared to most
sports, very little skill or technique involved in cycling. You and
the following posters have identified some of the more difficult
moments in a bike race, but c'mon - 98% of the sport is turning the
pedals. That's one of the best things about cycling. You can start
at any age and enjoy it, and if you have the proper genetics and
training you will be competitive with your age cohort. In almost all
other sports that simply isn't true, because the techniques need
constant practice and many of them are difficult to master. I would
say that for soccer, basketball, tennis, football, baseball, and many
more, starting early is a big advantage. Not necessary for cycling,
running, perhaps swimming, and the other aerobic oriented sports.

you don't believe me, watch a group of cyclists try to play a

Quoted message said:

pickup basketball game.

I think I can understand what you're saying, but I can see why you're
not getting your message across.

If I may restate:

To be a top performer in any sport requires absolutely mind blowing
dedication.

This dedication is comprised of various parts, but two of the most
important are skill and physical performance.

The ratio of times spent on developing these two abilities varies from
sport to sport.

It's quite hard to think of sports at the very extreme (at least what
most people would consider sport), but if you were to stretch a point,
and call darts a sport, it would be 99.9999% skill, and 0.0001%
physical ability.

Conversely, Weight lifting would be 1% skill and 99% physical ability
(approx, in both cases).

Cycling is a sport where the greater part of the training effort goes
into physical abilty, and a much smaller part to skills development.

At the top level, both aspects have had a LOT of work put into them,
just in a different proportion than, say, badminton.

On 18 Aug 2004 16:36:59 -0700, [email hidden] (MortDubois) wrote
(more or less):

....

Quoted message said:

And if you don't believe me, watch a group of cyclists try to play a
pickup basketball game.

Similiar to the bunch of serious competition sword-fencers I saw get
cuffed by a bunch of under-10s at football.

Fencers are pretty much drawn from teh pool of folk who didn't spend
every spare primary school moment playing football.

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

Quoted message said:

Guys, guys - read my original post. I said IN COMPARISON to other
sports that the skill level involved in cycling ISN'T AS IMPORTANT. I
never said there wasn't any skill involved.

That is exactly the point against which I argue. I believe that almost
all sports require hihg levels of skill to be successfull. I don't
think that cycling is superior in this respect but I don't hink it's
inferior either. I believe that different sports have different skill
sets but that none of them are superior or inferior.

Perhaps certain activities like cycling which have a huge recreational
but not competitive following lulls people into thinking that since
almost everyone can "do it" that the skills are not so difficult and
that the pros are simply more fit. But I assure you that top cyclists
have a set skills (not just fitness)that differ from the "average"
cyclist by an amount at least equal to what pro tennis players have
over the weekend player.