I was chatting with some cycling friends about the sport and we came to the conclusion that with all the doping, allegations of doping, sponsor's leaving, and mismanagement of almost all aspects of pro cycling... that the sport is not doing well right now. What it needs is some youth with AMAZING potential, like a Lebron James, Tiger Woods, Alex Ovechkin, etc...

So does anyone know of youngsters who have promise to be the next *gasp* Eddie Merckx *gasp*:blush2: :blush2: :blush2:

I'd venture a guess that one of the most promising juniors right now is mini-Phinney.

How young they need to be?

I started a thread a week or so ago asking whether or not anyone riding is capable of winning all 5 monuments. You should check that out, because that's probably the type of rider you will need, on top of the fact that they need to at least win the TdF.

I was chatting with some cycling friends about the sport and we came to the conclusion that with all the doping, allegations of doping, sponsor's leaving, and mismanagement of almost all aspects of pro cycling... that the sport is not doing well right now. What it needs is some youth with AMAZING potential, like a Lebron James, Tiger Woods, Alex Ovechkin, etc...

So does anyone know of youngsters who have promise to be the next *gasp* Eddie Merckx *gasp*:blush2: :blush2: :blush2:

Wasn't the Lance Armstrong the savior? or the cause?

Ivan Basso was to be next king...

Vos has the sort potential to win almost anything. A grand tour might be beyond her not then again maybe not.

I doubt that we will ever have a next Eddy Merckx.

Mark Cavendish is on his way to becoming a super star sprinter in road racing.

Robert Gesink, Thomas Dekker, Andy Schleck could become grand tour contenders and if not they always have the one day hilly classics.

Alberto Contador is still young.

Then you got cyclists in their prime, like Tom Boonen or Fabian Cancellara who could offer great spectacle for the following few years.

Sponsors will always come and go. Even with the departure of CSC and Gerolsteiner at the end of the year someone will almost certainly step in with the necessary bucks. I heard somewhere that some Russian oil interests wanted a pro-tour license. And probably some sheikh from Dubai or Qatar may also want one.

Screw that. I don't want another Lance or Miguel. Makes the Tour pretty boring, for one thing. Plus, there are already too many road cyclists.

The sport is doing fine. I've been rereading my history of the Tour, drug and sponsorship problems are cyclical. Put simply, there is a technology war between performance enhancers and detectors. Sometimes the balance swings one way (the late 90s Golden Age of EPO-fueled performance) and sometimes the other (TdF 2006, 2007).

In the meantime, you have genuine stars like Boonen, Cancellara, etc.

The sport is doing fine.

LOL!!! Yeah, doing G.R.E.A.T. times have never been better! :rolleyes:

LOL!!! Yeah, doing G.R.E.A.T. times have never been better! :rolleyes:


+1.....Let's get our head of of the sand and face reality....The sport is in serious trouble...

the problem with the sport isn't the quality of riders, and the doping problems seem to finally be taken seriously with real anti-doping policies among teams and external monitoring beyond WADA. The big probem seems to be political infighting between the UCI, race organizers, WADA etc. Teams are caught in the middle of this, along with totally inconsistent treatment of riders/teams. Why should Astana be singled out-what about Rabobank? They have swept the whole second Rabobank (including the chicken, Menchov others) under the carpet.

The racing so far this year has been phenomenal - Milan San Remo, Flanders, P-R, all have been exciting and inspired rides.

the problem with the sport isn't the quality of riders....

The racing so far this year has been phenomenal - Milan San Remo, Flanders, P-R, all have been exciting and inspired rides.

I agree on both counts... but for the sport to rebound (or, God forbid, GROW) it needs a shot of UBER-athlete to it IMO.

not sure what you mean by grow-the crowds for the classics have been huge as always, the television numbers in Europe were huge as well. The start of the tour in London was amazing in terms of spectators. Despite the bad weather, the ToC had huge crowds. German television is back to airing the Tour this year.

I don't know if anyone has done a real statisical analysis, but sponsor turnover has always been a reality of the sport and it may not really be much more today than in years past. We'll see if Riis has trouble finding a new sponsor. Maybe there will fewer protour size teams (which had to have enough riders to do all the major tours), but more smaller teams. Not necessarily a bad thing. The bottom line is sponsors will follow the money-if the sport continues to get public support and pull in large tv audiences, the sponsors will follow.

not sure what you mean by grow-the crowds for the classics have been huge as always, the television numbers in Europe were huge as well. The start of the tour in London was amazing in terms of spectators. Despite the bad weather, the ToC had huge crowds. German television is back to airing the Tour this year.

I don't know if anyone has done a real statisical analysis, but sponsor turnover has always been a reality of the sport and it may not really be much more today than in years past. We'll see if Riis has trouble finding a new sponsor. Maybe there will fewer protour size teams (which had to have enough riders to do all the major tours), but more smaller teams. Not necessarily a bad thing. The bottom line is sponsors will follow the money-if the sport continues to get public support and pull in large tv audiences, the sponsors will follow.

Please reference post #9

I cited the problems with cycling in a previous post and I'm not pretending there aren't real problems with it, but the bottom line still seems to me that it's still extremely popular among its fans. That's the bottom line for sponsors ultimately as well. The third party independent testing teams have adopted is extremely stringent and is a good sign that doping is finally being treated as a real issue. It's not like the sport is going to disappear tomorrow or anything.

The sport has changed too much for a single rider to be dominant anymore, so it's not like a young Merckx is going to be discovered and dominate the classics, tours, etc. There are a ton of great young riders (like Martijn Maaskant) but the sport is already full of great riders and what makes it interesting is the fact that there are so many potential winners in every race. People forget that in the days of Merckx there were only a few potential winners in every race, the race was more controlled, and a 'domestique' would never think of winning. Today you've got Bettini, Devolder, and Boonen on the same team. That's amazing depth, which other big teams have as well, which makes for great racing.

not sure what you mean by grow-the crowds for the classics have been huge as always, ...
The bottom line is sponsors will follow the money-if the sport continues to get public support and pull in large tv audiences, the sponsors will follow.
The crowds are still there, thank goodness. But the money doesn't follow, at least not in sufficient quantities to pay riders a decent wage, which I believe is a good barometer of a sport's "goodness".

ProTour teams must pay a minimum salary of 25K to 30k euros (depending mostly on whether ther rider is new-pro). I just don't think a 30K salary is sufficient for a top-flight professional. I promising young athlete is going to choose to spend his time in ball sports rather than ride for the love of riding.

I guess I'm saying that in addition to a "Tiger"-like rider, the sport needs some changes in structure to assure success going forward. LA (or, more accurately, the LA Story), did a lot for the sport's visibility in America and elsewhere. But here we are looking for another savior.

Anyway, based on sheer talent, you've got to like young Phinney.

JSR

Vos has the sort potential to win almost anything. A grand tour might be beyond her not then again maybe not.

And she studies biomedical sciences. That might come in handy.

Anyway, based on sheer talent, you've got to like young Phinney.

Did you catch the video interview of the old man on CycleTo? Part one: http://www.cycleto.com/videos.html?bcpid=1438501764&bclid=1406165222&bctid=1517402081 (part two linked on the page)

Did you catch the video interview of the old man on CycleTo? Part one: http://www.cycleto.com/videos.html?bcpid=1438501764&bclid=1406165222&bctid=1517402081 (part two linked on the page)

Yes. I wish Davis all the best with his surgery, really hope it helps.

Its all about Andy Schleck!

The crowds are still there, thank goodness. But the money doesn't follow, at least not in sufficient quantities to pay riders a decent wage, which I believe is a good barometer of a sport's "goodness".

ProTour teams must pay a minimum salary of 25K to 30k euros (depending mostly on whether ther rider is new-pro). I just don't think a 30K salary is sufficient for a top-flight professional. I promising young athlete is going to choose to spend his time in ball sports rather than ride for the love of riding.

I guess I'm saying that in addition to a "Tiger"-like rider, the sport needs some changes in structure to assure success going forward. LA (or, more accurately, the LA Story), did a lot for the sport's visibility in America and elsewhere. But here we are looking for another savior.

Anyway, based on sheer talent, you've got to like young Phinney.

JSR
And yet now they get a salary.
They hay days referred to in this thread included riders sharing a moldy attic and eating pasta without sauce to make ends meet in the hope they might eventually win something so they could get a decent contract.
The money has always been larger in soccer than in cycling.

Two issues:

Its pretty easy for a casual or fringe fan to see the greatness of Tiger, Lebron, Manning, etc. With cycling its a bit more difficult to see. Sure winning a load of races would draw attention but finding a highlight for Sportscenter or breaking down how he took over and dominated the last 50k of a race would be problematic.

The other issue is suspician of drug use. If a rider were to start dominating imagine the suspician that would surround him and how many would line up with "evidence."

Thinking about this from a North American perspective. I think a charismatic, English speaking rider (not necessarily American) dominating the Tour and then the Olympic Road Race would go a long way to improving the overall visibility of cycling.

The two I have to go with is Andy Shleck, he was second in the Giro d'Italia and he was the best young rider. I think he could win the whole race in a few years. And Taylor Phinney. At only 18 he got gold the 2008 L.A. World Cup Track Championships, individual pursuit.

Which sponsors are you concerned about leaving? Would that be Molteni or Peugeot or Gan (the first or second time) or Raleigh or La Vie Claire or PDM or Skil. Oh wait, Skil is back again.

Sponsors have always come and gone. Teams like Kelme and Telekom/T-Mobile had remarkably long runs. I'm not saying finding sponsors is easy now but I think a couple relatively clean years and the sponsors will be easier to find.

I'm not worried about the young riders. There are a bunch of good youngsters coming along.

With a little more cooperation between governing bodies, the sport will be fine.

I think a couple relatively clean years and the sponsors will be easier to find.

Good luck! In your estimation has the peleton had any "clean years" since the early 90's?

Plus, the damage is done with the public. Europeans knew of the probability that the cyclist were doping before, but after the past couple of years it is the local joke that the sport is horribly unclean. And in N.America, doping is the hottest topic in sports journalism now. To think that casual fans will come back on their own is a farce in my estimation.

With a little more cooperation between governing bodies, the sport will be fine.

Again, you see this happening anytime soon? I think they will drive each other to bankruptcy and beyond.

Edit: Badger, not trying to be offensive, but the sport is suffering. Suffering very, very bad.

When a sport must almost totally rely on sponsorship money to survive, then it will always be in a state of flux to some extent or another.

One of cyclings major problems is that it is not really revenue generating at the event itself. It's not like you can pack them into a staduim and sell tickets. The sport is reliant on sponsors and ancillary revenue to generate income. If there was a way to generate a steady stream of income though something like ticket sales, it would stabilize a lot more. It would be easier for sponsors to directly tie money spent on the sport to a revenue stream. That's a lot easier sell to a Corporate board of directors than the way it is now.

is the OP uses Golf, Basketball and Hockey as examples and if any of these sports (toss in baseball and football as well) had the dope testing cycling does you'd have no teams left

You think all these tall skinny guys got all bulked up to muscle around in the paint purely by hitting the gym?

football? geez I'd guess at 8o% plus percent used a PED to get where they are, many of them dating back to high school or college

baseball was saved after the strike by a bunch of juiced players having home run derby

look at Puerto, gee some cyclists, but a good # of footballers, tennis players and I think a golfer as well

Doping in cycling is news because cycling actually tests and punishes its athletes

every other sport is living in a mass state of denial, maybe cycling should follow suit

And yet now they get a salary.
They hay days referred to in this thread included riders sharing a moldy attic and eating pasta without sauce to make ends meet in the hope they might eventually win something so they could get a decent contract.

That is a good point... but really the money was always being brought in (at least in other sports, I cannot speak for cycling's history of revenues) The difference is just that today the players split the serious $$$ brought in, so the owners/mangers/ organizing bodies/ don't keep it all, like it was in yesteryears.

I was chatting with some cycling friends about the sport and we came to the conclusion that with all the doping, allegations of doping, sponsor's leaving, and mismanagement of almost all aspects of pro cycling... that the sport is not doing well right now. What it needs is some youth with AMAZING potential, like a Lebron James, Tiger Woods, Alex Ovechkin, etc...

So does anyone know of youngsters who have promise to be the next *gasp* Eddie Merckx *gasp*:blush2: :blush2: :blush2:

a competitive athlete at a pretty high level, but I have to disagree completely with what you're saying.

I just see this problem, in a bigger societal context. I don't want to go there in this response, but I think the solution is at more of a grass roots level.

Most of us on this forum are not minors, but grown ups with jobs and responsibilities. We do love to ride our bikes, that is the common thread in a very disparate group.

For kids, riding the bike, learning to ride is a huge milestone, but it's not kept up. Kids love riding a bike at every level, cruising, hanging out, transportation, fitness, racing. The promoters in the U.S. have done a horrendous job bringing cycling to the masses, whether it's for recreation, health, racing, whatever.

The people running cycling in the U.S. don't promote cycling as being central to health, fitness, and transportation. Every time I ride in South Florida I'm taking my life in my hands, the roads are very unsafe. Certain areas have taken the initiative with bike friendly roads, (Weston, Boca Raton) but too many have not.

We should let kids be kids and slowly learn and mature. By the same token, adults, have to put sport in context and stop falling all over themselves worshipping Tiger, Lebron, Ovechkin, or whatever new flavor of the month, year, or decade. Most of these guys are just big kids without much to say outside of their expertise in althletics.

People like Bannister should really be the role models, or someone maybe like Tiger who does clinics and promotes golf with some bigger agenda in mind. With golf they are promoting the self policing nature of the game. You know, not using the foot wedge when no one is watching.

I think the mistake here is to say that Cycling ever had any glory to begin with. Sure it is popular with the fans, but it is a fringe sport with an impossibly small following when compared to football, soccer, pro wrestling, or foxy boxing. It's extremely dangerous, expensive enough to alienate most people from pursuing it, and even if you area successful cyclist you are are still not a "celebrity" nor do you get that pro sports payday, so a lot of young folks have no motivation to make it their dream.

The next Eddie Merckx? Please. Go to the mall and ask 20 people who he was. That's correct, the answer is he was nobody. He didn't exist. It is common knowledge Lance Armstrong is the only person to ever ride a bike...ever. If you want a glory age for bikes you need to look past the most talented, look past the most iconic, you need to most marketable, you need the guy who can be charming and sell the sport on the today show while still being the rebel who shakes up the sport and stays in the headlines.

is the OP uses Golf, Basketball and Hockey as examples and if any of these sports (toss in baseball and football as well) had the dope testing cycling does you'd have no teams left

My point wasn't about doping, but about the need for the sport to rebound from where it is now. That is traditionally done in other sports by some uber-athlete. That is my only point.

a competitive athlete at a pretty high level, but I have to disagree completely with what you're saying.


When I say "sport" I mean the professional sport, not the activity of riding a bike. I think atheletes like Lebron, Overchkin, or whomever are generally great for kids to follow. Please note, I didn't say idolize, but follow.

I remember watching Jordan as a kid, and trying to (pathetically) replicate his moves on the floor as well. I don't see any thing wrong with this- and Jordan made the NBA in the 90's. My point is only we need someone to "make" pro-cycling a respected sport again.

I think the mistake here is to say that Cycling ever had any glory to begin with.

The next Eddie Merckx? Please. Go to the mall and ask 20 people who he was. That's correct, the answer is he was nobody.

Are you an ostentatious North American? No you couldn't be!!

There is a world outside of your strip mall in Ohio.

Are you an ostentatious North American? No you couldn't be!!

There is a world outside of your strip mall in Ohio.

Well, being that I'm from North America, and Ohio no less, are you going to try and tell me that even 1% of North Americans would know who Eddy Merckx is?

Thelonius is right and you need the "next Michael Jordan who happens to participate in cycling." Winning could be an ends to the mean, but is not in and of itself enough.

Suffice it to say Cycling will never be anything other than a niche sport here in N.A. The fact that Lance Armstrong became so popular is amazing in and of itself, and while he certainly helped introduce people into cycling, the general populace still has no interest in watching Paris-Roubaix (not that they know what it is) and they have no idea of the history of the sport.

As to why Cycling will be niche forever here, it's because it has too high of a barrier for entry when it comes to kids racing. Why is soccer (football in the rest of the world) so popular? Because you need something that is vaguely round and can be kicked. That's it. The poorest of poor kids can play anywhere in the world.

One could argue that all you need to cycle is some cheap bike, however bikes have the reputation of either being a kids toy or transportation, and to "play" at a team level you just up the danger and requirements way outside of the range of most communities.

Well, being that I'm from North America, and Ohio no less, are you going to try and tell me that even 1% of North Americans would know who Eddy Merckx is?

My point was that the original question wasn't focused on N. Americans. I would say 7 out of 10 Eastern Europeans know exactly who Eddy Merckx is.

The sport of cycling is suffering in Europe. We can talk about introducing the sport into N. America when it makes some kind of rebound in Europe.

The sport of cycling is suffering in Europe.

How? I don't see it.

Also, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2008/04/15/srdrug115.xml

My point was that the original question wasn't focused on N. Americans. I would say 7 out of 10 Eastern Europeans know exactly who Eddy Merckx is.

The sport of cycling is suffering in Europe. We can talk about introducing the sport into N. America when it makes some kind of rebound in Europe.

7 out of 10? I'll take that bet. I think if that was true, it wouldn't be suffering. But more to your point I think At least a good part of why cycling suffers in Europe is both global economics, and the success of Lance. First you have an industry that is steadily shifting away from Europe, mainly with respect to Asian manufacturing, then you add in non-Europeans becoming more dominant in their countries. There is a certain truth that a lot of folks will be unhappy that something that was theirs suddenly isn't so much anymore.

My modest opinion is doping is the least of cycling's problems. If anything those controversies give cycling a commonality with other sports. The difference between cycling and golf, football, and soccer is parents don't put stuffed toy bikes in their kids cribs imagining their baby in the TDF when they grow up. The kids don't start their first cycling team when they are 4 years old. There aren't grade school, middle school, and high school cycling teams. I don't have to spend $2000 to buy my kid a soccer ball, cleats and shin pads. Practically every high school doesn't have a velodrome. Kids don't get full scholarships to ride. A Pro cyclist has never been on MTV cribs. Most golfers don't worry about being run off the 7th fairway by a car. I don't regularly gripe about golfers holding up a lane of traffic. The seeds of cyclings obscurity are planted as early and as firmly as the love of soccer, football, and golf.

P.S. My deepest apologies to Kestreljr for not ignoring his point and staying on topic instead of being a butthole and attack people with snide little comments. I'll attempt better to conform to the board etiquette going forward.

P.S. My deepest apologies to Kestreljr

Apology accepted... anytime.

cycling suffers in Europe

How? I don't see it suffering. It isn't! Lefevere and Riis are complaining that they haven't found a sponsor yet, but teams have always folded, new teams have always been formed. People are ligning the roads, TV audiences are not declining, the number of pro riders is stable, new stars are emerging left and right. The ASO/UCI squabble will somehow be resolved, to the detriment of some self-agrandizing executives. Doping and doping talk will remain alive to some degree or another. Fans won't care too much about that, not as long as the Pounding Dick way of resolving doping problems does not grow to be dominant.

Cyclists are suffering everyday for their glory and our pleasure, cycling does not suffer, yet.

How? I don't see it suffering. It isn't! Lefevere and Riis are complaining that they haven't found a sponsor yet, but teams have always folded, new teams have always been formed. People are ligning the roads, TV audiences are not declining, the number of pro riders is stable, new stars are emerging left and right. The ASO/UCI squabble will somehow be resolved, to the detriment of some self-agrandizing executives. Doping and doping talk will remain alive to some degree or another. Fans won't care too much about that, not as long as the Pounding Dick way of resolving doping problems does not grow to be dominant.

Cyclists are suffering everyday for their glory and our pleasure, cycling does not suffer, yet.

I'm with Susan Walker on this one. I watched all the major classics this year, and there certainly seemed to be no lack of spectators.

Cycling seems to be as popular as it ever was in Europe. Arguably, it is even more popular because we now have two well-established US road races, and a third one (Missouri) seeming to catch on as well. And yet we "knowledgable" fans have the feeling there is serious trobule. How can these two realities co-exist?

I believe it is because the organization of the sport is inherently tenuous. It has been correctly pointed out that sponsors have always come and gone, just as they are now. It has been correctly pointed out that during the "golden age" (you are free to pick the era which seems golden to you) riders were very poor, as many of them are now.

I therefore reject the proposition that we need a Tiger or Lebron to "return the sport to glory." What the sport needs, what this thread is really seeking IMHO, is a catalyst to take it forward to glories not yet seen.

That catalyst (once again IMO) is a stable structure that facilitates the in-flow of buckets of money from sponsors and broadcasters. All the other elements are there - marquis events with long histories, outstanding athletes, regular technological innovations. What's missing is a massive amount of money.

Many on this forum have rejected the ProTour, but so far it is the only organization which has attempted to provide the necessary infrastructure. Maybe that means the missing person is a Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, or a George Halas (I'm sure there are people responsible for the success of soccer or cricket, but I don't know who they are). Somebody with the vision and will to bring the warring parties together and take the sport forward.

Today in Los Angeles, the Dodgers baseball team announced a $500M plan to improve the stadium, with a view to its remaining a flagship venue for another 50 years. That's the kind "bucket of money", and the kind of stability, I'm refering to. Cycling is scratching around for 10-20M euro annual team budgets, while other sports are leaving that as bar tips.

My 2c

JSR

I like the ProTour as a concept. I really want to be able to "pick a team" and be able to root for it year after year. I also want to be able to say relatively decisively who the best teams in the world are. You might have an argument about a couple of the current ProTour teams though. Bougie Telecom pretty much features in zero races.

How about Slipstream for young, exciting talent? I think they're raising the profile of cycling in the U.S. and give jaded fans a place to turn.

When I say "sport" I mean the professional sport, not the activity of riding a bike. I think atheletes like Lebron, Overchkin, or whomever are generally great for kids to follow. Please note, I didn't say idolize, but follow.

Well, both hockey and golf are much less popular than basketball, a large part of that is because of the expense of the gear. With cycling the expense is much greater, and the arena for the game is almost completely inaccessable for kids. Even though a rink and golf course is far from accessable, compare it to a road with heavy traffic.

I remember watching Jordan as a kid, and trying to (pathetically) replicate his moves on the floor as well. I don't see any thing wrong with this- and Jordan made the NBA in the 90's. My point is only we need someone to "make" pro-cycling a respected sport again.

David Halberstam wrote a 400 page book describing the Jordan phenomenon as the confluence of many events, but I will say there was always a very big talent pipeline that led to the NBA. College, High School, Jr. High, Youth league, and kids playing in the parks, streets, everywhere. If it wasn't Jordan, I bet it would have been someone else. Jordan's last title was 10 years ago and basketball has continued to grow around the world.

Yeah, I also played basketball down the street for hours every day when I was a kid, on a court at the end of a dead end street. One of my basketball heroes was David Thompson who also happened to be one of Jordan's heroes.

In the U.S. there is no talent pipeline for cycling because there is no grassroots participation among the youth; participation by some 40 something like myself means very little.

7 out of 10? I'll take that bet. I think if that was true, it wouldn't be suffering. But more to your point I think At least a good part of why cycling suffers in Europe is both global economics, and the success of Lance. First you have an industry that is steadily shifting away from Europe, mainly with respect to Asian manufacturing, then you add in non-Europeans becoming more dominant in their countries. There is a certain truth that a lot of folks will be unhappy that something that was theirs suddenly isn't so much anymore.

My modest opinion is doping is the least of cycling's problems. If anything those controversies give cycling a commonality with other sports. The difference between cycling and golf, football, and soccer is parents don't put stuffed toy bikes in their kids cribs imagining their baby in the TDF when they grow up. The kids don't start their first cycling team when they are 4 years old. There aren't grade school, middle school, and high school cycling teams. I don't have to spend $2000 to buy my kid a soccer ball, cleats and shin pads. Practically every high school doesn't have a velodrome. Kids don't get full scholarships to ride. A Pro cyclist has never been on MTV cribs. Most golfers don't worry about being run off the 7th fairway by a car. I don't regularly gripe about golfers holding up a lane of traffic. The seeds of cyclings obscurity are planted as early and as firmly as the love of soccer, football, and golf.

P.S. My deepest apologies to Kestreljr for not ignoring his point and staying on topic instead of being a butthole and attack people with snide little comments. I'll attempt better to conform to the board etiquette going forward.

Apology accepted... anytime.


Kestreljr, I may be wrong, but I think Thelonius was being sarcastic when he apologized.

I also think he was right on the button with his comments.


Honestly, cycling in the U.S. isn't even close to being on par with track and field, another sport on life support, although I think it could have much more general appeal.

When you enable kids to ride road bikes for a couple of hours a day without the good possibility of getting killed, and when U.S. society in general becomes more bike friendly, the upper echelon of the sport will also flourish. Without a grassroots effort, cycling will always be a lower rung niche sport.

When you enable kids to ride road bikes for a couple of hours a day without the good possibility of getting killed, and when U.S. society in general becomes more bike friendly, the upper echelon of the sport will also flourish. Without a grassroots effort, cycling will always be a lower rung niche sport.

Sounds like a call for more velodromes but they never seem to find the funding.

Sounds like a call for more velodromes but they never seem to find the funding.

Even a three foot wide bike lane would be nice in a lot of places. In South Florida, you almost have to be a daredevil to ride in most places....

The one thing the people who post on this website seem to have in common is the love of riding the bike.

IMHO most people find much of the same enjoyment I find. Even the friggin POTUS. Why this is not exploited is beyond me. Their are so many positive benefits to riding. Even LA, a guy I'm not fond of, has built that facility in Austin Tx which caters to bike commuters. If that could be replicated on a large scale, the benefits would be staggering.

Kids riding bikes to school, that would be amazing too.