"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - How Long?

How long do you think it takes in cycling to find out what your potential is for the sport?

If you suck at yr 2 of serious training are you destined for eternal suckage? Is there any hope down the road?

If you are talking about making it to the pro level, you should have already gone through the ranks to at least a USA cat2. If that has been difficult to achieve over two years, fuggitabowtit.

Can you ride 120k (75 miles) on your normal road machine in 3 hours? Then you might have a chance. That was always the old-school mark of ability.

I've been training only one year. So I'm still safe :D

I started from such a schlub though...might take 5 years for me!

Seriously...no clue :D

If you're wondering if you should go pro, you should know in the first year.

That's not to say that years of hard work won't pay off. But that's more determined by work ethic and desire than raw talent.

I've know a lot of talented riders who have squandered it, and I know some average riders who have worked harder than the next person to earn a living as a pro.

Didn't we just do this thread a week ago?

5 years

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=521394

If you are talking about making it to the pro level, you should have already gone through the ranks to at least a USA cat2. If that has been difficult to achieve over two years, fuggitabowtit.

Can you ride 120k (75 miles) on your normal road machine in 3 hours? Then you might have a chance. That was always the old-school mark of ability.

No I am not talking about turning pro. More of just wondering when you lie in the cycling world.


If you're wondering if you should go pro, you should know in the first year.

Do you thinks this applies to knowing if you are going to be a pack fodder in the 4's or guy who sees the podium in the 3's.


Didn't we just do this thread a week ago?

Oops. I had a respectable guy tell me that it may take 3 yrs to see what you have in the world of cycling and I wanted others opinions.

Oops. I had a respectable guy tell me that it may take 3 yrs to see what you have in the world of cycling and I wanted others opinions.


That is basically Friel's opinion as well. I have known some guys who really blossomed in years 3 and 4 when they can do a lot bigger load of training.

In my experience if you're not crushing it in the 4s in a year or two its unlikely you will ever see the podium in a 3s race. You may become a competent 3, but the podium, me thinks not. Guys on the podium of 3s races are really 2s just waiting to gather enough points to become a 2, and you'll know pretty quickly if you've got that kind of engine.

Does that mean you can't enjoy this sport? Hell no! I sucked when I started almost 20 years ago (and still suck btw). I won my first 4s race four years after getting my arse handed to me in my first two years of racing. I eventually upgraded to the 3s and got my head handed to me in the Masters 1-2-3 races. I left the sport for 6 years and returned three years ago as a 4.

Today I race 45+ or 50+ events, and sometimes M 35 4/5 or 45 4/5 races. When I line up for an "open" Master race I'm trying to go top 10, and if I really have a great day, top 6. I know that the guys with district jerseys and stars and stripes on their sleeves are going to walk away with the podium placings, but a "victory" for me is hanging in there and being competitive. When I do Masters 4/5 races then I have a chance at a podium spot, and that's pretty cool.

So even if you don't have "it", this sport can be a blast. So I wouldn't sweat it if you "suck" (your words) right now. Keep training hard and smart, adjust your goals, and enjoy.

I got better every year up till 6 years. For me though I think I mostly started getting my first wins because I figured out how to race more then developed fitness.

I have a hard time believing that anyone can't become a pro cyclist. Anyone can be a top regional level rider just by hard work. If you don't like hard work and want to become a pro cyclist then that's a different story. But for those that want it it's not only not impossible but a reasonable goal given the amount of time spent riding (5 years). Nowadays, even if you're good enough to ride at that level you may not find a team because few teams have the resources to invest in you.

I have a hard time believing that anyone can't become a pro cyclist. Anyone can be a top regional level rider just by hard work. If you don't like hard work and want to become a pro cyclist then that's a different story. But for those that want it it's not only not impossible but a reasonable goal given the amount of time spent riding (5 years). Nowadays, even if you're good enough to ride at that level you may not find a team because few teams have the resources to invest in you.

Are we really going to start up that again? Do you realize how inclusive anyone is?

Are we really going to start up that again? Do you realize how inclusive anyone is?

Truth...

Can you ride 120k (75 miles) on your normal road machine in 3 hours? Then you might have a chance. That was always the old-school mark of ability.

are you talking about 75m in 3h on any given road by yourself??? don't pros average that with the whole peloton working together?

i have wondered though...with solo breakaways...like with mancebo this year, i guess he must have been doing 25mph average by himself right, in order to stay in front of the rest of the pack? does anyone have the numbers on him from that day?

I got better every year up till 6 years. For me though I think I mostly started getting my first wins because I figured out how to race more then developed fitness.I have seen some older guys winning cat 1/2 races, and it was pretty obvious that it wasn't the watts/kg. They were just racing smarter and had a good sprint. I guess if you are really top class you can motor your way to a win without understanding the race at all. But that doesn't seem very likely.

Are we really going to start up that again? Do you realize how inclusive anyone is?

fair enough. Let's exclude all physically handicapped and mentally disabled people. Happy?

are you talking about 75m in 3h on any given road by yourself??? don't pros average that with the whole peloton working together?



Pros together can go wayyyy faster.
That's why a neo-pro should have this basic ability to ride 120k in 3hrs by themself.

How long do you think it takes in cycling to find out what your potential is for the sport?

If you suck at yr 2 of serious training are you destined for eternal suckage? Is there any hope down the road?

The beauty of this sport is the peter principle is in full play. Once you stop sucking on one level, and get bumped up, you get to suck again.

are you talking about 75m in 3h on any given road by yourself??? don't pros average that with the whole peloton working together?

i have wondered though...with solo breakaways...like with mancebo this year, i guess he must have been doing 25mph average by himself right, in order to stay in front of the rest of the pack? does anyone have the numbers on him from that day?

Mancebo averaged nearly 26mi/hr with some nice hills thrown in and it was raining. Pelotons dont necessarily work together. In fact rarely to never does a peloton work together.

Either I'm way below average (I may be, for real) but there is no way that I could have raced with the pros at my best. No frickin way. With an aero and weight advantage (I ran aero wheels before most folks thought they were safe for mass start races, and I ran some of the lightest and stiffest wheels/pedals out there), I couldn't beat good Cat 3s. I had a hard time going 21 mph on a solo ride, but I could easily hit 42-46 mph in sprints (headwind to tailwind speeds).

I've never won a Cat 3 summer race, a proper race with a good field.

A good friend of mine, who never made it beyond staglaire (sp?), which is sort of like a "trial pro", for usually a month or two in the fall or spring, would regularly avg 24-25 mph for 2-4 hours. When he was a little pip-squeak starting in high school he could out TT, climb, and ride me. He only got better. To give some relevance to his riding ability, one of his Junior National training camp mates was one Christian Vandevelde. My friend did about 7-8 years in Europe, returning for Philly, but never quite made it. He's a phenomenally strong cyclist, still very strong after not riding for a year and gaining 40 lbs.

Talent is talent. On sneakers you should be able to go 21-22 mph in a 10 mile TT. With a normal bike and a normal kit, you should be doing 25 mph regularly for an hour at a time.

If you're any less than that, forget it. Get a good day job.

I figure it takes about 9 months of racing to get an idea of where you'll be (in 3 months you'll have a good idea, but good riders just keep improving). 3 seasons to get to maybe 90% of your ability.

cdr

fair enough. Let's exclude all physically handicapped and mentally disabled people. Happy?

No. See the other thread, no need to repeat my arguments.

Talent is talent. On sneakers you should be able to go 21-22 mph in a 10 mile TT. With a normal bike and a normal kit, you should be doing 25 mph regularly for an hour at a time.

If you're any less than that, forget it. Get a good day job.


Rocking the day job.

Pros together can go wayyyy faster.
That's why a neo-pro should have this basic ability to ride 120k in 3hrs by themself.

i guess, i dont know why i thought that was so insane...im so used to seeing my average which includes stop signs, lights, and occasional obstacles that a pro would not necessarily have to deal with. i can hit 25 avg on fiesta island ( no lights, rarely cars) and tried for a 30 avg to beat the island TT record...but thats a different story.

I'm way stronger in my second year of racing than my first. I like the way that friel suggests making measureable goals for yourself. We're not going to be pro. F-it. so what.

What I love about this sport is that when I suck, I can fix it to a certain degree--or become measurably better. I/We know what we must do, doing it is the hard part. How that "measurably better" stacks up against other racers is a different story.

Sure we all work hard, anyone who can finish a race works hard to do that. Are you working hard enough?--is the real question. The answer for most of us: not really. Have you exhausted all your training options? prob not. So, destiny is in your hands.

Yes, you are destined for eternal suckage if you suck in your first years of cycling No Sarcasm. Does this mean that you can't get to the elite level (Cat 1)? I guess you'll have to figure that out yourself. Honestly, why do you care? Since you asked that question it sounds like you'll probably quit before ever giving yourself a decent chance at attaining that level.

Floyd Landis sucked at the Euro Pro level for many years (compared to 2004-06).

go to cycleto.com and watch the pro tips where they interview pro cyclists. It's under the "train to" tab.
I'd say 80% of them talk about the importance of hard work, discipline, persistence etc. Show me a person that has worked as hard as Tony Cruz still stuck in the cat2 level. I think people are overestimating the magical title of a Cat1. How did you work yourself from cat3 to cat2? Cat 1 is just another step. Albeit a bigger step since you're racing against other cat1s as a 2 in which we can qualify it as 2 steps. "Working hard enough" is not the right attitude to have either. It's called desire and it transcends work ethic.

:sigh:

That doesn't mean that everyone has the same absolute potential.

go to cycleto.com and watch the pro tips where they interview pro cyclists. It's under the "train to" tab.


ha, dave z. funny man

:sigh:

That doesn't mean that everyone has the same absolute potential.Exactly. You can have all the mental discipline, desire, drive etc you like and spend 1000-1500 hrs a year training but if you don't start with a decent natural ability you just aren't going to make it at the highest levels. Remember that the elite riders start with good genetics and then pile on the heavy training hours. It's not like they are sitting around on the couch all day eating nachos. They are generally training full time as much as their bodies will allow.

Athletic ability (eg VO2max for cyclists) follows a normal distribution. It's very unlikely you'll find someone with a below average (i.e. half the population) VO2max able to become an elite cyclist.

:sigh:

That doesn't mean that everyone has the same absolute potential.

I don't think everyone has the same absolute potential. I'm not an idealist, I don't think all people can even make it as a European pro. But as a low level domestic pro? Anyone. Ok, maybe not anyone. You have to start at a reasonable age because no team wants an average elite rider in his mid thirties. Do some people achieve that level of fitness faster than others given the same dedication, mindset, desire etc.? Yes, but does that make it impossible for the latter? No.

Have I got an article for you gregf83
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=850
3rd paragraph my friend.

I don't think everyone has the same absolute potential. I'm not an idealist, I don't think all people can even make it as a European pro. But as a low level domestic pro? Anyone. Ok, maybe not anyone. You have to start at a reasonable age because no team wants an average elite rider in his mid thirties. Do some people achieve that level of fitness faster than others given the same dedication, mindset, desire etc.? Yes, but does that make it impossible for the latter? No.

The bottom line is that we can never really know, it's all just idle speculation as to the athletic potential of the general population. However, I believe that the normal distributions that nature loves to throw at us pretty much dictates that you need to be near the far end of the curve at anything to make to elite status. Hard work and dedication can overcome a lot but I firmly believe that even "low level domestic pro" status is far above what many people could accomplish regardless of how much they put into it, nevermind having to do it on top of actually living a life, school, family, etc.

I don't think everyone has the same absolute potential. I'm not an idealist, I don't think all people can even make it as a European pro. But as a low level domestic pro? Anyone. Ok, maybe not anyone. You have to start at a reasonable age because no team wants an average elite rider in his mid thirties. Do some people achieve that level of fitness faster than others given the same dedication, mindset, desire etc.? Yes, but does that make it impossible for the latter? No.

Have I got an article for you gregf83
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=850
3rd paragraph my friend.

Your experience is soooo different than mine. We often ride w a few good domestic pros, and a number of REALLY good Cat 3s on our group rides. The difference between the 3s and these pros is substantial, and these 3s, many who will ultimately become 2s, train nearly as hard and as smart as most pros, but just based on raw talent they will never be domestic pros.

My experience is that this sport is binary. Either you have "it", or you don't. I'd like to believe that if I started racing at the same age as someone like Thurlow Rogers, and trained as hard as he did, I would be able to race like he did (and still does), but in the end I'm no closer to him than I am to the genetic freaks who are in the NBA, NHL, or on the PGA Tour for that matter.

I blame my parents and therefore forward my therapy bills to them! :D

Have I got an article for you gregf83
http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=850
3rd paragraph my friend.Fine. You found one guy from the center of the bell curve that made it to an elite level. That still leaves 50% of the population that are below average that don't stand a chance. Life isn't fair. We can't all be winners...

To answer the OP's question, the rules of thumb seem to be 10 years for mastery of a skill and something like 10,000 hours of training for physical ability. Now, should you know you "place" long before this? Probably. That's the difference in natural aptitude and ability that previous posters have discussed.

Some references:
Simon and Chase, 1973 (http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/Literacy/ReferenceMaterials/BibliographyLiteracy/ChaseAndSimon1973.htm)
The roles of talent, physical precocity and practice in the development of soccer expertise. (http://www.cababstractsplus.org/abstracts/Abstract.aspx?AcNo=20001813707)