Originally Posted by
RollCNY
Wow, I guess I have totally missed the point of being a good cyclist. I thought a good cyclist:
1 - Rides in a manner that doesn't screw it up for other cyclists. They guy that runs red lights thru traffic, blasts pedestrians, and is a general doosh so that everyone expects the same from every cyclist.
2 - Enjoys the crap out of cycling, and is committed to what they do, be it commuting, racing, or ultra cycling. Personally, I think the guys completing brevet series are darn good cyclists, regardless of their watts/kg.
3 - Shares that joy with others, and helps others understand and maybe enjoy the sport for themselves.
But it is apparently solely a measure of your group ride and race performance.
You can decide to value good riders by metrics other than speed and race placement. If that's the way you feel, go for it - I happen to like those criteria.
However, bottom line is that professional cycling events are RACING events where finish placement and/or times in finishing dictate all. You go faster, you're considered a better cyclist.
Your analogy would be very similar to characterizing the worst player on a local community pickup squad who knows the rules, enjoys the crap out of basketball, and shares that joy with others, as a good player. While that may be true for you, most folks would probably still go by the rules that the professionals are ultimately measured by, which is their measurable contributions to victory. If that guy isn't a good scorer,passer, or rebounder, he's not going to be generally considered a good player, even though he might be a great guy for the spirit of the game.