Originally Posted by Andy_K

Jumping in late and I just skimmed the posts...forgive me if I'm saying too much that's redundant....

4. Elitism aside, I think there is some practical benefit in being able to recognize whether or not someone belongs to an abstract social group of which I perceive myself to be a member. I like to ride bikes for fun, exercise and athletic challenge. While I recognize that the sort of person I see riding a craigslist beater to the store wearing blue jeans and a flannel jacket is by any reasonable definition a cyclist, I also recognize that this is probably not a person who is going to share my enthusiasm for the aspects of cycling that I enjoy. If I express the opinion that this person is likely not part of my social group, that is a conclusion based on experience and observation and is not in any way meant as a judgement of that person and his/her use of a bicycle.

Originally Posted by Jim from Boston

This summer was a thread on the Fifty-Plus Forum, “Bike Riding vs Cycling” with 105 replies, that IMO was a good discussion of the topic as in the article, and subject of this thread:

Sometime after that thread ended, I thought about this seemingly trivial distinction that makes me think a rider is a “real" cyclist. I watch the way they pedal. Without being judgemental about it, a cyclist has a fluid rotary pedaling motion, whereas I think “bike rider” when I see someone pedaling in a piston-like fashion. Now since pedaling is the foundation of bike riding, I think that style and form makes the distinction. Of course then, while an E-bike rider is a “bike rider” they are not cyclists. No moral or “snobbish” judgement here, but a more "objective" one, IMO, FWIW.