Are we THAT nuts?
 

The best way I can equate this is to running. I don't run, so if I had someone I knew who ran a workout of a 1/2 marathon every week, I might think they were super talented or a little nuts. I have run a few 1/2's, just not my thing.

Why do I NOT think cruising for a metric century once a week is equally nuts? Sure, we have the bias on our side of being in the game. So we think it's normal.

Are we THAT nuts, or has the standard just drifted so low for the rest of the public that anything with a nice large number sounds bonkers to them?

Also, your weight. You tell someone you're barely 11 stone or about 68kg and people look at you like you're physically ill in the body, and in the head. I still eat and drink as much as I please thank you very much.

So, are we purple spotted unicorns or not?

A metric century takes less time than 18 holes of golf.

Probably because people participate in activities they enjoy, and when you enjoy something you are willing to devote more time to it? Cruising a metric century for me is a large part of the day affair. So, I would find it odd if I were doing it once a week, chewing up either my Saturday or Sunday, even though I like cycling. I enjoy golf too, but like cycling, it is an after work activity, not an eating up a weekend day every weekend activity.

That said, I learned a long time ago to not care about what others think about how I spend my free time, and I grant them the same courtesy :thumb:

For me to do that as a regular routine becomes, well, routine. [MENTION=325999]col[/MENTION]oso above either plays golf slower than me, or rides faster! Either way, I don't want to commit to 18 holes every weekend either. Sometimes I ride a metric, more often a "long" ride for me is 40-50 miles and it is rarely planned, it just happens and is dependent on how I feel 15 miles in, how motivated I am, the weather, and what else I want to get done on any particular day.

But no, it's not nuts to ride a metric every week if you want. Personally I believe (based on my own experience) that running is MUCH harder on the body, particularly the joints so I can't equate riding a metric with running a 1/2 marathon.

I live in the 'burbs, North of Boston, MA. Used to ride with my daughter to her soccer practice, maybe 3 miles. All the parents in their suv's though that was such a long distance. I then ask them, so you drive that distance to the gym? I commute regularly the 17 miles from home to work, I tell people it takes only 20 minutes longer by bike than to drive, 1 hr vs 1 hr 20 minutes. Some get it, most don't.

There's the social aspect of it too. Riding for four hours isn't a big deal, especially if you're just cruising. Running for two hours, which, let's say, is about a 9:00/mile pace, is a lot tougher. The pounding on the body is tougher. The effort needed to be sustained is greater. I'd equate the effort of a 100-km ride to about the same as a 11-mile run, even though it's less than half the time.

Lots of things we do seem nuts to others who aren't apart of it.

it's really about relativity and the more you do something, the more you can do. When I started, 4 miles seemed like such a huge deal. now, metric centuries are just a fun long ride. there's a group in my town which routinely does a 65 mile ride one or both days of the weekend, meet at 6am and back by 10 (I rode this past Sunday, was home before 10 and even that was filled with some time waiting for someone to change a flat). People spend hours watching movies or tv, spending a few hours being active doesn't seem nuts to me.

It's definitely nut if you do it on a trainer or a stationary bike, the same can be same for treadmill as well.

Yeah, we're a little nuts, we might as well own it. But [MENTION=363941]hubcyclist[/MENTION] good point that it's not stranger than watching the TV. On weekends when I get back from a ride or run, my wife, son and/or his fiance are right where I left them, watching a different episode of whatever, no matter how long I was out. It feels a little surreal, like someone pressed the "pause" button.

This.

Even doing an all-out sprint on a bicycle, while as aerobically exhausting as a running sprint, is so much easier on the body. As it should be, since cycling is so much more efficient than running from a thermodynamic perspective.

I've been thinking about that a lot more lately... I ride my bike to my kid's sporting events all the time but that usually involves arranging a ride for my kid (80 miles is my record to attend a water polo tournament). My area is really hilly and even if it's not, the drivers are nuts so most people think *I'M* the nutty one. And of course, most people are terrified of riding anywhere that isn't a completely protected trail. But if we could get people to ditch the car for short trips, think how much less congested our EXISTING space would be? I found this fun comparative picture on the interwebz:
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...dbe57802f3.jpg

69 people, different modes. *sigh*

Exactly - A slow metric can still be easily knocked off in a morning or afternoon, and a fast one can be knocked out in 3 hours or less. While its no small accomplishment, it's also not exactly a superhuman effort. Lots of folks block out a half day or day every week for their favorite hobby.

I played an 18 hole round of golf recently and I think I was more worn out after that than a long ride. and I was riding in a cart!!

Yep. A lot of my riding friends are also soccer/lacrosse/baseball/swimming/etc dads. We've all got our tricks for getting in miles riding during practices, or to/from games and tournaments.

That's how I get MOST of my miles in! I'm probably a bit unique, but polo practice is 25 miles or so away from home through horrible traffic, 4 times a week, so it's an hour to get there, 2 hours of riding around while the coaches wear my kid out for me, and 1 hour home.

But if there were a reasonable way to get there I'd probably get a tandem and tell him he can just sit back there and sing show tunes while we ride to practice :D Probably wouldn't even take much longer to commute.

Neither running 13.1 miles nor cycling 62.5 miles as a once per week workout is that big of a deal and certainly not nuts.

-Tim-

Well..if you're living in the Carolinas and you express your body weight in units of 'stone', then yah..local folks might consider you a couple bricks short of a full load.

As for what people think of going for a 60 mile ride once a week..I can't imagine why it matters. Some people like to tie themselves in knots over all kinds of things, either by forming opinions of others or by what others think... useless waste of energy on all counts.

+1

I try to spend an hour each day cycling, just one little hour. Then one 50-60 miler and if I'm lucky two on the weekends. I've cycled long enough that 100km takes about three hours, leave by 6am I'm home in time for brunch :thumb:

​​​​​​You know what is crazy...
...referring to weight in "stones" :lol:

Not for me. As golfers go, I'm fast. In my weekday twosome, we'll walk the course in under 3 hours if no on gets in our way. But as a cyclist, I'm slow and a metric takes me over 4 hours.

Nuts------------absolutely not. If you set you rust. For the people like me that are retired, IMO it is the thing to do, since we have the time, and the exercise is good for us.

Not for me. I can easily knock out 18 holes in under three hours in a twosome if we aren't held up, no way I am maintaining a 20+MPH pace for three hours. I'd bet the overwhelming majority of the population fits more into my camp.