...is?

Not enough people doing it!

It is the most expensive sport I have ever played. Damn parts breaking and upgrades blah blah.

I'd say that's the perfect short answer. if there were more people doing it, that means there'd be more of a market, which means higher demand, which should mean more competition in the industry, which is generally good for us as consumers.

there'd also be more willingness on the part of city planners and the transportation departments to design bicycle-friendly roads, etc. and I don't think I need to get into all the myriads of health, environmental and economic benefits.

it's all about money. more people would do the trick.

--alex.

Motorists.

To many people it's cost prohibitive.

1) TIME

2) $$$$$$$

:confused:

automobile traffic

I see it just a little bit differently. Because I ride everywhere, we are a one car family. Even with breakages, upgrades etc, I'm still hundreds of dollars ahead. If I spend a couple of hundred on my bike I can replace the chain, cluster and a few other bits and pieces. Spend that on a car and the mechanic has only just started.

As for the biggest problem with cycling, headwinds.

It is addictive

Not enough good trails.

Simple response ...I am not a driver. In fact an avid non driver. But also driving a car isn't considered sport unless of course you race your family car

Amen to that. I would add...too many beginner trails. For every 10 beginner trails there is 2 intermediate and 1 advanced. That isn't enough

Because I do my own repairs, ride reliable old classics, buy high-quality used parts, and ride for transportation as well as for exercise, I do not consider bicycling expensive.

The biggest problem by far is incompetent, careless, inebriated, distracted, and/or aggressive motorists. In most states, it is too easy to obtain and to retain a driver's license, and too many judges and juries regard driving as a right, instead of the privilege it legally is and morally should be.

Problem? What problem?

Costwise, it is whatever you make of it. I cycle very happily on my 1980 touring bike (paid roughly $400 back then, racks, fenders and generator included). It was rather expensive, but since I didn,t have any repairs to do on it until 2000, it means an average cost of $20/year.

Consumables (tires, tubes, occasional chain and water bottle, gloves...) cost a grand total of $50-$100/year, which is much less than any kind of subscription I could pay to a ski resort, a gym, a tennis court, etc.
Moreover, a lot of these consumables are consumed because I commute and often shop around by bike. So not only I enjoy my time, but I save gas, automotive costs, etc.

OK, now I must confess: I endulged myself in a newer touring bike in late 2000, and added a trailercycle and a child trailer to that. Still, it is cheaper to buy that than to buy ski passes for the entire family. Besides, they love it!

Regards,

The biggest problem with cycling is that people keep calling it a sport. It is not. Bicycling is bicycling- only RACING is a sport. Treating bicycle riding as sport leads politicians and city planners to think of bicycles as sporting equipment (toys) and therefore not worthy of respect.

A bicycle is not a toy. It is your ticket to freedom, health and happiness.

I disagree. Anything physical can be a sport as long as you put some degree of competetiveness to it. I don't cycle for pure fun. If I didn't see a progression in my ability and speed I wouldn't do it.

Just because we don't all keep score vs others doesn't remove it from the sport category. For me it is a sport and very competetive. I don't race nor do I ever plan to.

If you politicians are that stupid then that is absurd. Since when does sport relate to toys? It is a tool, just like skis and snowboards. Neither of those are toys and your politicians would greatly offend almost the entire west coast of canada if they claimed we were 'playing' with 'toys'

No appropriate place to anchor the photon torpedo tubes.

I don't ... but so many motorists seem to.

i race, ride for health/fitness and for transportation --- i just love to ride

as a recreational sport: not many problems...
* for MTB, trail access/ettiquette

as a spectator sport:
*not enough people understand cycling (good example the idiot journalist who claimed cycling shouldn't be considered a "real" sport b/c it doesn't require speed or strength)

as transportation:
* people are lazy
*cities are designed for autos instead of people (cyclists and pedestrains)
* motorists endanger cyclists and pedestrians
* people associate AUTO with IMAGE

... the utter lack of respect one gets on the road from soccer moms, and others who just don't pay attention.

Road debris. Glass, cars, etc......

The point cycletourist makes is pertinent. If the people who plan cycle facilities and traffic policy regard cycling as only a sport, what they provide are leisure facilities, not transport facilities.

This is not to detract from the sporting aspects, just to bear in mind that you can use a bike for getting to work and doing the shopping. I cant thing of any definition of the word Sport which describes me doing the weekly grocery shopping.

Toys are things you play with, and if you do your playing with a bike, its a (expensive and sophisticted) toy. If you do your shopping on a bike, its a (generally cheap and unsophisticated) vehicle.
Toys are not tools, and you can see that by comparing any hardcore commuters bike to a sport bike. Skis (xc, not alpine downhill) can be tools, for people who live and travel in snowy regions, but what is the job for which snowboards are the right tool ?
The policy makers generally regard bikes as toys for leisure, not vehicles for transport.

Bad roads- potholes, etc.

Not enough good off-road areas within the city limits.

Too many SUVs.

1. $$$$

2. lack of media coverage