Non-athlete as a kid, cyclist as adult? - Page 2 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

08-11-2004, 10:27 AM

Claire Petersky wrote:
> Me, I wasn't the very last to be picked for the team, but maybe second or
> third to last. I've always had bad hand-eye coordination, well, bad any sort
> of coordination, which made traditional kids' sports like soccer and
> baseball, or girly things like gymnastics, always difficult. I got Bs in gym
> class not on ability, but because I showed up and did my best -- if it had
> been on actual accomplishment, I would have been in the C- category at best.
> Now, I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I think I'm in decent shape, better than
> most middle aged women I see around here.

I was picked last for the team, mainly because I was small and
chronically out-of-shape. Basketball was the worst for a shortie like
me (we were required to play all sports in turn); swimming was okay;
gymnastics was fun although I never was very good at it; I enjoyed
dance. We even did golf in high school: I was hopeless, the only kid in
the class who actually got worse the more I practiced. Mostly I loathed
team sports and did okay on less team-oriented and non-competitive
activities. And I also usually got Bs, based more out of doing my best
than on performance (which was pretty pathetic). But I'd have been
ecstatic if I hadn't been required to go to Phys Ed class at all (it
wasn't optional until senior year of high school).

I definitely fall into the "non-athlete as a kid" category. I've been
more active as an adult, with a 13-year sedentary hiatus that ended 11
weeks ago. I hesitate to call myself a cyclist, since I feel I'm not
there yet (I can't keep up with anybody), but it's always been my
preferred form of exercise.

My husband says I'm in better shape than most of the middle-aged women
where he works, but then, they're all computer geeks of the first water
just like him. Most of the women I know are as sedentary as I was for
those 13 years, so I suppose I'm in better shape than they are, but
that's not saying much. Yet.

One of these days, I'll get up the courage to make contact with the
local cycling club, but, um, uh... I'm a coward. I'm really afraid of
not being able to keep up with anybody and getting left behind. Again.
As usual. *wince*

-km

--
the black rose
proud to be owned by a yorkie
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

08-11-2004, 10:33 AM

In article <rOrSc.18132$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].pas.earthlink. net>,
"Claire Petersky" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Recently I ran into someone who I knew in high school. He was someone who,
> as a teen, was an archetypal nerdy type: glasses, brainiac, greasy hair,
> completely non-athletic. He's now a very strong cyclist, regularly
> completing centuries and doubles, and just got back from a bike tour to see
> the TdF. I bet all the football players in HS have now gone to lard, and he
> could kick all of their collective asses.

> I then recalled another person I know who was fat in his teens and was
> teased and harrassed for it. Now, as an adult, he has a normal weight. He's
> another century rider, a daily commuter.

You could be telling my story. I wasn't completely hopeless, but I was
bascially gawky and non-athletic. I struggled through a few years of
soccer, one year of baseball, a bit of elementary-school rugby (when I
was in grade seven, the coach snuck me onto the grade six team.
Technically illegal, but I was nowhere near the biggest kid on even the
grade six team. Nobody noticed), but put all that away before high
school. I didn't mind gym class in school, but I was uniformly mediocre
at sports: out of shape, overweight, though I did water-ski and ride my
mountain bike regularly (though on tame trails and roads only) in my
teens.

> For me, the thing about bicycling that makes it easier is that it doesn't
> take much coordination, and it is repetitively rhythmic. Your feet are
> strapped in; all you need to do is keep them moving and keep your balance.
> When I used to do aerobics, I loved it when we did the same routine for each
> class. Some members were bored silly, and wanted different routines. I hated
> it -- I'd have to think where my foot and arm had to go, and then I couldn't
> relax into the class. I like it when I don't have to think about such
> things -- I like just moving.

I strongly agree. Cycling is a more pure exercise of your cardiovascular
system than almost anything short of maybe running. And it hurts your
knees less. And you actually can get somewhere ina reasonable time.

> Bicycle champions are life-long athletes. You read the biographies of Tyler
> Hamilton or Lance Armstrong, and you realize that they were skiing or
> swimming or something in their youths, if they weren't necessarily
> bicycling.

I think the issue there is that most cyclists peak in their late 20s. If
they don't have several years of training before that, they won't be in
peak shape then. And so you have to have some sort of teenaged athletic
base so that when you take up riding in your late teens, you can do well.

> But your more garden-variety cyclists, like you find here on rbm -- were you
> someone who was considered an athlete in high school? Do you consider
> yourself athletic now?

No, and yes. See above for my high-school abilities. Nowadays I'm fast
on a bike and getting faster. Cat 4 this year; goal is to upgrade to 3
by the end of next season. Biggest impediment is that I'm lazy about
training, though I commute nearly every day.

Strangely, I don't do distance rides. My longest single day was 140 km
earlier this spring. I admire century riders (and clearly, if I could do
140, 160 km wouldn't be much harder) but it takes so much time!

I figure rando riding will be an activity I take up at age 40, when my
legs are no longer good enough for racing, but my aerobic base will be
unassailable.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

08-11-2004, 10:33 AM

In article <rOrSc.18132$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].pas.earthlink. net>,
"Claire Petersky" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Recently I ran into someone who I knew in high school. He was someone who,
> as a teen, was an archetypal nerdy type: glasses, brainiac, greasy hair,
> completely non-athletic. He's now a very strong cyclist, regularly
> completing centuries and doubles, and just got back from a bike tour to see
> the TdF. I bet all the football players in HS have now gone to lard, and he
> could kick all of their collective asses.

> I then recalled another person I know who was fat in his teens and was
> teased and harrassed for it. Now, as an adult, he has a normal weight. He's
> another century rider, a daily commuter.

You could be telling my story. I wasn't completely hopeless, but I was
bascially gawky and non-athletic. I struggled through a few years of
soccer, one year of baseball, a bit of elementary-school rugby (when I
was in grade seven, the coach snuck me onto the grade six team.
Technically illegal, but I was nowhere near the biggest kid on even the
grade six team. Nobody noticed), but put all that away before high
school. I didn't mind gym class in school, but I was uniformly mediocre
at sports: out of shape, overweight, though I did water-ski and ride my
mountain bike regularly (though on tame trails and roads only) in my
teens.

> For me, the thing about bicycling that makes it easier is that it doesn't
> take much coordination, and it is repetitively rhythmic. Your feet are
> strapped in; all you need to do is keep them moving and keep your balance.
> When I used to do aerobics, I loved it when we did the same routine for each
> class. Some members were bored silly, and wanted different routines. I hated
> it -- I'd have to think where my foot and arm had to go, and then I couldn't
> relax into the class. I like it when I don't have to think about such
> things -- I like just moving.

I strongly agree. Cycling is a more pure exercise of your cardiovascular
system than almost anything short of maybe running. And it hurts your
knees less. And you actually can get somewhere ina reasonable time.

> Bicycle champions are life-long athletes. You read the biographies of Tyler
> Hamilton or Lance Armstrong, and you realize that they were skiing or
> swimming or something in their youths, if they weren't necessarily
> bicycling.

I think the issue there is that most cyclists peak in their late 20s. If
they don't have several years of training before that, they won't be in
peak shape then. And so you have to have some sort of teenaged athletic
base so that when you take up riding in your late teens, you can do well.

> But your more garden-variety cyclists, like you find here on rbm -- were you
> someone who was considered an athlete in high school? Do you consider
> yourself athletic now?

No, and yes. See above for my high-school abilities. Nowadays I'm fast
on a bike and getting faster. Cat 4 this year; goal is to upgrade to 3
by the end of next season. Biggest impediment is that I'm lazy about
training, though I commute nearly every day.

Strangely, I don't do distance rides. My longest single day was 140 km
earlier this spring. I admire century riders (and clearly, if I could do
140, 160 km wouldn't be much harder) but it takes so much time!

I figure rando riding will be an activity I take up at age 40, when my
legs are no longer good enough for racing, but my aerobic base will be
unassailable.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

08-11-2004, 10:33 AM

In article <rOrSc.18132$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].pas.earthlink. net>,
"Claire Petersky" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Recently I ran into someone who I knew in high school. He was someone who,
> as a teen, was an archetypal nerdy type: glasses, brainiac, greasy hair,
> completely non-athletic. He's now a very strong cyclist, regularly
> completing centuries and doubles, and just got back from a bike tour to see
> the TdF. I bet all the football players in HS have now gone to lard, and he
> could kick all of their collective asses.

> I then recalled another person I know who was fat in his teens and was
> teased and harrassed for it. Now, as an adult, he has a normal weight. He's
> another century rider, a daily commuter.

You could be telling my story. I wasn't completely hopeless, but I was
bascially gawky and non-athletic. I struggled through a few years of
soccer, one year of baseball, a bit of elementary-school rugby (when I
was in grade seven, the coach snuck me onto the grade six team.
Technically illegal, but I was nowhere near the biggest kid on even the
grade six team. Nobody noticed), but put all that away before high
school. I didn't mind gym class in school, but I was uniformly mediocre
at sports: out of shape, overweight, though I did water-ski and ride my
mountain bike regularly (though on tame trails and roads only) in my
teens.

> For me, the thing about bicycling that makes it easier is that it doesn't
> take much coordination, and it is repetitively rhythmic. Your feet are
> strapped in; all you need to do is keep them moving and keep your balance.
> When I used to do aerobics, I loved it when we did the same routine for each
> class. Some members were bored silly, and wanted different routines. I hated
> it -- I'd have to think where my foot and arm had to go, and then I couldn't
> relax into the class. I like it when I don't have to think about such
> things -- I like just moving.

I strongly agree. Cycling is a more pure exercise of your cardiovascular
system than almost anything short of maybe running. And it hurts your
knees less. And you actually can get somewhere ina reasonable time.

> Bicycle champions are life-long athletes. You read the biographies of Tyler
> Hamilton or Lance Armstrong, and you realize that they were skiing or
> swimming or something in their youths, if they weren't necessarily
> bicycling.

I think the issue there is that most cyclists peak in their late 20s. If
they don't have several years of training before that, they won't be in
peak shape then. And so you have to have some sort of teenaged athletic
base so that when you take up riding in your late teens, you can do well.

> But your more garden-variety cyclists, like you find here on rbm -- were you
> someone who was considered an athlete in high school? Do you consider
> yourself athletic now?

No, and yes. See above for my high-school abilities. Nowadays I'm fast
on a bike and getting faster. Cat 4 this year; goal is to upgrade to 3
by the end of next season. Biggest impediment is that I'm lazy about
training, though I commute nearly every day.

Strangely, I don't do distance rides. My longest single day was 140 km
earlier this spring. I admire century riders (and clearly, if I could do
140, 160 km wouldn't be much harder) but it takes so much time!

I figure rando riding will be an activity I take up at age 40, when my
legs are no longer good enough for racing, but my aerobic base will be
unassailable.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

08-11-2004, 10:33 AM

In article <rOrSc.18132$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].pas.earthlink. net>,
"Claire Petersky" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Recently I ran into someone who I knew in high school. He was someone who,
> as a teen, was an archetypal nerdy type: glasses, brainiac, greasy hair,
> completely non-athletic. He's now a very strong cyclist, regularly
> completing centuries and doubles, and just got back from a bike tour to see
> the TdF. I bet all the football players in HS have now gone to lard, and he
> could kick all of their collective asses.

> I then recalled another person I know who was fat in his teens and was
> teased and harrassed for it. Now, as an adult, he has a normal weight. He's
> another century rider, a daily commuter.

You could be telling my story. I wasn't completely hopeless, but I was
bascially gawky and non-athletic. I struggled through a few years of
soccer, one year of baseball, a bit of elementary-school rugby (when I
was in grade seven, the coach snuck me onto the grade six team.
Technically illegal, but I was nowhere near the biggest kid on even the
grade six team. Nobody noticed), but put all that away before high
school. I didn't mind gym class in school, but I was uniformly mediocre
at sports: out of shape, overweight, though I did water-ski and ride my
mountain bike regularly (though on tame trails and roads only) in my
teens.

> For me, the thing about bicycling that makes it easier is that it doesn't
> take much coordination, and it is repetitively rhythmic. Your feet are
> strapped in; all you need to do is keep them moving and keep your balance.
> When I used to do aerobics, I loved it when we did the same routine for each
> class. Some members were bored silly, and wanted different routines. I hated
> it -- I'd have to think where my foot and arm had to go, and then I couldn't
> relax into the class. I like it when I don't have to think about such
> things -- I like just moving.

I strongly agree. Cycling is a more pure exercise of your cardiovascular
system than almost anything short of maybe running. And it hurts your
knees less. And you actually can get somewhere ina reasonable time.

> Bicycle champions are life-long athletes. You read the biographies of Tyler
> Hamilton or Lance Armstrong, and you realize that they were skiing or
> swimming or something in their youths, if they weren't necessarily
> bicycling.

I think the issue there is that most cyclists peak in their late 20s. If
they don't have several years of training before that, they won't be in
peak shape then. And so you have to have some sort of teenaged athletic
base so that when you take up riding in your late teens, you can do well.

> But your more garden-variety cyclists, like you find here on rbm -- were you
> someone who was considered an athlete in high school? Do you consider
> yourself athletic now?

No, and yes. See above for my high-school abilities. Nowadays I'm fast
on a bike and getting faster. Cat 4 this year; goal is to upgrade to 3
by the end of next season. Biggest impediment is that I'm lazy about
training, though I commute nearly every day.

Strangely, I don't do distance rides. My longest single day was 140 km
earlier this spring. I admire century riders (and clearly, if I could do
140, 160 km wouldn't be much harder) but it takes so much time!

I figure rando riding will be an activity I take up at age 40, when my
legs are no longer good enough for racing, but my aerobic base will be
unassailable.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

08-11-2004, 10:33 AM

In article <rOrSc.18132$[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].pas.earthlink. net>,
"Claire Petersky" <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Recently I ran into someone who I knew in high school. He was someone who,
> as a teen, was an archetypal nerdy type: glasses, brainiac, greasy hair,
> completely non-athletic. He's now a very strong cyclist, regularly
> completing centuries and doubles, and just got back from a bike tour to see
> the TdF. I bet all the football players in HS have now gone to lard, and he
> could kick all of their collective asses.

> I then recalled another person I know who was fat in his teens and was
> teased and harrassed for it. Now, as an adult, he has a normal weight. He's
> another century rider, a daily commuter.

You could be telling my story. I wasn't completely hopeless, but I was
bascially gawky and non-athletic. I struggled through a few years of
soccer, one year of baseball, a bit of elementary-school rugby (when I
was in grade seven, the coach snuck me onto the grade six team.
Technically illegal, but I was nowhere near the biggest kid on even the
grade six team. Nobody noticed), but put all that away before high
school. I didn't mind gym class in school, but I was uniformly mediocre
at sports: out of shape, overweight, though I did water-ski and ride my
mountain bike regularly (though on tame trails and roads only) in my
teens.

> For me, the thing about bicycling that makes it easier is that it doesn't
> take much coordination, and it is repetitively rhythmic. Your feet are
> strapped in; all you need to do is keep them moving and keep your balance.
> When I used to do aerobics, I loved it when we did the same routine for each
> class. Some members were bored silly, and wanted different routines. I hated
> it -- I'd have to think where my foot and arm had to go, and then I couldn't
> relax into the class. I like it when I don't have to think about such
> things -- I like just moving.

I strongly agree. Cycling is a more pure exercise of your cardiovascular
system than almost anything short of maybe running. And it hurts your
knees less. And you actually can get somewhere ina reasonable time.

> Bicycle champions are life-long athletes. You read the biographies of Tyler
> Hamilton or Lance Armstrong, and you realize that they were skiing or
> swimming or something in their youths, if they weren't necessarily
> bicycling.

I think the issue there is that most cyclists peak in their late 20s. If
they don't have several years of training before that, they won't be in
peak shape then. And so you have to have some sort of teenaged athletic
base so that when you take up riding in your late teens, you can do well.

> But your more garden-variety cyclists, like you find here on rbm -- were you
> someone who was considered an athlete in high school? Do you consider
> yourself athletic now?

No, and yes. See above for my high-school abilities. Nowadays I'm fast
on a bike and getting faster. Cat 4 this year; goal is to upgrade to 3
by the end of next season. Biggest impediment is that I'm lazy about
training, though I commute nearly every day.

Strangely, I don't do distance rides. My longest single day was 140 km
earlier this spring. I admire century riders (and clearly, if I could do
140, 160 km wouldn't be much harder) but it takes so much time!

I figure rando riding will be an activity I take up at age 40, when my
legs are no longer good enough for racing, but my aerobic base will be
unassailable.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Verus de parvis; verus de magnis.

08-11-2004, 10:39 AM

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:27:10 GMT, the black rose
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Claire Petersky wrote:
>> Me, I wasn't the very last to be picked for the team, but maybe second
>> or
>> third to last. I've always had bad hand-eye coordination, well, bad any
>> sort
>> of coordination, which made traditional kids' sports like soccer and
>> baseball, or girly things like gymnastics, always difficult. I got Bs
>> in gym
>> class not on ability, but because I showed up and did my best -- if it
>> had
>> been on actual accomplishment, I would have been in the C- category at
>> best.
>> Now, I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I think I'm in decent shape, better
>> than
>> most middle aged women I see around here.
>
> I was picked last for the team, mainly because I was small and
> chronically out-of-shape. Basketball was the worst for a shortie like
> me (we were required to play all sports in turn); swimming was okay;
> gymnastics was fun although I never was very good at it; I enjoyed
> dance. We even did golf in high school: I was hopeless, the only kid in
> the class who actually got worse the more I practiced. Mostly I loathed
> team sports and did okay on less team-oriented and non-competitive
> activities. And I also usually got Bs, based more out of doing my best
> than on performance (which was pretty pathetic). But I'd have been
> ecstatic if I hadn't been required to go to Phys Ed class at all (it
> wasn't optional until senior year of high school).
>
> I definitely fall into the "non-athlete as a kid" category. I've been
> more active as an adult, with a 13-year sedentary hiatus that ended 11
> weeks ago. I hesitate to call myself a cyclist, since I feel I'm not
> there yet (I can't keep up with anybody), but it's always been my
> preferred form of exercise.
>
> My husband says I'm in better shape than most of the middle-aged women
> where he works, but then, they're all computer geeks of the first water
> just like him. Most of the women I know are as sedentary as I was for
> those 13 years, so I suppose I'm in better shape than they are, but
> that's not saying much. Yet.
>
> One of these days, I'll get up the courage to make contact with the
> local cycling club, but, um, uh... I'm a coward. I'm really afraid of
> not being able to keep up with anybody and getting left behind. Again.
> As usual. *wince*
>
> -km
>

Typically, there are classes of riders. For instance, "my" club has rides
from below 10mph to above 20 mph. I say "my" because, even though I've
been a member for 3 years, I've never gone on a ride. The reason is that
although I'm a slow rider, I ride a long time. Typically, slow and long
don't go together.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

08-11-2004, 10:39 AM

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:27:10 GMT, the black rose
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Claire Petersky wrote:
>> Me, I wasn't the very last to be picked for the team, but maybe second
>> or
>> third to last. I've always had bad hand-eye coordination, well, bad any
>> sort
>> of coordination, which made traditional kids' sports like soccer and
>> baseball, or girly things like gymnastics, always difficult. I got Bs
>> in gym
>> class not on ability, but because I showed up and did my best -- if it
>> had
>> been on actual accomplishment, I would have been in the C- category at
>> best.
>> Now, I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I think I'm in decent shape, better
>> than
>> most middle aged women I see around here.
>
> I was picked last for the team, mainly because I was small and
> chronically out-of-shape. Basketball was the worst for a shortie like
> me (we were required to play all sports in turn); swimming was okay;
> gymnastics was fun although I never was very good at it; I enjoyed
> dance. We even did golf in high school: I was hopeless, the only kid in
> the class who actually got worse the more I practiced. Mostly I loathed
> team sports and did okay on less team-oriented and non-competitive
> activities. And I also usually got Bs, based more out of doing my best
> than on performance (which was pretty pathetic). But I'd have been
> ecstatic if I hadn't been required to go to Phys Ed class at all (it
> wasn't optional until senior year of high school).
>
> I definitely fall into the "non-athlete as a kid" category. I've been
> more active as an adult, with a 13-year sedentary hiatus that ended 11
> weeks ago. I hesitate to call myself a cyclist, since I feel I'm not
> there yet (I can't keep up with anybody), but it's always been my
> preferred form of exercise.
>
> My husband says I'm in better shape than most of the middle-aged women
> where he works, but then, they're all computer geeks of the first water
> just like him. Most of the women I know are as sedentary as I was for
> those 13 years, so I suppose I'm in better shape than they are, but
> that's not saying much. Yet.
>
> One of these days, I'll get up the courage to make contact with the
> local cycling club, but, um, uh... I'm a coward. I'm really afraid of
> not being able to keep up with anybody and getting left behind. Again.
> As usual. *wince*
>
> -km
>

Typically, there are classes of riders. For instance, "my" club has rides
from below 10mph to above 20 mph. I say "my" because, even though I've
been a member for 3 years, I've never gone on a ride. The reason is that
although I'm a slow rider, I ride a long time. Typically, slow and long
don't go together.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

08-11-2004, 10:39 AM

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:27:10 GMT, the black rose
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Claire Petersky wrote:
>> Me, I wasn't the very last to be picked for the team, but maybe second
>> or
>> third to last. I've always had bad hand-eye coordination, well, bad any
>> sort
>> of coordination, which made traditional kids' sports like soccer and
>> baseball, or girly things like gymnastics, always difficult. I got Bs
>> in gym
>> class not on ability, but because I showed up and did my best -- if it
>> had
>> been on actual accomplishment, I would have been in the C- category at
>> best.
>> Now, I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I think I'm in decent shape, better
>> than
>> most middle aged women I see around here.
>
> I was picked last for the team, mainly because I was small and
> chronically out-of-shape. Basketball was the worst for a shortie like
> me (we were required to play all sports in turn); swimming was okay;
> gymnastics was fun although I never was very good at it; I enjoyed
> dance. We even did golf in high school: I was hopeless, the only kid in
> the class who actually got worse the more I practiced. Mostly I loathed
> team sports and did okay on less team-oriented and non-competitive
> activities. And I also usually got Bs, based more out of doing my best
> than on performance (which was pretty pathetic). But I'd have been
> ecstatic if I hadn't been required to go to Phys Ed class at all (it
> wasn't optional until senior year of high school).
>
> I definitely fall into the "non-athlete as a kid" category. I've been
> more active as an adult, with a 13-year sedentary hiatus that ended 11
> weeks ago. I hesitate to call myself a cyclist, since I feel I'm not
> there yet (I can't keep up with anybody), but it's always been my
> preferred form of exercise.
>
> My husband says I'm in better shape than most of the middle-aged women
> where he works, but then, they're all computer geeks of the first water
> just like him. Most of the women I know are as sedentary as I was for
> those 13 years, so I suppose I'm in better shape than they are, but
> that's not saying much. Yet.
>
> One of these days, I'll get up the courage to make contact with the
> local cycling club, but, um, uh... I'm a coward. I'm really afraid of
> not being able to keep up with anybody and getting left behind. Again.
> As usual. *wince*
>
> -km
>

Typically, there are classes of riders. For instance, "my" club has rides
from below 10mph to above 20 mph. I say "my" because, even though I've
been a member for 3 years, I've never gone on a ride. The reason is that
although I'm a slow rider, I ride a long time. Typically, slow and long
don't go together.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

08-11-2004, 10:39 AM

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:27:10 GMT, the black rose
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

> Claire Petersky wrote:
>> Me, I wasn't the very last to be picked for the team, but maybe second
>> or
>> third to last. I've always had bad hand-eye coordination, well, bad any
>> sort
>> of coordination, which made traditional kids' sports like soccer and
>> baseball, or girly things like gymnastics, always difficult. I got Bs
>> in gym
>> class not on ability, but because I showed up and did my best -- if it
>> had
>> been on actual accomplishment, I would have been in the C- category at
>> best.
>> Now, I'm no Lance Armstrong, but I think I'm in decent shape, better
>> than
>> most middle aged women I see around here.
>
> I was picked last for the team, mainly because I was small and
> chronically out-of-shape. Basketball was the worst for a shortie like
> me (we were required to play all sports in turn); swimming was okay;
> gymnastics was fun although I never was very good at it; I enjoyed
> dance. We even did golf in high school: I was hopeless, the only kid in
> the class who actually got worse the more I practiced. Mostly I loathed
> team sports and did okay on less team-oriented and non-competitive
> activities. And I also usually got Bs, based more out of doing my best
> than on performance (which was pretty pathetic). But I'd have been
> ecstatic if I hadn't been required to go to Phys Ed class at all (it
> wasn't optional until senior year of high school).
>
> I definitely fall into the "non-athlete as a kid" category. I've been
> more active as an adult, with a 13-year sedentary hiatus that ended 11
> weeks ago. I hesitate to call myself a cyclist, since I feel I'm not
> there yet (I can't keep up with anybody), but it's always been my
> preferred form of exercise.
>
> My husband says I'm in better shape than most of the middle-aged women
> where he works, but then, they're all computer geeks of the first water
> just like him. Most of the women I know are as sedentary as I was for
> those 13 years, so I suppose I'm in better shape than they are, but
> that's not saying much. Yet.
>
> One of these days, I'll get up the courage to make contact with the
> local cycling club, but, um, uh... I'm a coward. I'm really afraid of
> not being able to keep up with anybody and getting left behind. Again.
> As usual. *wince*
>
> -km
>

Typically, there are classes of riders. For instance, "my" club has rides
from below 10mph to above 20 mph. I say "my" because, even though I've
been a member for 3 years, I've never gone on a ride. The reason is that
although I'm a slow rider, I ride a long time. Typically, slow and long
don't go together.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply