Cycling is boring

If you find it boring, you aren't training nearly hard enough. Anyway you're not out there for entertainment.

Bring a friend, or make it something you do for a quick errand. I wanted to go to the bookstore the other day so I biked there, quick grabbed my book, and then biked back home.

Shift up and spin the pedals faster. Repeat until you're in the mid-20 MPH range. Boom -- you're not bored anymore.

wheelsonfire wrote: I've tried to replace my easy runs with cycling but it's so boring that it gets on my nerves and I ride home at mile 10.

To each his own, I guess, but I find cycling to be infinitely more enjoyable than running ever was when I was in my fitness and competitive prime.

Cycling allows you to go farther and faster. Climbing a hill is a bigger challenge, and descending a hill is more exhilarating. Attempting to maintain a high cadence and/or speed while testing your handling skills and managing the technical challenges brings about an adrenaline rush unmatched by anything you'd do on a training run.

Sure, if all you're doing is going out for a 10-mile easy spin, then it's going to get old fast. If that's all you're into, try getting on a mountain bike. Great full-body workout and the technical aspects will keep you engaged.

Join Strava and smash some segments.

It's only boring if you're going slow and easy. Put some effort in mate.

xcyclist wrote:

If you find it boring, you aren't training nearly hard enough. Anyway you're not out there for entertainment.

+1

Your cure for boredom is to put on a HRM and try to ride at "easy run" HR.

xcyclist wrote:

If you find it boring, you aren't training nearly hard enough. Anyway you're not out there for entertainment.

This.

He shoudl sit at home and fondle himself with his foot in an ice bucket

moanswers wrote:

+1

Your cure for boredom is to put on a HRM and try to ride at "easy run" HR.

Just trying to clarify...are you saying that cycling is easier or harder than running? I ride a few times a week to help out with the old joints and I have to push 22-24 MPH to get even close to 75% of my MHR. I try to ride that rate for close to an hour on flat roads. It's not that it's hard to do, it's just that you have to conscientiously push harder than most people are used to. Most people I ride with rarely get about 65% or their MHR. It's too easy to go too easy when riding. You have to really push to get a workout.

Cycling is either super easy or you're seeing stars. There is no in between.

Tem Tibow wrote:

moanswers wrote:

+1

Your cure for boredom is to put on a HRM and try to ride at "easy run" HR.

I ride a few times a week to help out with the old joints and I have to push 22-24 MPH to get even close to 75% of my MHR. I try to ride that rate for close to an hour on flat roads. It's not that it's hard to do, it's just that you have to conscientiously push harder than most people are used to.

hey tem, i do the same thing. But when i first started biking with a HRM, i had to really work my legs to get my HR up to something that i would consider an "easy" run. The legs got tired so fast that i couldn't keep the HR up and could only do this in intervals. Now i can do this all day. i still have to make the conscious effort to do it but i can and i'm not bored when i'm doing this type of ride.

For anything at a higher intensity than "easy run" pace, unless i'm on hills, i use a spin bike. after a few years of serious cycling, i'm seeing HRs on the bike that i haven't seen running since my early 30s.

When running, you don't even have to think about working.

but you see so many fat cyclists because they kid themselves into thinking they are getting this great workout but in reality, they aren't doing anything for the heart.

You probably cycle about 2x as fast as you run, meaning you can see 2x the scenery. If cycling is boring, what is running?

Also not sure why you are trying to equate 10 meters of cycling to 1 meter of running. I don't think you're going that much faster.

Women find you boring but still you persevere.

i chose D2 wrote:

You probably cycle about 2x as fast as you run, meaning you can see 2x the scenery. If cycling is boring, what is running?

Also not sure why you are trying to equate 10 meters of cycling to 1 meter of running. I don't think you're going that much faster.

For me a comfortable running pace is about 7 mph (yeah, I'm old, female and slow) and a 90 minute run, covering a little over 10 miles, feels like a decent workout. A comfortable cycling pace is about 16 mph and I can easily maintain that for 2-3 hours, covering 35-45 miles. You can see a lot more on the bike. On the other hand, the roads on which it is pleasant and reasonably safe to cycle are much more limited than those suitable for running, so I can get about as much "variety" in a 90-minute run as in a 2.5-hour ride.

I prefer running, but I don't find either one boring.

i chose D2 wrote:

You probably cycle about 2x as fast as you run, meaning you can see 2x the scenery. If cycling is boring, what is running?

Also not sure why you are trying to equate 10 meters of cycling to 1 meter of running. I don't think you're going that much faster.

I do all my running on a 1km loop, I don't care about scenery only the feeling of running. Cycling is boring it's like sitting down

i chose D2 wrote:

You probably cycle about 2x as fast as you run, meaning you can see 2x the scenery. If cycling is boring, what is running?

Also not sure why you are trying to equate 10 meters of cycling to 1 meter of running. I don't think you're going that much faster.

I do all my running on a 1km loop, I don't care about scenery only the feeling of running. Cycling is boring it's like sitting down

Thank you for the various replies.

When I say cycling gets on my nerves, it's physical : I do have pins and needles in my legs after 10 miles of exercise and from there it's a vicious circle. It doesn't happen if I ride my bike for an errand.

As for pushing harder, I fully agree that it has to be a conscious effort and that might be one the reason it upsets me, besides the fact that it takes more time than running to get the same benefit.

Another reason might be that my bike is a very neglected 20 years old mountain bike. i know I'm working much harder than the fat bellies at the same pace and I tell myself it's a good thing but maybe I need to see myself cycling faster on a carbon fiber toy.

The act of running brings me joy whatever the scenery, the weather or the pace, there is no comparison possible.

Do you live somewhere flat? If so, that would explain the boredom.

If you are not comfortable on your bike, it doesn't fit right. Fit is the most important aspect of cycling. If you have pressure points on the bike, it makes you hate riding. My ability to cycle turned 180 when i got a good bike that fits. It shouldn't hurt at all and then it makes it easy to focus on hitting pace and getting a workout.

You will actually be able to work much harder if you get one of those carbon fiber toys with the clip+less pedals. Plus you'll be going much faster.

If you get Strava and look for KOMs in your area you'll probably find dozens of random old guys are kicking your a$$, and that won't change even if you get a good bike. You're not impressing anybody, and if you're not getting the same aerobic benefit as running, it's because you suck at cycling. If you tried running with a 100 lb backpack, you wouldn't get much aerobic benefit either, because you wouldn't be capable of spending much time at a strong aerobic pace without your muscles failing.

Cycling is genuinely terrible as a replacement for running training. Barely useful. The muscle workload is not similar.

Going to a gym and using an elliptical would be better as injury cross training.