Running vs cycling vs swimming

False premise. Most runners do not "suck" at cycling. Take me for example - I'm an above average weekend warrior cyclist who is built like a runner; chicken legs and great aerobic engine. Not winning any bike races now or ever, but can keep up for the most part and climb better than most.

I do agree that most athletes w/my build can't hold a candle to legit competitive cyclists because they don't have the leg mass and lower body build needed to generate wattage. When you look at the TDF cyclists, particularly the sprinters, they are built to blast the flats and conversely, are not well equipped to run long distances like legit runners.

In swimming you can watch the ladies in the next lanes underwater ...

Ii would call it low key. Simple and economical is not "interesting" for "normies", who would want to get some advantage out of the activity.

Don't forget, running is kinda hard to start when you're out of shape, especially if you do it on your own. IMO, too much effort and unpleasant panting / sweating for the average peeps, with not much glam to hope for. Looks like a masochist's / addict's hobby, from the outside.

*I would not call it low key.

Most "normal adults" with a "normal life" cannot afford to spend 10-15 hours per week on a hobby.

I do all three, look like Tyler Durden, and run 14-low for the heck of it. I'm all good.

"Appeal to normies" = running in the US since it's the biggest HS sport out there. But that doesn't translate to following the pro side of the sport. I would say cycling does the best job with getting people excited about their biggest races/athletes. Swimming the most niche -- some appeal every 4 years during the Olympics.

How do you think they get up the hill?

I've done all three. They all can have their place, regardless of you being primarily a runner, swimmer, or cyclist. A runner can benefit from some swimming/pool running or moderate cycling from time to time. Helps to engage some of the muscle groups that aren't utilized as much in just running mechanics.

I personally enjoyed cycling more than running because I got to traverse more distance in the same amount of time. (I could cover 21-22 miles in an hour vs about 9-10 miles in an hour for an easy day). Got to see more landscape so to speak. As I got older that was cool. I enjoyed running more than swimming but there was a time when I was injured for nearly 4 months and lived 5-6 days a week in the pool. I got to where I could pool run in the deep end for up to 75minutes without a flotation belt and swim 1500-2000yrds without stopping. I have to say I was more aerobically fit from that than 70-80miles a week running. I also bench pressed about 35-40lbs more than I ever had at the end of that because swimming makes you STRONG in ways running can't.

But of the three I miss running the most. Just kind of challenges you in a way the other two don't I think. However, running is more costly than cycling long term in the equipment aspect. If you're going through a new pair of shoes every 3-4 months plus a couple of flats/spikes you're probably spending entry level money for a decent bike w/carbon fiber front fork/seat post in that same amount of time. But if you take care of a bike, it will last you several years without needing to be 'upgraded'. I rode my bike for years without an upgrade, save replacing tires. Did fine. 1000$ spread over several years (even with shoes and a couple of riding shorts with padding) isn't bad. I would have spent 3-4x that on running shoes by themselves in that same time period.

Running has the most appeal I would think. Relatively cheap. Can be done anywhere and really in most any weather.

Cycling---expensive even if just doing casual riding.

Swimming-requires pool that is a cost and inconvenience. Plus it is just hard as a form of exercise.

What does it matter? Do what you want.

So easy to trigger a Lycra wearing failed runner.

All three are great. I get a terrific swim workout at my gym a couple of times a week, giving my running legs a break. I bike on a 25 yr old bike, works great, no expenses to speak of. And course running, I drive to a college and use the track, always open, and turf fields and nearby road hills. Perfect, plus some weight work. Feel great, in my late 70s, finish in top 10 percent overall in local road races.

Running and Cycling you are outdoors and get visual stimulation. Swimming is much tougher mentally starring at the bottom of a pool for the duration of the workout.

Running is the worst of the three disciplines regarding damage to the body long term because of the impact, Swimming is probably the best overall workout and does the least amount of damage to the body as there is no impact.

Cycling is also very good because there is no impact, however it is the most dangerous of the three disciplines as you are on the road with 3-4000 pounds vehicles.

Take your pick.

You're not a cyclist, clearly. The sport is full of ex-runners doing incredibly well.

So much runner cope in this thread, it’s actually sad LOL

Runners pretending like cyclists don’t climb literal mountains, runners ignoring the fact that TdF rider Pidcock ran a 13:25 5k off no run training and Adam Yates ran a sub-3 marathon for fun while out of shape LMAO