Why are cyclists so weird on group rides

A few reasons.

First, cycling is almost never an individual sport, except for time trials. Riding competitively in a pack is a skill itself that people need to practice.

Second, sprinting is also a highly technical activity (changing gears properly, picking cadences, etc) that needs to be practiced.

Third, runners do strides and intervals, their training is simply structured differently.

Fourth, cycling is not really as much of an endurance sport as running. True, you're on your bike for hours at a time, but the race often comes down to about two minutes' worth of effort, culminating in a sprint. In those types of races, your ability to sprint is much more important than the speed you can time trial for an hour.

Yeah, I've had similar experiences. I rode with a group where I felt less than welcome. When I was drafting in the back the guy whose wheel I was on slowed way down until we dropped away from others and then sprinted hard to rejoin the group and hopefully lose me.

Don’t you dream about becoming an Olympic athlete?

I am still dreaming of qualifying for the Olympic trials for the 800.

Whenever I run, I don’t see people as challenges. No, I see the speeding cars at traffic lights my competition. Because I ultimately know that I need to achieve 17-20 miles per hour for less than two minutes to become an athlete who gets paid for a living.

I would do the same on that group ride. I do take some things personal though.

I was starting to run and do hard intervals on a bridge and then some guy wearing his college sweatshirt or does his fvckin kick until the whole end of the bridge. I was left in the dust.

Also I used to do hill sprints. A construction or maintenance guy along with his partner, rolls alongside me in his pickup truck.

They kept shouting encouraging things, but ultimately I gave up 2/3rd the way up the hill and they said: Come on! And then a guy did a shrug with his hands outside the passenger seat.

Those moments hurt my running and speed ego. But years now when I think about it, it was fun and surprising. Now I have these stories to tell

Wrong group then. Perhaps american attitude. We always go with an even pace. Only uphill its open race but we wait for everyone so everyone goes as fast as He wants.

You think that’s bad? Well, wait until you get invited to the pre-ride meeting. Not to be confused with a circle jerk, this meeting is a dress-up session where cyclists try on colorful, skin-tight riding outfits.... suggestive comments welcome!

I'm not sure why they'd be sprinting, but riding in groups imo is casual cyclists' version of hobby jogging. It's just how they socialize.

Unless you're seriously into racing, why not hit the open road and go wherever you want, whenever you want? Particularly if you're in shape to go 32+kph on your own.

That's the beauty of cycling: you get to train (and race) at all intensities; and the interaction with other cyclists, in a sport where drafting has much more meaning than in running.

A more positive, for you, aspect of cycling: if you are on the road and you pass or are passed by another cyclist it's normal to cycle together. If one of the two is much stronger than the other, it's perfectly acceptable for the other just to sit on the stronger's wheel. You might chat and become friends. Now, try that with running and they might call the police.

There's a discipline of cycling that resembles running more: time trial (you have a distance, an approximate time, you try to keep a goal "pace" - power for cyclists - and you train with that power in mind). Needless to say, it's much less popular than mass start cycling.

[quote]adsfsfasfasf wrote:

A few reasons.

First, cycling is almost never an individual sport, except for time trials. Riding competitively in a pack is a skill itself that people need to practice.

Second, sprinting is also a highly technical activity (changing gears properly, picking cadences, etc) that needs to be practiced.

Third, runners do strides and intervals, their training is simply structured differently.

Fourth, cycling is not really as much of an endurance sport as running. True, you're on your bike for hours at a time, but the race often comes down to about two minutes' worth of effort, culminating in a sprint. In those types of races, your ability to sprint is much more important than the speed you can time trial for an hour.[/quote]

This sums up why its so weird for a runner watching a bike race. Quite often they are the equivalent of Usain Bolt winning an ultra in a mad sprint finish. Only when you get to the big climbs do the guys with mega quads drop off.

It shouldn't be possible until you look at the average HR of a tour rider and see that often its quite paltry.

One big difference in group runs and group rides are that the latter are inherently more dangerous. Someone shows up that no one knows and the fear is the new guy is going to be squirrely in a pack and cause a nasty crash.

Also the group ride culture varies from group to group. Learn the nature of the group ride and its norms. You are joining their group; if you do not like it find another group, but expecting the group to change for you is not going to happen.

Serious cyclists don't participate in group rides to socialize. They ride on their own the majority of the time and get together as a group to continue their training. Sprinting ahead of the pack is expected, as is aggressiveness. Sounds like you're not man enough to wear the bib.

people that complain about people that go balls to the wall just simply have no balls to put against the wall in the first place imo.

I just want to go one second longer then Markas. I remember that about American Flyers where he done the threadmill scene. That test looks easy to beat 25:14. The test starts of with a walk then some jogging. It is probably hard jogging up the steep slope at the end so you are really only working after 20 minutes.

If you look at the majority of cyclists, you will see people who did not participate in any sport in HS or anywhere. This is their one thing! The majority are nerds who read what the pros do, and then go out and copy that. Their arrogance in duathlons is hilarious. Spending $10,000 on a bike , and expecting this to make the difference from an average cyclist to a cat 1.

Nerds. That's it. Nerds.

Yep...this is the closest answer. Bunch of nerds & weirdos who were not good at any other sport, especially skill based ones...or were okay at other sports until they got injured and ended up a cyclist.

Pretty easy to become fit enough to hang with other cyclists then, especially on flatter courses. This gives them a hardon, so you end up with a bunch of big horny egos trying to race each other in every bunch ride...and doing lots of stupid things on the open road.

Notanerd wrote:

Pretty easy to become fit enough to hang with other cyclists then, especially on flatter courses.

This is one of my issues with cycling as a competitive sport (for me as a participant). Real road races require long climbs, which just don't exist in most of the country. Time trialing is okay, but there's nothing quite like being able to interact with your opponents. Criterium racing is pretty cool, though I don't have the balls for it. Cyclocross is actually the discipline that feels closest to running in that you can basically put out a very high and constant effort for the whole time, but you still have to interact with competitors.

A few years ago, I did three group rides. I had never ridden with a group before, so didn't know what to expect, although I did a little research on basic etiquette beforehand.

The three rides were with the same club, same summer. Bit three different experiences.

The first ride was a very hilly 40 miles. We stopped at the top of each hill to wait for everyone to catch up.

The second ride was 62 miles, and from the beginning the cyclist broke into small groups, including two riders who were leading on their own. I joined them, and took my turn pulling. I slowed momentarily after running a yellow light, thinking maybe they had stopped. At that moment, they both accelerated past. We were facing a stiff headwind, and, although I got close a few times, riding solo I just couldn't get back on their wheel. Ended up riding alone for 50 miles.

The third ride was a flat 40 miles, and we had a large group that stayed together. We were cruising nicely at 22 mph, each pulling for a couple miles. That is, until one rider I guess wanted to be a hero and wouldn't peel off to the back. Problem was he had immediately dropped the pace to 18 mph. Mile after mile after mile, it was excruciating to sit in the middle of the pace line with essentially a resting heart rate.

Back to solo rides for me.

There are two big differences between a group ride and a group run.

1. The difference in ability/fitness can be much greater among cyclists in a group than runners. Drafting allows cyclists who are vastly less fit to stay with a group ride.

2. No one crashes on a group run. Cyclists are always aware that some newby on the ride may bring down the bunch.

Luv2Run wrote:

One big difference in group runs and group rides are that the latter are inherently more dangerous. Someone shows up that no one knows and the fear is the new guy is going to be squirrely in a pack and cause a nasty crash.

Also the group ride culture varies from group to group. Learn the nature of the group ride and its norms. You are joining their group; if you do not like it find another group, but expecting the group to change for you is not going to happen.

Make sure you know what kind of ride you are getting into, and introduce yourself beforehand. Unfortunately, many "recovery" rides can turn into hard efforts, which is why I rarely ride with groups except for Tuesday Night Worlds.

Also, every city limit sign is a sprint finish line, which could explain the random sprinting.

yep, this is totally spot on. i just stopped running after over two decades and have picked up road cycling/racing and this is spot on.