A Rant About the Image of Cyclists

Notice anything about this picture? Shall I tell you?



They guy leading the race up the climb, a certain 7-time Tour de France winner, actually has arm muscles.

Compare and contrast to this image of a scrawny little nerd with no muscle mass whatsoever (Andy Schleck winning 2009 Liege-Bastogne-Liege).



The point is that you can be a cycling champion AND have muscles. All you ignorant cyclists out there worried about doing a few push-ups b/c you might "bulk up", gimme a break. You couldn't drop Lance on a climb, and you couldn't drop Andy Shcleck on a climb. But Lance can drop Andy Schleck on a climb, even though Lance outweighs him by a good 10 pounds, primarily muscle.

So do us all a favor and lift some weights, for crying out loud. Gain some muscle. Look like an ATHLETE for God's sake and stop looking like a weakling. No one wants to watch weaklings compete in sports on TV. That's why bowling isn't on primetime TV. Well, that and the fact that its lame. But its mostly b/c bowlers don't look like the Spartan warriors carved into statues that we generally associate with physical might and prowess. Sport replaces warfare in modern society, but people still need/want to watch warriors on the playing field. It makes it easy for the common couch potato fantasize that the athlete with so much strength and speed is himself/herself and temporarily forget about his/her own weakness and sloth.

Cycling isn't taken seriously in this country and that may be at least partially b/c of the image it's athletes impart. Kids WANT to be/look like Lebron, Kobe, Ladanian, and T-O. Even Tiger Woods is really muscular, and yet he plays a sport that has historically been filled with pale and pasty soft-bodied slobs. Yet look what Tiger has done for golf's image. Golf's popularity has skyrocketed b/c of Tiger Woods, and he's single-handedly reversed the image of golfers from one of guys with guts who can sink a putt, to one of a lean, muscular, flexible, strong ATHLETE who can drive the ball farther than most AND still sink the putt. Its primarily a skill-based sport but Tiger has taken it to a new level by being one of the fittest, strongest golfers out there. His muscles haven't negatively impacted his game one bit.

Tiger Woods



Tiger's contemporary, Phil Mickelson (nice man boobs, BTW)



Phil's a fantastic golfer, and he's 2nd in total earning behind Tiger. But compared to Tiger, he's done nothing for the image of the sport of golf. Because he's soft-looking. It all boils down to 1 irrefutable fact: people like athletes that look like athletes/super-heroes. Not slobs with a spare tire.

Lance Armstrong has done the same for cycling. He's changed the perception of the cyclist from a skinny, 135 pound weakling to ripped, muscular, versatile ATHLETE. And cycling's popularity, at least in the USA, is on the rise b/c of it. The fact that Lance's popularity is based largely around his having won the world's hardest and most popular bicycle race 7 times consecutively is not lost on me. But no one in the USA, except cyclists, gave a damn when Miguel Indurain won 5 times in a row. Lance being American had much to do with the rise in awareness of cycling here, but kids want to grow up to be like him b/c the dude has muscles (relative to other cyclists). They want real-life superheroes to cheer for. And super heroes have muscles. That's the bottom line.



So do your part and hit the gym once or twice a week, and stop crying about how cycling isn't popular in the United States. It never will be until it's athletes start LOOKING like athletes.