# How long does it take to go from average to pro?



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

How long does it take to go from average to pro?

I just turned 22 and thinking about my future ( Dreams  

so Im in decent shape among cyclist. I have fair power and decent endurance. 60 miles is a good ride for me. i can do that daily if I had the time. But Im no star, just average Id say.

but given taking on a serious training plan, how long does it take to make it to pro level from starting where I am?


----------



## bculp72 (Nov 10, 2006)

Hard to say...maybe never. There's just more to it than training hard. Genetics plays a huge part, and that's nothing you can change. That being said, give it all you got, you may just be the one. I however, aint got it, and at 38 have accepted that. Good luck!


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

A year if you're really talented, but you'd probably already know that. Otherwise at least a few, more if you've got average genetics.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

At 22...if you're not there yet, chances are you won't be....even if you just started. A rider might be able to do it, but it's highly unlikely.


----------



## Dwaynebarry (Mar 16, 2004)

Within 6 months of serious training.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

Eh, *if* you're not racing by now, be best if to get your "feet wet", and re-evaluate the question. I'm not saying you're going to suck, but perhaps you'll realize if that's what you want cycling to become in your life, and if you're willing to invest yourself into it.

But really, not to be a douche...if you're not winning at this point, you're not going to stand apart for every other aspiring cyclist. You'd have to come in with a real "bang" if you just start to get serious. Still, don't let that be discouragement. Don't make your life a part of cycling, but cycling a part of your life.


----------



## Dwaynebarry (Mar 16, 2004)

bculp72 said:


> There's just more to it than training hard. Genetics plays a huge part, and that's nothing you can change.


In a certain sense genetics play the only part, afterall anyone can train


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Wookiebiker said:


> At 22...if you're not there yet, chances are you won't be....even if you just started. A rider might be able to do it, but it's highly unlikely.


22 and "decent shape" isn't quite the start that a pro would need. You'll have *plenty* of years to race and have fun. It's not impossible, but I'll echo that it's not very likely. Genetics are important, but the day job you'll need to suport yourself will probably get in the way of being able to train enough to become a pro.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

I think you will generally know within 2-3 years of decent (12-14 hours a week) amount of training. If you are not in the top couple riders in your region by then you probably are not going to be making any insane jumps in ability that will suddenly catapult you to the pro level. 

My personal experience: 
Started racing in 2007
I went from a cat 5 to cat 2 in 13 months, and in my first P1/2 RR (state championship) I was top 5 on Junior gears. Didn’t get to race much after than because I was hit by a car summer of 2008. 
Last year I won and placed very well in some regional races, started training with the local pro riders, and upgraded to cat 1. Went to France and won and placed very well in several races there. 
Got my pro contract in September. 

I know several other guys who have stories that are close to the same, but I also know at least one pro who took quite some time to develop. He is only where he is today because of how hard he has pushed himself for the last 13 years

Maybe see if you can do a Vo2 test where you are, that can give you a decent idea if you have physical potential.


----------



## Poncharelli (May 7, 2006)

chase196126 said:


> I went from a cat 5 to cat 2 in 13 months


That's a real good indication of having pro potential; if you do it at a young age. I know of 2 other guys in my state who did the same thing. That's from "eating cheetos on the couch" to Cat 2. 

One of them is doing real well and got to race in Europe; only 19 years old so he has great future ahead of him. 

The other, had family problems and other issues, and things never really panned out. After not seeing him for 4 years he showed up to an A flite weekly crit, kinda out of shape. Even out of shape, he still dropped me. Now he's 27ish, and that "going-pro" ship has probably sailed away.


Having a good support system really helps.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Key point*



Poncharelli said:


> One of them is doing real well and got to race in Europe; only 19 years old so he has great future ahead of him. The other, had family problems and other issues, and things never really panned out.


Combine this with the comments about genetics and you can put it into a mathematical formula (taken with a grain of salt).

90% of us don't have the genetic potential to be a pro
of the remaining 10%, 90 % don't have the motivation to be a pro 
of the remaining 1%, 90 % don't have the opportunity to be a pro 
of the remaining 0.1%, 90 % get injured and can't continue on the path to being a pro

Any questions?


----------



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

I get the feeling that many of you think that if a current pro rider had started when they were 22 instead of when they did, they would be in the same boat as me and have only .0001% of a chance.

I think the odds are better. I feel I may have been nearly pro by now if i had just started a few years ago instead of last summer.

I also have the motivation and the support. i also have no motivation to get a real job so i am not conflicted about my pursuit even if i never make any money at all.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> I think the odds are better. I feel I may have been nearly pro by now *if* i had just started a few years ago instead of last summer.


If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas. 

Why are your odds any different? What all did you win last year?


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

I started when I was 21. Went from Cat 5 to Cat 3 in a few weeks and was Cat 2 by the end of the summer. Got to Cat 1 in a season and a half (but not a very good one at first). Pro a couple of seasons later. Retired due to bad injury. After 5 years of doing absolutely nothing but getting fat, decided to race again. Started riding in Feb of 2008, raced again as a Cat 1 (good this time, though), won some stuff, another pro contract in September 2008 (although I get the UCI minimum so I still have to work full time).

Not say that you don't ever have bad days and get worked over but you should have a pretty good idea that you have something more than everyone else. Let's just say that I don't think that many pros ever struggled to get their Cat 2 upgrade.

Also, I will say this (I've said it before): I tried really hard. I trained hard, studied the sport hard, and raced super hard. But I was barely getting better. Then one day I woke up and was way better. Same thing happened this past year: I was pretty good, winning stuff, but then one day I woke up and I was way better than I was before. That's how it happens with me. 

There's nothing to say that you won't wake up tomorrow and be a ton better than the day before. Although I ride with way too many people who think that they are the next big thing and should get a pro contract any day. The problem is that they measure that by the way they train (which is inevitably way too hard) and not by the way they race (way too mediocre). And while pros don't always look like superstars, there are definitely moments where they show signs of brilliance. Sometimes it's a particular event, a particular time of year, or in a particular situation. But you know it when you see it.

EDIT: One of the things that I have seen for years and doesn't change: someone inevitably thinks that if they trained all the time, they could be pro. Also, someone thinks that some people are pros because they got lucky breaks. Seriously, when I hear things like this, I know that most people really have no idea. There are very few cyclists in the US and around the world on professional cycling teams and it's not because there aren't a lot of people trying like crazy to be one of them. Wookiebiker said it best but it's not just that people don't realize how hard it is, they don't realize where it's really hard.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

sexybeast said:


> I get the feeling that many of you think that if a current pro rider had started when they were 22 instead of when they did, they would be in the same boat as me and have only .0001% of a chance.
> 
> I think the odds are better. I feel I may have been nearly pro by now if i had just started a few years ago instead of last summer.
> 
> I also have the motivation and the support. i also have no motivation to get a real job so i am not conflicted about my pursuit even if i never make any money at all.


And I get the feeling you think it's way easier than it really is.

There is a guy on another team around here that I and others on my team race against. Two years ago he had the same idea as you....he quit his job (which paid fairly well), had family support and thought he could be a pro bike racer. He hired a coach, had the work ethic, had the desire and did all the things he was supposed to do.

Two years later....he's still a CAT 3 with a good sprint.

It's not as easy as you think it is. Racing bikes is "HARD" and being a "Pro" is even harder. It's not to say that you can't do it....but the odds are stacked against you in a big way.

Unless you are a CAT 1 by the end of this season...chances are pro teams won't give you a look because you have no prior success and they have "Many" other under 23 racers and Junior racers that have a long history of results that they know what to expect from and what their potential is.

For the most part if somebody is 22 - 23 years old with no results to speak of....they are not worth their time, even if they have some potential. This is because so much time has already been lost. 

At best a person like that is going to make it to the "Regional Domestic Pro" level....which means working full time while trying to train and race....which means making any real money at it probably isn't going to happen.

That's just reality.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> I get the feeling that many of you think that if a current pro rider had started when they were 22 instead of when they did, they would be in the same boat as me and have only .0001% of a chance.
> 
> I think the odds are better. I feel I may have been nearly pro by now if i had just started a few years ago instead of last summer.
> 
> I also have the motivation and the support. i also have no motivation to get a real job so i am not conflicted about my pursuit even if i never make any money at all.


Big bite with that last statement. You fail with the pursuit of a cycling career with your mindset, and you may end up in a mess.

No one here is trying to discourage you, but they're also not trying to get you ahead of yourself. There are riders, literally seasoned from their pre-teen years, with their family force-freeding them every ounce of competitive cycling available, trying to go pro. It's one thing to be born with favorable genetics, but another to be brought up in a favorable fashion. Talent and experience doesn't appear through thin air.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

I'd wait until the bong hits wear off and then give hard training a shot for a few months and see where you go from "I have fair power and decent endurance. 60 miles is a good ride for me."
It's pointless to speculate at this point.


----------



## DirtTurtle (Dec 21, 2007)

Ventruck said:


> Big bite with that last statement. You fail with the pursuit of a cycling career with your mindset, and you may end up in a mess.
> 
> No one here is trying to discourage you, but they're also not trying to get you ahead of yourself. There are riders, literally seasoned from their pre-teen years, with their family force-freeding them every ounce of competitive cycling available, trying to go pro. It's one thing to be born with favorable genetics, but another to be brought up in a favorable fashion. Talent and experience doesn't appear through thin air.


The honesty there probably sums this up. Im the same age at 22, getting relatively high in the ranks but I just keep aiming for the next level up. Dont look towards being pro, its always better to set "achievable" goals, and if you get there then raise the bar another level. Aiming for pro as stated could leave you in a mess if you truly believe you can go pro, commit so much but end up finding out its just not possible down the road.

The other thing to take into consideration is that the art of bike racing takes many years to learn, let alone the physical component of it. Even if you were incredibly strong now, would you have the skill to consitently get results at higher levels to get you close to that pro contract? 

The good thing about cycling is that there is no cap on where you can get with it providing you are relatively young, but because of this so many people sacrifice far too much and never come up with the what they wanted.


----------



## California L33 (Jan 20, 2006)

Kerry Irons said:


> Combine this with the comments about genetics and you can put it into a mathematical formula (taken with a grain of salt).
> 
> 90% of us don't have the genetic potential to be a pro
> of the remaining 10%, 90 % don't have the motivation to be a pro
> ...


I think you're an optimist, but I'd tell the OP to try anyway. If he's got the urge to be a pro, it's better to say, 'I tried but didn't have the genetic makeup' than spend a lifetime wondering.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

I don't see anything wrong with trying and going for it. From what I get out of the responses is that you need to train hard but also do so responsibly and also race well and smartly. I don't think that it's out of the question it just wont be easy by any stretch of the word.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Sherpa23 said:


> Wookiebiker said it best but it's not just that people don't realize how hard it is, they don't realize where it's really hard.


Pretty much. 

Even though the OP hasn't posted his race stats (hopefully there are race stats!), when you're younger, you think you want to be a doctor, professional musician, professional cyclist, etc. Obviously not limited to cycling, but sometimes it's easy to want the endpoint, but it's never free. When I was in undergrad, I swear 1/2 of the freshman class was pre-med. After the first semester of biology and chemistry, that number quickly decreased. 

Long story short, they're called "dream jobs" for a reason. If they weren't difficult to get, very hard work, or difficult to maintain a "normal" life, everyone would have their dream job. By hook or by crook, sometimes you land that dream job and it's not what you expected......


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

On the internet. One post.


----------



## Fltplan (Feb 27, 2009)

Sherpa23 said:


> I started when I was 21. Went from Cat 5 to Cat 3 in a few weeks and was Cat 2 by the end of the season. Got to Cat 1 in a season and a half (but not a very good one at first). Pro a couple of seasons later. Retired due to bad injury. After 5 years of doing absolutely nothing but getting fat, decided to race again. Started riding in Feb of 2008, raced again as a Cat 1 (good this time, though), won some stuff, another pro contract in September 2008 (although I get the UCI minimum so I still have to work full time).
> 
> Not say that you don't ever have bad days and get worked over but you should have a pretty good idea that you have something more than everyone else. Let's just say that I don't think that many pros ever struggled to get their Cat 2 upgrade.
> 
> ...



One of the best posts I've seen on this board.


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

I think that people who end up being pros do extremely well as beginners on very little training stimulus.

Unless you are one of the chosen, you have to be racing for a much different set of reasons.


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

Hank Stamper said:


> I'd wait until the bong hits wear off and then give hard training a shot for a few months and see where you go from "I have fair power and decent endurance. 60 miles is a good ride for me."
> It's pointless to speculate at this point.


Agreed, but it does make me curious as to where the OP is in his (or her) progression and how "aware" of pro cycling (and elite amateur cycling) he or she is. Saying "60 miles is a good ride for me" suggests to me that s/he's probably not racing (or maybe is, as a 4 or 5), and what his or her basis is for thinking they might be able to go pro. A junior who's great in a strong juniors scene or is doing OK or better in P/1/2 races (or is really strong in certain races at the 3s level), or a young racer who's doing well at the P/1/2 level and can reasonably say that his/her training and dedication can improve---they might really wonder. An elite runner, cross-country skier, etc. who's crossed over to cycling and is showing a lot of strength (if bad tactics) might also wonder. But if I went down to the park and started hitting 90% of my free throws, I wouldn't think that meant I could play in the NBA. But the OP may have some basis

If the OP has the support, head to Belgium for a few weeks where you can get in a ton of decent amateur racing in a short period of time and see how you feel after that.


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

Undecided said:


> If the OP has the support, head to Belgium for a few weeks where you can get in a ton of decent amateur racing in a short period of time and see how you feel after that.


Not a great idea until you are at least an aggressive cat2, but more likely a cat1.

They don't mess around in Belgian races.


----------



## muscleendurance (Jan 11, 2009)

*well its a bit like how many balls are in this jar*










nobody knows, but everyone will have a guess and an opinion about it.
The ONLY answer is to start racing and win all the way to Pro level, there is no magic formula or short cuts.


----------



## STARNUT (Jun 19, 2005)

Kerry Irons said:


> of the remaining 1%, 90 % don't have the opportunity to be a pro
> 
> 
> Any questions?


I think is the biggest barrier for a US cyclist. 

What the OP is asking is equivalent to a 22 year old Italian guy wanting to become a pro baseball player. The fact is, our "system" in the US is not set up for us to make the jump. Our "pro" teams are not all that pro (in the sense of budget). To compound the problem, USA Cycling _sucks_ and commits very little of the overall budget to developing "pros". The euros are not that different from us genetically. In theory, everyone in the US has just as good a chance at becoming a pro as a euro does....... it don't happen that way though.

I live around the corner from a _very_ talented 22 year old "pro" cyclist. Went from Cat 5 to a 1 in a about 18 months, landed a "pro" deal in 22 months. At 17, went to belgium with US Jr team, did all the Espoir races. Won some. Now he's trying to find a team and doing coding for a internet company and going to school. 

Same town and almost same story as above, different kid. 17 years old and a cat 2, racing in belgium with the US Jr team, landed a "pro" gig over there. Enough "pro" to allow him to move over there after highschool and race full time while getting paid. Now........ back home, and going to school.

Elite crit champ from a few years ago lives here. He's a "pro" and he's also a mechanical engineer at an oil company. He's fast, obviously :lol:. _All_ of the guys on his team _all_ have jobs and _all_ are 1's or pro's. The team is strong regional team.

Like sherpa said, he has a real job. Most "pros" in the US have a real job as well or have a significant other that helps bring in income. They don't call it "living the $12,000 dream" for nothing.

Good luck and have at it.

Starnut


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

STARNUT said:


> I think is the biggest barrier for a US cyclist.


Very sad, but true. Despite a nicely attended Tour of Missouri, the general US population doesn't quite have the enthusiasm for cycling. I vaguely remember Greg LeMond on Wheaties boxes when I was a kid, but not much beyond that. Then again, my family was one of the last in the neighborhood to embrace cable.  

Before Lance, I really hadn't thought too much about racing. Up until last year, I didn't really know track cycling existed. 

Like it or not, finding info about cycling isn't always the easiest. I had originally hoped to start racing in '08, but simply had no idea where to find races. In '07 I barely knew where to find group rides. The shops I frequented didn't have racing teams and weren't quite in the loop. 

Now that I'm in the loop, know where to ask various questions, and have cable channels that show races along with DVR, much better. :thumbsup: 

Still, not an easy journey, but worth a shot, eh?


----------



## MR_GRUMPY (Aug 21, 2002)

"How long does it take to go from average to Pro?"

Nobody goes from "average" to Pro.

We've got one guy on our tean that did his first race as a Cat 5, in late 2008. By mid year 2009, he was a Cat 2. Even for him, the chances of ever going higher than a starving domestic Pro, are mighty slim.

Even if you're the Star of some regional team, chances are that you'll get eaten alive, by the really good domestic Pros.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

MR_GRUMPY said:


> "How long does it take to go from average to Pro?"
> 
> Nobody goes from "average" to Pro.
> 
> ...


I rode with this guy all last summer that went from Cat 5 to Elite in one season. He is pretty insane and fast. He really goes out there and trains as hard as he can. He has what it takes and he is also willing to push himself.


----------



## Lagavulin12 (Sep 3, 2009)

I'll go out on a limb here and say it ain't gonna happen for you based on your posts. It sounds like you're kind of flailing around trying to figure out what you want to do with your life. People who make it to the pro ranks (or become doctors or CEO's or great software developers or ...) are driven people. Rather than 'I don't want to work a 'regular' job so I'm thinking about being a pro cyclist', they're accomplishing things and are debating what to give up in order to pursue one direction. I'd bet in all of the stories of people who've jumped in to cycling older than maybe 20 and made it to Cat1 or pro quickly also have a string of other accomplishments.

Ask yourself what you've already accomplished. What things have you done that required a huge amount of self discipline and sacrifice over a long period of time. This will give you an indication if you have the motivation/drive element in Kerry's post. 

If you think you do have the drive, motivation, self-discipline, and genetics to be successful and you have a burning desire to put in the work necessary then I would go full steam ahead. When I was 17 I made a choice to forego bike racing (I was a junior racing cat 1) for another career. I've been successful, but I've always wondered what would have happened if I'd followed my dream and moved to Europe to race.


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

iliveonnitro said:


> Not a great idea until you are at least an aggressive cat2, but more likely a cat1.
> 
> They don't mess around in Belgian races.


Sure (I've done what I suggested the OP do); maybe I was too subtle, but if the OP's not ready to race at a high amateur level, what's the point in wondering about going pro?


----------



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

where im coming from is that i was able to work from not having played soccer in 6 years to starting on my colleges soccer team (Big Ten School) at mid field over this past fall semester. i would call that one of my greatest achievements

i dont know if this matters but my resting HR is 45(i have no other way to quantify my fitness). im in great shape even among my soccer team. thats a FIT group so to be among the best of them shows something

as far as cycling, everyone starts at the bottom.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> where im coming from is that i was able to work from not having played soccer in 6 years to starting on my colleges soccer team at mid field over this past fall semester. i would call that one of my greatest achievements
> 
> i dont know if this matters but my resting HR is 45. im in great shape even among my soccer team. thats a FIT group so to be among the best of them shows something
> 
> as far as cycling, everyone starts at the bottom.


Starts at the bottom, at a different time - that time being much earlier than yours. Nice soccer feat, but that has no indication on cycling succcess and is perhaps borderline irrelevent.

At this point, I don't think anyone else here has more to say before this blows up into some sleezy arguement on an internet message board. You asked how long it'd take you to go pro from your age; answer was consensually "unlikely" unless you a manged to instantly be a hit wonder. You can't seem to cope with that and keep self-promoting your physique and potential in unstatistically and substantially-quantified, hypothetical amounts. 

Just go do a race, and re-evaluate all this.


----------



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat

-Theodore Roosevelt

you guys need to dream a bit more


----------



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

[QUOTE

Just go do a race, and re-evaluate all this.[/QUOTE]

will do :thumbsup:


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

sexybeast said:


> where I'm coming from is that i was able to work from not having played soccer in 6 years to starting on my colleges soccer team (Big Ten School) at mid field over this past fall semester. i would call that one of my greatest achievements
> 
> i don't know if this matters but my resting HR is 45(i have no other way to quantify my fitness). I'm in great shape even among my soccer team. thats a FIT group so to be among the best of them shows something
> 
> as far as cycling, everyone starts at the bottom.


This still doesn't really say anything of major importance. So you can play soccer, that's good, but it doesn't translate much into cycling.

As for your resting HR being 45....not a big deal. I'd guess that 1/4 of this forum, especially those that race have a HR that low. Last time I had a check up my HR in the doctors office was 42 BPM, which means out of bed it's in the 30's. HR has nothing at all to do with fitness levels.

The only thing I or anybody else can say at this point is.....Go race and see how you do. If you can get to CAT 2 with some upgrade points toward CAT 1 by the end of the season...you have a shot at being a regional domestic pro, maybe a national level domestic pro.....or you might just be a good CAT 1 on an elite amateur team.

In the end....nobody on this forum can tell you how good you will be or how far you can go...the only way to find out is to race.

Just don't think that because you could play D1 soccer means you can be a pro cyclist.

Let me ask you this....do you think you could have been a pro soccer player? If so, why are you not pursuing that? Chances are you have a better shot at being a pro soccer player than you do a pro cyclist since you already have a skill set oriented to soccer.

However, if you don't think you could make it as a pro soccer player what makes you think you can be a pro cyclist?


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

sexybeast said:


> where im coming from is that i was able to work from not having played soccer in 6 years to starting on my colleges soccer team (Big Ten School) at mid field over this past fall semester. i would call that one of my greatest achievements
> 
> i dont know if this matters but my resting HR is 45(i have no other way to quantify my fitness). im in great shape even among my soccer team. thats a FIT group so to be among the best of them shows something
> 
> as far as cycling, everyone starts at the bottom.


consume more caffeine to raise this.

maybe an IV of caffeine will help! :thumbsup:


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

sexybeast said:


> where im coming from is that i was able to work from not having played soccer in 6 years to starting on my colleges soccer team (Big Ten School) at mid field over this past fall semester. i would call that one of my greatest achievements
> 
> i dont know if this matters but my resting HR is 45(i have no other way to quantify my fitness). im in great shape even among my soccer team. thats a FIT group so to be among the best of them shows something
> 
> as far as cycling, everyone starts at the bottom.


It appears you can't be President of the USA.

http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g43.htm

_"Bush's resting heart rate was 43 beats/minute"_


----------



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

bas said:


> It appears you can't be President of the USA.
> 
> http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/g43.htm
> 
> _"Bush's resting heart rate was 43 beats/minute"_


yeah and kim jong il's is only 5 bpm


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

sexybeast said:


> Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat
> 
> -Theodore Roosevelt
> 
> you guys need to dream a bit more


"Failure is always an option, just not the desired outcome" Adam Savage. 

I don't think that anyone here is saying that you shouldn't try. There's absolutely nothing wrong with shooting high and dreaming big. Just don't be surprised if you find out that you're not the next Eddy Merckx.


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

sexybeast said:


> Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat
> 
> -Theodore Roosevelt
> 
> you guys need to dream a bit more


No, no, you're totally right---you should dream big and pursue it---but the question you asked is sort of funny, especially if you haven't even raced. Why not a pro tennis player? Hockey? Boxer?


----------



## DirtTurtle (Dec 21, 2007)

sexybeast said:


> yeah and kim jong il's is only 5 bpm


His is actually 0, he doesnt have a heart!!!!!!!

No1 is telling you not to dream, like i said im the same age and working my way up to as high as i can acheive. All every1 saying here is yes its possible, but with the types of posts you put it worries me that you actually believe this so much that you are going to throw everything else down the toilet. I've talked to a few teenagers lately that are relatively average, yet are throwing their education away and pardon my french, but are basically "as dumb as dog ****", and i can see their future if the dont get an education and cycling falls through.
Theres nothing wrong with dreaming and striving for new things its what keeps you moving forward, but be realistic about it. Thats why at our age, we need to get a job to support our lives and passion of cycling, because it isnt going to support us.
Even if you are talented its going to be a few years till you do make enough money out of cycling. 

PS like Undicided's post, why not actually choose a sport where you dont work your bum off 90% of the year and getting a better pay check.


----------



## eddya (Aug 7, 2009)

If the OP had gone onto some online forum asking "How long does it take to become a surgeon? I have no aversion to blood, got an above average IQ, and am prepared to work hard", everyone would have suggested to work hard, get a place at university studying medicine, obtain your MD, in all think 10-14 years of post highschool preparation. No one would say "Don't even bother, it's too hard, only a few genius freaks make it". People seem to suggest that becoming a pro cyclist is something magical and only a select few make it. I think in the greater scheme of things, it isn't harder to become a pro cyclist than it is to become a good surgeon, software developer, whatever. It's actually quite simple: you train hard, and then you win some races. Now, that's not easy in itself, but it's certainly not magic either.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Kiddo, slogans don't mean jack ****. I once had a boss who was basically clueless and expected to get workers to do his bidding based on inspirational quotes to rally the troops. Did anything ever happen? Nope. 

There are dreams and goals. Learn the difference. It doesn't sound like you've even raced yet. Don't but the cart in front of the horse.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

eddya said:


> If the OP had gone onto some online forum asking "How long does it take to become a surgeon? I have no aversion to blood, got an above average IQ, and am prepared to work hard", everyone would have suggested to work hard, get a place at university studying medicine, obtain your MD, in all think 10-14 years of post highschool preparation. No one would say "Don't even bother, it's too hard, only a few genius freaks make it". People seem to suggest that becoming a pro cyclist is something magical and only a select few make it. I think in the greater scheme of things, it isn't harder to become a pro cyclist than it is to become a good surgeon, software developer, whatever. It's actually quite simple: you train hard, and then you win some races. Now, that's not easy in itself, but it's certainly not magic either.


for your analogy to make sense it would be like a 50 year old asked how to become a surgeon. 
Basically at the age of 22 you are some 8 years or maybe even more behind the curve.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

eddya said:


> If the OP had gone onto some online forum asking "How long does it take to become a surgeon? I have no aversion to blood, got an above average IQ, and am prepared to work hard", everyone would have suggested to work hard, get a place at university studying medicine, obtain your MD, in all think 10-14 years of post highschool preparation. No one would say "Don't even bother, it's too hard, only a few genius freaks make it". People seem to suggest that becoming a pro cyclist is something magical and only a select few make it. I think in the greater scheme of things, it isn't harder to become a pro cyclist than it is to become a good surgeon, software developer, whatever. It's actually quite simple: you train hard, and then you win some races. Now, that's not easy in itself, but it's certainly not magic either.


Part of the problem in your analogy is the numbers involved.

How many surgeons are there in the US alone? Tens of thousands. How many in the world? In the 100,000+ range?

Now....how many pro cyclists are there in the US? A couple hundred, maybe 1000? how about the world? A couple of thousand and at the top level maybe 400?

How many routes can one take to become a surgeon? There are lots of medical schools with hundreds of students in each one. How many routes are there for cyclists to become pro's? There are what, 25-30 pro teams in the US, maybe 100 world wide? Each of those teams have between 15-30 riders.

The numbers for becoming a surgeon are not that imposing, and funny as it may be the average surgeon has an average to slightly above average IQ. So it would appear there is little genetic component needed to become a surgeon other than persistence and the ability to study and retain knowledge....though to become a very good surgeon having a high artistic ability does come into play.

However there is a "HUGE" genetic component when it comes to cycling and it takes more than hard work and persistence to become a pro cyclist.

Nice try...but your analogy is very flawed. :idea:


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

Wookiebiker said:


> Nice try...but your analogy is very flawed.


The analogy fits in one respect: Most people could not become a surgeon, no matter how hard they tried.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

pretender said:


> The analogy fits in one respect: Most people could not become a surgeon, no matter how hard they tried.


In many ways, the mind and the body are probably more similar than one would want to admit. From a genetic perspective, they need to be smart and have good hands. They need a parental and educational structure to foster the necessary brains. There needs to be internal and external motivation...and plenty of endurance! When they apply to med school, they need the luck that some trust fund kid doesn't get their spot! I could go on, but you get the point.


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 5, 2004)

I think every 6-9 months there is some posting like this on this forum. I believe even 'nitro was "guilty" of such indulgences a couple of years ago .

At 22, I'll say your chances are pretty freakin' slim. Are you even racing? Or are just doing club rides and thinking you COULD race? I have seen a lot of guys go pro in my region, and I have had close ties with many of the riders on the now-disbanded Symmetrics team. From all I have seen it takes an enormous amount of work plus the ability to get a result at the right time in the right situation to get to the domestic pro level. There are so many guys fighting to get that last spot on any domestic team and the reality is they are all standout cat 1 racers. But to make the next step they have to standout in a team DS's eyes.

Sure, there are some truly gifted people out there who do some amazing stuff in a short time - the Svein Tuft story. In 1999 he did his first race ever, an open provincial championship road race near Whistler BC. Attacked from the start, got caught, towed the break all race and finished 5th or something. The guy who won was a former Commonwealth Games medalist. The next year Svein rode on a top regional team, won everything locally, had great results regionally, and finished his first real season of bike racing with the Cdn national team at the Tour de l'Avenir. Next year he rode Tour de Langkawi, won a stage at GP Beauce, was a stagiare with Mercury at Avenir. He was pro with Prime Alliance for 2 years before he had a mild burnout and stepped away from cycling for 8 months. He came back mid-way in 2004 and with only 6 weeks of training finished 2nd to Gord Fraser at the Cdn nationals, riding with Symmetrics. The rest of the story is better known - wins in Mt Hood, Redlands, Tour of Cuba GC, the US open, finished 7th in the Olympic TT and 2nd at worlds TT in 2008. Now in his 2nd year with Garmin.

What's my point other than having a freakish knowledge of Svein's career? That guy was easily the most raw-talented guy I have ever seen on a bike. From first race to Tour de l'Avenir in less than a year, I cannot imagine another 22 year old male doing that. But even so, it took him 6 or 7 years to really hit his full potential in 2007 and 2008. And even with his immense talent I have also witnessed what it takes to get there with his training first-hand and believe me, the workload is far beyond anything the average cat 1 or cat 2 rider could handle. Like Sherpa says, there are lots of guys who think they can be pro but it goes so much further beyond just training like or training with a pro. There is a reason why they are the ELITE.


----------



## Dwaynebarry (Mar 16, 2004)

waldo425 said:


> I rode with this guy all last summer that went from Cat 5 to Elite in one season. He is pretty insane and fast. He really goes out there and trains as hard as he can. He has what it takes and he is also willing to push himself.


Right, he was fast relatively soon after starting serious training. This is because your "natural" ability combined with your adaptation to training, the largest bulk of which will occur in roughly the first 6 months or so of serious training largely determines where you end up.

As Mr. Grumpy said no one goes from being "average" to a pro. If you've been training seriously for any amount of time and you're still average, the chance of you suddenly improving a tremendous amount is about nil.

Guys who are cat. 3 or cat. 4 after years of serious training don't suddenly get pro power.

IIRC, Tyler Hamilton broke his club's (one of the biggest in the U.S.) TT record after something like 6 months of training.

The first time Mary Decker-Slaney, with no training, ever ran a mile in school gym class she went under 5 minutes. Ninety-nine percent of the population could train their asses off for years and probably not be able to do a sub-5 minute mile.


----------



## Hank Stamper (Sep 9, 2009)

eddya said:


> People seem to suggest that becoming a pro cyclist is something magical and only a select few make it.



I wasn't sure which flaw in the entire quote to pick so I choose that one.
yeah, off course people are suggesting only a select few make it. It's kind of mind numbing that you'd suggest otherwise.


----------



## Eric_H (Feb 5, 2004)

sexybeast said:


> you guys need to dream a bit more


Haha. I missed this on the first read. Do a few races, the sport of cycling could also be called "Dream Crusher on Wheels".


----------



## tyro (May 15, 2005)

The title of this thread holds the answer. I don't think you can go from average to pro. You can go from exceptional to pro. This only happens with hard work, luck, etc...

That said, I'm not a pro, nor will I ever be. Don't listen to me. 

That said, I say go for it! That's the only way you will know. When you're 50, you do not want to say, "I wish I would have _________."


----------



## Mahatma Kane (Oct 25, 2005)

I thought this article would be relevant to this discussion:

http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/2010/01/the-myth-of-natural-ability-in-elite-sport/#more-8375

What do you all think?
At first I thought it was a joke, but the author seems quite serious.


----------



## tnwtnit (Nov 29, 2009)

Sherpa23 said:


> Also, I will say this (I've said it before): I tried really hard. I trained hard, studied the sport hard, and raced super hard. But I was barely getting better. Then one day I woke up and was way better. Same thing happened this past year: I was pretty good, winning stuff, but then one day I woke up and I was way better than I was before. That's how it happens with me.


But, but.. that's impossible, according to the Haters.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

tnwtnit said:


> But, but.. that's impossible, according to the Haters.


Then how come we're not all astronaut, rock star, porn star, President of the USA, Navy SEAL commando, pro cyclists?


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

tnwtnit said:


> But, but.. that's impossible, according to the Haters.


Well, it's not like if I went from average power to pro power, like others have said. It's more like all of a sudden I had a touch better power and a lot better recovery between efforts - not unlike how you feel when you taper, except that this was not during a taper and it was permanent. I guess the best way to describe it is that all the training caught up with me and the recovery was there and so my body absorbed it all.

But the point is, it didn't happen in a straight line; more like stair steps.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

spade2you said:


> Then how come we're not all astronaut, rock star, porn star, President of the USA, Navy SEAL commando, pro cyclists?


Because someone has to serve the french fries...and someone has to clean the toilets
But it would be cool to have a business card that read:
astronaut, rock star, porn star, President of the USA, Navy SEAL commando, pro cyclists

And the OP doesn't want a job? Being a Pro is a job...a really hard job that is hard to get.


----------



## Dwaynebarry (Mar 16, 2004)

Sherpa23 said:


> Well, it's not like if I went from average power to pro power, like others have said. It's more like all of a sudden I had a touch better power and a lot better recovery between efforts - not unlike how you feel when you taper, except that this was not during a taper and it was permanent.


That's basically how I felt whenever I got in really good shape, except for me really good shape was still average 

Anybody familiar with a local racing scene, be it running or cycling, knows the same guys are fast year in, year out, the same guys are average year in, year out, a new "fast guy" is almost always a relative newbie to the sport, or at least new to serious training.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

the mayor said:


> And the OP doesn't want a job? Being a Pro is a job...a really hard job that is hard to get.


Hard to get, hard work to maintain, hard to keep. In Friel's book, there's a quote that the novelty of a 40 hour training week wore off really quick. 

Since it's no my career, I'm no real expert, but keep in mind that most retire at a pretty young age. Definitely an awesome career to have, but what happens afterwords?


----------



## Dwaynebarry (Mar 16, 2004)

Mahatma Kane said:


> I thought this article would be relevant to this discussion:
> 
> http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/2010/01/the-myth-of-natural-ability-in-elite-sport/#more-8375
> 
> ...


I think it's worth distinguishing between sports that rely to a large extent on skill and those that rely to a large extent on physical capacity. Cycling is not soccer. The skill in cycling is minimal compared to most sports. Plenty of cyclists don't take up the sport until well into their teenage years and still become pros or even as adults begin and still have great ability. I dare say, no one has taken up soccer as an adult and developed pro-like ability or probably even as a late teenager and end up a pro, at least not one known for their technique and skill.


----------



## Benbo (May 16, 2007)

eddya said:


> If the OP had gone onto some online forum asking "How long does it take to become a surgeon? I have no aversion to blood, got an above average IQ, and am prepared to work hard", everyone would have suggested to work hard, get a place at university studying medicine, obtain your MD, in all think 10-14 years of post highschool preparation. No one would say "Don't even bother, it's too hard, only a few genius freaks make it". People seem to suggest that becoming a pro cyclist is something magical and only a select few make it. I think in the greater scheme of things, it isn't harder to become a pro cyclist than it is to become a good surgeon, software developer, whatever. It's actually quite simple: you train hard, and then you win some races. Now, that's not easy in itself, but it's certainly not magic either.


Software developer = genius freak = hard to achieve? I've been a software developer, and I've worked with lots of software developers. Believe me the ranks aren't fully populated with rocket scientists.....


----------



## moab63 (Aug 7, 2006)

*To keep it going a junior from a club*

here in san diego started to race(mtb) seriously about two years ago, last year he went(road) thru all cat5 races in a month. A couple of cat 4 podiums and then the wheels started to come off. He was dignosed with anemia and then mono. When he was sick and undignosed, he had some testing done results below.

He had an LT and VO2 testing and his LT is 290 watts and VO2 74, so genes do have something to with. He is training again and I can tell you he can drop cat1 and cat 2 guys on climbs right now with about three months of riding.


Now the answer to your question now one knows, but to quote someone very famous ride a lots and see where it takes you. Pain will be your friend, no life no other friends and no guarantees. 

The are many reasons people dont make it in sports, so you can only try but it has to be a 150% effort anything else wont do.
Good luck:thumbsup:


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

It sounds like you're ready. All you need is a few races under you belt and a TrionZ magnetic necklace.

http://www.trionz.com/?cmd=cart&type=2

Don't be too discouraged (though you don't sound it at all). Go out and give it your all and find out. But if you have average or better than average genetics, I think that is just too much to overcome.
Best of luck in your pursuit.


----------



## Dopamine (Jun 2, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> where im coming from is that i was able to work from not having played soccer in 6 years to starting on my colleges soccer team (Big Ten School) at mid field over this past fall semester. i would call that one of my greatest achievements
> 
> i dont know if this matters but my resting HR is 45(i have no other way to quantify my fitness). im in great shape even among my soccer team. thats a FIT group so to be among the best of them shows something
> 
> as far as cycling, everyone starts at the bottom.


I have a similar background to you so I'll give you a bit of advice. The main piece of advice is DO NOT neglect your day-job career that you start to develop out of College from the degree you've earned in school.

I was a pretty darn good NCAA DIII lacrosse midfielder in college and I started racing bicycles as soon as I graduated from college at 22. I can tell you first of all that all of that running fitness doesn't translate all that well to the bike. It's certainly better than starting from off the coach as a fat ass, but not much. You are not a distance runner as a soccer or lacrosse player, you are sprinter with good recoverability. You will need to re-develop all of your leg muscles into cycling muscles and you will need to develop a lot more aerobic endurance than you have right now - and I don't care if you are the strongest guy on the field in the 4th quarter (I was), this is still not even close to the aerobic endurance needed for cycling.

Now you need to find your local fast group rides, start riding hard and racing immediately. This weekend buddy. If you live in CA the season starts in 2 weeks. Ride and race as much as you can and you will find out your potential quickly. It will take 2 years or so to develop yourself into a cyclist. And you need to work a day job the whole time or you won't be able to feed yourself.

8 years later from being in your place and I am a good Cat 3 and have a much better business career than cycling career. I realized after how hard it was to claw my way into a Cat 3 upgrade that I didn't think I had that "extra" intangible needed to be a pro and even if I did it was hard as Hell and I didn't think I wanted to kill myself day after day on the bike to be a domestique and make less money than I make in business now.

You will know within your first couple of years if you have something "extra" or not. I had a lot of success early on with 9 podiums in the lower cats and then I topped out as a top-level amateur. I'm happy with what I've accomplished and still love to race to keep myself fit and healthy. 

Get out there and race and find out what you can do. Remember to have fun with it no matter what and don't neglect yoru day job career. Even the very best pros race only into their mid-30's on average and very few of them make a lot of money. You will need something to do afterwards even if you are one of the lucky few who get a contract.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> I get the feeling that many of you think that if a current pro rider had started when they were 22 instead of when they did, they would be in the same boat as me and have only .0001% of a chance.
> 
> I think the odds are better. I feel I may have been nearly pro by now if i had just started a few years ago instead of last summer.
> 
> I also have the motivation and the support. i also have no motivation to get a real job so i am not conflicted about my pursuit even if i never make any money at all.


Were you ever freakishly good at any other sports you may have played/participated in? Do you hold state high school middle distance or long distance track records, by chance? Were you recruited to run track or play any sport in college? Have you been the guy that, no matter what you're competing at, everyone comments ' he makes it look easy'?

If not, don't delude yourself by thinking you'd be closer to being a pro if you'd started a couple of years ago. If you had the genetic makeup to be a pro cyclist, it would've shown itself by now in one sport or another.

Sorry to piss in your cornflakes.


----------



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

Dopamine youre on my page!
good advice on the normal career.

im not afraid to "fail", i can blow away a year no problem. 
My ambitions in life are to have as much fun as possible and push myself all the time.
life experiences are what im after

ill come back and let you guys know where I am after the summer.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> Dopamine youre on my page!
> good advice on the normal career.
> 
> im not afraid to "fail", i can blow away a year no problem.
> ...


I'd really like to hear your plans of going pro after that first race. Dang near everyone will get crushed on that first one.


----------



## stewie13 (Feb 5, 2005)

One thing that I haven't really seen mentioned is that in cycling it really doesn't matter if you are pro or not. If we are talking about basketball, football, or baseball then you can have a bunch of really talented people that just never really got a shot at performing on the biggest stages. That isn't true at all in cycling. 

Win races and upgrade. When you get to Cat 1 then you can compete almost all of the pro races in the country. If you get results at NRC races then you will become a pro, if you don't then you won't. There are only a few races that top Cat 1's can't get into and many pro teams have trouble getting into those as well (Tour of Missouri, Tour of CA, etc.).

Besides some of the younger development riders on pro teams, you need to get results at NRC races to become a pro. Teams don't really care if you win industrial park crits or even state championships.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

I stumbled upon this article while doing a different search. Sure it's old, but still applies and worth a read.
Again, best of luck in your pursuit.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2001/06/news/searching-for-the-key_896


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

Get a USCF racing license, and start racing! That's the first step. All your answers will come with time once you start racing. 22 is not too old if you have the genetics.


----------



## tampafw (Jul 25, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> How long does it take to go from average to pro?
> 
> I just turned 22 and thinking about my future ( Dreams
> 
> ...


Coming from triathlon for over 2 decades I can't give an even Steven comparison, but would say if you have been at it for a year and you aren't showing signs of it then you probably won't, but don't stop trying! 

I watched 2 unknowns jump into the sport in their early 20's and within that first year they were at the elite amateur triathlet level. Let me put it to you this way, if you don't have manufacturers trying to shove gear down your throat by year 2.....keep going to class and working hard One of the kids I was speaking of was invited to Colorado Springs for 2 years, he was hammering out sub 50 minute 40k's at the local tt's.....and never made it to the pro ranks. Let me put it to you another way. This kid Kevin would routinely do pulls at 32 mph on flat ground and drop all but a few guys in Tallahassee. And we are talking about a triathlete here, not a top level cyclist. Triathletes are notoriously soft when compared to cyclists....bike handling skills, power, tactics....they just pale in comparison on all levels. I remember coming back from an 80 miler one evening and he just rode off the front and dropped us all at close to 30mph and I looked at my buddy and laughed. You will know if you have the potential.

By and large the pro job will choose you, you won't choose it. Unfortunately, to be at that level you have to have been dipped in the right gene pool.


----------



## the mayor (Jul 8, 2004)

The Weasel said:


> I stumbled upon this article while doing a different search. Sure it's old, but still applies and worth a read.
> Again, best of luck in your pursuit.
> 
> http://velonews.competitor.com/2001/06/news/searching-for-the-key_896


I know a couple of the guys from that camp...Rob Dapice won a Nat'l Junior Road Race Title...none of them race anymore.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

Listen, kiddo. It is certainly true that it would be terribly hard and that the odds are against you. That is going to be true whatever your age, though. People get very brave on the internet and don't mind hurting people's feelings. You aren't too old; Svein Tuft was mentioned, and Jens Voigt was 25 when he got out of the Army and turned pro at 26. Remember that Jens is a total freak, though. That is not a case of "average to pro"; Jens Voigt was never average, even when he wasn't racing. Just start racing. If you've got it, then it will show up soon. You might have to dust off a few cobwebs, but if you have what it takes you will start to improve quickly. If you love the sport enough to consider it as a career, then none of this would be a waste of time because though you may plateau at Cat 3, you will have a lifetime of fun Cat 3 racing ahead of you. Just go at it, and if you have what it takes you will succeed. If you do not, then you will not. Not a single person on this board can tell you how good your chances are or are not. There are plenty who make themselves feel better by talking down to people over the internet though, so don't worry about that. If you have the fortitude necessary, then they don't matter. Roadies are a snotty bunch, so you will have to get used to some of that if you want to truly pursue this. 

So:

-Get a license 
-Start racing
-Race as much as you can
-Upgrade as quickly as possible
-Go as far as you can go

That is it. You might be a Cat 1 in a year competing for pro sponsorship, you might plateau at Cat 3 and race in that Category indefinitely, or you could crash and break your collarbone in your first race and quit b/c you decide cycling isn't for you. I don't know which of these will happen to you, and nobody else on this forum does, either. Don't quit your day job, go for it with everything you've got, and if it's in you good things will happen. You have nothing to lose.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

Let me tell you something else. In a lot of cases, the difference between those who are "gifted" and not is mental. I have heard in several places (trying to find a link right now to cite this) that Eddy Merckx was not the most genetically gifted athlete of his time. But Jesus Christ he wouldn't allow himself to lose. Watch some classic Eddy Merckx races; he doesn't look like graceful Fausto Coppi dancing up the mountains. He usually finished ahead of everyone else, though.

I became a believer in this when I was in the Army. I was in the Infantry with the 10th Mountain Division, and our tour in Afghanistan was the most physically demanding thing that I have ever done. We had to climb mountains, crawl in caves, and fight terrible firefights on very, very little sleep. If you saw some of the guys that I went to war with, though, they did not look like the high-speed chiseled models that portray soldiers in the Army recruitment commercials. They were most certainly not genetically gifted, to say the least. I noticed when I started basic training that a lot of the best looking physical specimens didn't make it for very long. The guys I went to war with, however, accomplished physical feats that I would not have believed were possible. I made an observation that a lot of our physical training was not really the best as far as actually helping people get into shape. It was terribly painful though. I inquired about this once, and the answer that I received was that if we were doing some horrible forced assault through the mountains, it was going to hurt everybody. It was not necessarily going to be the most physically fit guy that was going to make it; it was going to be the guy that can keep going when it hurts so bad it is almost unbearable. It may seem a far fetched analogy, but my experiences led me to believe that there is some credence to this. Whereas it certainly helps, it isn't necessarily the guy with the highest V02 MAX that will win. The most driven guy is the one that is most likely to succeed. I think a lot of the people that come into sports and automatically blow everyone away are the ones with the most mental fortitude.

Whatever the case is, to succeed you will have to try so hard that you turn yourself absolutely inside out. You may be the most physically gifted guy out there, but if you can't dig into the very top 1% of what you are capable of, you will fail. You may not be the most physically gifted guy out there, but if you can truly give all 100% of what you are capable of, then you might be surprised who you end up ahead of. 

Or you might still fail.....

You will have to try and see.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> i dont know if this matters but my resting HR is 45(i have no other way to quantify my fitness).


I'm 53 and my resting heart rate is typically sub-40. Doesn't mean a thing.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat
> 
> -Theodore Roosevelt
> 
> you guys need to dream a bit more


I'll dream for me. For you, especially since you asked our opinions, truth is more in order. Delusions are for the delusional.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

Mahatma Kane said:


> I thought this article would be relevant to this discussion:
> 
> http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/2010/01/the-myth-of-natural-ability-in-elite-sport/#more-8375
> 
> ...


If natural ability doesn't have anything to do with it, explain Taylor Phinney.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I don't think anyone has been particularly cruel, but asking about going pro before racing is a bit peculiar. 

Cyclists are a bit of a different bunch, but I wouldn't consider them as a whole to be snotty. Once you prove that you can hang with the big dogs and you're a safe rider, that's most of it right there. I've noticed the ones that have problems with roadies go in with the mindset that they are automatically owed a certain level of respect, but it must be earned first. Coming in cocky never ends well.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

sexybeast said:


> where im coming from is that i was able to work from not having played soccer in 6 years to starting on my colleges soccer team (Big Ten School) at mid field over this past fall semester. i would call that one of my greatest achievements
> 
> i dont know if this matters but my resting HR is 45(i have no other way to quantify my fitness). im in great shape even among my soccer team. thats a FIT group so to be among the best of them shows something
> 
> as far as cycling, everyone starts at the bottom.


Im 40 my resting HR is 45 and Im a mediocre cat 2 so based on that you not going pro. However you may have what it takes but you have to go out there and do it, i.e. you need to actually get out and race.


----------



## Lookbiker (Sep 2, 2006)

Ahh, to be 22 years old again. Enjoy your riding and dreaming now, pro or hack, because 47 years old comes all too quickly....


----------



## Oldteen (Sep 7, 2005)

Gene pool comments are on target. Are you blessed with the huge aerobic engine? If not, killing yourself training won't matter. Just like a guy 5'6" is not gonna be star NBA center. 

From best evidence there are 3 basic responses to aerobic (VO2 max) training. Most raise VO2max up to 20% with optimal training. An unlucky 5% or so cannot improve aerobic max with training, but a very lucky few will can boost VO2max 40-50+%. Google Heritage Study.


----------



## Dwaynebarry (Mar 16, 2004)

thechriswebb said:


> Whereas it certainly helps, it isn't necessarily the guy with the highest V02 MAX that will win.


Your example is nice but it's not a case where your MAXIMUM ability has to be at a certain level to allow you to be in the game. "Average" folks can accomplish quite remarkable things if endurance and perseverance are the primary factors (e.g. adventure racing). That doesn't mean if only they tried hard enough, trained enough, they could, for example, run a 2:10 marathon. Nobody with an average ability to produce energy oxidatively will end up an elite endurance athlete.

As somebody else said there are no 5'6" centers in the NBA, there are no pro cyclists with average aerobic abilities. It could be otherwise, but the facts are that ~50% of your baseline aerobic ability and about 50% of your adaptation to training comes down to genetics. And again, if you've been training seriously for more than about 6 months and you're not showing any signs of being an aerobic stud, it's probably the case you're not going to end up being one, no matter how hard you try. 

Pick a skill sport where training accounts for a lot more, sports that stress maximum physical capacity, be it strength, power or endurance are probably the least likely arenas where "trying harder" will pay large dividends.


----------



## PhatTalc (Jul 21, 2004)

Dwaynebarry said:


> Pick a skill sport where training accounts for a lot more, sports that stress maximum physical capacity, be it strength, power or endurance are probably the least likely arenas where "trying harder" will pay large dividends.


Unfortunately the skill sports rely on innate talent too! For instance, if the OP could contine playing association football ("soccer")... but unless he has that natural ability, no amount of practice will lead to the Premier leaque or the MLS.


----------



## Dwaynebarry (Mar 16, 2004)

PhatTalc said:


> Unfortunately the skill sports rely on innate talent too! For instance, if the OP could contine playing association football ("soccer")... but unless he has that natural ability, no amount of practice will lead to the Premier leaque or the MLS.


Well certainly skill acquisition is a talent too, but I think skill is more trainable than physical capacity. I would think via training you're far more likely to be able to acquire Premier League skill than say elite marathoner ability. Of course, being an elite soccer player is not all skill, there's a lot of physical capacity too. And skill acquisition takes a very long time, and to optimize probably has to begin as a young kid so that it's occurring as the kid passes thru the "golden period" for motor learning. Low skill sports like cycling can essentially be taken up as a physically mature adult and still there is a chance to become "world class", whereas that's for all intents and purposes that's impossible for a high skill sport like soccer.

IMO, if you have a bunch of little kids you want to turn into "pros" you're better off attempting something like baseball, golf, pool, even soccer, etc. than something like marathon running, powerlifting, 100-yard dash sprinting, etc. Either way it's a long shot, but less of one for the former types of sports.


----------



## sexybeast (Dec 8, 2009)

Heritage Study, i cant find, there are so many things by that name.

I believe that skill sports definitely need to be picked up at an early age. it is such an advantage. I noticed this when i picked up soccer again last fall. I Sucked at the beginning it was embarrassing but with repetitions with the ball it all came back and I am now even better than before. I also think that skills learn themselves over time once the basics are acquired. I havent played soccer in 2 months but i went out on saturday and i was better than before and was impressing myself, i dont know where it came from but my mind just puts it all together over time. 

I dont have a team to play on anymore so i really cant continue my development in soccer so i am looking for something new. If i could find a club team id be all over it. I swear to god I LOVE SOCCER. but its very difficult to find a competitive league and group of people to train and grow with after college (especially in tennessee). But i do believe if i had time to get in reps playing soccer (2 or 3 years) i could nearly be competitive in MLS. I played with semi pros on my soccer team and im comparable to them... and i think thats about skill not physical ability

I have heard of so many athletes like rafael nadal or maria kirilenko (tennis players) from spain and russia who at age 7 had to choose a sport they wanted to play. I envy this culture and wish that my parents had had me specialize in something and truly devote myself to it. from 4 to 16 i played soccer baseball football lacrosse and crew. Often times playing multiple sports in a season. and I never focused on one sport.

PS

So if this is all about Genes then how do you think Lance's Boy will do? Think hes got IT in him?


----------



## Oldteen (Sep 7, 2005)

http://www.pbrc.edu/Heritage/home.htm

Good place to start for largest scientific effort to study "genes vs training".

BTW- The study does NOT look at skills, but rather overall aerobic performance.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> So if this is all about Genes then how do you think Lance's Boy will do? Think hes got IT in him?


Who knows, who cares?

Genetics might say you'll win or lose, but it's about crossing the line. Pedal more, research less.


----------



## Dopamine (Jun 2, 2009)

sexybeast said:


> So if this is all about Genes then how do you think Lance's Boy will do? Think hes got IT in him?


There are a lot of pro cyclists whose Dads were pro cyclists, to name a few with their Dads in parenthesis:

Tyler Phinney (Davis Phinney), Jo Planckaert (Walter Planckaert), Axel Merckx (Eddy Merckx), Nikki Sorensen (Rolf Sorensen).

So it is true that aerobic potential runs in the family but it doesn't prove anything. For example none of the above racers were nearly as good as their fathers were, although it's too early to know for Tyler (though he doesn't appear to have his Dads sprint).

All that being said I'm pretty sure I remember reading that Lance's ex-wife who mothered those kids ran a few marathons so I'm sure they've got big potential. Of course Lance will probably burn them out at a young age.


----------



## HIMEHEEM (Sep 25, 2009)

spade2you said:


> Who knows, who cares?
> 
> Genetics might say you'll win or lose, but it's about crossing the line. Pedal more, research less.


This is correct.

Here's a question for all of you that race, How many times have you pulled up to the starting line as the fittest, most talented natural in the race? I can answer that for myself - "0". I have still pulled off a few wins and placed(many times) higher than "superior athletes". 

Here's another question, how long does it take to go from average to sucky? (answer is about a week)

To the OP, go ride and see. Maybe you will be the one to answer your own question.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Dopamine said:


> All that being said I'm pretty sure I remember reading that Lance's ex-wife who mothered those kids ran a few marathons so I'm sure they've got big potential. Of course Lance will probably burn them out at a young age.


If I remember correctly....the endurance aspect of athletes comes from the mothers side, not the fathers....so ones genetic ability to do well in endurance sports is more dependent on their mother than father.

So pick your mothers well


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

Dopamine said:


> Nikki Sorensen (Rolf Sorensen).


nicki Soerensen? The one 10 years younger than Rolf?


----------



## Lagavulin12 (Sep 3, 2009)

Dopamine said:


> There are a lot of pro cyclists whose Dads and uncles were pro cyclists,


Peter Stetina


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

So, since my dad is a pharmacist, that makes me predisposed to be a pharmacist. Nah. Nature vs. nurture.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

spade2you said:


> So, since my dad is a pharmacist, that makes me predisposed to be a pharmacist. Nah. Nature vs. nurture.


Up until your post above, I'd assumed you were pretty smart. Please tell me you were kidding and that you do in fact understand the genetic component of athletic ability?


----------



## tjanson (Nov 11, 2006)

*Parents/ Genes*

The thing about children of pros becoming pros is that these kids were probably riding at 4 years and racing at 8. They all had likely had amazing opportunities and support because of their parents. I'm not saying that there's no genes involved, but one cannot conclude that genetics determine success from this example.


----------



## Sherpa23 (Nov 5, 2001)

deleted


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

yo mamma said:


> Up until your post above, I'd assumed you were pretty smart. Please tell me you were kidding and that you do in fact understand the genetic component of athletic ability?


Am I kidding, criminally insane, trying to take a jab at people for over-analyzing this topic to death, or am more of a street pharmacist practicing out of a van.....that is to be decided. Of course genetics play a role, but I don't think we've fully decoded the human genome to the point where we will tell children that they will be on the pro tour or just a pharmacist. 

Until then, the old college try is about the best answer there is. Besides, the OP wants the destination without the journey.


----------



## yo mamma (Aug 10, 2009)

tjanson said:


> The thing about children of pros becoming pros is that these kids were probably riding at 4 years and racing at 8. They all had likely had amazing opportunities and support because of their parents. I'm not saying that there's no genes involved, but one cannot conclude that genetics determine success from this example.


Your opinion notwithstanding, there is plenty of literature regarding the genetic component of athletic prowess, and it is commonly accepted that the single best determinant of future athletic potential is to look at the person's parents. 

FWIW, your comments re: children of pros being involved at an early age could not be more off base. Take T. Phinney for example. Didn't start riding till he was what, 14 or so, started racing at 16, winning nearly every cat III event he did in CO his first year, went 'pro' the next year, wins world championships, etc... after only a couple of years of racing.


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

thechriswebb said:


> Let me tell you something else. In a lot of cases, the difference between those who are "gifted" and not is mental. I have heard in several places (trying to find a link right now to cite this) that Eddy Merckx was not the most genetically gifted athlete of his time. But Jesus Christ he wouldn't allow himself to lose. Watch some classic Eddy Merckx races; he doesn't look like graceful Fausto Coppi dancing up the mountains. He usually finished ahead of everyone else, though.


Ive seen some of the videos and no he wasn't graceful on the bike at all but damn did he get the job done. He had power and the knowledge of when to attack and when to sit back. If you look at his race history you'll see that he raced a lot --- I mean A LOT. That's what it takes, just race a lot. The first few will not be graceful or pretty and you may even end up DFL but you will learn a lot every time.


----------



## tyro (May 15, 2005)

I have not read this entire thread, so I'm sorry if this is redundant...

My intuition tells me that this is mostly B.S., but what is the deal with athletic genetic testing?

http://www.cygenedirect.com/browse-10873/Optimum-Athletic-Performance-Dna-Analysis.html


----------



## Blue CheeseHead (Jul 14, 2008)

Dwaynebarry said:


> Within 6 months of serious training.


No f"ing way. Gaining that kind of fitness would take several years. Plus, you just don't hop on a bike and win races even if you are very fit. It takes time to learn the craft. Cat 5 to Pro in 6 months. Right.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

tyro said:


> My intuition tells me that this is mostly B.S., but what is the deal with athletic genetic testing?


Winning isn't enough and some people need to prove WHY someone is winning. We now have a fair amount of science and technology that can almost tell you if someone is likely to win. I almost get the impression that some guys won't compete if they don't think they have it in the bag.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> No f"ing way. Gaining that kind of fitness would take several years. Plus, you just don't hop on a bike and win races even if you are very fit. It takes time to learn the craft. Cat 5 to Pro in 6 months. Right.



Correction you don't just hop on the bike and win Pro races. If you are naturally talented you do just hop on the bike and win cat 5-2 races. We had a loacl guy who was a collagate swimmer, he got a bike and was winning races right away. He had no skill per se but I remember going up aginst him the cat 4s right before I upgraded he beat me into second twice doing everything wrong (pointless attacks leading out the entire last lap). All that changed when he got to the p12 races then it took him a few months to learn the ropes - then he went right back to winning stuff.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

Blue CheeseHead said:


> No f"ing way. Gaining that kind of fitness would take several years. Plus, you just don't hop on a bike and win races even if you are very fit. It takes time to learn the craft. Cat 5 to Pro in 6 months. Right.


There are a combination of factors here. First, if you have the potential to be a pro cyclist, you're probably pretty good at some other sport due to your aerobic abilities. Even if you're not already active, you'll likely gain that fitness quickly right off the couch.

Read Mike Jones' story for reference:
http://www.dailypeloton.com/displayarticle.asp?pk=2769


----------

