On Nov 26, 1:28 pm, The Luggage wrote:
On 24 Nov, 11:08, raisethe wrote:



Women's cycling (and men's track cycling) is a minority sport. The
only reason it gets any terestrial tele coverage in the UK at all is
because of their Olympic status.

What do you think are the relative numbers of leisure cyclists and
leisure joggers / runners? Or competitive cyclists and competitive
runners? I don't know the answers to these, but I wouldn't be
surprised if the cyclists outnumber the runners in both leisure and
competitive arenas. If my hunch is right, that would mean that
cycling is no more a minority sport than running.

It depends how you define 'leisure' and 'competitive'. There are
thousands of people paying to enter running races every weekend. Now,
you could argue that many of these are hardly 'competitive', but in
sheer numbers they outweigh the number of cyclists racing.

On the other hand, there are plenty of people who cycle purely for
leisure, commuting, or other 'utility' reasons who never race. Very
few people run purely to commute to work.