so you want to be a pro?
On Wednesday, 18 May 2011 12:29:35 UTC-7, Scott wrote:
On May 18, 10:36*am, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
On Tuesday, 17 May 2011 13:47:49 UTC-7, Scott *wrote:
On May 17, 10:02*am, "Steve Freides" wrote:
Michael Press wrote:
In article ,
"Steve Freides" wrote:
I'm always amazed by the folks who plug away their entire 20's,
chasing that elusive pro contract, thinking that if they just get
that one opportunity they'll make it big. *
Here's a case of what happens when you actually have the goods:
To put it another way, pro cycling is a fun hobby, but it should give you pause to consider how quickly pro peloton salaries converge with Europe-league basketball player salaries.
Again, focused on the wrong point. DeClerq is only relevant as a
counter-example to the Yugo driving, pb&j eating, and often doping no-
hopers. For those guys, they should accept that if they are not being
sought out at a relatively young age, it is not in the cards. Not
saying to quit racing, just face reality.
Scott, for all but 10-20 pro cyclists, the only way to win is not to play.
I'm slightly kidding. My point is that pro cycling is not a great career, even disregarding the question of how few "pro" riders there are. The pay is pretty bad at all but the very sharpest end of the peloton.
It's still fun, I suppose: there's lots of young dumb guys who are bike racing because they love it, almost without regard to renumeration. There are lots of riders who get paid little more than sports bars and free bikes to race, and still do that as their full time "job," and love it.
But I just want to note that the "successful pro" de Clerq, a rider who has won a high-level cycling prize, is probably hovering somewhere around the the median income of rbr posters, a group that, while doing quite well for itself, probably doesn't include any high-end income outliers.