Planet Rugby Forum

fatcat wrote:Chris Hoy is the latest.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-41092831

Cyclist Sir Chris Hoy has apologised for saying Lycra looked "awful" on anyone weighing more than 8st (49kg).

The six-time Olympic gold medallist took to Twitter to say he was "really sorry" for the comment, which he described as "tongue-in-cheek"

It followed a GQ article in which he said amateur cyclists did not have to pull on a pair of tight-fitting shorts to look good.

That led to criticism that he was "body shaming" larger cyclists.

In his article, Sir Chris said Lycra was not the most elegant material and that professional cycling gear generally looked bad on anyone heavier than 8st.
'14+stone Mamil'

He also said the desire of so-called "mamils" - middle-aged men in Lycra - to be seen in the latest high-performance Team Sky cycling kit all too often led to ridiculous results.

"Personally, I feel sorry for mamils," he wrote. "When they walk into a cafe dressed head-to-toe in Lycra, you always spot people sniggering at them."

However, in an apparent change of heart, Sir Chris said: "As a 14+stone MAMIL myself, this was a tongue-in-cheek article that wasn't meant to offend.

"I'm really sorry; reading it back it looks harsh & that wasn't my intention. Whatever ur age/build, if ur on a bike u have my respect."

Denirostaxidriver wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:I was conservative there, it's true. Power meter and Garmin will set you back €400+.

I would suggest that power meters are not necessary for the vast majority of punters out there. The vast, vast majority. But they are awesome to use when you are training for a race or a triathlon.

Bullettyme wrote:

Denirostaxidriver wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:I was conservative there, it's true. Power meter and Garmin will set you back €400+.

I would suggest that power meters are not necessary for the vast majority of punters out there. The vast, vast majority. But they are awesome to use when you are training for a race or a triathlon.

Oh I agree. They're great to have. My mate bought one and I'm quite jealous, but he's a nerd about fitness etc. and probably will get the use out of it.

More stuff to sink your money into though.

Denirostaxidriver wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:I was conservative there, it's true. Power meter and Garmin will set you back €400+.

I would suggest that power meters are not necessary for the vast majority of punters out there. The vast, vast majority. But they are awesome to use when you are training for a race or a triathlon.

guy smiley wrote: How much does a decent pair of golf shoes cost, anyone know?

JM2K6 wrote:

Crash_12 wrote:

Gospel wrote:Who gives a fudge what someone else is wearing when they're riding a bike? You lot sound like a bunch of old women down the hair salon.

I live out in the sticks down a single lane road slap bang in the middle of a popular cycling route and I just think 'fair-play big lad' when some lycra clad lard arse is grinding his big-ring to try and keep up with the sexy young things in front. If spending £200 on ill-fitting shorts is the excuse people need to do strenuous exercise then it's a good thing IMO.

The thing is he's been attacked by the type of idiots who sport #FatPride hashtags, endlessly blog about the heroics of being overweight and thus castigate dissenters as “fat shamers”.

Meanwhile men women are now fatter than ever.

Right, we should encourage people to do something about their weight

maybe exercise

like riding a fucking bike without some cunt taking the piss out of them

Lenny wrote:

SamShark wrote:Up north where I'm from originally you'd ordinarily use your car to show how sucessful you are.

A few of my mates now seem to want to spend £3k on a bike to ride round the park.

Yeah, every one of them seems to believe that splashing huge sums of money on a carbon framed bike is going to make feel less fcuked going up a hill.

I have a friend who has been a dedicated cyclist for years (he loves food and therefore cycles in order to be able to indulge his gluttony), but always cycles on his own, with a light weight high vis jacket being his only concession to cycling gear, and refuses to have anything to do with the gangs who clog up the roads. He did spend €4k on his bike though, but balanced this by spending €2k on a Weber bbq.

Crash_12 wrote:

JM2K6 wrote:

Crash_12 wrote:

Gospel wrote:Who gives a fudge what someone else is wearing when they're riding a bike? You lot sound like a bunch of old women down the hair salon.

I live out in the sticks down a single lane road slap bang in the middle of a popular cycling route and I just think 'fair-play big lad' when some lycra clad lard arse is grinding his big-ring to try and keep up with the sexy young things in front. If spending £200 on ill-fitting shorts is the excuse people need to do strenuous exercise then it's a good thing IMO.

The thing is he's been attacked by the type of idiots who sport #FatPride hashtags, endlessly blog about the heroics of being overweight and thus castigate dissenters as “fat shamers”.

Meanwhile men women are now fatter than ever.

Right, we should encourage people to do something about their weight

maybe exercise

like riding a fucking bike without some cunt taking the piss out of them

Are you fat and offended?

guy smiley wrote: How much does a decent pair of golf shoes cost, anyone know?

blindcider wrote:You don't need expensive gear for cycling but you definitely do need the padded shorts for anything much over 50 miles if you value the sanctity of your undercarriage.

The main difference in price is down to the quality of the chamois and the label. The only expensive (IMO) gear I have is a £150 castelli trisuit which has gone through a huge amount of abuse in the four years since I bought it and use for racing. The padding on that is absolutely awesome.

Do I look good in lycra? The honest answer is I couldn't give a shit if I do or don't, its comfortable on the bike and that's what it was bought for.

People are too obsessed about what other people look like. Although you angry fat plums sat in your stupid metal boxes worth £000s, spending money going nowhere fast in your ridiculous penguin suits that aren't hiding the fact you are shit at your job look pretty stupid to me.

theo wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:

Nolanator wrote:Do normal lycra undershorts that you buy for a tenner work as well as really expensive cycling branded stuff?

They (both cheap and expensive) usually have a chamois (fancy padding) as well. I've bought shorts for a tenner, or bib shorts for twenty, and they've been perfectly functional and I haven't chafed. I don't have any expensive stuff to really compare it to though. Maybe they feel nicer but I doubt it.

I agree. I always laugh at a tits in their Rapha tops and shorts. They saw you coming son.

Armchair_Superstar wrote:

theo wrote:

Bullettyme wrote:

Nolanator wrote:Do normal lycra undershorts that you buy for a tenner work as well as really expensive cycling branded stuff?

They (both cheap and expensive) usually have a chamois (fancy padding) as well. I've bought shorts for a tenner, or bib shorts for twenty, and they've been perfectly functional and I haven't chafed. I don't have any expensive stuff to really compare it to though. Maybe they feel nicer but I doubt it.

I agree. I always laugh at a tits in their Rapha tops and shorts. They saw you coming son.

I put quite a lot of effort into not being "that guy" in the Rapha gear. Then they had a sale and I got sucked in. It is far and away the best roadie gear I've had. Comfortable, breathable, stands up to a lot of use and washing, comes in plain colours and the sizing actually makes sense unlike a lot of the Italian kit.

Sandstorm wrote:

Crash_12 wrote:

JM2K6 wrote:

Crash_12 wrote:

Gospel wrote:Who gives a fudge what someone else is wearing when they're riding a bike? You lot sound like a bunch of old women down the hair salon.

I live out in the sticks down a single lane road slap bang in the middle of a popular cycling route and I just think 'fair-play big lad' when some lycra clad lard arse is grinding his big-ring to try and keep up with the sexy young things in front. If spending £200 on ill-fitting shorts is the excuse people need to do strenuous exercise then it's a good thing IMO.

The thing is he's been attacked by the type of idiots who sport #FatPride hashtags, endlessly blog about the heroics of being overweight and thus castigate dissenters as “fat shamers”.

Meanwhile men women are now fatter than ever.

Right, we should encourage people to do something about their weight

maybe exercise

like riding a fucking bike without some cunt taking the piss out of them

Are you fat and offended?

Nah, he's just thick. The fatties are being teased about their outfits, not their choice of exercise.

Winnie wrote:

blindcider wrote:You don't need expensive gear for cycling but you definitely do need the padded shorts for anything much over 50 miles if you value the sanctity of your undercarriage.

The main difference in price is down to the quality of the chamois and the label. The only expensive (IMO) gear I have is a £150 castelli trisuit which has gone through a huge amount of abuse in the four years since I bought it and use for racing. The padding on that is absolutely awesome.

Do I look good in lycra? The honest answer is I couldn't give a shit if I do or don't, its comfortable on the bike and that's what it was bought for.

People are too obsessed about what other people look like. Although you angry fat plums sat in your stupid metal boxes worth £000s, spending money going nowhere fast in your ridiculous penguin suits that aren't hiding the fact you are shit at your job look pretty stupid to me.

Are you on the blob?

danny_fitz wrote:

Duff Paddy wrote:The mamil market is highly lucrative. These eejits think nothing of spending €200+ on a pair of castelli cycling shorts. It is bonkers. A sport designed to part middle class men from their disposable income.

I have just come back from a few weeks in the south of France and cycling is huge down there. Interestingly it does not seem to be mostly middle aged men on expensive bikes but retired 60 somethings in lycra on very expensive bikes. In fairness, there was nothing flabby about these blokes, apart from looking a bit leathery they all looked stupendously fit.

JM2K6 wrote:

Crash_12 wrote:

Gospel wrote:Who gives a fudge what someone else is wearing when they're riding a bike? You lot sound like a bunch of old women down the hair salon.

I live out in the sticks down a single lane road slap bang in the middle of a popular cycling route and I just think 'fair-play big lad' when some lycra clad lard arse is grinding his big-ring to try and keep up with the sexy young things in front. If spending £200 on ill-fitting shorts is the excuse people need to do strenuous exercise then it's a good thing IMO.

The thing is he's been attacked by the type of idiots who sport #FatPride hashtags, endlessly blog about the heroics of being overweight and thus castigate dissenters as “fat shamers”.

Meanwhile men women are now fatter than ever.

Right, we should encourage people to do something about their weight

maybe exercise

like riding a fucking bike without some cunt taking the piss out of them

guy smiley wrote:

ID2 wrote: I'm not big into cycling and don't know much about it other than hopping on a bike and cycling it,

Crash_12 wrote:

JM2K6 wrote:

Crash_12 wrote:

Gospel wrote:Who gives a fudge what someone else is wearing when they're riding a bike? You lot sound like a bunch of old women down the hair salon.

I live out in the sticks down a single lane road slap bang in the middle of a popular cycling route and I just think 'fair-play big lad' when some lycra clad lard arse is grinding his big-ring to try and keep up with the sexy young things in front. If spending £200 on ill-fitting shorts is the excuse people need to do strenuous exercise then it's a good thing IMO.

The thing is he's been attacked by the type of idiots who sport #FatPride hashtags, endlessly blog about the heroics of being overweight and thus castigate dissenters as “fat shamers”.

Meanwhile men women are now fatter than ever.

Right, we should encourage people to do something about their weight

maybe exercise

like riding a fucking bike without some cunt taking the piss out of them

To be clear, I'm happy for people to ride bikes whilst whistling Dixie with a thistle poking out of their arses - it's these shitehawks who think #fatisfab when really it's a bigger killer than cancer who piss me off.

pjm1 wrote:Surely if people are doing cycling to get fitter, they'd be better off spending £90 on a crap Halfords steel framed bike, wear big flappy loose clothing and a giant helmet?

All that extra weight and drag would make you super fit in no time. Half an hour of struggling each day plus you'd be quids in, to boot.

Bullettyme wrote:

pjm1 wrote:Surely if people are doing cycling to get fitter, they'd be better off spending £90 on a crap Halfords steel framed bike, wear big flappy loose clothing and a giant helmet?

All that extra weight and drag would make you super fit in no time. Half an hour of struggling each day plus you'd be quids in, to boot.

If something is really unpleasant you're less likely to do it.

ID2 wrote:

BlackMac wrote:

guy smiley wrote:

ID2 wrote: I'm not big into cycling and don't know much about it other than hopping on a bike and cycling it,

Yah, just like to pop out for the odd 100kms whenever the mood takes me.

Not that blase but if the weather is good I'll pick a point on the map within ~100km and go for it. Regular mountain bike and I've never had any issues that made me think I'd need to go out buying any special gear

Womack wrote:I don't think it's that outlandish an idea to ride 60-odd miles on a mountain bike in normal clothes. Fairly sure I could do it, particularly if said bike was equipped with road tyres, albeit it wouldn't be as comfortable or easy as on a road bike in Lycra.

I can think of quite a few examples of me and others doing exactly that. Back when I did the London to Brighton, probably around 10 years ago, loads of the participants, again including me, were on hybrids/mtbs and wearing normal clothes - OK 54 miles but in the same ballpark.

Edit: I think possibly there is a difference of understanding here of how much effort needs to be put out whilst riding a bike. 100km in 3-4 hours with few stops is a very different proposition to the same distance in 6-7 hours with lots of stops.

Denirostaxidriver wrote:

Womack wrote:I don't think it's that outlandish an idea to ride 60-odd miles on a mountain bike in normal clothes. Fairly sure I could do it, particularly if said bike was equipped with road tyres, albeit it wouldn't be as comfortable or easy as on a road bike in Lycra.

I can think of quite a few examples of me and others doing exactly that. Back when I did the London to Brighton, probably around 10 years ago, loads of the participants, again including me, were on hybrids/mtbs and wearing normal clothes - OK 54 miles but in the same ballpark.

Edit: I think possibly there is a difference of understanding here of how much effort needs to be put out whilst riding a bike. 100km in 3-4 hours with few stops is a very different proposition to the same distance in 6-7 hours with lots of stops.

I know you are a big mountain bike guy so I get your point but the fact that you train and don't just hop on a mountain bike and decided to do 100km. It is a long way. Bad enough on a road bike. Which reminds I have failed to do my ride this morning.

I wonder if anyone would write an article suggesting that overweight women wearing tight clothing in the gym (and yes, it is primarily women) should not be seen wearing them. That would go down well.

backrow wrote:

Mullet 2 wrote:I have a bigger problem at the moment with grown men who seem to carry school bags everywhere these days.

Work, rugby matches etc.

the Poster Slick did that to the xmas cabal about ten years ago - he still gets the bantz as 'the man with the man-bag'

OptimisticJock wrote:

fatcat wrote:Chris Hoy is the latest.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-41092831

Cyclist Sir Chris Hoy has apologised for saying Lycra looked "awful" on anyone weighing more than 8st (49kg).

The six-time Olympic gold medallist took to Twitter to say he was "really sorry" for the comment, which he described as "tongue-in-cheek"

It followed a GQ article in which he said amateur cyclists did not have to pull on a pair of tight-fitting shorts to look good.

That led to criticism that he was "body shaming" larger cyclists.

In his article, Sir Chris said Lycra was not the most elegant material and that professional cycling gear generally looked bad on anyone heavier than 8st.
'14+stone Mamil'

He also said the desire of so-called "mamils" - middle-aged men in Lycra - to be seen in the latest high-performance Team Sky cycling kit all too often led to ridiculous results.

"Personally, I feel sorry for mamils," he wrote. "When they walk into a cafe dressed head-to-toe in Lycra, you always spot people sniggering at them."

However, in an apparent change of heart, Sir Chris said: "As a 14+stone MAMIL myself, this was a tongue-in-cheek article that wasn't meant to offend.

"I'm really sorry; reading it back it looks harsh & that wasn't my intention. Whatever ur age/build, if ur on a bike u have my respect."

Man takes pish out of himself everyone gets offended. FFS

Enzedder wrote:Used to happen all the time as a Mod here.

Womack wrote:I don't think it's that outlandish an idea to ride 60-odd miles on a mountain bike in normal clothes. Fairly sure I could do it, particularly if said bike was equipped with road tyres, albeit it wouldn't be as comfortable or easy as on a road bike in Lycra.

I can think of quite a few examples of me and others doing exactly that. Back when I did the London to Brighton, probably around 10 years ago, loads of the participants, again including me, were on hybrids/mtbs and wearing normal clothes - OK 54 miles but in the same ballpark.

Edit: I think possibly there is a difference of understanding here of how much effort needs to be put out whilst riding a bike. 100km in 3-4 hours with few stops is a very different proposition to the same distance in 6-7 hours with lots of stops.

Public Health England (PHE) said 41% of the 15.3 million English adults aged 40 to 60 walk less than 10 minutes continuously each month at a brisk pace of at least 3mph.

croyals wrote:I have no idea why someone would spend £200 on a pair of lycra shorts when, for what they're doing, a normal pair of sports shorts for a tenner would do the same job.

Rule #18 // Know what to wear. Don’t suffer kit confusion. No baggy shorts and jerseys while riding the road bike. No lycra when riding the mountain bike (unless racing XC). Skin suits only for cyclocross.