tip off
12

What’s wrong with “lycra louts”?

What Manhattan's proposed Gaudi skyscraper would've looked like had it been built....

There’s a regrettable tendency for some cycling advocates to demonise their fellows who wear lycra and ride road bikes, especially expensive machines made from carbon fibre and equipped with exotic groupsets.

It’s an unfortunate attitude because so-called “lycra louts” are the pioneers of riding on the road in Australian cities. As a group they’ve had a big role in helping to normalise the idea that cyclists are legitimate road users.

They’re the ones who’ve long had the confidence to mix it with motorists. Without them the visibility of on-road cycling would drop appreciably and the ‘safety in numbers’ effect would be weakened.

It’s sometimes said lycra louts earn cycling a bad name because they tend to flout road rules and earn the ire of motorists. However I’ve never seen any objective evidence to support that conjecture. Nor does it fit with my personal observations over the years.

I suspect cyclists who take a ‘flexible’ attitude to road rules are defined more by their age and sex than by what they ride or wear. If anything lycra louts might well cause motorists the least angst overall because they tend to ride fast and confidently.

I think a key reason some advocates criticise road bikes and lycra is their association with sport – they imply cycling is primarily a recreation. This is at odds with the utilitarian approach to cycling characteristic of European cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen.

Cyclists in those cities mostly ride practical, comfortable bikes and wear the same ordinary clothes they would if they were driving or taking the train. Cycling is just a means of transport rather than an end in itself.

Perhaps the cyclists who use the same roads as me here in Melbourne aren’t representative, but I see some road bike riders who (like me) don’t wear lycra. I also see some mountain bike riders who wear lycra. And I even know people who regularly commute on road bikes.

I suspect the prominence of road bikes and lycra is over-stated. Carbon fibre frames and Campagnolo groupsets are not typical of the Australian bicycle fleet. Most Australians already choose bikes more for comfort than speed – I see more mountain and hybrid bike riders on the streets than road bike riders (maybe the latter simply stand out more).

Like European city bikes, MTBs and hybrids are upright and relatively comfortable with friendly gearing for negotiating hills. They might look clunky and dated compared to chic Euro city bikes, but like them they’re designed more for comfort than speed.

Australia has its own cycling history that reflects local circumstances. Back in the day when I got my first  Malvern Star it looked, like every other boy’s, like a “racer” (the fashion was to turn the drops up – that provided a comfortable, upright and safe riding position for children). The racer form is part of Australia’s cycling tradition – we’ve never had bikes that looked like those in Denmark or China.

Girl’s bikes had a more traditional step-through design but then from around the late 80s mountain bikes stormed the market. Judging by the relative floorspace devoted to them in my local bike shop, MTBs and hybrid variants still strongly outsell road bikes.

I’ve not lived and cycled in a European city but when I used to commute 10 km each way by bicycle in Melbourne a separate set of cycling clothes was mandatory, otherwise one risked sweatiness in summer and mud in winter. I rode a mountain bike initially and then a hybrid – both had mudguards but they were never 100% effective.

Average cycling distances are likely to be longer in our more sprawled cities than they are in the likes of Copenhagen. Inner city cyclists could doubtless commute in their work clothes, but they account for less than 10% of the population in Australia’s capitals. Cyclists living elsewhere will probably want to wear special clothing (doesn’t have to be lycra though) and, better still, also have easy access to a shower and change facilities.

As the rise in popularity of MTBs shows, the existence of cyclists who ride other types of bicycles doesn’t in any way prevent the emergence of new fashions. Australians already mostly choose reasonably comfortable bikes and some of them will no doubt find other options like Euro-style bicycles attractive.

Road bikes are unlikely to enjoy wide popularity but roadies are not the enemy of cycling, even if some of them look silly in lycra. If anything they’ve had – and have – a key role in establishing the legitimacy of cycling on roads.

12

Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :



  • 1
    MarkD
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 9:00 am | Permalink

    Thanks for clearing that up for the bike snobs. Most people I know ride a bike – it’s not that strange. Most of them wear lycra at some stage, either on their weekly recreation (cafe racer) ride or when it’s too wet or too far to wear their work clothes.
    I save my harshest criticisms for those runners and swimmers who never run or swim in their normal clothes – a more contemptable lot, there never was!

  • 2
    suburbanite
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 9:58 am | Permalink

    The Lycra Lout tag is mainly used by non-cyclists who don’t regard cyclists as legitimate road users and are just looking for ways to marginalise them. The serious road bikers and the wannabes are more visible so they cop the rage and the attention. Most of the time motorist don’t even see the cyclists around them, but when someone on a bike is riding confidently at traffic speed they notice.

    I commute everyday and although I don’t wear much lycra I’ve found that good quality cycling gear makes a hell of a difference, especially when it’s raining. I have also noticed a growth in flat-bar road bikes for commuting, often equipped with mudguards, probably because that’s what I ride. It’s a good compromise between comfort and speed. Speed is important for cycling in Australia because of the sprawling nature of the cities and also it’s seems safer to ride closer to car speeds and take the middle of the lane, rather than find yourself with nowhere to go because some incompetent or pyscho driver decides to overtake you unsafetly.

  • 3
    Michelle Imison
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for another great post, Alan – I like the fact that your remit for discussing urban issues is so broad, and so regularly extends into (well-informed discussion of) cycling.

    However, I do have to pick you up on the comment ‘…so-called “lycra louts” are the pioneers of riding on the road in Australian cities’ – chiefly because it simply isn’t true. There’s a wealth of historical photos (I’ve seen mainly ones from the State Library of NSW) showing just how widespread and ordinary ‘road cycling’ was in Australian cities before the car completely took over.

    In addition, the book ‘The bicycle and the bush: man and machine in rural Australia’ (1980) by Jim Fitzpatrick gives a great history of just how widespread long-distance cycling was here a hundred years or so ago. The fact that this riding was undertaken on some pretty poor excuses for ‘infrastructure’ and using bikes far less engineered (and heavier) than modern ones makes ‘lycra louts’ – and, indeed, the rest of us on bikes – in cities today look positively ‘soft’!

    Michelle Imison: A very good and important point Michelle. What makes it worse is I already knew that! It’s a point Paul Mees has made a few times as well. The point I was (clumsily) endeavouring to make is that roadies have kept the fire burning for on-road cycle use in recent decades. AD

  • 4
    boscombe
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    Yet another paean to cycling! I’m not having it. Maybe it’s because you are in civilised Melbourne, and I am in redneck W.A., that accounts for your local paper not being full of accounts of collisions and near collisions between lycra louts and other users of shared paths. Lycra louts seem to think they have to always go at maximum speed – a macho thing, I suppose.

    Plus, although cyclists can be accomodated on most roads, I don’t think they should be allowed on highways (not the ones I use, anyway) during peak hour traffic. Too traffic congesting, too dangerous.

    “we’ve never had bikes that looked like those in Denmark or China.” I think we have. My grandfather rode a bike to work most of his life, it was still in the garage when I was a kid, and as I remember, it was a lot like the bike I had in China.

    boscombe: Maybe our bikes weren’t that different from the Chinese but surely they were pretty different from the European? AD

  • 5
    Tom the first and best
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    What if recumbent bicycles became popular? What would that do to cycling perception?

  • 6
    boscombe
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

    Make it seem even more un-natural.

  • 7
    lindsayb
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    Most bikes I see on my daily commute through the middle suburbs of Melb are the hybrid/MTB/flat bar touring variety, with Lycra running about 50/50. However, I ride on quiet streets and bike paths from preference. It would appear that those riding on major roads are mostly in lycra and on road bikes. This makes sense if you ride a long way and need to travel fast.

    @michelle imison
    it is my understanding that before cars, most shearers rode bikes from station to station. Faster than a horse and didn’t cost to feed them.

  • 8
    Luke Turner
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

    Well written Alan. It shouldn’t be necessary to try and tear down one style of cycling if you want to promote another style.

    However I can understand people who point out that you don’t NEED to wear lycra and ride a carbon fibre road bike to cycle. There is a perception in some parts of the community and media that cycling is sport, not a form of transport. Of course it can be both, but challenging that misperception is perfectly ok – although as you say it’s shouldn’t be necessary to deride sport cycling while doing so.

    Unfortunately it cuts both ways. Some roadies (by no means all) are just as inclined to try and push their own riding preferences onto others – specifically regarding protective clothing.

  • 9
    boscombe
    Posted June 25, 2012 at 7:12 pm | Permalink

    Alan – if you had picked the male version of the (hated) Gazelle, would it have looked much different to the Flying Pigeon? (Flying Pigeons were for the rich when I was in China, superior to my Five Rams; mine also had that double bar across the top – apparently the ‘peasant’ version of the single bar, and necessary for transporting heavier loads). My annoying Gazelle has hub gears and drum brakes, but the weight of it (steel), the lack of suspension and the sitting position are all similar to the Five Rams.

  • 10
    Burke John
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    If road bikers are “the pioneers of riding on the road in Australian cities. As a group they’ve had a big role in helping to normalise the idea that cyclists are legitimate road users.” then how does that accord with this statistic.

    Bike riding has dropped by 37.5% between 1986 and 2011 as a per capita activity according to a brand new Sydney University study found here http://www.smh.com.au/national/nation-backpedalling-on-bike-riding-20120627-212wu.html

    The study noted 2 reasons for the drop. Mandatory helmet legislation and infrastructure programs skewed towards cars.

    So if the sport cycling set is the big influence on cycling acceptance in Australia a new campaign focus is required. Perhaps something fronted by Shane Warne might better be worth trying.

  • 11
    Burke John
    Posted June 28, 2012 at 11:15 pm | Permalink

    Luke Turner I agree about not slandering other types of cyclists and I don’t really embrace the term “lycra lout” at all. But trying to explain my non-helmet wearing position to a sports cyclist is, well trying. In short I feel that the utility cyclist gets the prejudice from every segment but also often quite virulently from the sports cyclist.

    However the sports cyclist carries all the political clout in Australia complete with public funding. This means supporting MHL and policies accepting the dominance of the motor car. The Europeans have shown and are happy to tell us that both of these issues are an impediment to increasing cycling trips substantially. No helmet regulation and changing the legal onus onto motorists is the key along with infrastructure development of course. Unimaginable here at the moment, but it has been done already in several countries and will happen here without doubt.

    We continue our expansion of car culture at our economic and social peril. Cycling is bound to be an important part of the alternative but since sports cycling has been bearing the flag it is quite clear that things have gone backwards.

    Regrettably I can’t think of any reason for the situation to change in the short term but see only some potential in “The Great Helmet Debate” as a catalyst for both unity in the cycling community and the joint advancement of that activity. This is because generally the pro mandatory helmet cyclist has just accepted the intuitive position that helmets are positive safety devices without any research into contrary views which are in the majority. Those that have seem to always move at very least to an “agnostic” position. Therefore the issue is ripe for an awareness campaign that may have the utility cyclist and the sports cyclist singing from the same hymbook.

    In the meantime I and some others will just have to put up with insults from the uniformed. Perhaps the sports cyclist are correct and I am quite stupid, but at least I have read a number of studies on helmets and related issues. If that group were to do likewise there might be some changes and I might get a nice lycra outfit as a sign of fraternal feeling.

  • 12
    WikiCycling
    Posted July 8, 2012 at 4:18 pm | Permalink

    Look at the funny side Alan , one of these advocacy group is now about to employ a “Roadie recruitment officer “a position specifically created to attract the same Lycra louts which they have held with such disdain for over two decades. I guess they now realize which side “the bread is buttered on”. with a large percentage of its membership composed now of these so called Lycra lout a quick about face is about to take place from this advocacy group.

Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :



Womens Agenda

loading...

Leading Company

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...