I have been subscribing to Bicycling Magazine for a few years, and have been ticked off at the constant refs to weight (the lighter you are, the easier you go up hills, etc etc etc). Well, I'm not a racing cyclist, I'm a utilitarian/recreational cyclist, so I could give a crap about that.
Anyway, I was cautiously pleased when I got the Sept issue (see link for online version) http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,3253,13821,00.html?category_id=363
My fears were justified, that it would be at least partly about weight loss (didn't you know the ONLY reason fat people would ever ride a bike is to lose weight?) But while this article does get into that (the mag is published by Rodale so what else should I have expected?), they DO at least acknowledge that fat people DO RIDE BIKES and so, need decent cycling GEAR. Who knew?
Anyway, I was cautiously pleased when I got the Sept issue (see link for online version) http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,3253,13821,00.html?category_id=363
My fears were justified, that it would be at least partly about weight loss (didn't you know the ONLY reason fat people would ever ride a bike is to lose weight?) But while this article does get into that (the mag is published by Rodale so what else should I have expected?), they DO at least acknowledge that fat people DO RIDE BIKES and so, need decent cycling GEAR. Who knew?
