So last time, in Why the US Sucks at Olympic Lifting: Part 4 I started a discussion of UK Track cycling and how the UK went from also rans to the highest levels of the sport in a relatively short period of time.  First I introduced track cycling in general, bored you to death with a bunch of sociocultural crap, talked about some of the events and the physiology involved in success

From there, I introduced how the UK  decided to go from nobodies to dominance, did so in the span of about 10 years and how an infusion of UK lottery money was sort of the ‘key’ to let this happen (I’m sure the idea that money solves everything will make at least one forum poster happy).  But there was still a critical factor in all of this.

Oh yeah, briefly, it has been brought to my attention that some of my description of the the UK and what it is comprised of are not exactly correct.  I can live with it; my goal is not to give a geography lesson but rather to detail sports dominance in whatever the UK exactly comprises.  Trust me, when you see me completely garble the distinction between Russia, the USSR and the Soviet Union on Thursday you will realize I’m just a dumb, lazy American in this regard.  I can live with it and it doesn’t really change the point I’m trying to make.  Moving on.

.

The UK’s Got Talent

Because as I talked about in Why the US Sucks at Olympic Lifting: Part 3, none of the above means squat if you don’t have the talent.  But as I mentioned it’s not as if cycling isn’t monstrous in Europe and the UK.  It’s part of the culture, the country is set up for cycling and there are just tons and tons and tons of folks riding bikes.  The numbers of potential athletes were certainly there.  But did they have what it would take (or the interest in the first place) to pursue this odd little niche sport called track cycling?

Continue reading Why the US Sucks at Olympic Lifting: Part 5