Great pro cyclists "born not made" says David Millar as he takes aim at pushy parents

I was born in 1936.   Got my first bike at 11 (11+ reward) and a lightweight at 16.    Toured the UK on both.  In common with most of my generation did not start racing until I was 21 and after National Service.  My parents, relatives and friends were always supportive but not pushy.      Most were of a generation who had been brought up with little cash or time for leisure pursuits and knew nothing of cycle racing.

Later as an organiser of road races I experienced, as most organisers did, the problems of judging junior races in pre photo finish days to satisfy parents claims that their offspring had crossed the line in a much higher place than given in the official result.

PS I have done a lot of things in my life which I have lived to regret.   None of us are saints.    Sadly, we do not live in a perfect world.

I was born in 1936.   Got my first bike at 11 (11+ reward) and a lightweight at 16.    Toured the UK on both.  In common with most of my generation did not start racing until I was 21 and after National Service.  My parents, relatives and friends were always supportive but not pushy.      Most were of a generation who had been brought up with little cash or time for leisure pursuits and knew nothing of cycle racing.

Later as an organiser of road races I experienced, as most organisers did, the problems of judging junior races in pre photo finish days to satisfy parents claims that their offspring had crossed the line in a much higher place than given in the official result.

PS I have done a lot of things in my life which I have lived to regret.   None of us are saints.    Sadly, we do not live in a perfect world.

Okay kiddies -  he's not the best man to ask where's the best place to hide your stash. 

I don't think Millar has read the information from his employer on rider pathways!

It is true that you can come into cycling late, or from other disciplines outside of cycling, and be succesful. But that is really the minority. Indeed British Cycling made a big point at how many of their top cyclists came through the go-ride system of youth cycling clubs. 

As a volunteer BC coach at a youth cycling club, and a parent of children who race I'm very concious of over-training, pushing too hard etc. I've seen plenty of that at races I have taken my children to, and you can spot it a mile off. However BC don't make this easier to manage by contradicting themselves when it comes to youth riding, IF the child want to progress in the sport. No matter how much they say don't train when young just focus on bike skills, there are always those that do train and they get the attention/results.  

BC publish very clear guidance on rider pathways for youth riders https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/riderroute and depending on discipline, a rider needs to be showing promise as a first year U14 to get on that pathway. Sure, they can join the pathway late, but that happens a lot less than you would think. To get in to RSRs you need to be showing results and potential at U14, which means you need to be stepping it up as a second year U12 (age 11-12). By that I mean starting to do a little more than one go-ride session a week, otherwise the jump to U14 will be scary.  Sure, participating in other sports will benefit fitness, but you also need to be showing good bike skills and that requires time on the bike. To become an apprentice, the first real step on the lader, requires a lot of commitment to cycling at approx 14. 

For some disciplines being on the pathway is key, particularly track. There is very little money in track racing in the UK outside of the GB team. Whereas in road you can make your own way without being part of the BC system. 

All this can, and should, be done in a gradual progressive way, keeping it fun for the child, and not them being flogged. But there are plenty of pushy parents out there putting their children on the turbo and giving them protein shakes aged 8 and 9. 

I don't think he really knows what he's talking about here but the donkeys/racehorses comment is a good (although meaningless) soundbite.  Not sure the science completely backs up his claims and madcarew nails it in his/her contribution.

Firstly, you can turn donkeys into derby winners - EPO does that, as he would well know.

Why anyone is giving this oxygen thief publicity is beyond me. He's a dirty unrepentant cheat who is still making money off his cheating.

Please David Millar, go away and find something else to do. And take your ridiculous costumes and opinions with you.

As a dad of 2 teenagers who both ride bikes for fun and smash opponents at rugby I don't need to push them and DM is right you should let them decide what they want to do. Too much pressure on them puts them off a sport and makes it a chore rather than a passion imho.

DM I think is right but the other factor is parents being able to afford a decent bike and kit for their child. Even Chris Froome was amazed when he got his first bike. With regard to comments about DM I think it's right that people should be critical about him taking drugs but most if us have done stupid things that we later regret surely. For me DM some how seems to aloof and I can remember when he had a be site itsmillertime when you had to pay to join it. Hope I get to meet him some time and find my opinion is wrong.

My 8 and 10 year olds wear lycra kit too (indeed club kit, as they are proud to be part of their club). But I think the general point David Millar makes is well made. In our local cyclocross league we have parents who drive their kids all over Yorkshire to compete in each round, even when they themselves don't (i.e. it isn't just a family day out) and people worrying about gridding in the under 8s and the like. Since we live near the border of two leagues then you see some kids who are racing both league events on a Saturday and then the Sunday and yet are only 10.

You also see some kids smash the under 8s, not race the next year in the under 10s (when they are at a disadvantage as they are still only 8) but then reappear magically the next year when they expect to win in the under 10s again, so you get the impression that they only enjoy winning and not taking part. The problem is that it gets increasingly difficult to win as they go up the age groups and then they start to get disillusioned.

If you read the profiles of lots of pros then they only started racing bikes in their teens. Cycling isn't that technical a sport so it doesn't take years of practice to perfect how to ride a bike. Cycling is mostly about fitness.

I think part of the 'problem' is that a lot of parents are inactive and so they are living out their fantasies through their kids and cycling is just racing to them. But cycling is also a lovely family pastime where you can have a day out with the kids, going to cafe and whatnot. Mind you, my wife is worried that she will have to up her game a bit as our 8 year old can drop her on the hills!

Sorry David but your statement about what kids should and shouldn't be doing at what age is total shit.

My 9 year old rides road bikes mostly, and yes he wears lycra kit.  Why?  Because we go mountain bike riding, cyclocross, vdelodrome etc. and by far he prefers riding his road bike (I think it's a speed thing).  He wears his lycra kit because it's his (youth) club, and he likes 'feeling' like (or 'pretending' if you like) a pro which, in case you missed it, is quite a major part of being a kid.  Maybe David thinks only the chosen ones should ride a road bike because it might make him look bad or something.

Is he interested in other sports?  He loves football, he has no interest in playing it.  He loves F1, and I'd love to give him a shot at karting, but if you aren't a 'motor' type person who can maintain a kart yourself it's too expensive for Joe Schmo.  He did tri last year but it doesn't seem to be his thing.

The high attendance of the youth club he attends of all abilities from 8 to 16 is a great sight to behold.  Plenty of them showing up at the local track league every week too, having fun regardless of the results.

So whether he thinks it's right or not, I'm afraid plenty of kids will be ignoring that 'advice', and I'm glad of it.

I don't think he's being fair at all: those donkeys on the beach at Weston can really move when they see their tea waiting for them...

He's right. We seem to now live in a world where 'snowflakes' believe that anyone can do anything.

But you can't.

I'll never do massive bench presses,  carry any decent muscle mass and look like a brick shithouse. Likewise, those people will never catch me up a 12% hill.

As for parenting, I was a bit disappointed when my lad didn't want to martial arts any more. I had ideas I raise the next Bruce Lee but he doesn't want to do it and that's that. I'm not going to force the matter. I guess the better they are at something the more you, as parents, probably over rate their potential. The hard line of it is that 'elite' level  has that X-factor and those in charge can spot it better than parents. 

Okay, may you can’t turn a donkey into a racehorse. But you can get some damn fast donkeys trying, and you'll find whole lot more racehorses at the same time.

I don't think anyone should comment on Millar's integrity, unless they have read both Racing Through the Dark and The Racer.  Then form a view as to whether he is fundamentally honest or a great fictionalist.

David Millar does seem to be the "marmite" of the professional cycling world. Which, to put that in context, would make Lance Armstrong the surströmming (fermented Baltic herring, which similarly divides people into two camps: those who vomit after a single bite, and those who do so as soon as the can is opened.)

I like Millar. I think he's genuine, and I think he's making good on his second chance that everyone deserves.

The science is largely behind him, with one proviso. In athletics (and I think cycling) there has not been any athletes who have medalled at a world championships in over 30 years who did not attend a junior world championships, and all world champions have medalled at junior world championships (a few in a different discipline) (Stannard et al 2007), So, unfortunately, starting young is important to future success. However when it comes to development of the individual, greatest success comes to those who have had a good breadth in their development across the board. So those kids that have chopped and changed between codes in thier formative and even later years (Sagan, Stybar etc) are most likely to have success beyond their teens.

I think he simplifies it too far with reference to 'an endurance gene' because the truth is that it's a mixture of genes and background.

The 3 primary early indicators of success later in sports are: (Massey University Study, 2009)

• Initial excellence and ability in any sport (Nicholson brothers in NZ, both olympic attendees in cycling and / or ice skating were initally noticed as national level cricket players)
• Parental and network support
• Inclination to be able to repeat and focus on a task ad nauseum (those kids who are able to apply themselves to a training routine). 

There's always outliers of course, that don't fit the pattern. I didn't play any sport until I started cycling as a sport when I was 19, but attended commonwealth games trials  18 months later.

I think Millar does forget that there's an awful lot of cycling and competition, and personal achievement, satisfaction and development to be done at below pro level. So just because a kid won't make it pro doesn't meant they 'shouldn't' strive to be the best they can. This also might be their stepping stone to greatness in another, unrelated, sport. Just where parental support to this endeavour crosses into pushy parenting is probably a bit grey though.

Have to admit, I do like him commentating. He'll just have to live with being caught out. I think the reason he still holds his head high in cycling circles is because a lot of industry insiders can't talk shit to him - because he knows and they know that doping is commonplace and he was just unlucky to get caught.

Agree with what he's saying here but yes, he's opening himself up to criticism. Fair enough. He was a talent though for sure, with or without the drugs. 

I think that David Millar is a great guy, he is passionate about the sport and is an excellent commentator. The past is the past. 

Thumbs up for a real professional. I love his commentaries. Nothing wrong with Ned either.

I loved Phil Liggett and Paul Sherwin they were really good too, back in the day

 Eurosports Shaun Kelly is very good apart from his accent. Carlton Kirby is a very good commentator as he can fill in with interesting comment when the race gets boring. 

He doped (like almost everyone else) got caught and has been making amends. I have to say it seems a little bizarre that people taking drugs are tolerated in other walks of life but not pro cyclists.

I'm also tired of hearing "moralists" permanently taking Millar to task for something he clearly regrets doing. Or is it perhaps that they're jealous of what he's achieved before and after the doping scandal?

I also know a few French parents of the type he's describing and one 13-year-old, a BMX regional champion is permanently getting injured but still pushed to keep on.

I think he is spot on with what he says.  Anyone who is upset by the 'donkey' statement should apply rule 5.  

Ok he's been caught doping and did his ban, he didn't try to ruin lives like a Mr LA did.  We've all made mistakes when younger, some we paid for and some we got away with.  Let him try and advise the young un's and see how they turn out.