Originally Posted by
big john
For decades nearly every racer in nearly every discipline of bicycle racing has used some form of foot retention. Are they all just wrong? Are they all just stupid followers of "fashion"?
Toe clips came out over 120 years ago. In all that time nobody has figured out that it doesn't work?
If you don't want to use foot retention that's fine, nobody cares. But some of us have used various forms of retention for many years and not necessarily because it's "faster" or "more efficient".
I have absolutely no dog in this fight because I cannot use any foot retention without setting off very bad chronic pain in an ankle due to a gongenital defect. I'm stuck with platforms no matter what.
It really isn't all that far-fetched that racers are "wrong". My understanding is that the evidence for actual benefit of clipless is so marginal that we can't necessarily sort out whether they all train that way because of the benefit or whether they're just better on clipless because they train that way. As the cliche goes, practice makes perfect. If you don't ride on platforms, there's no reason to assume you'd be particularly good at it when you do objective testing.
I'm a firm believer that people should try things for themselves and see if they work better or worse for them. I have no idea whether OP will be faster, slower, more or less comfortable, but as long as there's no harm in trying, it's going to be a lot more informative than reading a bunch of arguments over what should or shouldn't happen.
One thing I will argue with, however. Usually, someone in these threads will start rattling off a list of things "you can't do" on platforms, which usually consists of items I do regularly on platforms, and/or assertions that platforms are somehow "dangerous". This stuff is so misleading, that I feel a need to correct that. I am convinced, however, that platforms suck for sprinting.