Talent vs tech
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Talent vs tech
at bike races I notice some riders are sooo tech heavy they have every bell and whistle available to a rider and other riders are minimalists or they don't have the money to spend on tech...it seems either races are determined by who can afford the most advantages or who actually is the better racer....talking about the local races that is
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Posts: 908
Bikes: Wife says I have too many :-)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 327 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times
in
158 Posts
at bike races I notice some riders are sooo tech heavy they have every bell and whistle available to a rider and other riders are minimalists or they don't have the money to spend on tech...it seems either races are determined by who can afford the most advantages or who actually is the better racer....talking about the local races that is
#3
Senior Member
The actual speed difference between a $600 bike and a $6000 bike isn't that vast. The cyclist is still vastly more important. Only between athletes with extremely well-matched ability will the equipment be a deciding factor.
#4
Banned
Thread Starter
its not just the bike its the helmets the shoes the body suit the aero water bottle the special aero handle bats the list goes on and on....ive seen people with none of these advantages dominate those that do have them
#5
Banned
Thread Starter
#6
Senior Member
The human body simply isn't that aerodynamic. If you're wearing lycra at all, you're already about 90% as aero as you can get, without using fairings or a recumbent.
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Posts: 908
Bikes: Wife says I have too many :-)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 327 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times
in
158 Posts
I agree robnol. But your statement didn't say the win would go to the one with the tech advantage, it was ambiguous. Your statement was: "EITHER races are determined by who can afford the most advantages or who actually is the better racer." So following your statement either one can win not just the one with more advantages. That is what prompted my question of what was your point. It didn't make sense. I know what you were trying to say though and I agree.
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Posts: 908
Bikes: Wife says I have too many :-)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 327 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times
in
158 Posts
This thread brings up some interesting questions. Should professional bike races have limits on how aerodynamic the bike frames can be so as not give an advantage over other bike frames. Where should they draw the line ? They already try to control and minimize the advantage from drug use.
#10
Senior Member
Without those rules, nearly all road and track and triathlon competition would be done on recumbents.
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Posts: 908
Bikes: Wife says I have too many :-)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 327 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times
in
158 Posts
Are you implying that they don't have regulations regarding bicycle aerodynamics? Because they do, and very strict ones. That takes the form of both limiting the use of fairings (and limiting the extent to which components can be designed as fairings), and very very very strict rules about posture on the bicycle.
Without those rules, nearly all road and track and triathlon competition would be done on recumbents.
Without those rules, nearly all road and track and triathlon competition would be done on recumbents.
I guess I am pretty naive about bike racing regulations. I didn't realize they had strict rues about aerodynamics. Thanks for educating me !
#12
Tragically Ignorant
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 15,613
Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM
Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8186 Post(s)
Liked 9,098 Times
in
5,054 Posts
I've seen plenty of riders on expensive bikes in super-aero kit who can't ride for beans, and they don't get fast.
#13
Me duelen las nalgas
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,513
Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel
Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4559 Post(s)
Liked 2,802 Times
in
1,800 Posts
Since the OP is talking about local races, those are mostly crits. Assume comparable conditioning, those are usually won by tactics and the best sprinters. You don't need the most aero bike and kit if you're mostly drafting, especially a teammate, friend or cooperative competitor exchanging favors. You mostly need to be in good shape, recover quickly from burning matches and a turbo charged blast furnace in the lungs and legs for the final sprint. Most of the better racers could do that on a good bike from any era.
But if you're talking local time trials, sure, aero gear matters more, unless it's the niche category for retro riders.
But if you're talking local time trials, sure, aero gear matters more, unless it's the niche category for retro riders.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times
in
177 Posts
At any level of racing there’s always going to be some riders ‘passing thru’ the category who are clearly stronger than most of the field. Usually young guys on there way to a higher level. They can get by with sub optimal equipment until they plateau and start racing with similarly capable riders. Then they will also need enough gear to be on a level playing field.
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,680
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked 776 Times
in
402 Posts
at bike races I notice some riders are sooo tech heavy they have every bell and whistle available to a rider and other riders are minimalists or they don't have the money to spend on tech...it seems either races are determined by who can afford the most advantages or who actually is the better racer....talking about the local races that is
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Southern Appalachians
Posts: 453
Bikes: A hauler, a commuter, and a steamroller.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
If there is something to win, folks will spend money trying to do it. Some other folks will also cheat any way they can.
#17
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,635
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4733 Post(s)
Liked 1,532 Times
in
1,003 Posts
Since the OP is talking about local races, those are mostly crits. Assume comparable conditioning, those are usually won by tactics and the best sprinters. You don't need the most aero bike and kit if you're mostly drafting, especially a teammate, friend or cooperative competitor exchanging favors. You mostly need to be in good shape, recover quickly from burning matches and a turbo charged blast furnace in the lungs and legs for the final sprint. Most of the better racers could do that on a good bike from any era.
But if you're talking local time trials, sure, aero gear matters more, unless it's the niche category for retro riders.
But if you're talking local time trials, sure, aero gear matters more, unless it's the niche category for retro riders.
#18
Banned
Thread Starter
#19
Banned
Thread Starter
I agree robnol. But your statement didn't say the win would go to the one with the tech advantage, it was ambiguous. Your statement was: "EITHER races are determined by who can afford the most advantages or who actually is the better racer." So following your statement either one can win not just the one with more advantages. That is what prompted my question of what was your point. It didn't make sense. I know what you were trying to say though and I agree.
Last edited by robnol; 02-17-19 at 09:42 AM.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,237
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18413 Post(s)
Liked 15,536 Times
in
7,328 Posts
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 4,770
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 630 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 369 Times
in
206 Posts
companies are always trying to sell products to the masses that will reduce weight more aero give u the edge ….if they are not lying them then the rider with every bell and whistle would seem to have an advantage over the low budget racer...would they not...or are companies preying on the gullable and the stupid promising things that aren't true
#22
☢
And at that point the difference is within fractions of a second. But that's only when your main concern is winning. Otherwise, your body doesn't know the difference.
#23
Banned
Thread Starter
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Posts: 908
Bikes: Wife says I have too many :-)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 327 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times
in
158 Posts
Lance Armstrong took advantage of a weight edge over the other riders in the tours. He did so well because he only had one testicle.
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,249
Bikes: 1964 Legnano Roma Olympiade, 1973 Raleigh Super Course, 1978 Raleigh Super Course, 1978 Peugeot PR10, 2002 Specialized Allez, 2007 Specialized Roubaix, 2013 Culprit Croz Blade
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 818 Times
in
421 Posts
I've got a modern carbon aero bike with Di2, disc brakes, 17 lbs, all the bells and whistles. I also have a 1964 Legnano, old school Campy, 12 speed friction shifters, 26 lbs. Guess which bike has my personal best avg. on my Malibu run on PCH? The Legnano. Surprised me too. I love tech, and I love old steel, but it's not all about the bike. Ride what you love, love what you ride. 😃