Originally Posted by Dave Mayer

Thank you !


The static analysis presented elsewhere here assumes the rider and bike combo is like a sold block of wood getting pushed up an incline. In the real world, on the hard climbs, the rider is humping on the pedals with the bike swaying back and forth underneath. A lot of that energy ends up on the pedals, but some ends up absorbed by the riders legs and arms. And then there is the constant surges and accelerations that require immediate responses, and even on the climbs, frequent braking to avoid pile-ups. As if a single rider isn't enough of a complex system, then add 100 other riders to the mix, some of which are trying to help you, but most trying to lose you or make you go slower. This is so complex that basic physics isn't enough.


And what the UCI-sponsored teams use on the mountain stages may not be an indication of best gear solution. For example, everyone wants to be on tubulars for the combo of lower rotating weight and safety. But the team may not have tubular options, and have to accept something sub-optimal for their sponsors, such as tubeless clinchers. The sponsors pay money not just to win races, but to showcase gear that will be bought by dentists with platinum cards. Nowadays, you cannot sell tubulars.


Or you put most of the team on heavier aero bikes/wheels, because they are disposable and will certainly be shed off the peloton on the first giant climb. But the team leaders: they will be on the lightest possible bikes and wheels.