Dave Mayer

So we're saying that the CPA president makes statements that impedes the ability of the industry to sell the latest and greatest shwag to gold-card weekend warriors? The entire thrust of the industry is to churn customer inventory and promote the latest and greatest bike shwag. Cardinal rule: do not go against this dominant narrative.


Disc brakes in the pro peloton? The pros actually preferred rim brakes despite regularly being faced with steep 10 mile descents in the rain at 40+mph. They knew how to brake, and didn't have to worry about some newbie overcooking a corner and losing tire adhesion, or someone panicking in the pack, slamming on their super duper disc brakes and taking out 50 riders.


Hookless is an absurd attempt to recover some of the ground lost when tubulars would not sell. Due to the inherent limitations of this tech, or any clincher rim technology, it will never be as good as tubular rim/tires. ONCE AGAIN, THE INHERENT ADVANTAGE OF TUBULARS ARE THE RIMS. Lighter, stronger and safer.


73psi? Way too low pressure for efficiency on decent pavement.


Degent hit something? Yep, we all believe that. Degent broke the code: whenever a pro rider has a mechanical problem (even if its totally the fault of hookless rim tech), he's supposed to accept all blame for the issue, and praise his bike, his gear and his team. Yep, some phantom rock came out of nowhere, and he just felt compelled to hit it. Maybe he aimed for the rock after his tire blew off.

Dave Mayer

New posting... Dog whistle! Here boy! Here boy!

genejockey 

If you want a vision of the future of Bike Forums, imagine two human hands facepalming a human face - forever - Not George Orwell

Atlas Shrugged

You pointed out yourself that Tubulars don't sell. Whether it is available or not, tubular is a niche within a niche in the cycling community.

When you find yourself standing alone in the belief that you're right while the world stands united in the belief that you're wrong, it's time to pause and reflect on the possibility that perhaps, just perhaps, they see something you don't." - John Greenleaf Whittier.

Iride01 

Have I missed anything important in this thread between now and back in February?

Atlas Shrugged

Yes, it has been transformative;

Carbon has been acknowledged as the best material for rims.
Tubulars are dead and everyone is switching to tubeless.
Wider tires are where it is at.
Low-spoke wheels are reliable and superior
Hookless is the future and works very well when installed properly

SoSmellyAir

Who does your shop cater to, if not gold-card weekend warriors? May I visit if I have a platinum card and occasionally ride on weekdays?

genejockey 

Just what I'm looking for - ashop that has mechanics blowing tires off the rims and the guy who holds his customer base in such contempt!

Mojo31

All the BS about the pros wanting rim brakes, tubular tires, this that and the other stuff is just BS. Pros will use whatever they believe gives them the best chance of winning the race. The sponsorships don't dictate everything in sports, but winning sure does with some frequency. If a pro was winning with rim brakes and Di2, they would just make more bikes with those components to sell to the guys that want to be like the pros. They would probably even make more money doing so since the rim brake tech is less expensive. Likewise, if they could not win using tubeless clinchers, they would use tubular. The fact that they use tubeless clinchers tells you there is something working well. If they needed to satisfy a sponsor by having the name emblazoned on the wheel, then it is a simple step to taking a preferred wheel and slapping the sponsor's stickers on it. No one would likely ever look close enough to give it much thought.

If anyone thinks differently, just look at golf. A player may have "Titleist" emblazoned on the bag while at the same time having clubs made by a different company. They go with what they think gives them a win.

Fredo76

Stir-less yogurt is the future.

Fruit-at-bottom yogurt is obsolete.

seypat

Not so in golf. I caddied some on one of the tours. Back before the hat/bag/apparel? deals, when it was mostly equipment deals, it was all about the money. Bad equipment deals cost many a pro golfer his/her career. I can give you many examples that I have personally seen/heard where a player was not playing equipment that fit well with his game. Here's one. The player had a deal from Company T. I thought it was a ball/putter deal. We play the practice rounds and pro-am on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday with a driver from company C. BTW, one of the amateurs in our group was Curtis Strange's identical twin Allen.(Alan) We also played the first round on Thursday with the C driver. On Friday morning, Darell Survey day, the player shows up in the parking lot and puts in a matching driver from company T as we head to the range. He tells me he has a ball/driver/putter deal and has to play with the T driver because of the Darell Survey. He tells me when he hits driver T good he hits it really good. He says he's not nearly consistent with driver T though. We go to the tee and the bag is checked by the Darell people. Our group then tees off. He hits 2 OB during the round with that driver and we miss the cut by a stroke. Afterwards, as he's shutting his trunk lid and paying me, he tells me that the equipment deal gives him enough money to pay his entry fee and expenses each week. He says he's got to find a way to hit the driver better cause it's the main part of the equipment deal. So it goes. On that particular tour as with most tours, the equipment companies even offered equipment deals by the tournament. You can better believe that if players showed up needing a cash infusion, they took advantage of those deals.

phrantic09

That may be true of the journeyman tour pros. But if memory serves, during the earlier part of his career, Tiger was playing with Miura forged irons stamped with a Nike logo because they were what worked for him. I realize this is likely the exception not the rule.

phrantic09

Same here. Wonder what the opinion on ebikes is.

seypat

No, they were a mixture of Mizuno MP 14 and MP 29s stamped with the Swoosh. He also used those terrible Nike drivers as did Rory McKilroy. As it was in those days, a player would sign a contract, then try/learn/adapt to playing the company's equipment in the off-season. Tweaking would go on, but eventually the player would have to play the clubs or the contract rewritten. At least Tiger got to keep the Titleist putter. Nike is/was a marketing/shoe company. They didn't even make their own clubs/balls until well into some of the pro contracts careers. They just copied everything until those drivers and some of the irons finally came out. Those drivers were so bad, a lot of contracts had to get rewritten. The actual equipment companies though, the players have to play one of their models, tweaked or not, at least on Friday. The poster child for bad equipment choices/endorsement deals would have to be Lee Janzen. He might be before your time.

seypat

Mizuno used to win the iron count every year by a wide margin until the equipment contracts got ridiculous. If a player doesn't have an equipment contract, there's a really good chance he/she'll have Mizuno irons in the bag. The only reason they don't have a bigger presence on the main tour is their equipment contracts are limited. At least that's the way it used to be. I've been out of golf for at least a decade.
Edit: In sad unrelated news, I just looked up Lee Janzen. We're about the same age. We're both old geezers.

PeteHski

I think your post speaks for itself and doesn’t require any further ridicule.

choddo

I find the concept of golfers buying the same stuff that the pros do so ridiculous.

It’s not the club that makes Woods able to drive 75% further than me.

You could say the same about cycling and bikes but at least if I buy the wheels Ineos are using, I’m not going to still find myself still putting my bike down a ravine or leaving it short into the water 4 times each ride and wondering what the hell I wasted my money on.

seypat

What's the old automotive saying? Something like win on Sunday sell on Monday. Someone help me me out here.

As it relates to this thread, I'm glad I'm just a lowly comsumer buying my own stuff. I have way more control over my equipment choices than the average or even high level professional cyclist. That wouldn't be such a problem, except for for the possible safety issue.

Mojo31

I get the club deals and driver surveys. Sheffler is sponsored by Taylor Made, but still plays Srixon irons and Titleist wedges ("scoring clubs").

PeteHski

Yeah it would be terrible being forced to ride any of the bikes from the pro peloton.

seypat

But his contract is probably written that way and can be changed if he needs to. It prevents those blowups like the one your fellow Pony, Bryson DeChambeau had a few years ago. Those aren't good for anyone in the industry related or not. Same for the rim controversy in this thread.

mstateglfr 

I remember when the first Nike driver came out- the Ignite that was like a cobalt blue- it was totally fine, but also not revolutionary or anything. I didnt think it was great, but I also dont remember it being terrible. This was when I was in college and golf was both my life and projected future...like late '02 or early '03? I remember some friends came back from internships with Ignite drivers and it was just before the driver was released to the public...we all thought that was awesome. I hit the Nike driver a bunch and it felt similar to a Titleist 975J that had come to market a year or two earlier.
Anyways, I never really thought much about that first Nike driver after it was initially released- it seemed quite middle of the road- some loved it and some didnt like it as much as whatever they had in their bag. Pretty typical driver.
Now the Nike SQ that came out in maybe '07 or so? That thing was an abomination. The square shape, the yellow paint, and most of all that awful sound it made- just terrible. A buddy had an equipment deal with Nike to help sell their stuff at the club he worked at and when a group of us got together in '06 or '07, he had one before it was released to the public. Once again, it was the center of discussion, but once he hit it, reactions were a mix of jaw dropping silence and rolling on the tee box laughter. Nobody could believe a club with such a horrible sound was actually going to market.

mstateglfr 

But most dont buy or play with the same stuff the pros use.

Most golfers have irons that the pros dont use, they have utility clubs the pros dont use, shafts the pros dont use, and they play with balls the pros dont use.
- Yes there are some that use golf balls that are also used on tour, even though their game really doesnt justify the need or benefit of using those balls. But most golfers use lower cost golf balls that are geared for distance or durability. And there are plenty of people who do benefit from using a higher performing ball, even though they arent pros. Pretty much anyone with a 6 or less has the ability to intentionally work the ball enough to benefit from a ball with a higher spin rate and softer feel. But again- most golfers are using balls that will never be seen on the Tour.
- As for clubs, countless golfers have clubs they bought off the shelf of their local sporting goods store. No pro is using those club models. And even those who have irons the pros use, the clubs are highly different due to fitting- lie angle changes, heel and toe grinding, COG weighting adjustments, and more make the clubs fundamentally different. And then there are the clubs that are never in a pro's bag, like the hybrids that replace 5 and 6 irons in an amateur's bag. Even if someone has the same driver model as a pro, the club is fundamentally different because the shaft flex and kick point will be different, the loft will likely be different, and the head weighting will be different.

PeteHski

I’m not a golfer (only played very casually for a couple of years as a teenager) but it seems like personal equipment choice in golf is far more critical than it is in road biking. I think it is safe to say that any of the pro cyclists could perform just as well on any other team’s bike. Whether they are riding a Cervelo, Specialized, Giant or whatever doesn’t really matter. The hookless debate is simply about safety. Is there a real safety issue or not? That is the only question being asked here.

seypat

One of those years around 2002, I caddied for a guy down from the PGA tour. He didn't have enough status that week for the PGA event, so he was down on the triple A version whatever it was called that year. He was head to toe TM. That was when the copper colored woods had replaced the grey System 2s or whatever they were called. On the range he got the whole treatment with the launch monitors going through his clubs. It was neat. Then we head out for a practice round with a couple of his buds. One of buds has a new Bridgestone prototype driver. They're smoking it talking about how much better it is than what they play at the moment. Then they get to talking about the Mizuno T Zoid VJ Sinjh was playing and how long it was. Evidently it was a whole lot longer than anything else. Must have been the trampoline face. That week we had the tournament leader/eventual champion and the local pro/hero in the group in front of us the first two rounds. They were stuffing every approach close and the crowds were great. We entered the final round in a tie for 5th only a couple of groups in front of the the final group. The putts didn't fall in the final round. I think we finished in a tie for 12th. Those were good times. I wouldn't want to do it for a living day in and out, but a few times a year was awesome!