Richard has a very valid point here. For one he is a frame builder and has been one for many years. He has seen the needs of riders change over these years as a result of equipment changes, the position of riders competing as well as the events they compete in.
For Lance the choice is simple, what will allow him to ride faster? He could care less about what the bike looks like. Does it have an ugly (in some folks eyes) sloping top tube? For many on the list to be able to ride at half the speed of one of Lances time trials for that given time would be an effort as well as very uncomfortable, different needs for different people.
I personally like steel lugged frames and find anything but not too interesting. The one thing that draws me to vintage lightweights, other that having grown up with and raced them, is the geometry. For the most part it is more relaxed than todays race and some sport bikes.
Living here in the mountains and doing many very long climbs I find that I have taken a liken to the new equipment, namely STI-Ergo, dual pivot brakes with light action. When descending for 4-7 miles light action brakes are much easier on my arthritic hands and fingers than Campagnolo NRs and I do love being able to shift on long climbs without having to sit back down. There will always be a down tube-shifting classic in the stable for the rolling rides without the mountains such as I saw at the Cirque.
We shouldnt forget that a persons needs or wants sometime comes before aesthetics and might different than ours. I am sure next year at the Cirque my Mercian will bring some critical comments, but you know what, I dont care, it is what I wanted and I love the way it rides. My dog aint pretty either, but I love him just the same.
Mark, you cant please everybody so ya got to please yourself, Poore Did Ricky Nelson say that?