Hi all. Pros may ride what they are told to ride because they don't have a choice and/or have something of a herd mentality. Alternatively, perhaps they don't think too much about what they ride because -- and should this be a surprise given what I've said earlier -- there isn't that much too think about. If top echelon frames are relatively similar once fit and event (and perhaps terrain) are controlled, then thinking about the fact that Mario is on that kick-a** super stiff Cannondale while you're stuck on that mushy Litespeed titanium is a waste of time at best and counterproductive at worst, since you'll be making ill-advised excuses for losing the sprint finish before it ever happens. The laws of supply and demand being what they are, if there were a clearly superior technology and material available, pros who want to win would congregate towards those teams using the right stuff, and teams who want to win, or at least to look like winners, would respond by supplying that stuff to their athletes. If there is no clearly superior way of making frames, the industry may sill pose as if there is and people may still may act as if there is, while athletes, knowing something about bikes, will behave as if technology is irrelevant, going not to the team that uses bike X but the one that gives them the most money, and in the case of the superstar, the supporting cast necessary for victory. Non-chalance is the equilibrium solution, not because atheletes are puppets, but because they are educated consumers in a market in which no one technology or pipe has the proven edge.
Jon
Jon Cowden Ithaca, NY
On Sun, 2 Jun 2002, Jerry & Liz Moos wrote:
> I agree, the pros ride whatever bikes sponsor or cosponsor their teams.
> Only the top riders in the world have the luxury of having bikes custom made
> for them by a company other than the one on the decals. Lemonde and Merckx
> reputedly did this, but even the top riders usually don't bother. And
> Merckx was a special case whose bikes bore his own name for most of his
> career, and who actually went into bicycle manufacturing after his
> retirement from competition (LeMonde seems to have been mostly a figurehead
> for the bikes bearing his name). When you think what it takes to succeed at
> a physically grueling sport like cycling, it's not surprising that most pro
> riders will have a "jock" mentality, which only rarely mixes with an
> interest in engineering.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
> Houston, TX
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard M Sachs" <richardsachs@juno.com>
> To: <mark@bulgier.net>
> Cc: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 11:16 AM
> Subject: [CR]Re: Debunking time again
>
>
> > i agree with mark's assessment, snipped and pasted below.
> > furthermore, i often wonder if the pros, i.e., those whose
> > careers depend on the use of these bicycles and parts,
> > are as analytical in their choice of equipment. for years,
> > it has been an industry supported sport, and nearly everyone
> > in the pro ranks uses the exact same goods sold down at
> > the mall. (okay, prologue bicycles & record attempts not-
> > withstanding). i never hear or read anything from that camp
> > that echos the list debate from the last couple o' days.
> > surely, someone will find an exception to this, but by
> > and large it <seems> that racers don't focus as much of
> > their energy (?!) on these matters. so why do we?
> >
> > that's a rhetorical question. i'm not suggesting that the differences
> > don't exist or that there isn't an academic explanation for all this.
> > and i'm not asking for an end to the thread; i am enjoying
> > following it and learning about differing points of view.
> > i do feel, though, that there is a point (for me, at least) when
> > bicycle riding ceases to be beautiful as a result of continued
> > microscopic dissection. when i ride or train, i never focus
> > on these things. i just enjoy the activity and the outdoors.
> > thanks for reading...
> > e-RICHIE
> > leaving for a ride in
> > chester, ct
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 2 Jun 2002 01:21:28 -0700 Mark Bulgier <mark@bulgier.net> writes:
> > >
> > > Everyone agrees some is wasted, turned into heat, a process called
> > > hysteresis. The question is how much.
> >
> > > But I'm in the camp that thinks most of the spring energy is useful,
> > > partly from looking at all the great riders who have chosen the most
> > > flexible frames they could find. Example: Sean Kelly on Vitus
> > aluminum.
> > > His average output was what, half again more? - than that of anyone on
> > > this list, and his peak output in a sprint, maybe double. How many
> > Tour
> > > green jerseys did he win, 5 maybe? Mostly on those Al noodles. Of
> > > course he might have won even more editions of Paris-Nice if he hadn't
> > > been wasting so much energy, but it's hard to imagine these pros
> > wouldn't
> > > notice that they were faster on stiffer bikes, if indeed they were.
> >
> > > The best you can say for the stiffer bikes is that if they are more
> > > efficient, it's by too small an amount for the pro peloton to
> > > notice. Note, some pros will *say* they like a stiff frame, then go
> > and
> > > choose a flexible one without realizing it is so. Many times I've
> > heard a
> > > racer say he likes a particular frame because it's so stiff, when I
> > knew it was
> > > one of the more flexy ones out there. He liked it, and thought he
> > liked 'em
> > > stiff (had been told stiff was good), so the one he liked must
> > therefore
> > > be stiff, right?! .
> >
> > > Example: Davis Phinney one season had two supposedly identical
> > > Serottas made of True Temper tubing, and raced them both enough to
> > > notice that he consistently liked one better than the other. He
> > couldn't
> > > put his finger on it, one just felt faster to him, and he wondered why.
> >
> > > So at the end of the season he gave the two frames to True Temper and
> > > asked them to test them and tell him the difference. The lab boys
> > found
> > > that the one Davis liked was significantly more flexible, and that that
> > was
> > > the only significant difference they could find.
> > > Mark Bulgier
> > > Seattle, Wa
> > > USA