All opinions expressed in this post are purely subjective and I acknowledge that they may be wrong. If you disagree with any of them, let me know - I'd like to hear a different page.



I'm a champion


The day you decide to race is the day when you can say that you are doing sport professionally. Regardless of whether you are fighting for time, for distance, for speed - competition counts. The fight for the result is governed by its laws. The Internet may accuse you every day with the information that the result is a consequence of the amount of work put into training, but this is obviously not true or incomplete. Of course, comparing people who start their adventure with racing and starting from a low sporting level, there is a much greater chance that the one who devotes more time will turn out to be faster. This, however, passes quickly.


Team Sky budget in 2016. it's 34 million euros. Bora has 4.5 million, Trek 13 million, CCC 3.5 million. The minimum salary of the World Tour's rider is about 60k euros, Pro Continental - 36k euros (on his own business).

*source, source about CCC.


The result obtained in the competition is a consequence of a huge number of factors: talent, physical activity in youth, the environment, quality of training, equipment, lifestyle, time that can devote to sports and financial resources. If you were not born a cyclist, even if you bend completely, you will not jump over a certain level. Let's be honest: people who have money (or their parents have and willingly share it), have easier. The world is not just and the sooner we come to terms with it, the better. Injustice begins at the moment of birth.

It is not difficult to guess that money also helps to win.



Where did the topic come from?


Well, from the post below. When everyone is deeply reconciled to the injustice of the world, the Tatra Road Race puts a stick into the spurs ... in an anthill, asking the question of introducing a weight limit for the bike in order to equalize opportunities.



At first I thought it was a joke, but no. At the moment when I write these words, the ratio of people willing to enter the limit is 4: 1 and some 100 comments.



Would you like your neighbor to have less, and the difference to win for yourself?


First, I'm surprised, and a moment later I realize that it's obvious - that's how the world works. You do not have to look far. Imagine a referendum: someone says that we will take the money from the richest and give it to the poor and average - almost everyone is "yes". Or that we will take the richest and the average and distribute them to the poorest - much fewer people are "for yes". We can take almost anything, and we will give away to people who are starving in Africa - almost nobody is "yes."



The UCI weight limit is a relic of the past. The maximum limit to 6.8kg weight was to ensure safety. Too light parts (including those whose weight was broken with home-made methods) were a serious threat to professionals and this has nothing to do with equalizing opportunities. The professional peloton is a race of people and equipment - this is the case in every discipline.



How much does a lower weight give you?


The steeper the driveway, the more. If you have read the entries about the Tatra Road Race, you probably know that if it is steep somewhere, it is there. It is a race in which the weight of the bike is more important than anywhere else.

On the internet we find a lot of pages (for example the), which compare how the weight of the bicycle (or rather the cyclist-bike system) affects the time obtained in the driveway. In a great simplification, it can be concluded that:


An ordinary man losing 1kg, on a normal driveway saves about 2 seconds for every 100 meters driven vertically *

* (source)


For comparison:

The loss of 10% aerodynamic resistance (that's a lot), during a 40 kilometer race of time traveled in 50 minutes, saves 5 minutes.


If a well-known Jelenia Góra blogger comes to the time on a bike for over 40,000, which according to the ads practically wins itself, is it ok?



If top aero bikes save a few percent of power, and solid wheels a little less compared to ordinary ones, is it ok? And if we add to this item developed in the tunnel, shoes, helmet, outfit, bearings and ceramics, and then a few other things ...

Where is the border?


Specialized claims that in the case of a 40-kilometer time trial:

Venge ViAS with wheels Roval CLX 64 saves 2 minutes compared to Tarmaca from the same year.

The S-Works Evade suit saves up to 96 seconds compared to an "ordinary" well-cut outfit

The S-Works Evade helmet saves 46 seconds compared to the S-Works Prevail helmet (which costs from a thousand, but is less aero)

S-Works Sub 6 shoes save 35 seconds compared to older S-Works

S-Works Turbo tires save 35 seconds compared to the tires that most of us use: Continental Grand Prix 4000.

source: Leonard Zinn - values ​​refer to models from 2016.




It is not difficult to guess that many other companies sell products that in a similar way allow you to "win" time. In the case of Speca, it is a cosmic 5 minutes at 40km! Fear to think what will bring next years.



Prohibit everything


Because, in order to even out the competition, we should approach the matter holistically and look beyond the bike also on:

- training plans: after all, people who can afford a good trainer and paid training support applications have easier
- training opportunities: because those who can go to warm countries, have easier, and those who live in the center of a big city and on their loop have an hour in traffic jams, are disadvantaged. Not to mention those who work 12 hours a day.
- access to the pharmacy: if you can afford to drink R2 after each hard workout, on the slaps, gels, BCAA and a thousand other things that may help, or maybe not, it wins at the start. The same as with a diet that is dominated by things that we do not find on traditional Polish tables.

If we want to select a better rider (in the sense of: stronger), let's just compare the numbers from the efficiency tests.



Why 6.8?


Trek Madone 7 saves 25 watts at 40km / h compared to the previous Madonka, despite a lighter frame by 65g.




A rather important question that arises automatically is why it is just 6.8kg and what does it matter. The topic really concerns the minimum number of people and has a marginal impact, because good bikes that are significantly (down) from this limit are very few. One thing is certain, the introduction of such a limit, would increase the proportion of bicycles with shields ... and that would be a plus. Well, because:



Is 50. worse than 1st?


I think that the average weight of a bicycle in the peloton is about 7.5kg-8kg. So why do we think that the difference between a 6.5kg and 7.2kg bike is more important than between 7.5kg and 8.2kg? If someone is fighting for place 63, is he less important in the race than if he is fighting for a box? I remind you that we are talking about amateurs here. Or maybe we just want to reduce the technological gap between bicycles?



The thing that I'm afraid to write about.


And here, unfortunately, we go to a topic that I am afraid to loudly move. There are often comments that anti-doping research would be more important than dealing with equipment. I do not agree with this. I believe that an amateur should not care about the food and pharmacological substances he is taking. If you want to introduce limits, checks, restrictions - focus on regulated races. On licenses, masters and events guarded by federations. Amateur is an amateur, as the name suggests.


Performance doping - artificially raising the athlete's physical and mental fitness by methods that go beyond the normal, "natural" training, although in practice the boundary between doping and training is often very difficult to determine. In general, medical methods that are potentially harmful to health are officially prohibited as doping.




In fact, using it to increase the performance of: testosterone and other anabolics, hormones, diuretics and other stimulants is morally questionable. Should it be banned by law - in amateurs, I'm not sure.


Do you know that you can pour out an anti-doping test by ingesting 3 tablets per day with Acataru Acti-Tabs or 6 Gripex, Ibumu and similar tablets? This is less than the permissible dose on the label.


Not to mention cases in which we treat some chronic illness or infection. *source





research they say that swallowing pseudoephedrine (which means also medicines for runny nose) before the 30 second cycling effort in the corpse increased in the control group the average maximum watts from 1228W to 1262W and increased the lung capacity. 

How much does professional doping give you? We probably will never find out. Icarus he gave some hope, but it turned out that the plot had gone a bit wrong. One thing is certain: without heavy and serious training, even chemistry will not help.


There are also more and more companies on the market offering intravenous and hormonal therapies and providing clients with complete anonymity. Let's look at the sample Revital (of course, they do not know anything about writing about them here) and one of their products:


Revital Sport
Kroplówka prepared especially for people who lead an active lifestyle, training at both amateur and professional levels. It does not matter whether you train before the start of the marathon, whether you are preparing for an important competition or if you are training intensively for your own satisfaction. Each body needs an appropriate amount of energy and nutrients to perform the effort and to effectively regenerate after it. Revital Sport helps players achieve maximum performance, increase muscle strength and physical performance, reduce fatigue and reduce the time needed to regenerate the body.


Or an even better product: hormone therapy with growth hormone: link.




Will it come out in research? Probably not - it has been known for a long time that if assistants are used, p

they only give you those who can not afford the right doctor.

Should it be forbidden? I doubt it. Is this moral? It does not matter.



Marginal gains


Ways to save watts do not have to look far and they do not have to be things directly on the bike. Everyone knows that even the best equipment will not provide better results if it is not properly cared for. The perfectly adjusted 105 is still better than the reared Ultegra. There are many companies that help in this. To support a local business (who obviously does not know that I am mentioning it), the company should be mentioned here Ceramic + C.
In marketing materials, for example, they advertise a coated chain "Rocket Coating" (coat life in dry conditions: 500km). We save 4W driving 250W, which translates into 60 seconds on a 90km time trial. They also have a lubricant that can supposedly save up to 5W, a carbon bracket with ceramic bearings, a rear derailleur wheel, and so on.

C + Ceramic is the local equivalent CeramicSpeedawhich is known for its prices and products that seem absolutely ridiculous to the average person. 500 euros for the competence of wheel bearings, 1345 euros for a chain, 800 euros for two circles derailleur ...



Do they really give so much? No one knows this. The profit of several watts also seems small unless we sum up all the benefits provided by all the changes we have made. 

Is it worth it? You know only that.



The leg is going, not the bike


I am kindly asking you not to use the argument in the discussion about the fact that it is not the bike that is going, but the leg. This is of course true, because if someone is clearly strong, he will win even weaker, regardless of the equipment. However, if two people have a similar level (we are talking about +/- 5%, which is my difference between early winter and summer), it turns out that the bike is also riding. And yes - a 3kg weight loss will give us more than to lose 0.5kg from the bike, and the training will give more than a ceramic wheel. Dropping 0.5kg can cost several thousand, and can be just a visit to Toi Toi before the startbut if someone likes to ride with a full belly, his case. The good equipment is simply more pleasant and the sense of investing in it is a completely separate topic.



Is I going faster with more expensive bike?


Yes, I'm going. End of discussion ;-)

Is it a lot? It depends.

Between the bike for 3000 PLN, and such for 7k, the difference is very large. Between such for 5k and for 10k also. Between 10 and 15 is still noticeable, and then everything starts to fade slightly. I've been driving an amazing aero gear lately, which costs probably from 50k. Would I ride Rondo Babka on it faster than my 2x cheaper and over 0.5kg lighter Rose? Certainly not enough for the competitors to notice. Would the winner running for solo do it easier and better? Yes definitely. Which rides me better in the mountains? My. It turns out that a good solution are two top bikes - on the mountains and on "niegóry” ;-)

Not to mention here, of course, profits such as switching to shields, especially if we compare them with standard brakes rubbing on average, carbon cones.



Am I wrong? Do we really want it?


And yes, I am a hypocrite - my bike weighs less than 6.8kg. However, I have no problem charging it. Not only that, I would even like to get an excuse to set up a webcam for the race in front of me. It's about the rules ;-)