3 ms·
> I was always curious if it was real It is real! It's an extremely aerodynamic position. > and why not everyone does it. In races, it isn't a race legal pos
by chrisfosterelli 4y ago
> I was always curious if it was real
It is real! It's an extremely aerodynamic position.
> and why not everyone does it.
In races, it isn't a race legal position to use. In practice, it is a very unstable position and you can't race in it so there's not much point to taking the risk. UCI is notorious for being very strict about that sort of thing (even as so far as to ban sitting on the top tube or resting your forearms on the handlebars) and they change the rules regularly to get rid of anything they feel is too risky.
- andreareina 4y agoThey're notorious for regs like sock height. Banning the supertuck and "invisible aerobars" is pretty recent (last 2-3 years IIRC).
- petre 4y agoThe last ones are unsafe. Regulating sock height I do not get it, maybe they had to do it to prevent the cyclists from using ridiculous knee high socks. Anyway, roads bikes are pretty efficient even without a peloton. On roads. I've recently built a vintage road bike and only managed to burn 350 kcal on an 1 hr, 18 km ride. Most of it was in HR zone 2, easy. Almost flat, but still. Imagine what a velomobile could do.
- chrisfosterelli 4y ago> Regulating sock height I do not get it, maybe they had to do it to prevent the cyclists from using ridiculous knee high socks. Yeah this rule was ostensibly designed to prevent everyone from racing in knee-high, very tight compression socks. Shortly before this rule went in place some teams had found they had a subtle aero benefit by reducing profile and were planning to race in them. However, you get hotter.