Amended your post slightly to articulate my contempt for the "scientific" "study"Sparknotes: 26" was faster on "downhill".
Which in itself is very close to the gravel grinders and ultraCX races in (too) many cases. Incidentally, all who ride drop bars are on 28" wheels on those...29" is only faster for XC because XC is now just road riding in the woods.
Was that the one where there was all sorts of riders panic braking and taking diggers off of the end and/or walking? That was some funny stuff.i can't remember which world cup it was last year, but riders were complaining about a "6 foot drop" on the xc course. when pictures finally surfaced on the internet it was a 4 foot roller.
yea i'm pretty sure it was.Was that the one where there was all sorts of riders panic braking and taking diggers off of the end and/or walking? That was some funny stuff.
Exactly, me too....left me with more questions than answers
At least someone is trying? Seems to be a more thorough attempt than Giant's marketing department.Here we go again...
I would love to know if the normalized to the wattage. There was a different "study" a couple of years ago in another bike mag where they showed that 29ers were faster. However, all riders put also a significantly higher effort into riding the 29er, so when you normalized the times against the wattage there was no advantage for the 29er.In this case, the researcher underlined that there was not a mathematical difference, but that the time difference on this course and for these three riders, with the three bikes tested, was clearly in favor of the 29er. That's pretty hard to call out as unscientific, especially without presenting a well-supported counter-argument. .
I interpreted the researcher stating (at the very beginning of part 2) that "if you look at it in scientific terms, there was no difference between the 26, 27.5 and 29 inch bike" as the normalized results. How else could he say that? He extends his explanation after a bit and to my ears make it clear that the normalization is what the statistical package is used for to reach the 'no difference' point.I would love to know if the normalized to the wattage. There was a different "study" a couple of years ago in another bike mag where they showed that 29ers were faster. However, all riders put also a significantly higher effort into riding the 29er, so when you normalized the times against the wattage there was no advantage for the 29er.
I wait until I see the study to judge if it is scientific sound, but most of what I have seen so far doesn't have the sample size needed for propers statistics, e.g. not enough riders and not enough different courses/conditions.
if you ever decide to do a scientific study about which tequila causes the rider to give the fewest fucks while riding, look me up.i'm only loggin in here to take credit for donating 3 bikes (one of which was a prototype) to the cause so we can definitely confirm that none of this nonsense actually fucking matters.
you're welcome monkeys
Does he have to donate the tequila(one of which is a prototype) or the bikes?if you ever decide to do a scientific study about which tequila causes the rider to give the fewest fucks while riding, look me up.