The whoa is me I've never had a bike that fit me like is getting old. For Petes sake, Minaar has won 19 world cups on...
The whoa is me I've never had a bike that fit me like is getting old. For Petes sake, Minaar has won 19 world cups on a non-29er bike. Horrible argument.
And just 1 on a 29er, on a track he's now won on 3 years running, and with almost identical time differentials within the top 5...
And just 1 on a 29er, on a track he's now won on 3 years running, and with almost identical time differentials within the top 5 on both 275 and 29.
Perhaps this is all much ado about nothing? The only real takeaway from the weekend seems to be confirmation that Greg Minnaar is the king of Ft. William.
Its a big brouhaha for nothing.
Sven alluded to it, but the number of guys who have exploited a technological advantage over the years is many. Most of those advantages were a lot harder to see, but as anyone who has ridden custom tuned suspension on a custom fit frame can attest (which isn't many), its a big difference to a stock ride when it comes to shaving seconds.
I could argue Nico had a better working bike during his reign of domination. He had, what I would argue, the first modern DH bike. Years ahead of the competition, and his attention to detail changed the sport (for the better) forever.
We all benefit from teams trying to find an advantage and exploit it.
The reasons the wheel thing is becoming such a hot topic, I'd argue, is the big wheel also comes with some pretty strong stereotypes from yesteryear. Who can't forget their first experience on a 29" XC bike. Steep head tube angle. Bad fork offset. Wonky wheels. Getting "rad" on one of those meant staying upright...hard to "unknow" that and judge the big wheel for what they are in this day/age.
If we are going to regulate wheel size, we'd better be prepared to regulate a lot more than that. Wheel travel, tire width, total wheelbase etc.
At the end of the day, it's either gotta be Group B (not F1 - Group B was unregulated) or its gotta be made as "Nascar" as possible. Otherwise, we end in some silly middleground where teams are still exploiting technological advantages that are harder to see, but still favor the teams with money....
For the good of the technological progression of the sport, I know which way I lean, but its an open topic for sure...
The whoa is me I've never had a bike that fit me like is getting old. For Petes sake, Minaar has won 19 world cups on...
The whoa is me I've never had a bike that fit me like is getting old. For Petes sake, Minaar has won 19 world cups on a non-29er bike. Horrible argument.
And just 1 on a 29er, on a track he's now won on 3 years running, and with almost identical time differentials within the top 5...
And just 1 on a 29er, on a track he's now won on 3 years running, and with almost identical time differentials within the top 5 on both 275 and 29.
Perhaps this is all much ado about nothing? The only real takeaway from the weekend seems to be confirmation that Greg Minnaar is the king of Ft. William.
Its a big brouhaha for nothing.
Sven alluded to it, but the number of guys who have exploited a technological advantage over the years is many...
Its a big brouhaha for nothing.
Sven alluded to it, but the number of guys who have exploited a technological advantage over the years is many. Most of those advantages were a lot harder to see, but as anyone who has ridden custom tuned suspension on a custom fit frame can attest (which isn't many), its a big difference to a stock ride when it comes to shaving seconds.
I could argue Nico had a better working bike during his reign of domination. He had, what I would argue, the first modern DH bike. Years ahead of the competition, and his attention to detail changed the sport (for the better) forever.
We all benefit from teams trying to find an advantage and exploit it.
The reasons the wheel thing is becoming such a hot topic, I'd argue, is the big wheel also comes with some pretty strong stereotypes from yesteryear. Who can't forget their first experience on a 29" XC bike. Steep head tube angle. Bad fork offset. Wonky wheels. Getting "rad" on one of those meant staying upright...hard to "unknow" that and judge the big wheel for what they are in this day/age.
If we are going to regulate wheel size, we'd better be prepared to regulate a lot more than that. Wheel travel, tire width, total wheelbase etc.
At the end of the day, it's either gotta be Group B (not F1 - Group B was unregulated) or its gotta be made as "Nascar" as possible. Otherwise, we end in some silly middleground where teams are still exploiting technological advantages that are harder to see, but still favor the teams with money....
For the good of the technological progression of the sport, I know which way I lean, but its an open topic for sure...
I think my biggest issues go beyond that a little bit:
1: How will this affect smaller teams? Canyon come into a sport in their first year, only to find they have to redesign a new bike before the season even starts. Transition's work on their 27.5 prototype is wasted. Gwin confirmed that YT doesn't really have anything in the works soon (& considering how protective Gwin is of his career, if YT doesn't have a 29er for him to race next year at the latest, he'll be on a different team.) Canyon mentioned in their response to the broken Sender on PB that they've only sold about 1000 of them. At what point do these brands decide, like Evil did when 27.5 came on the scene, to just focus on Enduro, since they actually sell a decent amount of those bikes? DH bikes are already a money losing business for most brands, even if they don't spend the money to sponsor a team, at what point do they just stop developing bikes for this niche? There's probably already FAR more brands that don't have a DH bike in their lineup than brands that do.
2: Is it faster? Sure, probably. Team testing seems to bear that out. I am concerned, however, that it gives an advantage to taller riders. In the spirit of fair competition, the wheel size in use shouldn't make a 6'4" rider inherently faster than a 5'6" rider, or vice versa. Minaar gets the benefit of the bigger wheels, but also 20mm more travel than his teammates due to his height. That sounds like an advantage that won't go away when everybody is on 29", & is going to eventually push people like Brosnan out of the sport. That's absolutely the sort of thing that the UCI has a responsibility to prevent.
3. I don't see regulating wheelsize as a slippery slope when they already do it: you have to run the same size wheels, front & back. What's worse is THAT is probably the best way to make it fairest for all riders: a 29F/27.5R bike would probably be faster under all riders, corner better than either equal wheelsize option, & be extremely close to a full 29 in the straights.
I think my biggest issues go beyond that a little bit:
1: How will this affect smaller teams? Canyon come into a sport in their first...
I think my biggest issues go beyond that a little bit:
1: How will this affect smaller teams? Canyon come into a sport in their first year, only to find they have to redesign a new bike before the season even starts. Transition's work on their 27.5 prototype is wasted. Gwin confirmed that YT doesn't really have anything in the works soon (& considering how protective Gwin is of his career, if YT doesn't have a 29er for him to race next year at the latest, he'll be on a different team.) Canyon mentioned in their response to the broken Sender on PB that they've only sold about 1000 of them. At what point do these brands decide, like Evil did when 27.5 came on the scene, to just focus on Enduro, since they actually sell a decent amount of those bikes? DH bikes are already a money losing business for most brands, even if they don't spend the money to sponsor a team, at what point do they just stop developing bikes for this niche? There's probably already FAR more brands that don't have a DH bike in their lineup than brands that do.
2: Is it faster? Sure, probably. Team testing seems to bear that out. I am concerned, however, that it gives an advantage to taller riders. In the spirit of fair competition, the wheel size in use shouldn't make a 6'4" rider inherently faster than a 5'6" rider, or vice versa. Minaar gets the benefit of the bigger wheels, but also 20mm more travel than his teammates due to his height. That sounds like an advantage that won't go away when everybody is on 29", & is going to eventually push people like Brosnan out of the sport. That's absolutely the sort of thing that the UCI has a responsibility to prevent.
3. I don't see regulating wheelsize as a slippery slope when they already do it: you have to run the same size wheels, front & back. What's worse is THAT is probably the best way to make it fairest for all riders: a 29F/27.5R bike would probably be faster under all riders, corner better than either equal wheelsize option, & be extremely close to a full 29 in the straights.
1) I'd argue "this is how capitalism" (and progression) works. At its core, this reminds me of the minimum wage argument (none vs $XX.XX). Putting in a rule to *maybe* help protect a small team is a slippery slope.
There are teams of all sizes on the circuit. Privateers are at a disadvantage, but compared to literally any other form of tool-based (technological) racing, cycling as a whole is the most-level playing field I can think of.
To my point, if I were racing DH and wanted a 29" DH bike, I am 100% sure I could figure out a way to build one, right now. Alex Morgan did it a decade prior (though he's an unreal fabricator). Point is, I know I'm capable of pulling it off. So I really struggle with the argument that the small teams are at a disadvantage.
Any company can do their own math with respect to sales, but most have a DH team for the image, not for selling DH bikes. That has long been the case and will be the case with or without 29" wheels.
I'd argue preventing progression and regulating bike technology can also make it seem less worth it to a number of teams. DH racing has always been the hotbed of testing and building out ideas. If you come in with regulations (which we all know the UCI isn't exactly great at structuring), you may push out teams for this reason too.
2) The flip side to this is smaller riders will have an advantage on Minnaar if you don't let him ride a bike that fits (this includes wheels that fit). Few things. First, you also are presuming that 6'3" Minnaar is faster everywhere, which I'd argue isn't true. Minnaar has certain tracks that fit him, just like Danny has certain tracks that fit him. Are you suggesting all tracks need to suit all styles? That's impossible, just like all bikes don't fit all riders. Greg will likely carry more speed when he has room to do so, on all wheel sizes. Conversely, he will struggle to fit through tight stuff like the smaller guys. This is *any* sport.
To argue smaller guys will get pushed out of the sport seems a tough argument unless the tracks continually get built to only suit the bigger guys (then its a track, not bike, argument). I remember guys used to say Troy couldn't win at Fort Bill cause he's too small. Guess that proved to be wrong...
We are speculating that smaller guys can't ride 29" wheels as well as larger guys. True, Greg's bike has more travel, but I'd wager in time this too will be consistent through (most) sizes.
Looking at the stats, it looks like Gwin would have been right there had he not crashed. Now, maybe he's on a different level (I don't think he is, but maybe) but that alone should show how close the 27.5" wheel is to 29". I'd argue "blackbox" or "factory" suspension is the same differential as the larger wheel, just harder to see.
3) The hybrid (29/27.5) idea doesn't seem to hold much water in testing according to those I know who have tried variations over the years. Maybe its worth revisiting, but I am not buying that as being the fastest at this point. Both wheels after all have to roll over the same hole/obstacle at the same angle of attack with the same inertia to achieve any wheel size benefit.
In the end, as I've implied, DH racing shouldn't be Nascar. It should be a place where ideas can be played with. What is to say a smaller rider with a low COG can't be the best pilot of a big wheeled bike? Right now, the answer is, "speculation".
I find it funny there was none of this talk when we went to 27.5" bikes (or at least not to this degree). I also find it funny that a certain Rat found no problems to continue to win on his "slow" 26" wheeled bike in a sea of bigger wheeled brawlers.
The same will ring true here. And like EWS racing, I think we'll see both wheel sizes for the foreseeable future...
The rules of a sport are intended to make for a level playing field while letting the spirit of the sport carry on in an uninhibited fashion. Making DH racing a socialist environment, negatively impacts this. Keep it open. Keep it free. Let people run what they want and let the chips fall where they may....maybe that's too democratic and capitalist of me, but those are two principals I (obviously) whole heartedly believe in, in life and in DH racing.
1) I'd argue "this is how capitalism" (and progression) works. At its core, this reminds me of the minimum wage argument (none vs $XX.XX). Putting in...
1) I'd argue "this is how capitalism" (and progression) works. At its core, this reminds me of the minimum wage argument (none vs $XX.XX). Putting in a rule to *maybe* help protect a small team is a slippery slope.
There are teams of all sizes on the circuit. Privateers are at a disadvantage, but compared to literally any other form of tool-based (technological) racing, cycling as a whole is the most-level playing field I can think of.
To my point, if I were racing DH and wanted a 29" DH bike, I am 100% sure I could figure out a way to build one, right now. Alex Morgan did it a decade prior (though he's an unreal fabricator). Point is, I know I'm capable of pulling it off. So I really struggle with the argument that the small teams are at a disadvantage.
Any company can do their own math with respect to sales, but most have a DH team for the image, not for selling DH bikes. That has long been the case and will be the case with or without 29" wheels.
I'd argue preventing progression and regulating bike technology can also make it seem less worth it to a number of teams. DH racing has always been the hotbed of testing and building out ideas. If you come in with regulations (which we all know the UCI isn't exactly great at structuring), you may push out teams for this reason too.
2) The flip side to this is smaller riders will have an advantage on Minnaar if you don't let him ride a bike that fits (this includes wheels that fit). Few things. First, you also are presuming that 6'3" Minnaar is faster everywhere, which I'd argue isn't true. Minnaar has certain tracks that fit him, just like Danny has certain tracks that fit him. Are you suggesting all tracks need to suit all styles? That's impossible, just like all bikes don't fit all riders. Greg will likely carry more speed when he has room to do so, on all wheel sizes. Conversely, he will struggle to fit through tight stuff like the smaller guys. This is *any* sport.
To argue smaller guys will get pushed out of the sport seems a tough argument unless the tracks continually get built to only suit the bigger guys (then its a track, not bike, argument). I remember guys used to say Troy couldn't win at Fort Bill cause he's too small. Guess that proved to be wrong...
We are speculating that smaller guys can't ride 29" wheels as well as larger guys. True, Greg's bike has more travel, but I'd wager in time this too will be consistent through (most) sizes.
Looking at the stats, it looks like Gwin would have been right there had he not crashed. Now, maybe he's on a different level (I don't think he is, but maybe) but that alone should show how close the 27.5" wheel is to 29". I'd argue "blackbox" or "factory" suspension is the same differential as the larger wheel, just harder to see.
3) The hybrid (29/27.5) idea doesn't seem to hold much water in testing according to those I know who have tried variations over the years. Maybe its worth revisiting, but I am not buying that as being the fastest at this point. Both wheels after all have to roll over the same hole/obstacle at the same angle of attack with the same inertia to achieve any wheel size benefit.
In the end, as I've implied, DH racing shouldn't be Nascar. It should be a place where ideas can be played with. What is to say a smaller rider with a low COG can't be the best pilot of a big wheeled bike? Right now, the answer is, "speculation".
I find it funny there was none of this talk when we went to 27.5" bikes (or at least not to this degree). I also find it funny that a certain Rat found no problems to continue to win on his "slow" 26" wheeled bike in a sea of bigger wheeled brawlers.
The same will ring true here. And like EWS racing, I think we'll see both wheel sizes for the foreseeable future...
The rules of a sport are intended to make for a level playing field while letting the spirit of the sport carry on in an uninhibited fashion. Making DH racing a socialist environment, negatively impacts this. Keep it open. Keep it free. Let people run what they want and let the chips fall where they may....maybe that's too democratic and capitalist of me, but those are two principals I (obviously) whole heartedly believe in, in life and in DH racing.
Signed,
A libertarian DH fan.
Sigh... Did you really have to take this to a political argument? Since you've decided to frame this in the "libertarian vs socialism" brouhaha, let me just point out that a market that purely exists as halo product for other markets, is, by definition, not a healthy market. It's not self sustaining, it needs more help than an "invisible hand." The free market solution for DH bikes would be the market collapsing, because supply greatly outstrips demand.
Also,having rules so that racing is fair isn't "socialism." It's just fair play.
Sigh... Did you really have to take this to a political argument? Since you've decided to frame this in the "libertarian vs socialism" brouhaha, let me...
Sigh... Did you really have to take this to a political argument? Since you've decided to frame this in the "libertarian vs socialism" brouhaha, let me just point out that a market that purely exists as halo product for other markets, is, by definition, not a healthy market. It's not self sustaining, it needs more help than an "invisible hand." The free market solution for DH bikes would be the market collapsing, because supply greatly outstrips demand.
Also,having rules so that racing is fair isn't "socialism." It's just fair play.
I'm trying to boil this down to something based on principals, not simply this "one instance". I'm also trying to find something quantifiable when I can.
On principal I'm arguing technological progression has long been a cornerstone of the sport, despite whether or not its fair.
On "quantifiable results" I'm yet to see anything that suggests 29" wheels to be so much of a "step" that it breaks the status quo of what other "technologies" have brought to the sport with respect to speed. EG: Everyone has access to it (within reason), and nobody has shown me that small guys can't use it, only big guys benefit etc (this is speculation).
The platform I'm standing on says "its arbitrary to all of a sudden pick this one thing an not allow it" when the sport has a history of other progressions rooted in technology that pre dates you or me being involved in the sport on any level. (well, at least it predates my 16 years in the sport)
Apologies for the political parallels but it is the best analogy I can think of. And it also illustrates why this is such a heated debate, as at its core, it will touch on the foundations of these beliefs as well...
Rules have always been there, will always be there. They are important. But like my view on government, I believe "less is more". Studies seem to imply we benefit the most, as a whole, this way.
...so in the end the question to me is "would banning 29" wheels seem like the UCI overstepping their rule making boundaries" to which i reply, based on previous history, yes, that is over reaching. They allowed other technology to progress, and allowed us to change wheel size in the past.
Sigh... Did you really have to take this to a political argument? Since you've decided to frame this in the "libertarian vs socialism" brouhaha, let me...
Sigh... Did you really have to take this to a political argument? Since you've decided to frame this in the "libertarian vs socialism" brouhaha, let me just point out that a market that purely exists as halo product for other markets, is, by definition, not a healthy market. It's not self sustaining, it needs more help than an "invisible hand." The free market solution for DH bikes would be the market collapsing, because supply greatly outstrips demand.
Also,having rules so that racing is fair isn't "socialism." It's just fair play.
I'm trying to boil this down to something based on principals, not simply this "one instance". I'm also trying to find something quantifiable when I can...
I'm trying to boil this down to something based on principals, not simply this "one instance". I'm also trying to find something quantifiable when I can.
On principal I'm arguing technological progression has long been a cornerstone of the sport, despite whether or not its fair.
On "quantifiable results" I'm yet to see anything that suggests 29" wheels to be so much of a "step" that it breaks the status quo of what other "technologies" have brought to the sport with respect to speed. EG: Everyone has access to it (within reason), and nobody has shown me that small guys can't use it, only big guys benefit etc (this is speculation).
The platform I'm standing on says "its arbitrary to all of a sudden pick this one thing an not allow it" when the sport has a history of other progressions rooted in technology that pre dates you or me being involved in the sport on any level. (well, at least it predates my 16 years in the sport)
Apologies for the political parallels but it is the best analogy I can think of. And it also illustrates why this is such a heated debate, as at its core, it will touch on the foundations of these beliefs as well...
Rules have always been there, will always be there. They are important. But like my view on government, I believe "less is more". Studies seem to imply we benefit the most, as a whole, this way.
...so in the end the question to me is "would banning 29" wheels seem like the UCI overstepping their rule making boundaries" to which i reply, based on previous history, yes, that is over reaching. They allowed other technology to progress, and allowed us to change wheel size in the past.
I would argue the fact that Greg gets more travel on his bike already tilts the argument towards "it probably does disadvantage shorter riders." I would argue there's a burden of proof in proving that the extra travel doesn't provide an advantage, or some actual evidence that it's not going to become a common refrain. Sure, it may shake out in the future, but right now, one of the only examples shows a clear bias.
I would argue the fact that Greg gets more travel on his bike already tilts the argument towards "it probably does disadvantage shorter riders." I would...
I would argue the fact that Greg gets more travel on his bike already tilts the argument towards "it probably does disadvantage shorter riders." I would argue there's a burden of proof in proving that the extra travel doesn't provide an advantage, or some actual evidence that it's not going to become a common refrain. Sure, it may shake out in the future, but right now, one of the only examples shows a clear bias.
Clear bias? I don't know about that. The argument more travel makes for a faster bike too is one without much merit. Comes down to track, location, rider, style etc.
Didn't Vergier qualify higher than Greg at Lourdes (the race that never was)?
Greg has won more at Ft William than anyone, so hard to dissect those results. I also have to believe plenty of frames will have the same travel throughout the size lineup.
If we are going to argue travel is an unfair advantage then why aren't we seeing 12" travel DH bikes winning?
Point is, we're splitting hairs, which is exactly why I say "let em run it!"
would argue the fact that Greg gets more travel on his bike already tilts the argument towards "it probably does disadvantage shorter riders." I would argue there's a burden of proof in proving that the extra travel doesn't provide an advantage, or some actual evidence that it's not going to become a common refrain. Sure, it may shake out in the future, but right now, one of the only examples shows a clear bias.
Hmmmm, but again he also qualified slower than both his shorter-trace teammates in Lourdes. Using Minnaar and Ft. William to draw any conclusion beyond Minnaar being the man to beat on that track is fairly heavy speculation.
I'm not sure a centimeter of travel on either end constitutes a measurable advantage, certainly not to the point where it's tilting in the favor of any particular size or style of rider. Travel already varies tremendously across the range of frames being raced on the WC, as do suspension components, access to custom components, tire treads and compounds, frame geometry, weight, etc etc. The standard to which all the bikes adhere is that there is no standard. Soon as we start framing 10 cm increases in suspension as an advantage where is the line drawn? I'm not talking the slippery slope nonsense that says this will end with everyone using the exact same spoke tensions and tire pressure, but keep in mind that the nature of racing is to always be looking for an advantage against all your competitors. That Minnaar can get 10cm more travel on his personal frame is no different from another rider fitting a custom longer stroke shock onto their own bike or simply being sponsored by a different frame supplier. This sort of thing is already done all the time, and truth be told the biggest advantages racers and teams are able to find often go unreported and unnoticed by those of us who cover the WC racing year in and year out. That's the just the nature of racing, to start framing minute details as aseries of advantages/disadvatages fair/unfair cut against the grain of what DH racing has always been.
WC DH racing isn't fair. Never has been. That's racing.
Can't believe I'm getting drawn into an internet hair-splitting debate but one last thought and I'm outta here: I think a good number of skeptics would be well served to tune into the EWS and look at the variance of bike setups. Sure, there aren't direct parallels to DH racing but a significant number of stages every year are either old DH race tracks (or in the case of NZ a few years ago most of the actual DH race track), or minutes long section of track equally as challenging if not more so than WC tracks. For all the speculation about what bigger or smaller wheels can and can't do, or what compromise in setup offers an advantage or disadvantage, the best case study may well be EWS racing. For several seasons now 275 and 29 wheeled bikes have both won stages and overall events. Some riders swap between the two regularly, others have opted for one or the other from one season to the next. Some of the shortest riders in the field use 29ers, specifically, if you can believe it, because they feel it helps shorter riders roll through holes their stubby arms and legs otherwise can't. This tit for tat could go on all day, but if you look at the top 20 you will find 275 and 29" wheels, fork travel ranging from 160-180mm, rear travel 130-180mm, guys on little frames, guys on really big frames, carbon, aluminum, flat pedals, clips, long slack, short steep, you name it. Even among teammates the setups can be +/- and inch of suspension, different wheels sizes, and often entirely different frames. And the take away as to what setup is optimum or fastest?
None.
We've had exactly 1 proper WC race with 29ers in the field and really nothing out of the ordinary in terms of times and results. Look at the time gaps for the top 5, they're almost identical to last year. Maybe best to take the long view and wait a few rounds before getting worked up any farther over a few cm of wheel diameter?
He has 2cm of extra travel, not 1. That's enough to define different market segments anywhere else in the sport. Could we please not let facts become victims of winning arguments?
Second, I'm not making any conclusions. I merely making the point that there's a legitimate example of a taller rider getting something that shorter riders are not on 29" DH bikes. I'm saying that if we're talking about advantage, it's one of the only clear defined differences we've got to talk about. "Burden of proof" isn't a conclusive, it's merely terminology for which side of an argument has presented a point, & which side is on the hook for refuting it with an argument of equal merit.
I won't loose any sleep over the number of DH bikes available shrinking. The competition in pro motocross is just fine with a limited number of suppliers. DH will be fine is not every company out there can offer a DH bike too. Should put sponsorship on outside teams and not have the factories burndening the bulk of the load as it seems now.
This race still came down to execution. Perhaps the 29er wheels helped keep Minaar, Mior, and Remi out of the holes in the mud bog, but why not Luca and the rest?
If Gein didn't throw it away and he still got beat by 4+ seconds then we can talk. But as it was it still came down to execution.
All that being said, I'm still in favor of a wheelsize standard for racing. Whatever it may be.
Can't believe I'm getting drawn into an internet hair-splitting debate but one last thought and I'm outta here: I think a good number of skeptics would...
Can't believe I'm getting drawn into an internet hair-splitting debate but one last thought and I'm outta here: I think a good number of skeptics would be well served to tune into the EWS and look at the variance of bike setups. Sure, there aren't direct parallels to DH racing but a significant number of stages every year are either old DH race tracks (or in the case of NZ a few years ago most of the actual DH race track), or minutes long section of track equally as challenging if not more so than WC tracks. For all the speculation about what bigger or smaller wheels can and can't do, or what compromise in setup offers an advantage or disadvantage, the best case study may well be EWS racing. For several seasons now 275 and 29 wheeled bikes have both won stages and overall events. Some riders swap between the two regularly, others have opted for one or the other from one season to the next. Some of the shortest riders in the field use 29ers, specifically, if you can believe it, because they feel it helps shorter riders roll through holes their stubby arms and legs otherwise can't. This tit for tat could go on all day, but if you look at the top 20 you will find 275 and 29" wheels, fork travel ranging from 160-180mm, rear travel 130-180mm, guys on little frames, guys on really big frames, carbon, aluminum, flat pedals, clips, long slack, short steep, you name it. Even among teammates the setups can be +/- and inch of suspension, different wheels sizes, and often entirely different frames. And the take away as to what setup is optimum or fastest?
None.
We've had exactly 1 proper WC race with 29ers in the field and really nothing out of the ordinary in terms of times and results. Look at the time gaps for the top 5, they're almost identical to last year. Maybe best to take the long view and wait a few rounds before getting worked up any farther over a few cm of wheel diameter?
Only quoting this because this is far more articulate than I'll ever be. #nailedit.
I won't loose any sleep over the number of DH bikes available shrinking. The competition in pro motocross is just fine with a limited number of...
I won't loose any sleep over the number of DH bikes available shrinking. The competition in pro motocross is just fine with a limited number of suppliers. DH will be fine is not every company out there can offer a DH bike too. Should put sponsorship on outside teams and not have the factories burndening the bulk of the load as it seems now.
This race still came down to execution. Perhaps the 29er wheels helped keep Minaar, Mior, and Remi out of the holes in the mud bog, but why not Luca and the rest?
If Gein didn't throw it away and he still got beat by 4+ seconds then we can talk. But as it was it still came down to execution.
All that being said, I'm still in favor of a wheelsize standard for racing. Whatever it may be.
If you think the amount of money in DH is anywhere near what Moto has, you're on crack. Let me assure you, Yamaha isn't losing money on any bike starting with YZ. Contrasted with DH, where if Canyon really hasn't sold more than 1000 Senders, they're nowhere near recouping mold costs, much less R&D.
He has 2cm of extra travel, not 1. That's enough to define different market segments anywhere else in the sport. Could we please not let facts...
He has 2cm of extra travel, not 1. That's enough to define different market segments anywhere else in the sport. Could we please not let facts become victims of winning arguments?
Second, I'm not making any conclusions. I merely making the point that there's a legitimate example of a taller rider getting something that shorter riders are not on 29" DH bikes. I'm saying that if we're talking about advantage, it's one of the only clear defined differences we've got to talk about. "Burden of proof" isn't a conclusive, it's merely terminology for which side of an argument has presented a point, & which side is on the hook for refuting it with an argument of equal merit.
Not interested in winning anything, just pointing out that the hyper focus on the 'fairness' of wheel diameter ignores the multitudes of ways that the current bikes would have to be considered 'unfair' as well using the same standard. It just doesn't hold up under the slightest scrutiny.
I was under the impression he had settled at 200. So Greg is 200 front / 210 rear presumably and his teammates are 190/190 then.
This remains a distinction without a difference.
Older V10s had up t0 250mm, Remi Thirion's 275 wheeled Commencal had 220, the Pivot has 205, Loic's Demo has 200mm, Troy's Canyon has 200mm. That's a 2 cm difference just among a handful of the top tier 275 frames currently being raced. Of the published travel #'s for 29ers we've seen so far Trek is 190 and SC is 190-210, so the same 2cm variance as existed between various 275 frames remains with 29s. Just the facts.
Edit* more facts: The Intense M16 has 215-240mm and the 29er proto is 180-200mm. That makes up to a 4cm difference among current WC level 275 bikes and as much as 3cm variation between current 29ers that we know of.
Clear bias? I don't know about that. The argument more travel makes for a faster bike too is one without much merit. Comes down to track...
Clear bias? I don't know about that. The argument more travel makes for a faster bike too is one without much merit. Comes down to track, location, rider, style etc.
Didn't Vergier qualify higher than Greg at Lourdes (the race that never was)?
Greg has won more at Ft William than anyone, so hard to dissect those results. I also have to believe plenty of frames will have the same travel throughout the size lineup.
If we are going to argue travel is an unfair advantage then why aren't we seeing 12" travel DH bikes winning?
Point is, we're splitting hairs, which is exactly why I say "let em run it!"
Kind of a stupid argument, which really actually hurts the point you're trying to make. The fact that DH travel has been set for a while supports the idea that there might be an optimal value. But even if the extra travel isn't an advantage for Greg, 12" is still just a shitty straw man.
Anyway, I agree that this whole idea that 29 is always faster/unfair is premature, and the idea that it's something new and unimaginable is laughable. I'm pretty sure all these companies had a 26 before going to 27.5, and they didn't consider 29 when they were making that change?
Not interested in winning anything, just pointing out that the hyper focus on the 'fairness' of wheel diameter ignores the multitudes of ways that the current...
Not interested in winning anything, just pointing out that the hyper focus on the 'fairness' of wheel diameter ignores the multitudes of ways that the current bikes would have to be considered 'unfair' as well using the same standard. It just doesn't hold up under the slightest scrutiny.
I was under the impression he had settled at 200. So Greg is 200 front / 210 rear presumably and his teammates are 190/190 then.
This remains a distinction without a difference.
Older V10s had up t0 250mm, Remi Thirion's 275 wheeled Commencal had 220, the Pivot has 205, Loic's Demo has 200mm, Troy's Canyon has 200mm. That's a 2 cm difference just among a handful of the top tier 275 frames currently being raced. Of the published travel #'s for 29ers we've seen so far Trek is 190 and SC is 190-210, so the same 2cm variance as existed between various 275 frames remains with 29s. Just the facts.
Edit* more facts: The Intense M16 has 215-240mm and the 29er proto is 180-200mm. That makes up to a 4cm difference among current WC level 275 bikes and as much as 3cm variation between current 29ers that we know of.
Which of those are different based on rider height?
Different gear for riders on different teams/brands=discrimination based on skill level or talent at sponsorship deal making.
Different gear for different riders based on height=discrimination based on uncontrollable physical attributes.
Those are fundamentally different from each other.
Not interested in winning anything, just pointing out that the hyper focus on the 'fairness' of wheel diameter ignores the multitudes of ways that the current...
Not interested in winning anything, just pointing out that the hyper focus on the 'fairness' of wheel diameter ignores the multitudes of ways that the current bikes would have to be considered 'unfair' as well using the same standard. It just doesn't hold up under the slightest scrutiny.
I was under the impression he had settled at 200. So Greg is 200 front / 210 rear presumably and his teammates are 190/190 then.
This remains a distinction without a difference.
Older V10s had up t0 250mm, Remi Thirion's 275 wheeled Commencal had 220, the Pivot has 205, Loic's Demo has 200mm, Troy's Canyon has 200mm. That's a 2 cm difference just among a handful of the top tier 275 frames currently being raced. Of the published travel #'s for 29ers we've seen so far Trek is 190 and SC is 190-210, so the same 2cm variance as existed between various 275 frames remains with 29s. Just the facts.
Edit* more facts: The Intense M16 has 215-240mm and the 29er proto is 180-200mm. That makes up to a 4cm difference among current WC level 275 bikes and as much as 3cm variation between current 29ers that we know of.
Which of those are different based on rider height?
Different gear for riders on different teams/brands=discrimination based on skill level or talent at sponsorship deal making...
Which of those are different based on rider height?
Different gear for riders on different teams/brands=discrimination based on skill level or talent at sponsorship deal making.
Different gear for different riders based on height=discrimination based on uncontrollable physical attributes.
Those are fundamentally different from each other.
What is instant reversion upon the many many 'endgame' scenario to racing DH with 29" wheels is that the advantage to the larger-diameter wheel is something able to be repeatedly attained on paper.
Or, the Giant Bicycles two-page ad at the front of most the Magazines a couple years back.
It is nonsense really. EWS is a calculated race with riders conserving energy and also going FOT, It is much more than pointing straight downhill and following gravity.
Which of those are different based on rider height?
Different gear for riders on different teams/brands=discrimination based on skill level or talent at sponsorship deal making...
Which of those are different based on rider height?
Different gear for riders on different teams/brands=discrimination based on skill level or talent at sponsorship deal making.
Different gear for different riders based on height=discrimination based on uncontrollable physical attributes.
Those are fundamentally different from each other.
1) Its a fairly big assumption to think only an XXL bike can be built around that amount of travel. Remember, Santa Cruz isn't even using a modified front triangle for the bigger wheels yet...
2) There is a school of thought that implies bigger guys can use more travel more effectively whereby smaller guys are more efficient with less travel...
3) Your definition of "fair" and discrimination is a bit wonky. Sports in general are not "fair". Under your school of logic, its unfair tall guys can rebound better in the NBA or the small guys are better horse jockeys. Yes, sports in general do reward certain body types/physical attributes.
4) As to deathstars point, sure, maybe I shouldn't have used hyperbole with my "more travel isn't always better" example. Still, as I alluded to above, even if there is an "optimal travel" amount for a bike, this may be highly dependent on rider weight and wheel size.
^^^ said, what makes DH so special, as Lee alluded to, is there is no one bike, one suspension setup, one amount of travel, or one body type that is so obviously the "magic formula". Its the mesh of all these things combined with an otherwordly understanding of your own body's capabilities/reaction times/ability to perform when it counts that makes for a great racer.
Here, this is a fun one - https://youtu.be/BZdz9MdeQDM?t=51 Watch how Peaty talks about cornering styles. Small guys can lean. Tall guys have to lean the bike. Is this also unfair that we have to ride differently? (yes, I know, I'm being semi-dramatic again)
End of the day, looottt of speculating from one point five races. To add, at this point, it seems pretty obvious there will be no rule change.
I just watched Minaars run and then Rats run from 2014 on 26". Must say the 26" are much better to watch from a viewer perspective. The 29er is just not as lively or loose. Sure they are faster but quite boring to watch. #bringback26
I just watched Minaars run and then Rats run from 2014 on 26". Must say the 26" are much better to watch from a viewer perspective...
I just watched Minaars run and then Rats run from 2014 on 26". Must say the 26" are much better to watch from a viewer perspective. The 29er is just not as lively or loose. Sure they are faster but quite boring to watch. #bringback26
Those two riders have *always* had extremely different styles. Rat will look more lose on 29" wheels than Greggy on 24". Just sayin...
If you think the amount of money in DH is anywhere near what Moto has, you're on crack. Let me assure you, Yamaha isn't losing money...
If you think the amount of money in DH is anywhere near what Moto has, you're on crack. Let me assure you, Yamaha isn't losing money on any bike starting with YZ. Contrasted with DH, where if Canyon really hasn't sold more than 1000 Senders, they're nowhere near recouping mold costs, much less R&D.
I'm not on crack and you misunderstand my point. My point was that it is possible that the DH bike market is already too flooded. No need to have as many options as we do. If DH goes the way of F1 then the manufacturers need to have enough capital to move quickly with trends. Therefore maybe the only brands that will stick around will be the Treks, Santa Cruzes, i.e. the bigger boys and the Canyons might not continue to offer DH models. Personally I don't care if you only see 4-5 brands in the whole field. Doesn't bother me in moto and won't bother me in DH.
Part owner, engineer, and designer of Banshee Bikes, Keith Scott, reached out to me following Fort William with a quick analysis of the splits as they pertain to wheel size. His observations are interesting. He also noted, "Of course a single sample from each rider is far from scientific, but better than nothing. Enjoy geeking out."
Keith's initial thoughts:
Section 1: Fast, fairly smooth, switchbacks on grit, rocks and ladders
Fastest Loic (27.5), then Gwin (27.5), then Greg (29). Fairly close timing with 0.4 seconds between Top 3. Slight advantage 27.5… maybe from acceleration out of gate?
Section 2: Fast rough 'pinball' with switchbacks / rock, grit
Fastest Gwin (27.5), Greg (29), Remi (29). 1.4 seconds between Top 3. This is where I’d expect 29er to excel the most as highspeed and rough. Other than Gwin, they did. Loic crashed here after early lead losing 10-12 seconds so out of race.
Section 3: New section, fast flowy start, but the dreaded glaggy tech woods section also…
Fastest Greg (29), Loic (27.5), Troy (27.5) 0.9 seconds between Top 3. None of these riders crashed in the woods, but it took out a lot of top contenders on both wheel sizes. A lot of luck played it’s part here, was drying off a bit towards end of race. Gwin crashed after woods in a weird spot and threw away 0.5 second lead over greg, plus has to pedal harder til end due to lost momentum at start of flat section… killed his race, could have maybe won… would have been close.
Section 4: Road gap into mixed flattish section/ grit, hard, roots
Fastest Moir (29), Marcelo (27.5), Remi (29) 0.2 seconds between Top 3. Fairly boring section of track to be honest, just about keeping flow as it’s fairy flat, but lots of stumps and roots so tricky to pedal without pedal strikes on parts. Moir on 29er seemed to hold speed best. Marcelo probably put down most power.
Section 5: Motorway, fast, pedal, jumps / grit
Fastest Marcelo (27.5), Greg (29), Moir (29). 1.1 seconds between Top 3. Marcelo put down the power on final section… what an animal! This is really a test of fitness and smoothness through the jumps, doubt wheel size played much part in this section and it’s like a bmx track.
Random thoughts:
Overall, Greg won by 3 seconds… he won by 3.5 seconds last year, and he is the master of Fort William with seven wins there now. He wasn’t stand out fastest anywhere, but was Mr. Consistent as per usual. So I wouldn’t say it was stand out result to be honest. Jack Moir coming 2nd… he is a rider on the up, but that is a great result for him.
Weather didn’t play a factor between top guys. While a bit of rain might have made it a little harder to see, it also makes the grit corners a lot more grippy weirdly… it’s very loose when bone dry. So I don’t feel the light rain right at end was a factor.
Both top guys on 29ers are tall (over 6’), I honestly think 29er only makes sense if you can control it… Look at the women's race. Tracey Hannah won on 27.5 by 10 seconds over someone she has close battles with race in race out who was on 29er.
29ers didn’t dominate the pinball section, which was the one bit of the track I thought they would be significantly faster one due to high speed and very rough.
The woods… they took out a lot of contenders and wheel size didn’t seem to be much of a factor in that… lots of luck and commitment required. It was certainly getting drier and easier by end of race, looked impossible when women's race was on. But top guys were all near the end so not a factor between them really.
Ultimately, top two riders were on 29ers… would they also be top on 27.5? Possibly yes, impossible to tell, but there is no obvious evidence that 29ers excelled on any one section of the track which made a big difference.
Part of my wonders if the 29er is faster simply in that it allows a little bit more room for error rather than a track type. The whole a "29" must be faster on this type of track," I think is more based on the stereotypes around wheelsize than anything tangible. You still have to be super precise at the WC podium level, but the few times a guy like Greg or Gwin get that slight bit off line the 29er gives you a tad more breathing room - you loose a tad less time than on a 27.5.
Gwin was on a banger run at Ft. Bill, arguably flawless till he washed out. If Gwin nails a run flawlessly, I don't think the wheelsize matters - he's winning. However, if Gwin and Greg both make a couple small mistakes, I bet Greg comes out on top because the mistake on the 29 looses slightly less time.
That being said, I will defer to Keith who actually makes bikes vs. someone like me that hits the cube couloir every morning.
I just watched Minaars run and then Rats run from 2014 on 26". Must say the 26" are much better to watch from a viewer perspective...
I just watched Minaars run and then Rats run from 2014 on 26". Must say the 26" are much better to watch from a viewer perspective. The 29er is just not as lively or loose. Sure they are faster but quite boring to watch. #bringback26
I think it would depend what mistake you make. If it's going off line maybe the 29er would manage better, but if you stalled, on paper, the 29er would take more effort to get going again.
I just watched Minaars run and then Rats run from 2014 on 26". Must say the 26" are much better to watch from a viewer perspective...
I just watched Minaars run and then Rats run from 2014 on 26". Must say the 26" are much better to watch from a viewer perspective. The 29er is just not as lively or loose. Sure they are faster but quite boring to watch. #bringback26
29ers weren't fastest in the 2nd section because Gwin is the the master of rough and fast.
I think in general there is a slight advantage because its more about keeping momentum rather than accelerating
Sven alluded to it, but the number of guys who have exploited a technological advantage over the years is many. Most of those advantages were a lot harder to see, but as anyone who has ridden custom tuned suspension on a custom fit frame can attest (which isn't many), its a big difference to a stock ride when it comes to shaving seconds.
I could argue Nico had a better working bike during his reign of domination. He had, what I would argue, the first modern DH bike. Years ahead of the competition, and his attention to detail changed the sport (for the better) forever.
We all benefit from teams trying to find an advantage and exploit it.
The reasons the wheel thing is becoming such a hot topic, I'd argue, is the big wheel also comes with some pretty strong stereotypes from yesteryear. Who can't forget their first experience on a 29" XC bike. Steep head tube angle. Bad fork offset. Wonky wheels. Getting "rad" on one of those meant staying upright...hard to "unknow" that and judge the big wheel for what they are in this day/age.
If we are going to regulate wheel size, we'd better be prepared to regulate a lot more than that. Wheel travel, tire width, total wheelbase etc.
At the end of the day, it's either gotta be Group B (not F1 - Group B was unregulated) or its gotta be made as "Nascar" as possible. Otherwise, we end in some silly middleground where teams are still exploiting technological advantages that are harder to see, but still favor the teams with money....
For the good of the technological progression of the sport, I know which way I lean, but its an open topic for sure...
I think my biggest issues go beyond that a little bit:
1: How will this affect smaller teams? Canyon come into a sport in their first year, only to find they have to redesign a new bike before the season even starts. Transition's work on their 27.5 prototype is wasted. Gwin confirmed that YT doesn't really have anything in the works soon (& considering how protective Gwin is of his career, if YT doesn't have a 29er for him to race next year at the latest, he'll be on a different team.) Canyon mentioned in their response to the broken Sender on PB that they've only sold about 1000 of them. At what point do these brands decide, like Evil did when 27.5 came on the scene, to just focus on Enduro, since they actually sell a decent amount of those bikes? DH bikes are already a money losing business for most brands, even if they don't spend the money to sponsor a team, at what point do they just stop developing bikes for this niche? There's probably already FAR more brands that don't have a DH bike in their lineup than brands that do.
2: Is it faster? Sure, probably. Team testing seems to bear that out. I am concerned, however, that it gives an advantage to taller riders. In the spirit of fair competition, the wheel size in use shouldn't make a 6'4" rider inherently faster than a 5'6" rider, or vice versa. Minaar gets the benefit of the bigger wheels, but also 20mm more travel than his teammates due to his height. That sounds like an advantage that won't go away when everybody is on 29", & is going to eventually push people like Brosnan out of the sport. That's absolutely the sort of thing that the UCI has a responsibility to prevent.
3. I don't see regulating wheelsize as a slippery slope when they already do it: you have to run the same size wheels, front & back. What's worse is THAT is probably the best way to make it fairest for all riders: a 29F/27.5R bike would probably be faster under all riders, corner better than either equal wheelsize option, & be extremely close to a full 29 in the straights.
There are teams of all sizes on the circuit. Privateers are at a disadvantage, but compared to literally any other form of tool-based (technological) racing, cycling as a whole is the most-level playing field I can think of.
To my point, if I were racing DH and wanted a 29" DH bike, I am 100% sure I could figure out a way to build one, right now. Alex Morgan did it a decade prior (though he's an unreal fabricator). Point is, I know I'm capable of pulling it off. So I really struggle with the argument that the small teams are at a disadvantage.
Any company can do their own math with respect to sales, but most have a DH team for the image, not for selling DH bikes. That has long been the case and will be the case with or without 29" wheels.
I'd argue preventing progression and regulating bike technology can also make it seem less worth it to a number of teams. DH racing has always been the hotbed of testing and building out ideas. If you come in with regulations (which we all know the UCI isn't exactly great at structuring), you may push out teams for this reason too.
2) The flip side to this is smaller riders will have an advantage on Minnaar if you don't let him ride a bike that fits (this includes wheels that fit). Few things. First, you also are presuming that 6'3" Minnaar is faster everywhere, which I'd argue isn't true. Minnaar has certain tracks that fit him, just like Danny has certain tracks that fit him. Are you suggesting all tracks need to suit all styles? That's impossible, just like all bikes don't fit all riders. Greg will likely carry more speed when he has room to do so, on all wheel sizes. Conversely, he will struggle to fit through tight stuff like the smaller guys. This is *any* sport.
To argue smaller guys will get pushed out of the sport seems a tough argument unless the tracks continually get built to only suit the bigger guys (then its a track, not bike, argument). I remember guys used to say Troy couldn't win at Fort Bill cause he's too small. Guess that proved to be wrong...
We are speculating that smaller guys can't ride 29" wheels as well as larger guys. True, Greg's bike has more travel, but I'd wager in time this too will be consistent through (most) sizes.
Looking at the stats, it looks like Gwin would have been right there had he not crashed. Now, maybe he's on a different level (I don't think he is, but maybe) but that alone should show how close the 27.5" wheel is to 29". I'd argue "blackbox" or "factory" suspension is the same differential as the larger wheel, just harder to see.
3) The hybrid (29/27.5) idea doesn't seem to hold much water in testing according to those I know who have tried variations over the years. Maybe its worth revisiting, but I am not buying that as being the fastest at this point. Both wheels after all have to roll over the same hole/obstacle at the same angle of attack with the same inertia to achieve any wheel size benefit.
In the end, as I've implied, DH racing shouldn't be Nascar. It should be a place where ideas can be played with. What is to say a smaller rider with a low COG can't be the best pilot of a big wheeled bike? Right now, the answer is, "speculation".
I find it funny there was none of this talk when we went to 27.5" bikes (or at least not to this degree). I also find it funny that a certain Rat found no problems to continue to win on his "slow" 26" wheeled bike in a sea of bigger wheeled brawlers.
The same will ring true here. And like EWS racing, I think we'll see both wheel sizes for the foreseeable future...
The rules of a sport are intended to make for a level playing field while letting the spirit of the sport carry on in an uninhibited fashion. Making DH racing a socialist environment, negatively impacts this. Keep it open. Keep it free. Let people run what they want and let the chips fall where they may....maybe that's too democratic and capitalist of me, but those are two principals I (obviously) whole heartedly believe in, in life and in DH racing.
Signed,
A libertarian DH fan.
Also,having rules so that racing is fair isn't "socialism." It's just fair play.
On principal I'm arguing technological progression has long been a cornerstone of the sport, despite whether or not its fair.
On "quantifiable results" I'm yet to see anything that suggests 29" wheels to be so much of a "step" that it breaks the status quo of what other "technologies" have brought to the sport with respect to speed. EG: Everyone has access to it (within reason), and nobody has shown me that small guys can't use it, only big guys benefit etc (this is speculation).
The platform I'm standing on says "its arbitrary to all of a sudden pick this one thing an not allow it" when the sport has a history of other progressions rooted in technology that pre dates you or me being involved in the sport on any level. (well, at least it predates my 16 years in the sport)
Apologies for the political parallels but it is the best analogy I can think of. And it also illustrates why this is such a heated debate, as at its core, it will touch on the foundations of these beliefs as well...
Rules have always been there, will always be there. They are important. But like my view on government, I believe "less is more". Studies seem to imply we benefit the most, as a whole, this way.
...so in the end the question to me is "would banning 29" wheels seem like the UCI overstepping their rule making boundaries" to which i reply, based on previous history, yes, that is over reaching. They allowed other technology to progress, and allowed us to change wheel size in the past.
Didn't Vergier qualify higher than Greg at Lourdes (the race that never was)?
Greg has won more at Ft William than anyone, so hard to dissect those results. I also have to believe plenty of frames will have the same travel throughout the size lineup.
If we are going to argue travel is an unfair advantage then why aren't we seeing 12" travel DH bikes winning?
Point is, we're splitting hairs, which is exactly why I say "let em run it!"
Hmmmm, but again he also qualified slower than both his shorter-trace teammates in Lourdes. Using Minnaar and Ft. William to draw any conclusion beyond Minnaar being the man to beat on that track is fairly heavy speculation.
I'm not sure a centimeter of travel on either end constitutes a measurable advantage, certainly not to the point where it's tilting in the favor of any particular size or style of rider. Travel already varies tremendously across the range of frames being raced on the WC, as do suspension components, access to custom components, tire treads and compounds, frame geometry, weight, etc etc. The standard to which all the bikes adhere is that there is no standard. Soon as we start framing 10 cm increases in suspension as an advantage where is the line drawn? I'm not talking the slippery slope nonsense that says this will end with everyone using the exact same spoke tensions and tire pressure, but keep in mind that the nature of racing is to always be looking for an advantage against all your competitors. That Minnaar can get 10cm more travel on his personal frame is no different from another rider fitting a custom longer stroke shock onto their own bike or simply being sponsored by a different frame supplier. This sort of thing is already done all the time, and truth be told the biggest advantages racers and teams are able to find often go unreported and unnoticed by those of us who cover the WC racing year in and year out. That's the just the nature of racing, to start framing minute details as aseries of advantages/disadvatages fair/unfair cut against the grain of what DH racing has always been.
WC DH racing isn't fair. Never has been. That's racing.
None.
We've had exactly 1 proper WC race with 29ers in the field and really nothing out of the ordinary in terms of times and results. Look at the time gaps for the top 5, they're almost identical to last year. Maybe best to take the long view and wait a few rounds before getting worked up any farther over a few cm of wheel diameter?
Second, I'm not making any conclusions. I merely making the point that there's a legitimate example of a taller rider getting something that shorter riders are not on 29" DH bikes. I'm saying that if we're talking about advantage, it's one of the only clear defined differences we've got to talk about. "Burden of proof" isn't a conclusive, it's merely terminology for which side of an argument has presented a point, & which side is on the hook for refuting it with an argument of equal merit.
This race still came down to execution. Perhaps the 29er wheels helped keep Minaar, Mior, and Remi out of the holes in the mud bog, but why not Luca and the rest?
If Gein didn't throw it away and he still got beat by 4+ seconds then we can talk. But as it was it still came down to execution.
All that being said, I'm still in favor of a wheelsize standard for racing. Whatever it may be.
I was under the impression he had settled at 200. So Greg is 200 front / 210 rear presumably and his teammates are 190/190 then.
This remains a distinction without a difference.
Older V10s had up t0 250mm, Remi Thirion's 275 wheeled Commencal had 220, the Pivot has 205, Loic's Demo has 200mm, Troy's Canyon has 200mm. That's a 2 cm difference just among a handful of the top tier 275 frames currently being raced. Of the published travel #'s for 29ers we've seen so far Trek is 190 and SC is 190-210, so the same 2cm variance as existed between various 275 frames remains with 29s. Just the facts.
Edit* more facts: The Intense M16 has 215-240mm and the 29er proto is 180-200mm. That makes up to a 4cm difference among current WC level 275 bikes and as much as 3cm variation between current 29ers that we know of.
Anyway, I agree that this whole idea that 29 is always faster/unfair is premature, and the idea that it's something new and unimaginable is laughable. I'm pretty sure all these companies had a 26 before going to 27.5, and they didn't consider 29 when they were making that change?
Different gear for riders on different teams/brands=discrimination based on skill level or talent at sponsorship deal making.
Different gear for different riders based on height=discrimination based on uncontrollable physical attributes.
Those are fundamentally different from each other.
Or, the Giant Bicycles two-page ad at the front of most the Magazines a couple years back.
It is nonsense really. EWS is a calculated race with riders conserving energy and also going FOT, It is much more than pointing straight downhill and following gravity.
2) There is a school of thought that implies bigger guys can use more travel more effectively whereby smaller guys are more efficient with less travel...
3) Your definition of "fair" and discrimination is a bit wonky. Sports in general are not "fair". Under your school of logic, its unfair tall guys can rebound better in the NBA or the small guys are better horse jockeys. Yes, sports in general do reward certain body types/physical attributes.
4) As to deathstars point, sure, maybe I shouldn't have used hyperbole with my "more travel isn't always better" example. Still, as I alluded to above, even if there is an "optimal travel" amount for a bike, this may be highly dependent on rider weight and wheel size.
^^^ said, what makes DH so special, as Lee alluded to, is there is no one bike, one suspension setup, one amount of travel, or one body type that is so obviously the "magic formula". Its the mesh of all these things combined with an otherwordly understanding of your own body's capabilities/reaction times/ability to perform when it counts that makes for a great racer.
Here, this is a fun one - https://youtu.be/BZdz9MdeQDM?t=51 Watch how Peaty talks about cornering styles. Small guys can lean. Tall guys have to lean the bike. Is this also unfair that we have to ride differently? (yes, I know, I'm being semi-dramatic again)
End of the day, looottt of speculating from one point five races. To add, at this point, it seems pretty obvious there will be no rule change.
Keith's initial thoughts:
Section 1: Fast, fairly smooth, switchbacks on grit, rocks and ladders
Fastest Loic (27.5), then Gwin (27.5), then Greg (29). Fairly close timing with 0.4 seconds between Top 3. Slight advantage 27.5… maybe from acceleration out of gate?
Section 2: Fast rough 'pinball' with switchbacks / rock, grit
Fastest Gwin (27.5), Greg (29), Remi (29). 1.4 seconds between Top 3. This is where I’d expect 29er to excel the most as highspeed and rough. Other than Gwin, they did. Loic crashed here after early lead losing 10-12 seconds so out of race.
Section 3: New section, fast flowy start, but the dreaded glaggy tech woods section also…
Fastest Greg (29), Loic (27.5), Troy (27.5) 0.9 seconds between Top 3. None of these riders crashed in the woods, but it took out a lot of top contenders on both wheel sizes. A lot of luck played it’s part here, was drying off a bit towards end of race. Gwin crashed after woods in a weird spot and threw away 0.5 second lead over greg, plus has to pedal harder til end due to lost momentum at start of flat section… killed his race, could have maybe won… would have been close.
Section 4: Road gap into mixed flattish section/ grit, hard, roots
Fastest Moir (29), Marcelo (27.5), Remi (29) 0.2 seconds between Top 3. Fairly boring section of track to be honest, just about keeping flow as it’s fairy flat, but lots of stumps and roots so tricky to pedal without pedal strikes on parts. Moir on 29er seemed to hold speed best. Marcelo probably put down most power.
Section 5: Motorway, fast, pedal, jumps / grit
Fastest Marcelo (27.5), Greg (29), Moir (29). 1.1 seconds between Top 3. Marcelo put down the power on final section… what an animal! This is really a test of fitness and smoothness through the jumps, doubt wheel size played much part in this section and it’s like a bmx track.
Random thoughts:
Overall, Greg won by 3 seconds… he won by 3.5 seconds last year, and he is the master of Fort William with seven wins there now. He wasn’t stand out fastest anywhere, but was Mr. Consistent as per usual. So I wouldn’t say it was stand out result to be honest. Jack Moir coming 2nd… he is a rider on the up, but that is a great result for him.
Weather didn’t play a factor between top guys. While a bit of rain might have made it a little harder to see, it also makes the grit corners a lot more grippy weirdly… it’s very loose when bone dry. So I don’t feel the light rain right at end was a factor.
Both top guys on 29ers are tall (over 6’), I honestly think 29er only makes sense if you can control it… Look at the women's race. Tracey Hannah won on 27.5 by 10 seconds over someone she has close battles with race in race out who was on 29er.
29ers didn’t dominate the pinball section, which was the one bit of the track I thought they would be significantly faster one due to high speed and very rough.
The woods… they took out a lot of contenders and wheel size didn’t seem to be much of a factor in that… lots of luck and commitment required. It was certainly getting drier and easier by end of race, looked impossible when women's race was on. But top guys were all near the end so not a factor between them really.
Ultimately, top two riders were on 29ers… would they also be top on 27.5? Possibly yes, impossible to tell, but there is no obvious evidence that 29ers excelled on any one section of the track which made a big difference.
Gwin was on a banger run at Ft. Bill, arguably flawless till he washed out. If Gwin nails a run flawlessly, I don't think the wheelsize matters - he's winning. However, if Gwin and Greg both make a couple small mistakes, I bet Greg comes out on top because the mistake on the 29 looses slightly less time.
That being said, I will defer to Keith who actually makes bikes vs. someone like me that hits the cube couloir every morning.
Watch Greg in 2013 and compare it to Ft. Bill 2017. The big wheels make it look so boring. #loicisright
I think in general there is a slight advantage because its more about keeping momentum rather than accelerating
Post a reply to: Should There Be a 29er DH Class and 27.5 DH Class at World Cups?