thekaiser

@R-M-R: You're clearly forgetting about Pro-Flex "Dig-in Technology", where the marketing materials clearly explained how anti squat (although that term was not yet in common usage yet) actually pulls the tire down into the ground. ;-) Just kidding, in case that wasn't clear, and actually I always really appreciate your insights!

@justinfoil: The Curnutt shocks and forks that Foes used on their bikes were position sensitive about 20yrs ago, as were the Progressive 5th element shocks that a lot of major companies (Santa Cruz, Intense, etc...) offered on their frames, which were based on a Curnutt patent if I remember correctly. Manitou also did some position sensitive designs in that time period. More recently, there was a DT enduro fork that was position sensitive. The position sensitivity of all of those varied throughout the travel, as opposed to hydraulic bottom out systems.

@Mtn-Goat-13: Yeah, is Levy on any of the socials? Insta, etc...? I don't really use those, but was hoping that if he is posting on them, and other PB users follow him on those channels, then maybe they'd have some updates they could pass along to us on here. I think people would be less curious/suspicious if it weren't for the way that Outside has consolidated/cut staff at most of the publictions in their portfolio without any sort of public announcement from either party, so people are bound to be worried if one of their favorite writers/presenters dissapears without a trace. All it would take is some reference to an "extended vacation" or "he's on a 3mo sabbatical", but silence tends to get people worried as it smacks of corporate HR policy.

Out of curiosity, what motor/s do you favor and why? I know the Specialized full power ones were having a number of failures, relating to their belts, but haven't heard about other brands.

@sino428: I get what you're saying man, and I actually think most people are in agreement with you if one clarifies that you are talking about amount (as in the number of millimeters) of absolute flex in each direction under normal usage, whereas they are talking about the amount of flex under an equivalent load. Bars are loaded far more in a roughly vertical (impact or braking) direction than in a horizontal (steering direction), so they will inherently flex less when steering because the loads are lower. You are correct that an equivalent amount of absolute flex in the steering direction as in the vertical direction could be problematic...as long as everyone is on the same page that you would only have the same flex in both directions if the bar was engineered in such a way that it has LESS stiffness in the steering direction. In other words, since the steering loads are lower, one would need to have less absolute stiffness in that direction to arrive at the same amount of deflection in all directions under normal usage. I hope that helps further clarify things, and if there are people out to further critique your point, I hope they specify if they are talking about flex under equivalent loading conditions or unequal loading conditions (which are what we encounter in the real world), rather than just belligerently telling you you are wrong.

@severniy: That is a good point. If they're not on the podium, then it doesn't matter so much which category they're in, so sponsor/social pressure could deplete the women's category.

@dcaf: @loamseeker: Yes, it seems that the longer the event, the closer the sexes get. For powerlifting, men's records are often over 50% higher weights, which is obviously huge, but for the bicycling Race Across America, the overall record difference as of a couple years ago was 12.4%. It is also noteworthy that Seana Hogan's women's RAAM record was set almost 30yrs ago and is still is head and shoulders above the women's 2nd place, with over a 10% difference between her and the next fastest woman, whereas there are quite a few men who would be within that margin of the men's record, so she's a real outlier. Similarly, the 2021 Western States 100 running race was noteworthy for having 3 women finish in the top 10 overall, which is really remarkable for a race with over 200 entrants. However, the top women's finisher (Beth Pascall), in 7th place, was still about 2.5 hours behind the overall winner, which amounts to a bit over 14%. I'm not aware of the gap ever getting past a floor of about 10% for a well attended endurance athletic event with a robust fields of competitors, but I'm open to being proven wrong. I know that there are some really impressive overall records held by women, for example swimming from Cuba to Florida without a shark cage, however, the woman who set that record was 64 years old at the time, which suggests to me that there isn't a lot of competition for that sort of title, or surely a younger person (of any sex/gender combination) would hold the record. What kind of figures have you seen for other, well attended, Ultradistance events?

@mtb-scotland: To be accurate, my understanding of the new policy, as detailed in the above article, is that the "Male" category has become the "Open" category, so still 2 categories. Your idea of "Open" as a 3rd category would be an interesting modification of the idea that has been bandied about previously for a "Trans/Non-binary/Genderfluid category. By making this new 3rd category simply "Open" then it would open the door to the female competitors who don't have concerns about racing with trans-women to demonstrate their lack of prejudice by entering the "Open" category instead of the newly restrictive "Women's" category, which would be an interesting twist on things.

@Adamrideshisbike: Wow man, thanks for posting that article, that is pretty wild about the trajectory of CCES. I have often wondered about the perspectives of women racers on the topic. My observations have been that there seem to be a small number of cis-women competitors who are very pro trans inclusion, and a small number who are anti trans inclusion, with a silent majority that leaves a lot of question about the overall picture. Both extremes often lay claim to speaking for the silent majority, with no easy way for the outside observer to know where the truth lies. I've been inclined to think they leaned anti, for the reason that the social penalties for coming out as pro trans inclusion for an athlete are nearly non-existent, but coming out as anti will get you labeled as a bigot, a transphobe, and often leads to losses of hard won sponsorships, however I didn't want to make assumptions. The article you link to seems to support that idea though, as far as where the silent majority stands. It seems like some sort of anonymous voting system for women in sport could be helpful for matters like this. They're ultimately the ones most affected by these decisions, so it is pretty bananas that the Canadian governing bodies were making these decisions without consulting the female athletes themselves.

Thanks for providing a bit of data on the subject, as I've wondered the same as you, given that trans-men are on supplemental testosterone so it seems they must get a boost in their performance vs. pre-transition. As you say, dropping all categories would be one type of "fairness", but it seems like giving more categories a chance to win is advantageous both for individuals and for sport in general. If you'll excuse me partially cutting and pasting my reply to earlier comment on a similar line of thinking, I wanted to add the following regarding the possibility for fairness by adding a new category, which would allow for more winners than just 1 big "Open" category: I've wondered about the viability of creating a "Trans/non-binary/genderfluid/intersex" category for people who don't fit into a standard binary category. It seems British Cycling and most of the commenters here agree that cutting down Testosterone levels in a biological man does not make their performance level drop to the equivalent of a biological female, however I think most people would agree that it has to drop their performance level somewhat. On the flip side, giving Testosterone to a biological female, who now identifies as male, seems to be a performance enhancer (or at the very least, it's a popular doping strategy for strength and power sports to build muscle, and to speed recovery in endurance sports, thus allowing a higher training load). Given that, I've wondered if they sort of meet up in the middle, in such a way that one could have a fair, genderless, "Trans" category.