The Deep Vs are a hilariously bad addition to this bike, but other than that the STA of this bike doesn't look much out of the ordinary for a time trial bike or some track disciplines. STA is measured from the BB to the saddle, not the angle of the tube the saddle connects to. In most cases it's pretty similar, but in bikes with aero cutouts or curved seat tubes, it can be a bit misleading. The Cervelo P3 for instance sports a 78 degree head tube, and triathlon bikes can commonly go into 80 degree + territory. It's done mostly for aerodynamics, namely that the bike is intended to be ridden with a lot of saddle to bar drop and/or with the rider stretched way way out. When you do that you decrease the angle in your hips and you end up being more "crunched up" on the bike. To get effective muscle recruitment you need a certain degree of openess in the hips, so you move the saddle forwards to put your feet more underneath you instead of in front of you where you're all bunched up. Try experimenting with your saddle position on the rails and getting down deep into your drops and you can see it for yourself.
As for the HTA, this bike is meant for speed in a closed course, not dodging other riders or riding on winding trails. You want stability, not responsiveness.
So the geometry makes sense, it's just a little bit more curvy for the sake of being exotic I guess. The actual set up of the bike (Deep Vs, base bars without the aero bars) doesn't make a ton of sense though. Frame is still beautiful for what it's intended for.
Here's a good read on the fastest bike ever built.
http://www.lotusespritworld.co.uk/Lo...SportBike.html Note the STA and how far forward Boardman is on the saddle. Then the UCI stepped in and said Bike designs couldn't get all crazy anymore so things are a little more traditional looking at the track.
ITT: you don't know about bike geometry but comment anyway.