I think it's more a misunderstanding situation than anything else.

Cyclists seem to OBSESS over calories on the ride. It's probably from seeing the pros with their long multiday tours and long all-day races, where it's really crucial to fuel well.

However, for anything under 2.5hrs, it's almost a negligible effect. Runners who burn even more calories than cyclists routinely do 3hr races on no calories whatsoever, and never blame underperformance on 'not eating enough during the race.'

Yet on 41 and elsewhere, it's pretty standard advice that you apparently 'need' sugar even for 1hr TTs. And I'm going to get flamed completely for even suggesting otherwise, even though the minimal need for fueling on <3hr hard race efforts has been decisively shown in running both at elite (sub 5 min miles) and amateur levels. And no, you don't burn so many more calories cycling than running.