Originally Posted by
1500SLR
That's a bit yeah and no, it depends on the rest of the geometry of the bike. If it has a standard length top tube then you will be out in terms of reach. If its a compact bike like a TCR then you might be good. Quite personally I prefer a lower saddle height to begin with. I'm not a fan of compact geometry. That's why I've ridden bikes like CAADs and my Trek which prior to that I had a CAAD5. I believe in classic geometry. What I mean to say is that aggressive geometry that started out with the TCR doesn't really suit me. I much prefer the classic style of a rider like Marco Pantani. That's what I grew up watching in the 1990s in the grand tours and that's what I believe in. Even Lance rode a 5900 once upon a time also.
I preach what I believe in.
Traditional, "compact" and sloping frames all have the same nominal horizontal top tube lengths for a given frame size. A compact is traditional geometry but with a short seat tube. A sloping frame can be everything from a compact to a bike with an taller than traditional head tube. But other than the location of the top of the head tube and the top of the seat tube, the rest of the fit geometry is the same.
The OP must have a back problem which made his professional fitter unable to get a "normal" reach out of his upper body. In the old days he would have gotten a custom frame with a short top tube compared to the height of the head tube. Today many sloping bikes have such tall head tubes that they are effectively like a tall bike with a short top tube when you size down.