Who's the beneficiary of this so called "test"? The bicycles, or the riders? You may be more objective in looking at this more than most people, a lot of people (just look at the posts here, it's like smoke blowing up your skirt) with absolutely no clue about stiffness will go "that bike is better because it's stiffer." It's moot. A good bike is the one you like to ride and hopefully be riding more often and enjoying, not because some lab test says so.

The fact that riders have won on almost every bike on the list gives this test little value, it is a mean of comparison, but it doesn't tell the audience anything other than numbers most of them don't understand. This leaves the audience to make the arbitrary judgment saying they read it somewhere that CAAD9 is stiffer than R3, and it's cheaper too, so it's a "better" bike and a better value, like what BT is doing. Two years ago, the day after I read this article, I attended a race and asked a rider riding a Litespeed Ghisallo about the bike, he likes it and says it rides well enough for him, and really, that's all it matters.