Originally Posted by alanbikehouston
Reginald Shaw was one of the foremost voices for road cyclists in the UK in the 20th century. His book "Cycling" was a basic "primer" for British riders from the '50's to the 70's. Then, as now, there were folks who confused the setup that Pros use for sprints, track racing, time trials, and crits, with the MUCH different setup that is superior for long distance riding on a road bike.
About those people, Mr. Shaw wrote: "it is regrettable that many young riders adopt an absurdly exaggerated racing position for normal riding. They do harm to themselves and harm to the good name of cycling".
So here you are quoting somebody who wrote a book in 1953 to describe something that you claim happened in 1989? Am I the only one who is missing the link? Besides, is what you write above not exactly what I have said since the beginning, a bike designed for racing is not appropriate for all riding. This even if the bikes used by pros in the 40's and 50's closely resemble what would now be defined road bikes, as opposed to 'racing' bikes like the Vitus.
As I stated at the start of this inane exchange, bike designs have changed to follow variations in road conditions and equipment. I mentioned the differences brought about by the better road conditions, and the 'improvement' in cycling shoe soles. You can also look at the improved brakes and derailleurs, as well as tires, rims, protection against saddle sores... All impact the design of bikes.
That is it for me on this topic. It is quite obvious that you will not settle for anything less than the last word, so write away, you won't get a response from me.