Why make such a big deal about Eddie Merckx' one hour record that was set more than 30 years ago? I see they have one standard for the Merckx record. They call it UCI, and the rider must check his equipment to make sure it qualifies beforehand with this standard.
Yes, I realize that Eddie Merckx is the most dominant cyclist to ever compete in professional cycling, bar none. Just look at his win/loss record. He won about 1 out of 3 races he ever entered. But this track record, where the other riders need to check their aerodynamics, etc. seems a little bit off. The biggest factor is not the aerodynamics, but the thinness of the air. Merckx set the record in Mexico City. The altitude there is 7,000 feet. Therefore, the wind resistance, inside a velodrome or outside, is considerably reduced, aerodynamics or not.
Why don't they emphasize this in the media? Do any of you riders out there realize this? I had read and heard many times about this long standing record, but I only today discovered it was set in Mexico City.
Yes, I realize that Eddie Merckx is the most dominant cyclist to ever compete in professional cycling, bar none. Just look at his win/loss record. He won about 1 out of 3 races he ever entered. But this track record, where the other riders need to check their aerodynamics, etc. seems a little bit off. The biggest factor is not the aerodynamics, but the thinness of the air. Merckx set the record in Mexico City. The altitude there is 7,000 feet. Therefore, the wind resistance, inside a velodrome or outside, is considerably reduced, aerodynamics or not.
Why don't they emphasize this in the media? Do any of you riders out there realize this? I had read and heard many times about this long standing record, but I only today discovered it was set in Mexico City.