In recent years, professional race bike setup has shifted, especially in terms of geometry. Previously, saddles were slammed far back, and bars were relatively long and low. Nowadays, riders position their saddles further forward, over the bottom bracket, to open the hip angle for more power and a more aerodynamically efficient position, paired with a fairly long front end.
But as consumers and amateurs, should we emulate the positions professionals are adopting and, as a result, buy into the race machines they use? Or would we be better served by looking for a solution better suited to our needs and requirements?
The problem with copying the pros
A key difference between professional bike riders and us is how much time we can commit to training. Typically, we can't do as much mobility work as professional riders do to maintain those positions. In addition, many of us work behind desks or sit, which likely tightens posterior-chain muscles like the hamstrings. This in itself is a key limiting factor in being able to mirror the aggressive riding position of the pros.
The other consideration is that professionals adopt these positions largely to improve aerodynamics. Several stages of the men’s Tour de France this year exceeded an average speed of 45km/h, with stage 11 from Vinchy to Nevers the fastest in history, completed at an average speed of 50.91km/h. At that speed, about 80 to 90% of the forces the rider must overcome come from aerodynamic drag. This is why riders can adopt such an aggressive, aerodynamic position on the bike and, thanks to mobility and stretching work, do so without compromising their power.
Another byproduct of this position is that pressure concentrates in different areas. With the rider shifted forward from the bottom bracket and still with a generally long, low front end by most comparisons, this can put a lot of pressure on the wrists and forearms.
What should we do instead?
When choosing a bike position, we should base it on our individual physiology, biomechanics, and the type of events we are targeting. For example, my gravel bike setup has a significantly shorter, slightly higher stem, so I can sit more upright and feel less wrist pressure after hours on rough off-road surfaces. My road bike, however, has a saddle positioned far forward with both a long stem and long reach bars. My longest rides on it are about 2.5 hours at around 45km/h. However, since I went from racing at an elite, UCI level to working full-time, I need to do a lot of stretching and mobility work to maintain that position for longer. Which is exactly why I tend to ride the gravel bike for most of the year with road wheels and tyres fitted. It is a far more sustainable position for me.
This is why most consumers who ride for pleasure, do sportive events, or target rides between 25 and 35km/h should look at an endurance bike rather than a race bike. A good example is the Cannondale Synapse versus the SuperSix. The Synapse is very lightweight, has similar aero frame tube profiling to the SuperSix, but has a shorter reach and higher stack. This gives a slightly more upright position, which takes pressure off the wrists and neck. In terms of 'like for like' performance, there is very little difference between the bikes. The main difference is that one is raced on the WorldTour and the other is not.
The added comfort of the endurance bike will likely mean that, over longer rides and events, it will be the fastest setup because the rider experiences less fatigue. Interestingly, more professional riders are adopting higher stack heights with more spacers under their bars, evidence that comfort really is a performance gain.
My biggest recommendation, however, for anyone looking to increase their cycling performance or volume is to get a specific bike fit. There are a lot of options out there, but ideally you want a fitter who will do a full range-of-motion assessment and ask about your targets and goals.
If you are racing, they will likely set the bike up closer to the limits of what you can maintain flexibility-wise. If it is more endurance-focused, they will likely set you up in a position that allows sustained power output and comfort. In much the same way that we shouldn’t necessarily emulate the pros in how they train or fuel, when it comes to fit on the bike, we also need to individualise that to our specific needs and requirements.
A curious case for copying the pros
If you do higher-speed events, such as amateur road races that often exceed 40km/h or fast-paced group rides, aerodynamics still matters. That is why bikes like the Factor One aero bike perform so well at high speeds. The geometry supports high power output and a lower drag coefficient.
A saddle positioned further forward generally supports higher power output. Combined with shorter cranks, it opens the hip angle and generally lets riders produce more power; a saddle set far back can limit hip-angle openness and put undue pressure on the posterior chain. It is, of course, subjective, as with most bike fit and position-related things.
But for those looking to go fast and who might achieve similar speeds, emulating the pros isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, if you are serious about performance and comfort on the bike, the first thing you should do is get a bike fit.