We all know that Mental Strength can make huge differences in performance (eg Home vs Away games, choking, etc). There has been a lot of debate about whether saving weight on your frame/wheels, or having deep section carbon rims vs alloy boxed rims, stiff vs flexible frame, Campag vs Shimano, etc really makes a difference in speed. These debates usually end when others drawing on data from sites like analytical cycling which suggests that it doesn't in any huge way, especially in the amateur ranks.
I argue that it could. Wouldn't having all the best equipment and knowing your bike is in top working order mechanically, give you the confidence to know that you have noone or nothing else to blame but yourself for bad performances? And when you have no excuses but yourself aren't you more likely to push a little harder to keep up or perform because you don't want to have to admit to yourself that you just weren't good enough. It's not like you can say as your about to be dropped "if only I had those carbon lightweight wheels, I could keep up". When you can place blame on other things (eg. the wheels), there is a possibility you may not fight as hard as you feel it really isn't your fault. Not as much to fight for vs if it is entirely all your fault.
On the other hand, beating all those show ponies on inferior equipment sure does feel good and does give you a rise in confidence (when in matter of fact you were probably on realitve equal footing to begin with). Vice versa being beaten by someone with no frills clothing on a crappy, dirty bike when you have all the best, really does suck and can probably kill any confidence gains from having the best.
Anyone know of any professional research papers on this? But my theory is that there is a correlation that could make up more time than the improved equipment really caters for. (FYI, I do have a psych degree). All opinions welcome.
I argue that it could. Wouldn't having all the best equipment and knowing your bike is in top working order mechanically, give you the confidence to know that you have noone or nothing else to blame but yourself for bad performances? And when you have no excuses but yourself aren't you more likely to push a little harder to keep up or perform because you don't want to have to admit to yourself that you just weren't good enough. It's not like you can say as your about to be dropped "if only I had those carbon lightweight wheels, I could keep up". When you can place blame on other things (eg. the wheels), there is a possibility you may not fight as hard as you feel it really isn't your fault. Not as much to fight for vs if it is entirely all your fault.
On the other hand, beating all those show ponies on inferior equipment sure does feel good and does give you a rise in confidence (when in matter of fact you were probably on realitve equal footing to begin with). Vice versa being beaten by someone with no frills clothing on a crappy, dirty bike when you have all the best, really does suck and can probably kill any confidence gains from having the best.
Anyone know of any professional research papers on this? But my theory is that there is a correlation that could make up more time than the improved equipment really caters for. (FYI, I do have a psych degree). All opinions welcome.