What is decentralised bike fitting?
Decentralised bike fitting means that there is no centralised controller involved in the bike fitting process. Instead, the fitting service is tailored specifically to your n=1 and does not utilise any pre-determined centralised parameters or systemised methodology to determine the outcome.
Inception:
The centralised bike fitting systems we see today originated in the early adoption of motion capture systems, by academics, to collect data from performance cyclists on their bikes. This data was then used to select an arbitrary set of angles and ranges, which could be packaged up and sold as a bike fitting system to inspiring bike fitters around the world. These arbitrary angles and numbers were basically invented, presented as fact and then sold. Let us talk about where that idea has taken us to, in 2023.
Marketing & strategy:
In the beginning, if we assume the purpose of designing such a system was to sell it and to make money, then to get it off the ground, you first need to market it well. Marketing works and as we shall see works well. That is why there are marketing degrees after all. So how would you market this?
1. Sponsorship - Using pro tour teams to sell your brand has been around since forever and there’s nothing which breaks (knowingly or not) into the cyclist’s consciousness quite like watching the best in the world succeed using a particular brand or product. It makes sense you would want pro teams using your product or at the very least just saying they are using it.
2. Media coverage - This is a big one. Nowadays social media is a huge driver and has most likely overtaken magazines in terms of reach, but back then it was magazines that had the influence and once again, if you wanted your product in the cycling communities subconscious minds then that was the place to get it there.
Whether or not there is validity in any advert or article that is printed, utilising these methods of marketing ensures that anyone who wishes to, can target and reach a much wider audience, and in this case, the audience in question was that of the aspiring bike fitter. All that really matters here is that teams acquire money from sponsorship and all that matters to the sponsor is that their fit system is getting marketed to their potential consumer.
Adoption by bike fitters:
Marketing has now planted a seed in the potential bike fitter’s psyche. The aspiring bike fitter now decides to purchase the system, because it promises that, to adequately fit a rider to their bike, all you need to do, is simply buy the technology. The bike fitter is now invested and as we know, people who are invested in something, spend a great deal of their time promoting the very thing they are invested in. The guy with the Colnago loves his Colnago, the guy with the Cervelo loves his Cervelo, the girl with the Audi loves her Audi and so on and on it goes. At no point along the way, did we have… “We are prepared to give you this technology, on a money back guarantee, or on a month loan period, so convinced are we that this tech will become an indispensable, irreplaceable and invaluable part of your business - we just know you will have to keep it”.
This, ever increasing online presence, of systemised, centralised bike fitting packages, as well as bike fitters promoting the use of these technologies, has formed the foundations of the consumers perception of what bike fitting is today.
I once attended a course where a fellow bike fitter made the remark “I have conducted market research into what people want, and the highest percentage of people would pay more for a bikefit where technology is employed” (meaning motion capture, pressure mapping, angle based fitting etc) therefore concluding, “as fitters, we should buy it and use it, even if we don’t believe in it” and I am fairly certain, having just read that, a great deal of you will have come to the same conclusion in your own head, both quickly and subconsciously, however, as far as I can see, this is where the real problems begin. Why do those questioned in the market research think that? Why do they ‘want’ technology in a fit? Have they stopped to ask themselves why? Have they ever read a single convincing thing about it? Or have they just seen it in a magazine, seen a YouTube influencer promoting it or seen it on their Instagram feed? Maybe their favourite pro tour team is saying they are using it?
I have now heard this reasoning being employed by many bike fitters and I know of many, who have started out thinking “I don’t really need any tech, to become a competent bike fitter” to then jump on the bandwagon, because the guy down the road has it and they feel they will lose out on business if they don’t invest in it. I don’t understand this way of thinking, but fear and the herd mentality are so entrained in our psyche that if we are not conscious enough and aware, we can easily fall victim to it.
So, what do we have now? We have a product, created out of thin air, marketed well, invested in by fitters, promoted by fitters, magazines, world tour teams and so all the while, the consumer, the cyclist, is basically being bombarded, from everywhere they look, with the message “this is what you need - this is conducive to a proper bike fit - this is what a bike fit is” Now, through no real fault of their own, the uncomfortable cyclist simply believes “a bikefit can only be of value if it employs technology”, because it is presented in that way, everywhere they look. For most people, there is not much requirement to think, that there is anything more to think about on a deeper level, when the information is the same everywhere they look.
As far as I can see, we now have bike fitters standing directly underneath the problem, contributing to the overall problem themselves.
Lies Presented as fact.
On the back of this, what I would call centralised layer two technologies have now been built, whereby data is taken from a layer one technology to provide the foundations for a new technology. Pressure mapping being one such thing. “Why is this so bad Garry”? I hear you say... because if we use flawed data to design any system, then the output is always corrupt. This layer 2 technology is an academic task, one whose task is to come up with a technology to measure pressure on a bike seat, something that, you guessed it, is now very much a sales tool, not only in getting people in the door, but in selling saddles. To date more and more bad ideas are getting built on top of bad ideas. Why do I think this is bad? Last year I had a stream of about 7 clients who came to me from England in the space of about 1-2 months, some having previously been fitted as much as 7 times, with every fit utilising pressure mapping and every one of them with a measurable leg length difference. Every MLLD was instantly recognisable to me, as soon as they got on their bike. Their main fit related complaints were saddle issues, so the previous fitters obviously deduced the primary issue was a saddle issue and so they needed to be pressure mapped and sold a saddle. I can walk around a client on a bike and in 20-30 seconds, I can see that they have a measurable leg length difference. It is immediately apparent to me. I have a view from any angle I wish to observe from, because I can move to any position I wish to observe from, I can compute what I am seeing and in 20-30 seconds have an overall picture about what it is that I am seeing. No technology can do that, and I highly doubt, in our lifetime, there ever will be one, or certainly one that isn’t built on flawed data. If you don’t know what you’re looking at and you don’t know how to extract information from your client, then you are reliant on a set of hypothetical ideals which encourage you to work towards or from hypothetically ideal end points. That is the opposite to the way I bikefit.
This article is one of the best bike fitting articles you can read as a cyclist seeking out a bikefit, or for someone who is thinking about becoming a bike fitter. If you address these 3 challenges to the best of your knowledge base during a bikefit, you are working towards a decentralised end result that is based on the client in front of you, rather than working towards, or worse back from a centralised hypothetical end point.
Here’s the thing, these centralised ideas are being applied to a unique creation within nature… you! There only is one of you. Not one of you are symmetrical, not inside or out, you have your own past medical history, your own functional issues, only you have walked day by day, during your every heartbeat and breath on this planet the path you have walked. Only you have experienced the traumas and illnesses, the viruses and diseases, and ingested the toxins and diets you have. You are actually the ultimate expression of entropy at any given moment in time. You have your mother’s mtDNA and hers before her, there is a story of you, maybe you have long femurs, maybe you have short legs, really long legs or really big feet for your height, a long torso, a fused ankle, a 25mm leg length diff, have suffered a traumatic brain injury, maybe you want to race across America, or want to break a 19 min TT and so on it goes. Nature is decentralised and you are part of nature. I know this is such a difficult concept for many to really get a grip of because we live lives that are so detached from how we evolved and so we think that the way we live today is normal, but the fact remains, we are a part of nature - we are not separate from it. The challenges will be discussed in greater depth, along with environmental challenges in other sections of this blog, but it is safe to say, that my primary focus in bike fitting, is to work with your story, to arrive at your n=1
As humans we have managed to centralise so much of what we do..., governments are centralised, medicine is centralised, education is centralised, money and finance are centralised. Centralised ideas are installed in our psyche. I want you, the cycling consumer to start thinking about what you believe in the world of cycling to be true and why you believe it to be true.
Comments