>>are they good or bad for the sport of cycling?They are the sport of cycling.
>>are they good or bad for the cycling industry as a whole?They are largely run by the biggest bicycle industry players. This is good if you're puegot or mavic, not so good if you're molton, or spinergy. Almost 100 years of tradition jumps out the window for e-mtb racing, and they don't even have real rules or guidelines on what will be allowed to race. This coincides with when the big makers making e-mountain bikes.
>>list the ways they've held back technological development of bicycles I would run out of post space.
>>what would you like to see UCI do differently?Have more support for experimental and practical bicycle types. Get the sport in front of more people. Less debacles like the kerin scandal. Figure out how doping control works for transexuals.
>>1318059>>1318056The baseline would be a faired recumbent, but different bikes for different roles. Leadout might have an extra large fairing, more for optimizing the pocket behind them for an example. Sprinters would have smaller front wheels to get closer and draft better.
>>1318068Even on many climbing stages, aero is still pretty important. But imagine a dedicated HC stage climbing bike being an ultralight moulton minivelo, maybe 4kg. Imagine variable geometry, like a dropper post taken to it's logical extreme, so you can be upright for the big climb and then get low for the decent.
