It Is Not A Mountain Bike

 Not where you should review a gravel bike.

The other day I was looking at some stuff on the internet and I came across a review for a gravel bike I was interested in. I clicked on to the You Tube video and saw an unbelievable thing. Crazy good single track! Mountainous terrain! Twisties, descents, and roots!

Just exactly the type of terrain everyone has at their disposal and wants to ride a "gravel bike" on, right?

Well...... No, not really. 

I mean, I'm not going to tell anyone where they can ride whatever bike they want to ride, but in a review? I think you really need to review any bike on terrain it was meant to be ridden on. This is another reason why "gravel" in the bike's name is the wrong term. Had this been called an "all-road" bike, the ridiculousness of how this bike was reviewed would have been immediately obvious to the journo that was making the video. Having said that, it should have been painfully obvious anyway.  

I have reviewed products for years and I take pride in how I do that process. Now, I'm not here to throw shade on other reviewers. I'm just taken back by this reviewing of a road bike on mountain bike terrain. A thing you can do - yes, obviously - but it isn't the point, or should not be, of a gravel bike review. 

Then I came across this nugget on posted by a user of Threads:

 "Every gravel bike review is always obsessing about the same things. Tire clearance?! UDH?! Is it compatible with the same set up that Dylan Johnson used at Unbound?!?! It's so boring and repetitive."

Maybe try some gravel roads to test your bikes, eh?

This is the other facet of most cycling media that seems to keep living on and on. The utterly ridiculous focus on the elite racer, their gear, and the misconception of how racing informs every cyclists choice when it comes to gear and bicycles. 

Elite level cyclists who are finely tuned athletes make up way less than one percent of the world's cycling folks. Way less than one percent. Yet I would wager that more than 90% of what passes as reviews and opinions on cycling, what is proffered for events, and what gets focused on in general, is Pro/Elite level people, gear, and associated things like training, etc. 

That does not make any sense. Now, I would also like to point out that certain segments of cycling media don't focus on this stuff that represents so little of the world's cyclists. If you get the chance, look up some electric bike media. It is so different than what you'd see from 100% human powered cycling media that it looks alien to my jaded eyes. At least what I see there is actually relevant to everyday cyclists. 

All I am saying is if and when I see something like that bike review of a "gravel" bike done on MTB trails, or any obviously incongruent review things, I am not prone to putting any trust in the source. I'm sure I cannot be the only one thinking this.