Maybe not necessarily "faster" but there is an idea that adding any kind of technology should be avoided for recreational activities. For example, you can mountain bike with a fully-suspended e-bike, or you can struggle with a hardtail or even a road bike. Different kinds of fun, but in the former you'll wonder if it's the technology doing all the work.
> Different kinds of fun, but in the former you'll wonder if it's the technology doing all the work.
"All the work" is useless hyperbol. There are things that simply can't be done on a road bike. There are things that can be done on a road bike without a significant loss of safety.
Sport technology can reduce the skill required for certain things, but it also tends to extend the envelope of what is possible. It is almost never correct to think of technology doing all the work but rather to think of it as an ability multiplier.
There are of course, times when it is beneficial to practice without a specific piece of equipment. Either for a challenge or/and to hone a specific sub skill.
there is an idea that adding any kind of technology should be avoided for recreational activities
How do you draw the line at "any kind of technology"? Isn't the bike itself "technology"? How about pneumatic tires? Or computer designed tread for optimal traction? Is a bike suspension too much technology? How about electric assist that can help you up a hill but won't propel the bike without you pedaling along with it?
Draw the line wherever you want, this isn't some kind of absolute theory of anything. Just that adding stuff to maximize your output isn't necessary to have fun.
> you'll wonder if it's the technology doing all the work.
We’re talking about manually propelled bikes here. The bike isn’t doing all the work, but it is pretty essential in reaching the speed and sustaining the pace.
Sure you can argue that if you strap a rocket to your bike then you aren’t doing any work, but that’s not the case in either of these examples, so what’s the purpose of going down that tangent?
