Bike fit based on what...

It seems that bike fitting is the latest greatest thing in the bike industry. I see this trend from a slightly different perspective than most. As bike fitting is on the rise, I think the standard should be elevated.

Here's where I have my beef. Bike fit based on what? Here's the way the conversation goes with a cyclist. "I was fit on my bike. The guy who did it said I looked good." What? The bike fit is based on what someone thinks looks good?. There's an interesting phenomenon in neuroscience. In a nutshell, if the practitioner is able to get the client to do what they "think" is best(regardless of whether is right or not), it makes the practitioner feel good! There is actually a release of endorphins. Does this seem like a principle that best serves the client?

Here's my question. If the fit process is based on the subjective opinion of the fitter vs. laws of physics, principles of physiology and rules of biomechanics? I would say that we have a problem. Don't get me wrong, many fitters use tools that make the process look objective. However, they are willing to go against what the tools tell them if the client has complaints. That would be the subject of another post(you can't chase fit if the problem is based in lack of function).

I think I've said this before... Bike fit is a doorway to function. It is not the end all be all. Bike fit allows for effective force delivery and bike control. In addition, bike fit without technique training is akin to purchasing a set of keys(without the car to go with it). Keys are useless unless you can use them to access the car's power.

So, next time you consider a bike fit, ask some questions.
How do you determine if someone is in the right position?
What is this based on?
Is there any scientific evidence that one position is better than another?
Now that your bike is fit, what do you do next? If the fitter says, "go ride", you should request your money back. They don't understand what they are doing.