Most athletes who first use Best Bike Split learned about it through time trial or triathlon racing, where the tool has an almost obvious application. Minimize surges, hold the most even power possible, ride the physically optimal pacing strategy for the course and conditions. That's the whole game in a TT or a non-drafting triathlon bike leg. The model tells you what steady effort gets you to the finish fastest, and your job is to execute it as cleanly as possible.
Gravel racing asks something different of the tool, and if you're using it the same way you'd use it for a time trial, you're leaving most of its value on the table. - Dave Schell
Why Variability Index Works Differently in Gravel Racing
In a time trial, a high variability index, meaning your power fluctuates a lot relative to your average, is almost always a sign of poor pacing. You surged on a climb you didn't need to attack, you backed off too much on a flat section, and the inefficiency costs you time relative to the smooth, even effort the physics model says is optimal.
Gravel racing doesn't work that way, and treating a high VI as a mistake in a gravel context misunderstands what's actually happening on the course.
Gravel is a drafting event with tactical racing dynamics, technical terrain that demands variable power output, and group dynamics that create surges you don't control. A draft-legal mass-start race naturally produces a higher variability index than a solo TT effort, and that's not a flaw in your execution. It's the nature of the event. When the group accelerates out of a corner, when someone attacks on a punchy climb, when the pace settles on a flat exposed section and then spikes again at the next feature, your power file is going to look choppy by TT standards. That's expected.
What Best Bike Split is actually useful for in gravel isn't holding you to an artificially smooth power target. It's helping you understand where the surges are coming from, which ones are worth matching, and which ones you can let go and recover within the group dynamic rather than out in the wind alone.
How to Model Drafting Value and Group Dynamics in Gravel
This is the piece that doesn't get talked about enough. Best Bike Split's physics engine models aerodynamic drag as a major component of the power required at a given speed. That means you can use it to quantify exactly how much energy a draft is worth on specific sections of a gravel course, not just in the abstract sense that drafting helps, but in real watts saved for real terrain.
On long exposed sections with significant wind, the draft value is enormous. Sitting in a group instead of riding solo into a headwind can be worth 20 to 40 watts depending on group size and positioning, and modeling that against the course-specific wind forecast tells you exactly where staying connected to a group matters most. On technical, twisty, or climbing-heavy sections, the draft value drops because aerodynamic drag is less dominant relative to gravity and rolling resistance. Those are the sections where it's less costly to lose contact with a group temporarily and more important to ride your own sustainable effort.
This changes how I coach athletes to think about group racing in gravel. Instead of treating "stay with the group at all costs" as a blanket strategy, we can identify specific segments of the course where the energy cost of staying connected is worth fighting for, and segments where letting a small gap form and closing it later on a section with low draft value is the smarter play.
Using Course Modeling to Anticipate Attacks in Gravel Races
Course-specific modeling also tells you something tactically valuable: where the terrain and wind conditions create natural opportunities for attacks, and therefore where you need to be paying the most attention.
A tailwind section followed by a sharp transition into a crosswind, or a course feature that funnels into a narrow technical section, are both places where a strong rider can create a meaningful gap with relatively little physical cost to themselves while extracting a high cost from anyone trying to respond. When you model the course with Best Bike Split and look at where the power requirements shift dramatically segment to segment, particularly around wind direction changes and terrain transitions, you can identify these moments in advance.
That doesn't mean you can predict exactly when a competitor will attack. It means you walk into the race already knowing where the course makes attacking easiest, so when it happens you're not caught completely off guard, and you understand whether matching the move is worth the energy cost given what's left on the course.
How to Plan Aid Station Stops Using Best Bike Split
This is one of the more practical, less glamorous applications, and it matters more than people expect for long gravel events.
Best Bike Split models your predicted time and effort at every point along the course based on your power targets and the terrain. That means you can see in advance roughly when you'll arrive at each aid station or water source, what your cumulative fatigue and effort look like at that point, and what terrain is coming immediately after.
The strategic question isn't just "should I stop for water," it's "where is stopping for water going to cost me the least." If an aid station sits right before a long climb, topping off there before the effort increases makes more sense than carrying extra weight up the climb and stopping after. If the model shows a long flat or gradual section after a water stop where you can settle back into rhythm easily, that's a better place to take the extra 60 to 90 seconds than right before a technical section where you need to be fully focused and moving well.
For longer events like Unbound or Big Sugar, where aid stations might be 30 to 40 miles apart, this kind of planning matters even more. You're not just deciding whether to stop. You're deciding how much to carry between stops based on the modeled time and effort for that segment, which tells you how much fueling and hydration you actually need to carry versus what you can pick up along the way.
Gravel Tire and Wheel Selection With Course-Specific Modeling
I've written about this before in the context of equipment decisions generally, but it's worth restating specifically for gravel. Best Bike Split's physics model treats rolling resistance as a direct input into the power required to hold a given speed, which means you can compare tire options against the actual demands of a specific course rather than against generic rolling resistance numbers.
A tire that tests fast on a smooth rolling resistance chart might not be the right choice for a course with significant rough or technical sections, because the model will show that the time cost of an increased flat risk or reduced control outweighs the marginal rolling resistance gain. Conversely, on a smoother and faster course, the rolling resistance difference between tire options becomes more meaningful because there's less terrain variability to dilute its impact.
Wheel selection follows similar logic. Deeper, more aerodynamic wheels matter more on exposed, fast sections with significant wind exposure. On technical, twisty, climbing-heavy courses, the aerodynamic benefit shrinks and the handling characteristics and weight of the wheel become comparatively more important. Modeling your specific course tells you which of those variables actually matters for the event you're racing, rather than defaulting to whatever the fastest TT setup would be.
How Best Bike Split Works Differently for Gravel vs Time Trials
The tool is the same. The application has to change based on the event. - Dave Schell
In a time trial, Best Bike Split is mostly answering one question: what's the smoothest, most efficient way to produce this amount of work over this distance and terrain. In gravel, it's answering a more layered set of questions: where does drafting matter most, where are the tactical pressure points on the course, how should I manage fueling and hydration given the terrain and aid station spacing, and what equipment actually serves this specific course rather than a generic standard.
Athletes who use the tool the same way for both event types are missing most of what it can actually do for them in a gravel context. The physics underneath the model doesn't change. What you ask it, and how you interpret what it tells you, absolutely should.
Dave Schell / Kaizen Endurance
Dave Schell is the Founder and Head Coach of Kaizen Endurance coaching based out of Boulder, Colorado, where he works with off-road cyclists of all abilities. Dave is the former director of coach education at TrainingPeaks where he traveled the world teaching coaches how to better use training software with their athletes.
Read more about Dave Schell at Kaizen Endurance.
