Disc or no disc? No more a matter because the UCI allowed them for everybody in 2016. As far as me, I'm a little perplexed and basicly I think all or nobody because people with disc are going to brake differently and that could cause big crashes. Here you have Alex Dowsett's opinion about it.
“In the mass pile-ups where there are bodies and bikes everywhere, we’re very vulnerable. And to put two more blades, effectively, on the bike, which could be glowing hot due to heavy breaking before a crash, I think we’re going to see an injury, something serious, and that may be when they pull the disc brakes idea back.
These are just my opinions from being in and seeing crashes on the road. I really hope I’m wrong and I hope we can adopt disc brakes. Because cycling needs to move forwards – it always needs to move forwards – but if it’s an unnecessary move forwards that's going to put our safety at more harm than it already is, then it shouldn’t be taken. It would be a crying shame if it takes someone to have a serious injury for the idea to be pulled back.
I’ve never been short of braking power on a road bike. My belief is that on a road bike you lose traction between tyre and road before you lose braking power, so the wheels will lock up before you think you physically need to pull the brakes any harder.
There’s a video from the Tour – stage 5 I think – in the wet, everyone’s grabbing the brakes and people are going down. They’re not hitting people – they’re grabbing brakes and the front wheels are locking up and they’re coming down before they’ve actually hit anyone. What you can see from that is that, certainly in the wet, you’re not short of braking power – if anything you’ve got a bit too much. In the dry, I don’t feel like I’ve ever been short.
We’ve got brakes that work well now – do we need to go that extra step, with the risk of perhaps casuing some serious injury?"