kgt wrote:Not at all
Ok, thing is: aero is one "parameter" in a set of properties of a frame. Pro riders pick the bike that is fastest for them at the given race. So, other parameters might outweigh the fact that one frame is more aero than the other. For GC riders, aerodynamics of a frame are in fact largely irrelevant. Look at where Nibali lost his time, it was in the TT(T) and on steep climbs. So he was right to pick the lighter of the two frames he has on offer. It is a myth that aero frames can all easily be built to 6.8kg with the equipment that the pros are using no matter of how tall the rider is, so weight of the frame is important. Also, he might like the geometry of the Scultura better or whatever other parameter was outweighing aerodynamics of the Reacto for him.
We might however see a different distribution of aero vs non aero frames if riders were free to pick whichever frame they want instead of only 2-3. Not for GC riders of course. Their case doesn't matter here.
What you are doing is that you pick a certain group of rider type and deduct from them not choosing the aero frame option that aero in general doesn't matter outside of TT events and this is a plain logical error in your line of thinking. It's like saying cars don't need four wheels because motorcycles are perfectly fine with only two.