In the UK, there tends to be an inverse correlation between the shininess of your bike and your performance. The young Cat A riders with one eye on a professional contract mostly ride 15-year-old aluminium race bikes or cheap off-brand carbon bikes; the weekend plodders are often on brand new Pinarellos or Cervelos. There's also a difference in clothing - it's almost a badge of honour to wear faded and threadbare kit, because it shows that you really put the hours in.
No amount of go-faster equipment will substitute for youth and training, but the middle-aged amateurs with pro-grade gear like to dream and help to sustain the cycling economy by doing so.
There's definitely a few of the older folks rolling around on equipment that's far in excess of their ability, sure.
The strongest folks I know are on good, well maintained bikes of about the class I mentioned. Most don't have the cash to upgrade frequently. Plus, most of us at this level are too picky about components to be happy with a factory build anymore, so you end up with upgrades on your bike until your bike is a new bike. LOL.
>Threadbare kit
I don't actually see a lot of that. I think a good chunk of why is climate here -- shit just wears out faster in the heat. There is a sense of bride in faded Rapha, though. (Guilty)
For myself, I've always been really opposed to showing up for any hobby where my gear vastly exceeded my skill. I get that some folks don't have that thing, but holy hell if you show up on a shiny new $12,000 Pinarello, you'd better be pretty fast -- if not, I kinda feel like it's okay to rag you.
Back in the 90ies, I stayed in the same hotel as a pro team who were racing in the Giro d'Italia. It was interesting to see their bikes: except for the GC guy, they were 'workhorses' - good components, and steel frames that, taken together, where not exactly featherweight.
A nice bike certainly helps, but it's all about your fitness and strength.
In a punchy crit with constant accelerations, absolutely. For sustained efforts like time trials, it makes essentially no difference. Once you're up to speed, it's all aerodynamics, gravity and rolling resistance. Ondřej Sosenka actually used a weighted back wheel for his successful hour record ride, with the logic that it would act as a flywheel in the later parts of the hour and smooth out his ragged pedalling. Of course he did test positive for methamphetamine in 2008, which may have had something to do with breaking the hour record.
It's interesting you mention rolling resistance because in mountain biking, cross country anyway, where there will be climbing on loose surfaces, you have to trade off rolling resistance of the rear tire against traction.
If you over-inflate your tires, you'll have less traction.
There's also the fact that during a tough climb on a trail with obstacles (roots rocks) you can't just power your way up, you have to maintain constant awareness of where the contact patch of your rear wheel is at all times, and modulate the power such that you deliver the most power where you have the most traction.
Fail to do that on a rock or root and you'll blow the climb.
No amount of go-faster equipment will substitute for youth and training, but the middle-aged amateurs with pro-grade gear like to dream and help to sustain the cycling economy by doing so.