But that's your choice, but you don't seem to accept most people wouldn't do that. I also suspect you aren't chucking that bike down a mountain, or riding quickly, so you will get away with bad maintenance, and it will just unship the chain. Do that when climbing or descending and it could be a disaster. But, hey ho, if just trundling about then fine.
Do you own a car, I so hope you don't, for the sake of people living near you ?
I don't care about what "most people" do or don't, I pointed out choices that proved as voiding safety.
There is no need to "suspect" whatever, what I said matters, not whatever you fabricate.
Yet another repeat: my bicycle does the job with the described sprockets conditions, current chainring 7 years, current cog 2+1 years.
- the former with 12 teeth broken off, and staying like that since 3 years,
- the latter with all teeth broken off, still doing the job, over 6 months.
What was/is that job: a fixed gear, gear ratio 47/16 (the diameter matters not the tooth counts - for the *ped)=2.94, riding over flat sections, up and down bridges, down and up tunnels, bicycles weight with default (always) luggage is near to 30 kg, shop goodies and street finds varying wildly, one day a carpet of 25 kg, the other day a bunch whatever together 15 kg.
This kinda default weight and luggage is already since 2010, upto 2017 with my 2 previous bikes, the current, forum avatar bicycle is since 2017 - 9 years.
So, all yours, and others here, talks about disasters, broken dental teeth, related to drivetrains wear state, is just scaremongering.
While on the other hand, that Hollow cost cutting of the Light Religion to cheat in races, as this topic is 1 of its illustrations of, is real story - based.
A spindle that breaks, a crank that looses or breaks, those are THE recipes for disaster, with as prime reason for it its unexpected nature.
As one suffering those "delaminating" (in itself a bullshit word since it's construction is just a wider U and a smaller U construction glued in the overlap, not a massive layering like multiplex wood) colorful worded: "I'm 70, far from a powerhouse, and I broke my crank.".
Why: because power was not the heaviest parameter in its failure, the hollow religion for the weight cheating with as motive to win races or to keep up with the rest, was.
My bicycle application is not racing, not keeping up with the rest, instead, maintaining/improving condition and while doing so, transporting stuff.
I don't care about 2 or 20 or 200 gram bicycle weight, I do care about bicycle failures due to choices that were made in the interest of race-cheaters and imposed on others as a "standard", since such failures void my purpose of the bike.
... which is all quite Obvious.