Silly Commuter Stats
Comments
-
It's not creep, it was in the original stats, as was the ratio of climbing to miles! It was only removed because some people 'didn't have the way of recording the data;, which I accept, but then it was only optional and was another way of looking at data. My commute (or perhaps fecklessness) means 1000 mile months aren't really an option for me, but I suspect it is rather hillier than those banging in 1000 mile months at will. Just used to give me a slightly warmer glow to see that I was leading on the ratio and was up there on the total climbing too, than mid-table medocrity in the mileage that is all I could ever aspire to!
Incidentally Hatbeard, I tried to pre-register and clicked submit but all that happened was the fields all cleared - would that be a success or not?0 -
Re the climb thing, that was a good idea that didn't really take off so I took it out when the whole thing was recoded just over a year ago. At risk of dumping a whole load of effort onto HB's shoulders, now's the time to ask for things like that to be put back.
I nearly registered for New Stats myself but didn't as it wanted my email address. I don't have a problem with giving it out [although I do actually...], but is there any need for it? We have an open comms channel right here and a one-to-one via PM. There never seemed to be any need to have direct contact via email from where I sat tbh, and more than a few people commented on how good it was to have a fuss-free no-details log-in process.
Good to see it's moving on though. Hopefully by the time the new one is ready for importing legacy data I'll have a working PC with SQL Manager on it, which counts out my Ubuntu machine.0 -
Cheers CIB, I guess there will be more and more users with GPS or bike computers with altimeters now, so we might have more takers this time. As I recall it was around 15 users who recorded climb data too, so that was about 10% of users.
I do still wonder if anyone has worked out how much effort it takes to get a certain bike to travel a flat mile and how much to climb 100ft, so you could have a more meaningful ration, but I guess it is so dependent on weight of bike/rider, gear used etc, but if anyone is scientifically minded and can work it out, would be a nice little challenge!
Problem discussed with a basic ratio of climb to distance was that someone who rode up a very steep short hill once and did nothing else would sit at the top of the table all year!0 -
IIRC Salsa you're right - there was quite some discussion on the merits & calculation of the climb ratio that would produce the right number. Trawl back to around September 2009 in this thread and it might be around there.
And to be frank, Climb Ratio was dropped when Stats moved from PHP to ASP code, and I didn't fancy reworking the PHP Climb code into ASP; it didn't really work in the way it should have IIRC so I took the easy option. And we still look on it as a simple Miles Challenge, not a full-on training effort recording mechanism. HB may have different ideas.0 -
Where do I join this insanity? Do I use the link in CiB's sig?Novice runner & novice cyclist
Specialized Tricross
Orbea (Enol I think)0 -
Sign up on the one in my sig and that'll keep us ticking over until the new one's up & running, when we should be able to shift the existing stats data over to the new one. Hat+Beard posted a link to the new Sign On a page or two back; use that to sign up to the new one although AFAICS there's nothing yet beyond the sign-up page on there.
For anyone signing up to the new one, it's probably a good idea to keep your user name the same on both as that'll be the only link between old & new, and I wouldn't fancy trawling through the data trying to tie the two sets together.0 -
I think it was me that originally suggested the height thing - or at least things like the climb ratio. As it happens, I think CiB was right to get rid of it. The problem is that total climb tends to just be proportional to overall miles anyway. Obviously, if you live in a hilly part of the country you climb more but that statistic is still just proportional to your mileage - bunging in a Fred Whitton or two isn't going to change the stats much over the whole year - the climb ratio actually doesn't really change at all. You'd get much the same feel for someones commute if there was a static self selected classification for your commute to say 'very climby, climby, not that climby, flat as a pancake, Southern Softy London commute'.
That said, I do log, roughly, my climb total based on Bikely data which is a pretty big underestimate. I like to think that maybe my fifth place overall last year equates to a higher rank in terms of mileage toughness; 665765 feet climbed!
So, maybe it just wants the basic climb option.Faster than a tent.......0 -
That rings a bell - the ratio fluctuated a little bit over the first few rides that were entered, but beyond that once someone had a few hundred and then over a thousand miles on the board a ride of 20 miles that included a couple of thousand feet of climb had little or no effect on the ratio. The discussion on how to calculate it beyond a simple [miles / climb] x a number (to make it between 0 & 10 or something like that) did contain a few good ideas, but it didn't happen; in the end you can't beat my outburst of apathy & idlenessRolf F wrote:The problem is that total climb tends to just be proportional to overall miles anyway... but that statistic is still just proportional to your mileage - bunging in a Fred Whitton or two isn't going to change the stats much over the whole year - the climb ratio actually doesn't really change at all.
0 -
Is Deep Thought still in commission after coming up with the number 42? Perhaps we could get it to look into the meaningful climb ratio question? (Apologies to non-readers/viewers of Hitchhikers Guide)0
-
salsajake wrote:Is Deep Thought still in commission after coming up with the number 42? Perhaps we could get it to look into the meaningful climb ratio question? (Apologies to non-readers/viewers of Hitchhikers Guide)
The climb ratio was perfectly meaningful - a combination of ratio and overall distance is a good indicator of how tough your cycling is. Unfortunately, it isn't interesting because it doesn't vary much because most people, most of the time, cycle relatively locally.
For example, at the end of April, my climb ratio of height gained in feet per mile was 71.81(131601/1832). At the end of the year it was 64.63 (665765/10300). In April I'd barely got out of West Yorks; after that I did spend quite a while in East Yorkshire and the Plain of York hence the less than spectacular reduction. It is very meaningful (as I know that Airwave, The Running Man, gbsahne and Will3 all had much easier, less climby rides which makes me the winner
) but not that exciting day to day hence maybe climb is enough alone (and, just in case you are missing the point of the climb ratio - that was meant to distinguish between big miles with relatively little climb and small miles with relatively big climbs). Effectively it is, as I said above, a measure of the toughness of your riding. Faster than a tent.......0 -
In that case maybe Hatbeard could add a field for height gain and a simple ratio could be displayed simply as a quick guide as you say to how tough someone's rides generally are.0
-
So what's really needed is a drop down / set of radio buttons to describe each ride's effort, labelled Pussy cat, Piece of cake, Boy's Ride, OK, Okish, Blimey, Strewf, & For Sale One Bike - Never Again. Morph that lot into a Hard As Nails factor per rider as a function of how many of each we all manage and Bob's yer uncle. Cos that's what we want - Olympian ideals. Faster, further, fatter.
:idea:0 -
But that wouldn't take into account level of fitness. An effort I feel to be For Sale One Bike - Never Again would be Pussy cat to someone fitter and could in fact decrease through the levels as my fitness increases.
So there would need to be some kind of current fitness variable
0 -
We should all be provided with GPS enabled power meters that you can watch live that team on the Tour De France this year. Could set up something to capture the data and update the table automatically, live in terms of miles, average speed, height gain and - most important - watts used. When are you sending the power meters out Hatbeard?0
-
My miles this month have been added.
You laugh now, wait, it'll rise.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
suzyb wrote:But that wouldn't take into account level of fitness. An effort I feel to be For Sale One Bike - Never Again would be Pussy cat to someone fitter and could in fact decrease through the levels as my fitness increases.
So there would need to be some kind of current fitness variable
Indeed - need to account for whether big girls blouse lightweight carbon commuter machine is being used (almost counts as cheating as they take no effort to pedal) or a big, tough steel MTB with big fat metal spiked tyres.DonDaddyD wrote:My miles this month have been added.
You laugh now, wait, it'll rise.
Excellent - now don't fight it. Let the fun of the SCStats slowly absorb you over the coming months before spitting out your cold, dead, destroyed corpse at the end of the year!Faster than a tent.......0 -
well it's official I have signed myself up!
I can see this leader board being much like cyclogs and a bit addictive taking longer routes home from work just to try and get another place on the leader board!!!FCN 7
FCN 4
if you use irrational measures to measure me, expect me to behave irrationally to measure up0 -
How about feet climbed per KG, or even miles per KG. I might win that!--
Chris
Genesis Equilibrium - FCN 3/4/50 -
I know it may have been in jest, slightly personal info regarding weight of individual, but if it was being factored into some kind of formula, I'd be game (and it could be optional) Would need to factor bike weight in too. Could we have a clicky thing to choose which bike we were on that automatically sets the weight for the ride?
Be interesting to see at the end if the person with the most miles was also the one that hauled the most weight the furthest!
A ratio of weight & distance & height & speed would be the dream ticket and I'm amazed no-one on this thread has the science or academic skills to have a stab at something vaguely meaningful!0 -
Discount the weight of the bike - over on Road recently they had a long debate about the effect of the bike and the concensus [which I agree with] is that the effect is minimal. It's not about the bike, as someone once said. Doesn't mean you can't have a pile of carbon bling to get to work on though.
Rider weight does count though, but so does amount of sleep v normal sleep hours, red wine intake previous night (Pints is ok as a measure there), feel-good factor, feel-wife factor too come to that, wind [internal / external...], numpty motorists count en route, desirability of getting to the office on time [factored on whether your favourite project managers are in, or out on site that day], and day of week - Tuesdays are quicker than Fridays, unless Friday is the first day of the week.
I'm pretty sure HatBeard will be able to throw a matrix together to allow the revelvant selections to be made for each commute, along with a nice graphic showing each of us on a Nails scale.0 -
Can we please factor in body weight as I think my miles should count as double due to being 135kgs!!!
Not prund of it and trying to do something about it but in the mean time it'd be nice if being a very very fat bloke counted in my favour for once!!! 8) FCN 7
FCN 4
if you use irrational measures to measure me, expect me to behave irrationally to measure up0 -
I think there should be a body size modifier in the FCN as well, but all the skinny people complained when I mentioned it. Fact is though no one wants to be scalped by a fat bloke on a hybrid. Watch out tonight on CS7......
It's early days but I'm very pleased to be sitting in 20th in the table considering I'm currently 115Kgs.....--
Chris
Genesis Equilibrium - FCN 3/4/50 -
The bike weight not counting is absolute nonsense. That professor or dr or whatever he was didn't even record traffic condition or how hard he was pushing it. It is a simple fact that if you take a 30lb bike and put in a certain amount of effort and then a 15lb bike and put in the same effort, you'll get there faster. Problem is most people get a lighter bike and don't push it hard, so it takes similar time but is easier for them, but not so perceptible. My records record wind and perceived effort and my Trek road bike is almost always quicker than my Kona Jake with pannier, yes I ride it a bit harder but I arrive feeling the same. Anyone can spin lazily on a trick race bike and say " no different to my full sus MTB" but that is clearly nonsense.
When I first got my Trek (2200) I was underwhelmed at first, nice and sweet but didn't feel all that first. it was only when I started 'spanking' it (so to speak) that I really thought "ah, so this is what a road bike is about" and I was getting places in times I could never have done before, so it was clearly travelling faster for the same amount of effort. Also, why does a car create less CO2 when you make it lighter, because it takes less effort for the engine to move it. I agree body weight is more significant, but bike weight should be factored in too. And tyre drag, and frontal area, and weight of load, and amount of moisture and mud on bike. You got all this Hatbeard?
Anyway, don't want to reopen an argument that has been clearly had elsewhere!0 -
Just keep it simple - a box to say what county you live in. That'll sort the wheat from the chaff
PS height should count as well. CafeWanda miles are equivalent to about 1.5 normal persons miles.Faster than a tent.......0 -
Rolf F wrote:Just keep it simple - a box to say what county you live in. That'll sort the wheat from the chaff
PS height should count as well. CafeWanda miles are equivalent to about 1.5 normal persons miles.
But then there's not much air at the height Clever Pun lives, so that has to count too0 -
I'm happy to include the fields to log additional information if people want to track it it won't count in the big leaguetable but it would allow for data-mining later on for lulz and to make pretty infographics and the such.
if people let me know what info they want to track I'll try to add it as I go.Hat + Beard0
