Average Speed

karlth · August 2012

Slowbike wrote:

karlth wrote:

Imagine a hypothetical hill that is a half mile long. It reduces your speed from 20mph along the flat to 10mph. Plenty of hills like that. How fast would you have to go down the other side (it's a symmetrical hill) so that your average speed was still 20mph?

Answer - infinite.

Er - no ... the answer is 40mph ... ignoring the fact that you don't go from 10mph to 40mph in an instant .. but then the hill is hypothetical anyway ..

No it isn't. To do the whole mile at 20mph you've got to do it in 3 minutes. But it's taken you the whole of that three minutes to do the first half mile at 10mph (half the distance at half the speed = same time). Therefore you'd have to travel infinitely fast to get the last half mile done in the zero time you have left.

If you did the first half at 10mph and the second at 40mph, then you would take 3 minutes to go up and 45 seconds to go down - a total time of 3 min 45 seconds - an average speed of 16mph.

rolf_f · August 2012

Slowbike wrote:

karlth wrote:

Imagine a hypothetical hill that is a half mile long. It reduces your speed from 20mph along the flat to 10mph. Plenty of hills like that. How fast would you have to go down the other side (it's a symmetrical hill) so that your average speed was still 20mph?

Answer - infinite.

Er - no ... the answer is 40mph ... ignoring the fact that you don't go from 10mph to 40mph in an instant .. but then the hill is hypothetical anyway ..

It's a funny one is this. To average 20mph over 1 mile means you need to cover the mile in 3 minutes. The point about climbing half a mile at 10mph is that you've already used up your 3 minutes so you can't average 20mph over that specific mile.

Edit - beaten to it!

Simon Masterson wrote:

But why should they substantiate them? If you want to be Mark Cavendish on the internet, be my guest. It just makes you a juvenile idiot. I'm happy to let idiots be idiots.

If people go around saying that they are a beginner and cruise at such and such an improbable speed then if another beginner believes them they may think that they are doing something wrong when in fact they are doing very well. Ideally, if someone asks for advice, they get facts rather than bravado to make them feel small.

Ultimately, a simple claim for speed is meaningless unless terrain, distance, weather, solo or group etc is accounted for. I'd say 20mph for 15 miles on the flat with a tailwind is a sight less impressive than 16mph across the Lake District in bad weather.

slowbike · August 2012

karlth wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

karlth wrote:

Imagine a hypothetical hill that is a half mile long. It reduces your speed from 20mph along the flat to 10mph. Plenty of hills like that. How fast would you have to go down the other side (it's a symmetrical hill) so that your average speed was still 20mph?

Answer - infinite.

Er - no ... the answer is 40mph ... ignoring the fact that you don't go from 10mph to 40mph in an instant .. but then the hill is hypothetical anyway ..

No it isn't. To do the whole mile at 20mph you've got to do it in 3 minutes. But it's taken you the whole of that three minutes to do the first half mile at 10mph (half the distance at half the speed = same time). Therefore you'd have to travel infinitely fast to get the last half mile done in the zero time you have left.

If you did the first half at 10mph and the second at 40mph, then you would take 3 minutes to go up and 45 seconds to go down - a total time of 3 min 45 seconds - an average speed of 16mph.

Ah bolx ... I should read the post a bit more carefully shouldn't I !

simon_masterson · August 2012

Rolf F wrote:

If people go around saying that they are a beginner and cruise at such and such an improbable speed then if another beginner believes them they may think that they are doing something wrong when in fact they are doing very well. Ideally, if someone asks for advice, they get facts rather than bravado to make them feel small.

I definitely agree with the sentiment.

However, makes one a 'beginner' is very ambiguous, and this forum is ample proof of that. For a start, there are plenty of people who post here regularly who aren't 'beginners'. From what you present of your cycling experience, you aren't a 'beginner', for example. I don't think I am one either; I have plenty to learn but so do we all. Also, how do we define 'cruising'?

But are fitness and strength really defining features of one's skill level? There are plenty of old blokes that have decades of cycling experience, countless miles behind them and are dab hands at working on bicycles, but they can't/can no longer ride as fast as I can. And of course, 'beginners' come to cycling from very different backgrounds. Some are fat, unfit middle-aged ex-smokers who want a hobby, whilst others are fit, young and thin who already take part in other sports (if not other types of cycling), and have ambitions. There are of course many intermediate shades between the two.

Knowledge doesn't result in fitness, and therefore I cannot dismiss anybody's claims on principle just because they are a 'beginner', because they could very well be true. I daresay that when Lizzie Armitstead was a young 'beginner' in road cycling, her stats would have ruffled plenty of feathers around here.

Unless the person making the claims is deliberately bragging about them or otherwise being provocative, or giving conflicting details from post to post, I don't think they should be assumed to be a liar.

Rolf F wrote:

Ultimately, a simple claim for speed is meaningless unless terrain, distance, weather, solo or group etc is accounted for. I'd say 20mph for 15 miles on the flat with a tailwind is a sight less impressive than 16mph across the Lake District in bad weather.

If there's something we should all agree on, it is this!

houndlegs · August 2012

philthy3 wrote:

Here's the link to the "slow is fast" theory.

http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... sts-28838/

I now have the perfect excuse for everyone who passes me. I'm just going to tell them, I'm on a training run in zone 1 and it's only my awesome dedication and self control that allows me to go this slow

springtide9 · August 2012

Simon Masterson wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

If people go around saying that they are a beginner and cruise at such and such an improbable speed then if another beginner believes them they may think that they are doing something wrong when in fact they are doing very well. Ideally, if someone asks for advice, they get facts rather than bravado to make them feel small.

I definitely agree with the sentiment.

However, makes one a 'beginner' is very ambiguous, and this forum is ample proof of that. For a start, there are plenty of people who post here regularly who aren't 'beginners'. From what you present of your cycling experience, you aren't a 'beginner', for example. I don't think I am one either; I have plenty to learn but so do we all. Also, how do we define 'cruising'?

But are fitness and strength really defining features of one's skill level? There are plenty of old blokes that have decades of cycling experience, countless miles behind them and are dab hands at working on bicycles, but they can't/can no longer ride as fast as I can. And of course, 'beginners' come to cycling from very different backgrounds. Some are fat, unfit middle-aged ex-smokers who want a hobby, whilst others are fit, young and thin who already take part in other sports (if not other types of cycling), and have ambitions. There are of course many intermediate shades between the two.

Knowledge doesn't result in fitness, and therefore I cannot dismiss anybody's claims on principle just because they are a 'beginner', because they could very well be true. I daresay that when Lizzie Armitstead was a young 'beginner' in road cycling, her stats would have ruffled plenty of feathers around here. Unless the person making the claims is deliberately bragging about them or otherwise being provocative, or giving conflicting details from post to post, I don't think they should be assumed to be a liar.

Rolf F wrote:

Ultimately, a simple claim for speed is meaningless unless terrain, distance, weather, solo or group etc is accounted for. I'd say 20mph for 15 miles on the flat with a tailwind is a sight less impressive than 16mph across the Lake District in bad weather.

If there's something we should all agree on, it is this!

+1

As you say, the problem is that there are no definitions of what an actual beginner is, so context of the persons background is needed to really understand where that person is coming from. But if someone spools out their life history including quotes on speed etc, they'll get knocked down for bragging.... so they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I have personally come close to a 20mph average over a reasonable distance, but there again I have been cycling for 3 years (18 months on a road bike), so I guess I an no longer considered a beginner.
But in many aspects of cycling I feel a beginner. e.g. I have very little experience of riding in groups and feel I have a lot to learn from my peers and I have only just joined a club (and haven't actually done a group ride with them yet!)

I wouldn't say I find trying to average 20mph easy mind you and it's only really been this summer where I have tried (and had the fitness). Most of my rides are more like 17mph. I am more than happy to share my Strava rides if people are interested, but wouldn't want it to come across as bragging. I also don't live in the Lake District which helps lol

StillGoing · August 2012

houndlegs wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

Here's the link to the "slow is fast" theory.

http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... sts-28838/

I now have the perfect excuse for everyone who passes me. I'm just going to tell them, I'm on a training run in zone 1 and it's only my awesome dedication and self control that allows me to go this slow

You should try it, I can't even manage to stay in zone 2 for long before I get bored or the first old boy on his shopping bike comes past me whistling.

Bobbinogs · August 2012

I do zone 1 training sometimes but have found that it is impossible do out on the road. Hence, I have to do it on the turbo, steady cadence at 80-90, and dropping to very low gears. Usually, after about 45 mins I have to drop to the bottom 2 gears and then oscillate between them for the last 15 mins. I could always back off the turbo resistance before I start but it feels like I am spinning in free air as it is.

I find it good for training the legs to spin and great for overall recovery sessions...as long as I have a good cycling DVD lined up on the laptop.

StillGoing · August 2012

Simon Masterson wrote:

But why should they substantiate them? If you want to be Mark Cavendish on the internet, be my guest. It just makes you a juvenile idiot. I'm happy to let idiots be idiots.

The exchange that is A: 'I can ride at ... speed for ... time' B: 'No you can't!' makes all participants involved look like armchair cyclists; any onlooker would think that all are fat old men who are past it and bitter. To date I've seen no evidence of high level cyclists spending their time on cycling forums to denigrate people for their claimed average speeds and achievements on Strava. I wonder why that could be...

Maybe not but then if they're anything like motorcycle racers and trackdayers then some will be full of the proverbial crap. I packed in the motorcycle lark when I noticed how many riders i was sharing the paddock with were boasting about lap times I knew to be false because I was lapping quicker than them and not doing that time. Some of them would've been on the 3rd row of the WSB grid if they'd done the times claimed. Transponder readouts soon revealed the lie.

Unfortunately people will lie and whilst the small group I ride with hasn't demonstrated any of that, there must be others who have found it. Personally I can't see the point in idle boasts, you're only cheating yourself and look an ass when caught.

springtide9 · August 2012

R0B75 wrote:

Hi all

I got my first proper road bike this week and took it out for its first ride yesterday. I say proper as I previously had a Cyclocross bike which I had been using mainly on the road although it was bought for commuting. I also have a mountain bike.

Anyway, I try where possible to average a minimum of 15mph average on any ride. Generally manageable (just), but gets harder the longer the ride. I know in time I will be able to manage this on longer rides more easily, but does anyone have any tips for reaching or beating that target (preparation/recovery etc) and what kind of average should I hope to aim for in the future. What are your averages on general road rides, not TTs?

OK lets post some data for you to look at and maybe actually answer your initial question.

Data from January 2011 (when I first got my road bike) to the present date. Pretty much all of my data is in Strava for you to browse anyway.

This is me: http://app.strava.com/athletes/18796

01/16/2011 (First road ride, but had been riding an MTB regularly for approx 18 months)
http://app.strava.com/rides/401169

10/07/2011
http://app.strava.com/rides/911071

11/09/2011
http://app.strava.com/rides/1586337

26/12/2011
http://app.strava.com/rides/2894238

05/03/2012
http://app.strava.com/rides/4825473

15/04/2012
http://app.strava.com/rides/6772063

22/07/2012
http://app.strava.com/rides/14166647

I'm 43 years of age and 85kg and 'train' between 3-5 times a week (probably 4 times on average)... but have small children so they always take priority. I also have a job that has a workload that changes from taking over my life (and I end up doing no exercise at all), to slackening off and I end up with having more time to ride. So my performance has been a little up and down over the last three years (and so has my weight!)

The only ride that is cherry picked is the last one as it was a big effort for me.

So over undulating terrain I was roughly 15mph average initially.
After 6 months approx 16.5-17 mph.
After 12 months approx 17.5-18 mph
After 18 months approx 18.5-20 mph

Obviously the summer is where I make the most improvements as I'm able to ride more. In the winter things tail off a bit and I get a bit heavier lol

You'll also notice if you look at my my data that I have made decent improvements over this summer. Work has settled down and I have been able to get out on a real bike vs popping down the gym for an hour and using the static bikes.

In terms of tips, if you want to get the fastest average speed you really need to keep a consistent effort. So that means putting in the same effort for climbing the hills as well as the flats. i.e. don't push too hard on the hills. Obviously if a hill has an obvious peak and you'll know you'll get a break going down the other side (as you'll be breaking for corners etc) then put in more effort on the hills, but don't over cook yourself.

Improving average speed is different to actually trying to get the fastest average speed. It's all about mixing up your training to include intervals. Strava segment 'bagging' I find is good for this as it creates intervals for you; although useful to compare with others, it's best use is to compare with your previous rides.

Hopefully this is helpful.

RoadMeridaBen · August 2012

springtide9 wrote:

R0B75 wrote:

Hi all

I got my first proper road bike this week and took it out for its first ride yesterday. I say proper as I previously had a Cyclocross bike which I had been using mainly on the road although it was bought for commuting. I also have a mountain bike.

Anyway, I try where possible to average a minimum of 15mph average on any ride. Generally manageable (just), but gets harder the longer the ride. I know in time I will be able to manage this on longer rides more easily, but does anyone have any tips for reaching or beating that target (preparation/recovery etc) and what kind of average should I hope to aim for in the future. What are your averages on general road rides, not TTs?

OK lets post some data for you to look at and maybe actually answer your initial question.

Data from January 2011 (when I first got my road bike) to the present date. Pretty much all of my data is in Strava for you to browse anyway.

This is me: http://app.strava.com/athletes/18796

01/16/2011 (First road ride, but had been riding an MTB regularly for approx 18 months)
http://app.strava.com/rides/401169

10/07/2011
http://app.strava.com/rides/911071

11/09/2011
http://app.strava.com/rides/1586337

26/12/2011
http://app.strava.com/rides/2894238

05/03/2012
http://app.strava.com/rides/4825473

15/04/2012
http://app.strava.com/rides/6772063

22/07/2012
http://app.strava.com/rides/14166647

I'm 43 years of age and 85kg and 'train' between 3-5 times a week (probably 4 times on average)... but have small children so they always take priority. I also have a job that has a workload that changes from taking over my life (and I end up doing no exercise at all), to slackening off and I end up with having more time to ride. So my performance has been a little up and down over the last three years (and so has my weight!)

The only ride that is cherry picked is the last one as it was a big effort for me.

So over undulating terrain I was roughly 15mph average initially.
After 6 months approx 16.5-17 mph.
After 12 months approx 17.5-18 mph
After 18 months approx 18.5-20 mph

Obviously the summer is where I make the most improvements as I'm able to ride more. In the winter things tail off a bit and I get a bit heavier lol

You'll also notice if you look at my my data that I have made decent improvements over this summer. Work has settled down and I have been able to get out on a real bike vs popping down the gym for an hour and using the static bikes.

In terms of tips, if you want to get the fastest average speed you really need to keep a consistent effort. So that means putting in the same effort for climbing the hills as well as the flats. i.e. don't push too hard on the hills. Obviously if a hill has an obvious peak and you'll know you'll get a break going down the other side (as you'll be breaking for corners etc) then put in more effort on the hills, but don't over cook yourself.

Improving average speed is different to actually trying to get the fastest average speed. It's all about mixing up your training to include intervals. Strava segment 'bagging' I find is good for this as it creates intervals for you; although useful to compare with others, it's best use is to compare with your previous rides.

Hopefully this is helpful.

Your last ride you stopped for nearly half an hour and theres a big jump on one climb that misses 600ft of elevation.
suggesting you paused your computer on the biggest climb and restarted at the top (just an observation!) :P
good effort anyway though

springtide9 · August 2012

...

RoadMeridaBen · August 2012

First ride has nearly 15 miles of downhill at the start
2nd one says you rode with 2 others :P

check this out for average speed http://app.strava.com/rides/18824528 lol

springtide9 · August 2012

...

Frank the tank · August 2012

ROB75 just enjoy riding your bike. Unless you intend racing, ave speeds............do they really matter?

If you want to get faster there are loads of books/manuals that will tell you how to achieve this goal, you would have to be pretty dedicated as a lot seem to think riding a bike is all you have to do in a day. :shock:

Average Speed

Comments

Categories