"Hazardous" Segments

Frank Wilson
Frank Wilson Posts: 930
edited June 2014 in Road general
Any body know if there is a way on Strava to contest what one individual deems as a "hazardous" segment that perhaps others may not.

On my daily training run no fewer that 12 segments have now been deemed hazardous by some killjoy and the run is only 18 miles.

One segment in particular a lot of the Wirral / Cheshire / North Wales riders will know is a great piece of relatively straight, flat new tarmac and some weapon has decided it is dangerous.

http://app.strava.com/segments/6935205

I can only guess they are saying it is dangerous because of the TA firing range, but you just don't go on it when instructed not to on the days they are firing.
«1

Comments

  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    If it bothers you that much not to have these segments, just create private ones and then you can train on them all you want. If it's actually KOMs you are concerned about then too bad!
  • charlie_potatoes
    charlie_potatoes Posts: 1,921
    support@strava.com
    "You really think you can burn off sugar with exercise?" downhill paul
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    Or just create duplicate ones.

    Dangerous segment doesn't always mean its dangerous - just that someone wants it removed - often because its data set is wrong - I've flagged one on my commute that states it's a cat4 climb. It's nothing of the sort.
  • PHILATHAM
    PHILATHAM Posts: 50
    The reason this is classed as hazardous is that this section of the NCR5 has been recently opened and is extensivley used by walkers and families. As a result of lots of Strava segment hunters who seem incapable of riding anywhere unless it is at 'lightspeed factor 4' there have been calls from the community to have this section closed to cyclists. If people continue to cycle in this way it will turn non cyclists against us even more. I may sound harsh, but those are the facts, oh and by the way, the TA range is not one you ride across , merely near to
  • Frank Wilson
    Frank Wilson Posts: 930
    PHILATHAM wrote:
    The reason this is classed as hazardous is that this section of the NCR5 has been recently opened and is extensivley used by walkers and families. As a result of lots of Strava segment hunters who seem incapable of riding anywhere unless it is at 'lightspeed factor 4' there have been calls from the community to have this section closed to cyclists. If people continue to cycle in this way it will turn non cyclists against us even more. I may sound harsh, but those are the facts, oh and by the way, the TA range is not one you ride across , merely near to


    Think you are being slightly unfair to cyclists there Phil. Not all cyclists are doing warp speed, even we we are just tootling along we are baulked by the day dreaming, headphone wearing, straddle the complete path and look with contempt at anybody else who wants to use it walkers.

    I'll find another route ta.
  • Flâneur
    Flâneur Posts: 3,081
    Regarding the cycle path across the marshes you linked. It is probably due to the fact that it is used by walkers, family type rides, bird watches and then club riders getting off the Wirral, Same with the earlier stretch which has the farmers gate and sheep. The section from the Harp now has a gate on the bend should you ever skip Denhall lane.

    I wouldn't worry about that segment, it will always go to a club group who get lucky with the wind behind them
    Stevo 666 wrote: Come on you Scousers! 20/12/2014
    Crudder
    CX
    Toy
  • Pedro77
    Pedro77 Posts: 59
    So... Let me get this right! Just because someone classified that route as hazardous and in your view wrongly.. You can't enjoy it anymore???

    So you can't upload it to Stavra or whatever... Who cares? Just enjoy the ride mate... Don't get too hung up on Stavra... There is more cycling than Stavra out there!!!

    Alternatively if you really need the segments do as someone suggested, private ones or duplicate some...

    Pedro
  • BrandonA
    BrandonA Posts: 553
    Slowbike wrote:
    Or just create duplicate ones.

    Dangerous segment doesn't always mean its dangerous - just that someone wants it removed - often because its data set is wrong - I've flagged one on my commute that states it's a cat4 climb. It's nothing of the sort.

    You shouldn't flag a segment just because it has incorrect elevation. Instead you should contact Stava and they will fix it - I've done that on numerous occasions and it doesn't leave lots of duplicate sections because someone re-creates the one you incorrectly marked hazardous.

    I think it is a shame that it only takes one muppet (not calling you a muppet Slowbike - this is a non-related point than the one you raised) to mark a segment as hazardous. There have been numerous sections near me that existed for in excess of a year and then someone new comes along and stops everyone from riding them.

    I think it would be better if segments had user comments or recorded and showed to users the number of people that thought it was hazardous (along with a reason). This way educated people could assess the risks of certain segments prior to riding them.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    BrandonA wrote:
    Slowbike wrote:
    Or just create duplicate ones.

    Dangerous segment doesn't always mean its dangerous - just that someone wants it removed - often because its data set is wrong - I've flagged one on my commute that states it's a cat4 climb. It's nothing of the sort.

    You shouldn't flag a segment just because it has incorrect elevation. Instead you should contact Stava and they will fix it - I've done that on numerous occasions and it doesn't leave lots of duplicate sections because someone re-creates the one you incorrectly marked hazardous.
    The one I flagged was autocreated by my commute home - having just left the office in winter the Garmin 800 decided the temperature change meant I was going up a significant climb ... I got bored of deleting it and it wasn't in a place where you'd want a segment anyway - so flagged it :)
    BrandonA wrote:
    I think it is a shame that it only takes one muppet (not calling you a muppet Slowbike - this is a non-related point than the one you raised) to mark a segment as hazardous. There have been numerous sections near me that existed for in excess of a year and then someone new comes along and stops everyone from riding them.

    I think it would be better if segments had user comments or recorded and showed to users the number of people that thought it was hazardous (along with a reason). This way educated people could assess the risks of certain segments prior to riding them.
    I totally see your point - at the moment one person can decide a segment is dangerous and flag it then it's gone (until Strava staff sort it) - I'll own up to being one of those flaggers - but only on (IMHO) nonsense segments that are short and turn right onto a main road from a cyclepath or one that starts in the middle of town, over a mini-roundabout, turn right on a blind corner and finish nowhere in particular - I believe they're autocreated judging by the climb category usually allocated to them.

    I don't bother flagging stupid downhill segments usually a hundred meters long with titles of "fastest bit of xxx hill" with KOM speeds >70mph when I know only too well that they're not going over 50mph because you can see that from the other segments that overlap this one ... yes, it's dangerous and a pointless segment - but it's not dangerous because it encourages you to race across traffic.
    A way of "voting to delete" would be handy
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    BrandonA wrote:
    I think it is a shame that it only takes one muppet (not calling you a muppet Slowbike - this is a non-related point than the one you raised) to mark a segment as hazardous. There have been numerous sections near me that existed for in excess of a year and then someone new comes along and stops everyone from riding them.
    How do they stop everyone from riding it? They simply stop you from competing with other people on it. All flagging a segment actually does in the end is hide the leaderboard. You can still see your own times, and as I already said you can also create your own private segment that nobody can flag in the first place if you really care about "training" on it. I would not be shocked to find that people who complain about segments getting flagged just happen to have been at or near the top of the leaderboard on said segments.

    I've flagged a bunch of segments in the past. What they all had in common was that they encouraged riding at high speed through some combination of sharp corners, traffic lights, roundabouts, junctions and pedestrian areas in a major city. It's stupid. I think UK Strava users go way over the top in defining segments. You could probably create pretty accurate and complete street maps of all major cities in the country just from Strava segment data because so many city streets seem to have segments, no matter how short or flat they happen to be, and it's pointless because the times on these segments are usually inaccurate due to GPS uncertainty and totally dependent on traffic conditions and willingness to take risks. What I'd love to see on Strava is a global profile option to hide any segments that don't go uphill, because it'd instantly filter out almost all of these segments that just clutter up ride pages.
  • special11
    special11 Posts: 21
    I hate the attitude of the do-gooders, who appointed you lot strava police just because you don't happen to like a segment.... If someone wants to ride round a sharp right hander/ across traffic lights/ or roundabout , why would anyone take the time and effort to upload their ride trawl through all the segments and decide they don't like one and flag it!!!! What a kn0b
    I see loads of segments on my rides that don't particularly make sense but if someone specifically targets them that's down to them.
    A segment near me crosses a set of lights , I'm up the rankings on it but I know I need a perfect storm of no traffic and a green light to creep any further.... Am I going to risk my life trying to improve on it.... Don't think so.
    But it's not for me to decide it's wrong, I tend to think most sane people have the ability to take responsibility for their own actions and wouldn't put their life at risk for the sake of a few seconds
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    special11 wrote:
    I hate the attitude of the do-gooders, who appointed you lot strava police just because you don't happen to like a segment.... If someone wants to ride round a sharp right hander/ across traffic lights/ or roundabout , why would anyone take the time and effort to upload their ride trawl through all the segments and decide they don't like one and flag it!!!! What a kn0b
    I see loads of segments on my rides that don't particularly make sense but if someone specifically targets them that's down to them.
    A segment near me crosses a set of lights , I'm up the rankings on it but I know I need a perfect storm of no traffic and a green light to creep any further.... Am I going to risk my life trying to improve on it.... Don't think so.
    But it's not for me to decide it's wrong, I tend to think most sane people have the ability to take responsibility for their own actions and wouldn't put their life at risk for the sake of a few seconds
    There's very little "trawling" involved, it's more like glancing at the (stupidly long) list of segments for a recent ride and thinking "What sort of idiot created a segment there?". If you don't want your favourite segments flagged, try riding up some hills instead of doing 50m flat city "sprints". You don't get many climbs flagged for being hazardous and you don't need any "perfect storms", just good legs.

    If your last sentence was correct, these segments wouldn't exist in the first place and Strava wouldn't be so popular. You may also want to consider that it will often not just be your own life that you're putting at risk going for KOMs on hazardous segments.

    Finally, thanks for proving my point about the people who complain often being the same people who are worried about their rankings.
  • special11
    special11 Posts: 21
    ADR - you get out of strava what you want .... If you want it purely to track your own performance then fair enough, if you want to use it to compare yourself with others .... Then so be it .... If you are looking at it and deciding there's too many segments and then decide to flag ones you deem hazardous then maybe you should use cyclemeter or one of the myriad of other apps out there.
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    special11 wrote:
    I hate the attitude of the do-gooders, who appointed you lot strava police just because you don't happen to like a segment.... If someone wants to ride round a sharp right hander/ across traffic lights/ or roundabout , why would anyone take the time and effort to upload their ride trawl through all the segments and decide they don't like one and flag it!!!! What a kn0b
    As I already stated - those I've flagged tend to be the auto-create segments where the elevation data from the GPS is a bit wayward making Strava think a mountain has suddenly popped up... it's just one method of removing a segment that nobody created and nobody wants.
    There's no "do gooder" about it - and not being a knob either (how polite) - it's just self-administration.

    QQ - if someone grabbed all the KOMs on your route and it was obviously in a car or motorbike - would you flag the ride?
  • iron-clover
    iron-clover Posts: 737
    It depends if the segment really is hazardous to the users or others. I've flagged a couple of segments before- one involved a nasty hairpin descent well known for causing crashes, and another which ended after a busy traffic light junction at the bottom of another descent.

    I agree with the comments about flagging the segment in question if there have been complaints about cyclists riding inappropriately. I have a similar path alongside the A27 between Portsmouth and Havant which is shared use, and on nice days we have a lot of walkers and families down there. The strava segment is perhaps inappropriately named as the "Marshes TT West- East" and another coming the other way. It can be good fun to blast along, but there are a couple of narrow blind bends that care needs to be taken on- and only ever either really early in the morning or on a grey and miserable winter's day.
    Luckily we don't seem to have a big problem with cyclists riding dangerously down there when there are people about- but if like the case of the one mentioned above there are people riding inappropriately to the extent there are threats to ban cyclists then by all means remove the Strava segment! It's not worth aggravating other users for the sake of a segment- my argument would be for those who are bothered to go and race in a real TT or race instead.
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    special11 wrote:
    ADR - you get out of strava what you want .... If you want it purely to track your own performance then fair enough, if you want to use it to compare yourself with others .... Then so be it .... If you are looking at it and deciding there's too many segments and then decide to flag ones you deem hazardous then maybe you should use cyclemeter or one of the myriad of other apps out there.
    The myriad of overlapping segments is certainly annoying, but I can live with that by hiding the ones I don't care about. I have no compunction whatsoever about flagging segments that are blatantly hazardous, but that has nothing to do with how many of them there are. You seem to think I'm some sort of spoilsport who spends all his time going through segments one by one and flagging them all just to annoy other cyclists, while back in reality I've probably flagged about 20 segments in 2 years, some of which were downright dangerous rather than simply "hazardous". The ability to flag segments is there for a reason, and I'm using it the way it was designed to be used. If you don't like that, I think you're the one that should use something other than Strava.
  • special11
    special11 Posts: 21
    Slow bike - fair enough re the auto create... Re your QQ ....There are segments on my commute in to work , between two sets of lights and the KOM averaged 74 mph, 2nd 3rd and 4th places are occupied by people averaging in the 60 mph ,,, it's a short flat section .... Quite clear that someone has done it on their motorbike .... I (along with 3700 people) have ridden that route for 2 years and it's always been the same.... I couldn't care less and neither it seems do the 3000 odd other people that have ridden the same segment.
    So to answer your question .... Nope I wouldn't flag the segment .... Cos I'm just not that bothered what other people do
  • PHILATHAM
    PHILATHAM Posts: 50
    Think you are being slightly unfair to cyclists there Phil. Not all cyclists are doing warp speed, even we we are just tootling along we are baulked by the day dreaming, headphone wearing, straddle the complete path and look with contempt at anybody else who wants to use it walkers.

    I'll find another route ta.[/quote]

    Not being unfair as I am a cyclist myself,maybe generalising though . You are correct that there are some 'headphone wearing, straddle the complete path and look with contempt at anybody else who wants to use it walkers'but there are an equal number of people on bikes who do the same. I am a Sky Ride Leader and while I'm out I try to show respect to others ,as an example, when you pass a dog walker who makes sure their dog is under control as you pass, saying thank you goes a long way to promoting a better view of cyclists . I am also happy to say that whether I'm walking or cycling I find people more than often say hi and pass the time of day with complete strangers who have similar hobbies,(its really nice, everyone should try it) . Since I tried to post this earlier the thread seems to have been taken down a different route, but I dont want you to find a different route to ride on just think about how the behaviour of some can spoil it for the rest .
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    special11 wrote:
    So to answer your question .... Nope I wouldn't flag the segment .... Cos I'm just not that bothered what other people do
    Wrong question - the question was would you flag the RIDE. But I guess you don't bother anyway as otherwise you would've said you did.

    I can't remember if I've flagged a ride or not - I have noticed two people recently who've accidentally left their GPS on during a drive home - I wasn't the only one to notice - one I just added a comment to the effect that they would've been better off putting that effort in during the race .. and the other I just gave Kudos to ... both rides were removed by the owners! :)

    What you have to think about though is what the flag system is there for. People who obviously cheat or make mistakes (GPS on in the car) can easily be flagged. Segments that are auto-created and obviously dodgy can also be flagged. Then there's the grey area of "hazardous segments" ...
  • downhill paul
    downhill paul Posts: 236
    I also found a few segments that had been flagged as hazardous a few weeks ago.
    after the climb up holme moss on the holme firth side, I came down the descent on the woodhead side. it was quite an experience hitting 45mph without pedaling. then when I got home and uploaded the ride, the descent was fine, but the segment, holme moss south side final dip had been flagged as hazardous. there is no way that last 0.3 miles could be considered more dangerous than the rest of the 2.2 mile descent.
    I think it's more a case of people can't get to the top of the leaderboards on certain segments, so they flag them as dangerous.
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    downhill paul wrote:
    I also found a few segments that had been flagged as hazardous a few weeks ago.
    after the climb up holme moss on the holme firth side, I came down the descent on the woodhead side. it was quite an experience hitting 45mph without pedaling. then when I got home and uploaded the ride, the descent was fine, but the segment, holme moss south side final dip had been flagged as hazardous. there is no way that last 0.3 miles could be considered more dangerous than the rest of the 2.2 mile descent.
    I think it's more a case of people can't get to the top of the leaderboards on certain segments, so they flag them as dangerous.
    I just had a look at that area on the segment explorer. This segment seems to cover the entire descent, right into the flat part at the bottom, and isn't flagged. It could just have been a mistake or something I guess. Don't see any reason why it'd be called hazardous, looks like a fun descent :D
  • slowbike
    slowbike Posts: 8,498
    downhill paul wrote:
    but the segment, holme moss south side final dip had been flagged as hazardous. there is no way that last 0.3 miles could be considered more dangerous than the rest of the 2.2 mile descent.
    I think it's more a case of people can't get to the top of the leaderboards on certain segments, so they flag them as dangerous.
    the thing is - 0.3 mile segments when you're going 40mph+ are completely and utterly pointless due to the way Strava works out your time for that segment. That's the sort of segment that is over and done with in under 1/2 minute and with a 3second recording interval for the smartphone your actual 45mph speed could vary between a reported 36 and 60mph.
  • downhill paul
    downhill paul Posts: 236
    The segment holme moss to woodhead descent is the one that covers the whole descent. including the dip at the bottom. this segment finishes where the holme moss road meets the main road. if the dip at the bottom has been marked as hazardous then why hasn't the other segments that include that dip?
    I have also seen segments on flat sections of road that have been flagged as dangerous. what sort of pussy thinks riding on a flat road is dangerous.
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    I'm happy to flag the segments on the OP's path - its a shared use path - owned I believe by the RSPB and they had threatened to stop cyclists from using it if there was inconsiderate cycling on it.

    Its not rocket science - don't race the path with people or livestock on it. If you want a challenge - find a hill.
    We should be grateful we have a great traffic free route into North Wales - lets not shoot ourselves in the foot by crashing into walkers on the path eh ?
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    downhill paul wrote:
    The segment holme moss to woodhead descent is the one that covers the whole descent. including the dip at the bottom. this segment finishes where the holme moss road meets the main road. if the dip at the bottom has been marked as hazardous then why hasn't the other segments that include that dip?
    My point was why does it matter if that short segment is marked as hazardous when the larger segment hasn't? It's not a rule that if you flag a segment that is contained in a larger segment you have to flag that one as well. Someone could have flagged it by mistake, who knows? Can't see any reason for it myself but I don't see what the problem is either, who cares about a segment that covers a fraction of the full descent?? That makes as much sense as people who create segments which stop halfway up a hill.
    downhill paul wrote:
    I have also seen segments on flat sections of road that have been flagged as dangerous. what sort of pussy thinks riding on a flat road is dangerous.
    Examples? Depends entirely on what sort of environment that flat road happens to be passing through.
  • downhill paul
    downhill paul Posts: 236
    Examples?
    Manchester road in Macclesfield. the segment is called Belfry Dr Climb.
    it's listed as a 18% average grade cat 4 climb on strava, but it's a flat road. it goes from -1.4% to 0.6%. that is the information given for the segments listed under the ride map. but if you click on segment details, it says the climb starts at 66.5%.
  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    cougie wrote:
    I'm happy to flag the segments on the OP's path - its a shared use path - owned I believe by the RSPB and they had threatened to stop cyclists from using it if there was inconsiderate cycling on it.

    Its not rocket science - don't race the path with people or livestock on it. If you want a challenge - find a hill.
    We should be grateful we have a great traffic free route into North Wales - lets not shoot ourselves in the foot by crashing into walkers on the path eh ?

    couldn't agree more a segment on a shared path is totally ridiculous
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • kajjal
    kajjal Posts: 3,380
    There is a segment in a village nearby that is flagged as dangerous. It is down hill, goes across a blind junction and also round a completely blind corner with cars parked legally on the opposite side of the road. It is easy enough to hit 30mph there without a headwind and at either point if a car appeared on the road you would be in real trouble. Quite rightly this is flagged as dangerous to protect people from themselves.
  • adr82
    adr82 Posts: 4,002
    downhill paul wrote:
    Examples?
    Manchester road in Macclesfield. the segment is called Belfry Dr Climb.
    it's listed as a 18% average grade cat 4 climb on strava, but it's a flat road. it goes from -1.4% to 0.6%. that is the information given for the segments listed under the ride map. but if you click on segment details, it says the climb starts at 66.5%.
    So are you claiming it was flagged because someone thought it was actually hazardous or because the elevation was obviously wrong...? Don't see any reason to flag it other than that, and I'd never bother flagging segments for having the wrong elevation.
  • downhill paul
    downhill paul Posts: 236
    I have no idea why it was flagged, it wasn't me who flagged it.
    it could be because the elevation was incorrect. other than that I can't see any reason to flag it.

Categories