235 miles a day for a year (Amanda Coker Challenge)

[Dogtrousers]

Todays pointless graphic tells us some amazing facts.

• If Steve puts in more power he tends to go faster
• If Steve does less climbing he tends to go faster

This graph shows
the vertical axis, how steep a ride was, expressed in metres per 100km (because I flatly refuse to use feet for elevation)
the horizontal axis, moving average speed in mph (because most people are discussing Steve's speed in mph, so I will grudgingly use imperial units)

Each dot shows a day's riding.
Red dots are days with an average wattage of >= 140 watts
Pink dots with a black border have an average wattage >= 130W and < 140W
Blue dots have an average >= 120W and < 130W
Black crosses have an average of < 120W or no power data

So ... the red dots tend to be further to the right (more power=faster)
The blue dots tend to be to the left (less power=slower)
The pink ones are in the middle, and you can pretty much ignore the crosses as they tend to be bad data.
The higher up a dot is the more to the left it tends to be (more climbing = slower)
The lower down a dot is the more to the right it tends to be (less climbing = faster)

I think I may be on the verge of a major scientific breakthrough. Alert the Nobel committee.

(I pinched the idea for this from SoreTween in The Other Place, and added the power data)

 

[tallliman]

Highlights a trend certainly but I wouldn't make a decision based on that data!

Steve appears to be slipping below his target line which isn't good. Is the UK weather too variable for this?

In related news, Dave Barter's wonderful book on the record won't be updated: http://phased.co.uk/the-year-updated/

 

[srw]

There's less of a correlation between speed and climbing than I think I would have guessed, perhaps because of the effect of wind.

From the earlier graph it looks as if he's only 1 or 2 mpd short of his target. Which at this stage is nothing - less than 10 minutes per day. Add half an hour riding per day (and assume no bad luck) and he'd smash the Coker record.

 

[Dogtrousers]

There's less of a correlation between speed and climbing than I think I would have guessed, perhaps because of the effect of wind.

It's something Steve has said - that shelter is as important as flatness. He's quite close (by his standards) to the Fens but they are very exposed.

 

[Dogtrousers]

Highlights a trend certainly but I wouldn't make a decision based on that data!

Steve appears to be slipping below his target line which isn't good. Is the UK weather too variable for this?

In related news, Dave Barter's wonderful book on the record won't be updated: http://phased.co.uk/the-year-updated/

That means I can buy a hardcopy without it being superseded by a new edition! I can fully understand his reasoning.

By the way, all I'm trying to do is highlight trends and paint pictures with dots (call me Seurat). I'm not expecting anyone to make any decisions. I'm not planning on doing chi squared tests or any of that statistical cobblers of which I once long ago had at best a meagre understanding.

 

[tallliman]

@Dogtrousers, apologies if I'm replying as if answering a question at work.....I'm too often looking at these sorts of graphs so it comes too easily!

 

[Dogtrousers]

Steve put in a big week 22-28 May at 230 mpd, his biggest yet (Mon-Sun weeks, which excludes the first two days). Last week was lower at 214 mpd.

A quarter of the year has been done.

Steve's stats as at 04 Jun 17
Days: 93 (25.5% of year)
Dist: 33,205 km / 20,633 mi
Avg daily dist: 357.0 km / 221.9 mi
Avg daily elevation (Strava): 1,523 m / 4,998 ft
Moving speed (Strava): 25.8 km/h / 16.1 mi/h
Hours per day riding: 15.2
Projected total at current daily rate: 130,322 km / 80,978 mi

 

[Justinslow]

Not sure if this is in the right place or not so feel free to move.
Just bought Steve "McDonalds"(food of champions) he just pulled into my local one as I arrived, least I could do for him!
How he does it I don't know, he looked absolutely shattered and still had to ride home. Apparently he favours McDonalds and Wetherspoons (but not on a Saturday night!)

 

[Justinslow]

Has he given up on the technical wholefoods diet then?

No idea, it was a quick "pit stop",
He had a "chicken select 5 piece meal" with a tea and a black coffee, and a chance to whack on some ibuprofen gel and use the toilets.
I guess you do what you need to do and whatever's easiest on your given route.

 

[Saluki]

Can I just ask about Amanda's record. A couple of things that I don't understand.
Is it not a Guinness record as Kajsa wasn't allowed to draft and could only use one bike whereas Amanda can draft and uses a combination of a road bike and a recumbent - or at least that is what I read in a cycling magazine.

Not trying to pick a fight, I am just interested.

 

[ColinJ]

Didn't they (somewhat annoyingly!) change the rules when Kajsa was already well into her record attempt?

 

[Saluki]

Didn't they (somewhat annoyingly!) change the rules when Kajsa was already well into her record attempt?

I did not know that. That doesn't seem very fair at all.

 

[tallliman]

Didn't they (somewhat annoyingly!) change the rules when Kajsa was already well into her record attempt?

They did and then they changed them back after Kajsa challenged them on it.

 

[Sea of vapours]

What they effectively did was:
- choose to ratify Kurt Searvogel's record under UMCA rules, which allow drafting, recumbents, etc.;
- try to change their own rules part way through Kajsa's attempt as a result of having ratified Kurt's record, which Kajsa quite rightly pushed back on and they agreed to stick with them;
- ratified Kajsa's record under their own rules when she completed;
- then, pretty much unavoidably, ratified Amanda's record basd on UMCA rules when she surpassed Kurt's record;
- 'retired' Kajsa's record.

Pretty irritating basically. What they should have done was have less onerous rules in the first place, but given that, and given that they, not unreasonably, wanted to ratify the UMCA rules attempts then they should have not retired Kajsa's record; that bit of simplification seems to me to be uncalled for.

 

[Saluki]

What they effectively did was:
- choose to ratify Kurt Searvogel's record under UMCA rules, which allow drafting, recumbents, etc.;
- try to change their own rules part way through Kajsa's attempt as a result of having ratified Kurt's record, which Kajsa quite rightly pushed back on and they agreed to stick with them;
- ratified Kajsa's record under their own rules when she completed;
- then, pretty much unavoidably, ratified Amanda's record basd on UMCA rules when she surpassed Kurt's record;
- 'retired' Kajsa's record.

Pretty irritating basically. What they should have done was have less onerous rules in the first place, but given that, and given that they, not unreasonably, wanted to ratify the UMCA rules attempts then they should have not retired Kajsa's record; that bit of simplification seems to me to be uncalled for.

Thank you. That is much clearer for me.