Don't ride in groups or we will be stopped cycling completely.

[Kevfm]

Who's good at laws of probability?

Is there any difference in risk to either the rider or the public if a single rider does 5x 10 miles rides over 5 days than a single rider doing 1x 50 mile ride within the same 5 day period.

No. But if everyone individually tries to work out how they can push the boundaries of the government advice to suit themselves the overall effect of social distancing will be less. These are extraordinary times; we all need to stop doing most of the things we normally do and IMO than includes exercising outside for 2+ hours at a time. I normally ride a motorcycle for leisure regularly, on my own and wearing quite an effective cough and sneeze proof mask over my head. I'm not doing this at the moment even though the risk of catching or spreading COVID-19 is low. And I'm not going shopping on the bike or anything similar to get around the guidance.

Just follow the guidance and don't take the pi55.

 

[nickyboy]

People may be riding less far than normal (which is itself a bad thing for public health) but that doesn't contradict my belief that a lot are riding further than they would be without the Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt over a tighter limit.

Also, as you know, Strava is skewed.


As above, I'm not sure reining in is a good thing, but I agree that stuff like arranging online riding and supporting people riding alone and skipping the coffee stop are great things which should be praised more.

Hang on...

Previously you said you felt that people were being encouraged to ride further

Now you're saying it's a "belief" not backed up by any evidence at all other than how you're riding

I'm saying I have hard data (small sample, yes etc etc) that shows people are doing the opposite of what you "believe"

Just give me the data to back up your belief. Otherwise it's just another unsubstantiated opinion and should be treated as such

 

[Mr Celine]

Who's good at laws of probability?

Is there any difference in risk to either the rider or the public if a single rider does 5x 10 miles rides over 5 days than a single rider doing 1x 50 mile ride within the same 5 day period.

That depends how many people in the open air that you pass (pedestrians, joggers, dog walkers, cyclists etc) in the two scenarios. If your 50 mile ride was five loops of your 10 mile ride then there's likely to be no difference in risk at all.
But if your 50 mile ride took you out into unpopulated countryside and you pass fewer people than you would in five 10 mile rides then the risk is lower.

 

[mjr]

Previously you said you felt that people were being encouraged to ride further

Now you're saying it's a "belief" not backed up by any evidence at all other than how you're riding

Beliefs can be informed by evidence. See Bayesian statistics for an introduction: "probability expresses a degree of belief in an event."

I'm saying I have hard data (small sample, yes etc etc) that shows people are doing the opposite of what you "believe"

Really? Earlier you posted that you had very soft data (not only small and not a sample but unrepresentative and probably incomplete because of private/hidden/untracked rides by the riders involved) that showed something entirely different (that they were publicly admitting to riding less far than pre-lockdown) and not inconsistent with my belief (that they are riding further than they would if there was no perceived threat of tighter lockdown), so what have you found now?

Just give me the data to back up your belief.

Sorry, I'm not giving you access to my cycling social network accounts. Would you give me access to all of yours?

Otherwise it's just another unsubstantiated opinion and should be treated as such

Of course. Just like all the others that you seem to believe.

 

[Vantage]

To quote @Yellow Saddle

Ride a bike, drink a beer.

 

[nickyboy]

Beliefs can be informed by evidence. See Bayesian statistics for an introduction: "probability expresses a degree of belief in an event."


Really? Earlier you posted that you had very soft data (not only small and not a sample but unrepresentative and probably incomplete because of private/hidden/untracked rides by the riders involved) that showed something entirely different (that they were publicly admitting to riding less far than pre-lockdown) and not inconsistent with my belief (that they are riding further than they would if there was no perceived threat of tighter lockdown), so what have you found now?


Sorry, I'm not giving you access to my cycling social network accounts. Would you give me access to all of yours?


Of course. Just like all the others that you seem to believe.

I'll ask the question again as you are avoiding it

Do you have any data to back up your assertion that people are riding further?

I'm not interested in seeing the data. I just want to know if you have data that backs up your "belief".

 

[mjr]

I'll ask the question again as you are avoiding it

Do you have any data to back up your assertion that people are riding further?

I'm not interested in seeing the data. I just want to know if you have data that backs up your "belief".

Yes but it's far from robust. Now a question for you: do you see that your data is about a different claim entirely?

 

[nickyboy]

Yes but it's far from robust. Now a question for you: do you see that your data is about a different claim entirely?

Average ride length of sample with no threat of lockdown = X

Average ride length of sample with same riders with threat of lockdown < X

Threat of lockdown reduces ride length

 

[PaulSB]

People may be riding less far than normal (which is itself a bad thing for public health) but that doesn't contradict my belief that a lot are riding further than they would be without the Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt over a tighter limit.

Also, as you know, Strava is skewed.


As above, I'm not sure reining in is a good thing, but I agree that stuff like arranging online riding and supporting people riding alone and skipping the coffee stop are great things which should be praised more.

Personally I don't know anyone who is expressing fear, doubt or uncertainty over cycling. This would be over a club membership of 170+ so I feel is a reasonable sample. I do know one person who has lost his motivation but is at least now back on the turbo. This is where banning cycling in pairs or more doesn't work. This guy is a good friend and I know a bit of encouragement would soon have him out for a ride as a pair.

I do have two very close friends who are extremely stressed and anxious by the whole situation but this is not cycling related. I'd love to see them and give out hugs!!

I agree people reducing riding could be harmful but the people I'm thinking of are extremely fit and unlikely to come to harm by reining things in. I do feel it's important to show social responsibility at this time. Riders reducing their miles is a contribution because they're not flaunting the freedom to cycle at everyone whose lives are badly restricted.

I agree Strava can give a skewed image by people going private. I can only counter this by saying everyone I expect to see posting rides is doing so.

 

[mjr]

Average ride length of sample with no threat of lockdown = X

Average ride length of sample with same riders with threat of lockdown < X

Threat of lockdown reduces ride length

So is that a yes, you see that's different to my suggestion:

Average ride length under lockdown with no threat of tighter lockdown = L

Average ride length of same rides with threat of tighter lockdown > L

Threat of lockdown increases ride length.

 

[mjr]

Personally I don't know anyone who is expressing fear, doubt or uncertainty over cycling.

That's rather beside the point of there being FUD over a tighter lockdown. For an example of that, just look at this thread's title!

 

[Rusty Nails]

To quote @Yellow Saddle

Ride a bike, drink a beer.

Much more fun, and healthy, than finding things to criticise all the time.

 

[matticus]

Average LOGGED ride length of sample with no threat of lockdown = X

Average LOGGED ride length of sample with same riders with threat of lockdown < X

Threat of lockdown reduces LOGGED ride length

<my bold>
There is enormous social pressure to reduce riding (and ride length). The most likely rides to not be logged will be the longest.

Now as I said above, I think most riders are reducing their rides, but your data collection method is doomed to underestimate* the minority who may be doing the opposite (for whatever reason).
*both the number of riders, and the length of their rides.

 

[carlosfandangus]

I have seen far more cyclists out that have "dusted down" the mountain bike at the back of the garage and are using this as a form of exercise

 

[fossyant]

I know of a couple of folk pushing the limit of what's really acceptable for bike rides. Out every day for 4 hours. Erm no. Maybe two hours is it. Mine are currently about 90 minutes as I've a few circuits I do - all low risks of stacking it (off road).

One of my mates is riding all over Ghent at the minute, and occasionally with a friend - putting in some serious miles. That said, he's not working as they have been furlonged, so what are you going to do mental health wise - he's in a flat, on his own. It's a bit different for me, family of 4, 5 cats, still working (from home) - I'm busy still.. He does suffer from depression, so it's probably what's keeping him sane at the minute.

You possibly have to look at personal circumstances as well ! I'm doing more rides as I'm not sat in a car for 2 hours a day. I'm also avoiding busy times as much as possible. I've got quite a few colleagues that have openly said 'oh I've been lazy' - you can't keep being lazy though.