The Annual Lunacy (aka "I Don't Do Winter") Challenge Chatzone

[Sea of vapours]

it's spot height is 318m according to my OS map, which is about the height I started at

Soooo.... you lost 1,025 ft (net), which is 312m. So you finished 6m above sea level. That covers a lot of England. This could be a good new game though

 

[FrothNinja]

The thing is - it doesn't matter how much you go up and down during the ride because everything cancels out except for the difference between the start and finish points! (It obviously does matter in terms of the effort required, but not for the difference in overall ascent and descent.)


Ah, you are talking about the Jinny Lane Clarion House at Newchurch-in-Pendle. I was looking at the one at the crossroads on Shelfield Lane between Trawden and Nelson.

I took my figures from Strava (coz I have been told on a number of occasions that it is more accurate) which now only lets me see past activities to 22 May 2022. Komoot and Garmin Connect, however, are more forthcoming and give up 1,100 ft, down 2,050 ft & 311.0m Total Ascent, 612.0m Total Descent respectively - far more in accordance with your calcs. Black mark to Strava

 

[FrothNinja]

Soooo.... you lost 1,025 ft (net), which is 312m. So you finished 6m above sea level. That covers a lot of England. This could be a good new game though

I usually do circular routes but it could be fun to have a greatest difference thread - mind you it would have to be judged by regions or summat - I suspect it would be a lot easier for me to do well compared to someone in Norfolk

 

[ColinJ]

I usually do circular routes but it could be fun to have a greatest difference thread - mind you it would have to be judged by regions or summat - I suspect it would be a lot easier for me to to well compared to someone in Norfolk

I mentioned GPS devices playing silly buggers... I have had my ancient Edge 500 tell me that my house has dropped 60+ metres during a 2 hour ride!

 

[Alex321]

I usually do circular routes but it could be fun to have a greatest difference thread - mind you it would have to be judged by regions or summat - I suspect it would be a lot easier for me to do well compared to someone in Norfolk

I usually do circular routes too, but both my Wahoo Roam and Strava more often than not tell me there is a difference between metres climbed and metres descended. I think the worst I've seen was one time when it had me 70 feet different.

 

[Sea of vapours]

I usually do circular routes too, but both my Wahoo Roam and Strava more often than not tell me there is a difference between metres climbed and metres descended. I think the worst I've seen was one time when it had me 70 feet different.

70', so 20m.: That's pretty good, surely? What's that; 2% or thereabouts error over a hundred kilometres, assuming 1,000m ascent? Given how gps works and the inherent reduction in accuracy in the vertical plane, that's quite impressive and certainly acceptable, isn't it?

I've just checked a few rides and my Wahoo Roam has a similar maximum difference (a few tens of metres over a hundred kilometres), but in fact it's mostly within 20m. That said, the device I actually use for recording is a Suunto watch with a barometric altimeter and I rarely see differences beyond single digits on that. For example: 3,300m last Wednesday with a difference of 7m in ascent and descent. Essentially, barometers are better than gps for altitude :-)

 

[lazybloke]

I mentioned GPS devices playing silly buggers... I have had my ancient Edge 500 tell me that my house has dropped 60+ metres during a 2 hour ride!

I once monitored the height above sea level of my lounge over a 6 month period. During lockdown it probably travelled further than I did.

 

[lazybloke]

Ride #7 today, 43 miles. Short description in "Your Ride today" https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/your-ride-today.173254/post-6752729

The legs feel quite strong after RideLondon, although only on the flat, so I opted for a route with only 1,400 feet of climbing; very easy and fast, until I tried a bit of 26mph TT. Okay, maybe not as strong as I thought.

 

[Alex321]

70', so 20m.: That's pretty good, surely? What's that; 2% or thereabouts error over a hundred kilometres, assuming 1,000m ascent? Given how gps works and the inherent reduction in accuracy in the vertical plane, that's quite impressive and certainly acceptable, isn't it?

It was actually a 50Km ride with about 700m of climbing, but yes I suppose it still isn't bad.

I've just checked a few rides and my Wahoo Roam has a similar maximum difference (a few tens of metres over a hundred kilometres), but in fact it's mostly within 20m. That said, the device I actually use for recording is a Suunto watch with a barometric altimeter and I rarely see differences beyond single digits on that. For example: 3,300m last Wednesday with a difference of 7m in ascent and descent. Essentially, barometers are better than gps for altitude :-)

The Roam uses barometric pressure. It is usually within a few metres, that 20m one was a bit of an anomaly. Maybe the atmospheric pressure was changing rapidly at the time.

 

[Sea of vapours]

The Roam uses barometric pressure. It is usually within a few metres, that 20m one was a bit of an anomaly. Maybe the atmospheric pressure was changing rapidly at the time.

I'd forgotten, or didn't know, that the Roam had a barometric altimeter. No wonder mine is really not bad at all. It's not as good as the Suunto watch, but it's well within 'good enough'.

 

[FrothNinja]

Given that there are 'weight weenies', are there also (the politest of the alliterations I thought of) 'ascent anoraks'?
I think I might be turning into one - I've noticed that only about 50% of my qualifying rides have over a 1000 metres of ascent. Today's ride only just squeaked in, partly because I deliberately chose a steeper route.

 

[Sea of vapours]

Whatever the name applied: most certainly there are ! Personally, I am at least mildly displeased with rides which don't exceed 1,500m ascent per 100km.

And congratulations to @FrothNinja for being the first to complete the Lunacy Challenge in 2022

 

[FrothNinja]

Whatever the name applied: most certainly there are ! Personally, I am at least mildly displeased with rides which don't exceed 1,500m ascent per 100km.

And congratulations to @FrothNinja for being the first to complete the Lunacy Challenge in 2022

Wonder if a height based lunacy challenge would take off?

 

[Sea of vapours]

Wonder if a height based lunacy challenge would take off?

Not in what you might call a wildly popular sort of way, no. Once was very much worth doing though.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/the-2021-annual-lunacy-climbing-challenge.270444/

 

[Alex321]

Given that there are 'weight weenies', are there also (the politest of the alliterations I thought of) 'ascent anoraks'?
I think I might be turning into one - I've noticed that only about 50% of my qualifying rides have over a 1000 metres of ascent. Today's ride only just squeaked in, partly because I deliberately chose a steeper route.

I've never had a ride with 1000m of ascent, and yet I seem to do more climbing than the average, based on last years end-of-year figures. Mind you, I've also never had a ride over 43 miles in length yet.

Closest I've been was 3,035 feet (925m), in 32.99 miles.