All the segments on my commute are marked as hazardous

[TwoWheelsDC]

@mstone 61427 wrote:

myspace

Endomondo = MySpace

[hozn]

@PeteD 61365 wrote:

http://www.strava.com/segments/4546867
– Hazardous, since I guess you could crash or be hit by a car on a street, especially when climbing the hill on a 2 lane highway with a couple of right hand bends.

http://www.strava.com/segments/1129134
– Not Hazardous, since you’re actually on a road, and not a trail, just like the one above, and those right handers provide a big sight line.

http://www.strava.com/segments/1596546
– Also not Hazardous, as it’s a shorter route, that doesn’t include the very hazardous bit of bridge that crosses over I-66, as you might be distracted and crash looking at all the lemmings sitting in their shiny metal boxes.

I can understand the marking of segments in well traveled parts of the W&OD as hazardous; there’s no reason for providing ELITE Stravathletes a reason to ride fast, but marking routes as hazardous that are uphill climbs on a paved road… That’s silly.

I like Strava segments, but I disagree here; I think all of those segments are probably right to have been flagged. It looks, anyway, like all of those segments start right at the W&OD/VirginiaLn stop sign. I.e. the only way you are going to get on the leaderboard for any of those segments is by blowing through that stop sign at 25 mph (at least).

I’m not sure how one creates a safe segment on that hill right there. The Buckelew hill segment seems like it’s probably decent (other than having to cut across potential oncoming traffic up Shreve).

It comes down to the difficulty of having sprint challenges on or around multi-use paths. I think Strava is doing the right thing by making these easy to flag and siding by default with the flaggers. Luckily there are lots of great segments around that aren’t on multi-use paths.

[mstone]

All I’m saying is that the number of web sites that are cultural and innovation leaders for a decade can probably be counted on one hand. It’s not impossible that strava might be one, but it’s far more likely that strava is just another fad. IMO the odds of burning out increase when people talk about its future being “more social” (the 2010s equivalent of the late 90s “add a .com for profit!”) The only way they could out-social all the other sites that want to be the next big thing in social (including a lot with proven competence at social) is if they manage to keep their users’ data locked up. My optimistic side hopes that as the exercise/tracking segment gets more attention and more players jump in, an open exchange protocol will evolve.

[Tim Kelley]

@mstone 61420 wrote:

smart money says strava will be gone and forgotten in 10 years.

Smart money has Strava doing something with all the data they are generating, like continuing to nurture the transportation aspects of their user base and helping local jurisdictions with infrastructure planning.

Also, crowdsourced voting on hazardous segments seems like it would be the way to go.

[NicDiesel]

@Tim Kelley 61464 wrote:

Smart money has Strava doing something with all the data they are generating, like continuing to nurture the transportation aspects of their user base and helping local jurisdictions with infrastructure planning.

I don’t know about that. Strava is a rent seeker with an affluent user base that hasn’t went the way of Fecesbook/Myspace/Twatter/fillintheblank as a means of rent collection. As long as they keep their price low (which it is even by notoriously cheapass standards) they’ll continue to grow. They’ve already started down the easiest revenue stream possible -clothing and accessories.

[dasgeh]

@Tim Kelley 61464 wrote:

Smart money has Strava doing something with all the data they are generating, like continuing to nurture the transportation aspects of their user base and helping local jurisdictions with infrastructure planning.

Also, crowdsourced voting on hazardous segments seems like it would be the way to go.

I would love this to be true, but I don’t see Strava doing a lot to nurture the transportation aspects of their user base.

[Tim Kelley]

@dasgeh 61528 wrote:

I would love this to be true, but I don’t see Strava doing a lot to nurture the transportation aspects of their user base.

I’ve been doing some behind the scenes emailing with their staff–they’re just starting out, so they haven’t dedicated many resources to it yet, but hopefully they realize the full potential of the data they have.

[dasgeh]

@Tim Kelley 61531 wrote:

I’ve been doing some behind the scenes emailing with their staff–they’re just starting out, so they haven’t dedicated many resources to it yet, but hopefully they realize the full potential of the data they have.

Here’s hoping. FWIW, they need to show elevation data to make planning for transport possible.

[Vicegrip]

@dasgeh 61537 wrote:

Here’s hoping. FWIW, they need to show elevation data to make planning for transport possible.

I was tinkering around with the new plan a ride function on
Strava and I think it does show elevation. I think you can also toggle it to pick the flattest route

[MRH5028]

Just got back from a ride on the W&OD, from Cedar to Custis and back. Basically all of the segments along that route have been marked as hazardous, even the ones that have no street crossing or start/end at a street. Kinda odd…

[mstone]

@hozn 61436 wrote:

I like Strava segments, but I disagree here; I think all of those segments are probably right to have been flagged. It looks, anyway, like all of those segments start right at the W&OD/VirginiaLn stop sign. I.e. the only way you are going to get on the leaderboard for any of those segments is by blowing through that stop sign at 25 mph (at least).

Ah, so the confusion is caused by the illegal stop sign? So hopefully once NVRPA gets around to removing the illegal stop signs the stravontroversy will simply resolve itself.

[NicDiesel]

@mstone 61596 wrote:

Ah, so the confusion is caused by the illegal stop sign? So hopefully once NVRPA gets around to removing the illegal stop signs the stravontroversy will simply resolve itself.

One can only hope.

[PeteD]

@hozn 61436 wrote:

I think all of those segments are probably right to have been flagged. It looks, anyway, like all of those segments start right at the W&OD/VirginiaLn stop sign. I.e. the only way you are going to get on the leaderboard for any of those segments is by blowing through that stop sign at 25 mph (at least).

It comes down to the difficulty of having sprint challenges on or around multi-use paths.

I agree, that with consumer grade GPS and a capped GPS system, having a segment next to a multi-use path is difficult. But you’re wrong on the leaderboard part. One needs not even ride on the W&OD to achieve a >20mph speed (well, 19.9mph): It’s quite easy to complete a legal turn from Shreve onto Virginia which involves no stop signs. (For example: http://www.strava.com/activities/60933387 did not touch the W&OD until after I crossed I-66).

Same with Bucklew to Tower. If you come down the hill from Shreve, turn left onto Bucklew, and sprint for all your might, making a right turn (with no stop sign) onto Tower, you have now completed two legal turns that involved 0 ft traveled on the W&OD, though you probably broke the speed limit before you bunny-hopped over the speed bump and the bottom of the hill.

Though I do ride the majority of my miles on the W&OD/Custis/MVT, I’m not *always* on a mutli-use trail. And a Bike’s normal place is on a road.

–Pete

[hozn]

@PeteD 61606 wrote:

I agree, that with consumer grade GPS and a capped GPS system, having a segment next to a multi-use path is difficult. But you’re wrong on the leaderboard part. One needs not even ride on the W&OD to achieve a >20mph speed (well, 19.9mph): It’s quite easy to complete a legal turn from Shreve onto Virginia which involves no stop signs. (For example: http://www.strava.com/activities/60933387 did not touch the W&OD until after I crossed I-66).

You are right the road is an option there, but the vast majority of people ride on the trail. The segment should be redefined to include Shreve (though it may match crappy GPS devices anyway). I haven’t looked at how the top 10 got there, since I don’t expect to get in the top 10 myself on that segment. Perhaps they rode down Shreve.

Luckily there are tons of road segments that don’t run parallel to or intersect trails, etc. I think that flagging this one was probably a little silly, but that is one of the least safe intersections between Arlington and Reston, so putting a sprint segment there is also kinda silly.

[mstone]

@hozn 61608 wrote:

but that is one of the least safe intersections between Arlington and Reston, so putting a sprint segment there is also kinda silly.

Not even close. Much of the time when I go through there, there is no traffic, and the sight lines are fine to prepare well in advance. There is also a stop sign and a turn slowing down the motorists. The next intersection down is far worse, with higher speeds and a bad sight line over the hill. And even that pales in comparison with many of the crossings in Loudoun. (Only one lane each way, and people tend to actually stop at the crosswalk!)

[Author]

Posts