Freezing Saddles 2018

[TwoWheelsDC]

@Steve O 168898 wrote:

So if you ended up in 46th place instead of 36th place because some other people took rides with other FS participants, would you get your panties all in a knot?

See my post directly above yours…

[Bob James]

I don’t get the “DC people” not being able to ride as much as others. I’m out in Manassas. If I had a trail system I could just pop on and ride it would be easier than facing cars on busy roads every day, especially in winters cold and dark
months.

In theory I don’t have a problem with assigning some points based on participation as well as miles. But the problem becomes who defines which type of participation gets [more] points over other types and why. Seems very subjective, whereas miles ridden is not.

As a Team Captain last year it was very hard to organize rides at a time and place that was suitable for the team and we had a fairly active and participatory team (just hard to get together at same time). Some teams, by the luck of the draw, may be have more people living closer together or with similar schedules and lifestyles and could ride more. Should that team get the chance to earn more points than others more spread out geographically and with more varied available time?

Introducing participatory points opens a whole bunch of fairness issues. Which is why I think encouraging participation (physically and online), pointless prizes and events should be favored over elaborate and subjective participatory points.

[komorebi]

I’m agnostic on whether a social component should be added to the points system, but I have concerns about doing so using Strava’s “automatic grouping” feature.

First, as w&w pointed out, caravans are often the least “social” of the social activities we do.

Second, as LhasaCM pointed out, there’s the asymmetry problem for people on shorter and longer rides.

Third, on multiple commutes Strava has told me that I rode with a complete stranger, simply because the other rider and I happened to be going at about the same pace on the trail. People who ride on popular trails at peak commute times might inadvertently end up scoring social points, even if they weren’t being social in any meaningful sense.

Fourth and finally, the feature can be glitchy for other reasons that I haven’t figured out. For example, Judd and I did an out-and-back ride a few Saturdays ago. I uploaded it as one ride, whereas Judd uploaded the first half when we got to our destination, and uploaded the second half a day later. Both of Judd’s rides indicate that he rode with me, but my ride doesn’t indicate that I rode with him.

I recognize that some people might participate more if there were a social component in the scoring system. For myself, however, I doubt that it would change my degree of involvement. I’ve found that participating in the social aspects of Freezing Saddles has been its own reward. The fact that other people choose not to be social doesn’t diminish my enjoyment of the coffee clubs, happy hours, group rides, and other events one bit.

[elizsnyder]

@Bob James 168916 wrote:

I don’t get the “DC people” not being able to ride as much as others. I’m out in Manassas. If I had a trail system I could just pop on and ride it would be easier than facing cars on busy roads every day, especially in winters cold and dark
months.

In theory I don’t have a problem with assigning some points based on participation as well as miles. But the problem becomes who defines which type of participation gets [more] points over other types and why. Seems very subjective, whereas miles ridden is not.

As a Team Captain last year it was very hard to organize rides at a time and place that was suitable for the team and we had a fairly active and participatory team (just hard to get together at same time). Some teams, by the luck of the draw, may be have more people living closer together or with similar schedules and lifestyles and could ride more. Should that team get the chance to earn more points than others more spread out geographically and with more varied available time?

Introducing participatory points opens a whole bunch of fairness issues. Which is why I think encouraging participation (physically and online), pointless prizes and events should be favored over elaborate and subjective participatory points.

I have room in my house, Bob, come live in North Arlington

[Bob James]

@elizsnyder 168918 wrote:

I have room in my house, Bob, come live in North Arlington

Thanks for the offer, but Arlington has way too many big hills for my liking .

Which brings up another reason not to use subjective participation as part of scoring system. Even for miles ridden there
are often subjective elements in point based events that is often brought up to make the scoring system “more fair”. For example,
climbing elevation, wind, temperature (often big difference based on time of day), traffic volumes, accessible bike lanes, trails, country roads,
etc…. the list goes on.

[hozn]

I’m not sure I get the point.

Yes, there are many environmental factors that affect our bike rides. Freezing Saddles is a game that was conceived — at least loosely — to encourage folks to have fun riding in the winter. If using Strava’s system (which may not be perfect but certainly isn’t “subjective”) for identifying group rides is part of the scoring that seems quite in line with the “get out and have fun” spirit of the game.

If folks decided that part of having fun meant riding off-road and decided that off-road miles should count extra or miles ridden in snow should count extra, that also seems perfectly compatible with the premise here.

We have lots of data available to us; I don’t see any inherent reason to restrict ourselves to using a simple mileage metric for scoring.

[Judd]

@wheels&wings 168890 wrote:

I’m hoping we will keep the point system simple without a social component, and consider making riding-with-others a pointless prize option.

I have retained Cynthia as my spokesperson.

@TwoWheelsDC 168894 wrote:

I’m an anti-social reverse commuter (DC to the ‘burbs), so a socially-orientated points system would probably lead me to go ahead and withdraw.

I’d likely benefit in the standings if a social component were added since I was near the top of the Social Butterfly standings last year. Even with this I’d heavily consider withdrawing from the contest or joining the Slackers non-team for the same reason that Subby doesn’t play anymore. I don’t want my inability to resist trying to win at being social to cause me to burn out and resent being social.

@Steve O 168896 wrote:

It is, in fact, all the other things about FS above and beyond just pedaling that make it such a rich experience for so many. Somehow including the most important aspect of the game in the scoring seems like a no-brainer.

Somehow all of the social stuff seems to still happen and be the primary positive takeaway for participants without it being included in the point system.

[Sunyata]

@Judd 168927 wrote:

Somehow all of the social stuff seems to still happen and be the primary positive takeaway for participants without it being included in the point system.

I agree. Which is exactly why I created the Social Butterfly (and Infiltrator) pointless prize last year. It was a fun way to get people more involved in the social events without making it overwhelmingly competitive.

But… as always, if the group decides to add “rode with” bonus points into the scoring system, I will not object (although I do feel that 50 points per different person is a bit too much, maybe 10 bonus points?).

[jrenaut]

I’d really like to get into the “rode with” data, and maybe put up some fun leaderboards, but I don’t like the idea of merging it with the scoring.

[hozn]

@Sunyata 168930 wrote:

I agree. Which is exactly why I created the Social Butterfly (and Infiltrator) pointless prize last year. It was a fun way to get people more involved in the social events without making it overwhelmingly competitive.

But… as always, if the group decides to add “rode with” bonus points into the scoring system, I will not object (although I do feel that 50 points per different person is a bit too much, maybe 10 bonus points?).

Yeah, I think 50 is too high. Especially given the questionable nature of some of the correlations. 10 sounds like a good suggestion!

However, at the end of the day, I feel that the scoring system would be improved if it were to incorporate some of the things that the contest leaders want to encourage.

Perhaps the question to ask would be: Would you feel that it would be appropriate for FS to have a winning team that rode most consistently and with others but perhaps fewer miles than another team? To me that seems perfectly in line with what I perceive the spirit of the competition to be.

Sure, you can always make pointless prizes that incorporate these other leaderboards/metrics; however, you can also make pointless prizes that are simple distance-based metrics. I guess I’m not sure why the simple distance-based metrics should be assumed to be the default best way to score the competition.

I also don’t think it would be that terrible to change up the scoring system every year a bit to see what works best (or just to keep it interesting).

[Steve O]

There’s a weird sport called the biathlon. The objectives are to cross-country ski and shoot a rifle at targets. There are two objectives to the sport, and both are scored.

How odd it would be if at the end of the race the only thing that was scored was how fast you skied?

There is a pretty strong consensus that the two main objectives to Freezing Saddles are:

• to encourage riding in winter conditions
• to encourage growth, activities, friendships, connections and enjoyment in our biking community

How odd it would be if at the end of the game the only thing that was scored was how many days and miles you rode?

[lordofthemark]

@Steve O 168951 wrote:

There’s a weird sport called the biathlon. The objectives are to cross-country ski and shoot a rifle at targets. There are two objectives to the sport, and both are scored.

How odd it would be if at the end of the race the only thing that was scored was how fast you skied?

There is a pretty strong consensus that the two main objectives to Freezing Saddles are:

• to encourage riding in winter conditions
• to encourage growth, activities, friendships, connections and enjoyment in our biking community

How odd it would be if at the end of the game the only thing that was scored was how many days and miles you rode?

As cool as watching biathlon is, I really don’t want to carry a rifle when I ride, thankyou very much.

[Judd]

@Steve O 168951 wrote:

There’s a weird sport called the biathlon. The objectives are to cross-country ski and shoot a rifle at targets. There are two objectives to the sport, and both are scored.

How odd it would be if at the end of the race the only thing that was scored was how fast you skied?

There is a pretty strong consensus that the two main objectives to Freezing Saddles are:

• to encourage riding in winter conditions
• to encourage growth, activities, friendships, connections and enjoyment in our biking community

How odd it would be if at the end of the game the only thing that was scored was how many days and miles you rode?

I think this will all be covered by my Guns and Gears Pointless Prize.

[todd@d2t2.org]

Just joined forum and am looking forward to participating in Freezing Saddles based on suggestion from Susan Stillman this morning. It is supposed to be snowy winter so should make riding most days of the week an interesting/fun challenge. During winter, besides commuting, I spend way too much time on my trainer with Zwift. Freezing Saddles should force me out into the weather more often instead. Thanks!

[LhasaCM]

@lordofthemark 168957 wrote:

As cool as watching biathlon is, I really don’t want to carry a rifle when I ride, thankyou very much.

It’s a different way of enforcing “no cars in the bike lane” laws, maybe even more effective than the “almost nothing” that’s done now. Easier to do for you Virginians, though – so clearly not fair.

[Author]

Posts