Freezing Saddles 2018

[wheelswings]

What I like about FS is that each of us can participate in our own ways and in a capacity that meets our unique personal situations, lifestyle challenges, work shifts and geographic limitations. What brings us together is that we’re all riding our bikes through the winter. We are all “crazy.”

In terms of community building, there are so many different ways of interacting that I don’t see why we’d want to give extra weight to the least social of them – riding “together.” To have a conversation, however superficial and shallow, while riding “together” on the Custis or MVT, you need to be side by side. And frankly, that is something I try to minimize even with the best of friends, because often it is rude and hazardous to other trail users. Caravans can be fun, but interactions are far deeper and more meaningful when not playing hopscotch with joggers, cars, and other cyclists.

I think we all want to discourage the “dead wood” who sign up but don’t ride and never introduce themselves all season long. To that end, I applaud the ideas of Sunyata and others to cull the teams as needed. If people don’t show up at the opening happy hour and remain invisible online for the first week or two, it makes sense to give their slots to others.

[consularrider]

@wheels&wings 169022 wrote:

… What brings us together is that we’re all riding our bikes through the winter. We are all “crazy.” …

You win the pointless prize for best Forum comment ever!

[lordofthemark]

@wheels&wings 169022 wrote:

To have a conversation, however superficial and shallow, while riding “together” on the Custis or MVT, you need to be side by side. And frankly, that is something I try to minimize even with the best of friends, because often it is rude and hazardous to other trail users. Caravans can be fun, but interactions are far deeper and more meaningful when not playing hopscotch with joggers, cars, and other cyclists.

I am good with however FS is “scored”. But I want to defend group ride conversations There are lots of things, like deep dives into how to brew coffee, or even what to pay for a new bike, that can happen better in other venues, sure. But there are some things – like pointing out infrastructure things, or ways to ride efficiently and safely, or how beautiful a particular tree is, that are really best discussed out in the wild. Of course we should never ride in an unsafe manner on trails (and yes, I am truly sorry for the time I was so absorbed talking to BobCo that I drifted a bit over the yellow line on the CCT) but there other ways to talk – side by side in a road, at a stopping point, and even NOT by side by side (with tolerance for “wait, what did you say? I didn’t catch that”) .

[bentbike33]

@wheels&wings 169022 wrote:

In terms of community building, there are so many different ways of interacting that I don’t see why we’d want to give extra weight to the least social of them – riding “together.” To have a conversation, however superficial and shallow, while riding “together” on the Custis or MVT, you need to be side by side. And frankly, that is something I try to minimize even with the best of friends, because often it is rude and hazardous to other trail users. Caravans can be fun, but interactions are far deeper and more meaningful when not playing hopscotch with joggers, cars, and other cyclists.

Also, the proposed means of measuring riding together, Strava’s determination that you rode “with” someone, will give some crazy results that will not necessarily count the interaction described by W&W above, but may count something even less than that. For example, in the Great Pumpkin Ride, Stava said I rode with only riders I follow: the other members of Team TMNT (whom I did spend considerable time riding “with”) plus Tania, whom I passed a few times because I hung out at the pit stops longer than she did but whom I would not consider I rode “with” in any meaningful way. On my commutes, I don’t know how many times I’ve ridden “with” someone I may not even have seen on my ride because we kept about the same pace but remained however far apart Strava will still consider riding together. Based on a surprising lack of expected FlyBys, I think there may also be an element of ride posting timing that affects whether Stava decides you rode with someone.

Point being, it might be worth setting up a leader board including an element of “riding with” other participants just to see if the results make any kind of sense, and if they do consider adopting it for 2019.

[hozn]

@bentbike33 169026 wrote:

Also, the proposed means of measuring riding together, Strava’s determination that you rode “with” someone, will give some crazy results that will not necessarily count the interaction described by W&W above, but may count something even less than that. For example, in the Great Pumpkin Ride, Stava said I rode with only riders I follow: the other members of Team TMNT (whom I did spend considerable time riding “with”) plus Tania, whom I passed a few times because I hung out at the pit stops longer than she did but whom I would not consider I rode “with” in any meaningful way. On my commutes, I don’t know how many times I’ve ridden “with” someone I may not even have seen on my ride because we kept about the same pace but remained however far apart Strava will still consider riding together. Based on a surprising lack of expected FlyBys, I think there may also be an element of ride posting timing that affects whether Stava decides you rode with someone.

Point being, it might be worth setting up a leader board including an element of “riding with” other participants just to see if the results make any kind of sense, and if they do consider adopting it for 2019.

I acknowledge that it’s not perfect — especially on races or large group rides (where I think we also don’t really care that much) — but Strava’s algorithm generally produces expected results for me on normal rides or commutes. I ride with people two or 3 times a week and Strava has yet to get confused about that.

We may agree that sitting down at coffee to talk to someone is more social than riding bikes with them, but we can’t measure that, so it doesn’t make sense to score it. (I’d generally say that anything one does when they’re not pedaling a bicycle probably doesn’t make sense to incorporate into scoring for a cycling competition.)

Anyway, I think we need to summarize the proposed rule changes. (And I need to spell out the proposed algorithm for mileage -> points conversions.)

[Judd]

So I think the consensus here is that scoring should be based entirely on the number of Hains Points laps.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UnknownCyclist]

After twenty eight pages of looking downward, I can definitely say my navel remains an innie.

[ginacico]

I like to ride when it makes sense; weather conditions are not often the determining factor. I would never appear in the high mileage category, or add all that much to a team ranking. To turn the winter months into a cycling game the past two years taught me good stuff about how to endure the cold on a bike*, but it was primarily a self-challenge. I enjoy sincere interactions with people I’ve met in this community, just a quick catch-up or great conversations while huddling over coffee. I really don’t care if anyone grants me the badass label, and I respect and appreciate those of you for whom that’s a thing**.

This game as it’s evolving with emphasis on scoring social interactions, mandatory social media participation and selfies, consuming empty sugar-based calories, and prizes for a wide array of “whatever” seems adolescent, totally confusing, and ultimately abhorrent to me. There’s an undercurrent of real competition, but it’s lost in the two-faced advertising. Culling the losers in an otherwise ridiculous game where everyone can win something seems like an arbitrary, cruel, and unnecessary bait-and-switch. Sure “each of us can participate in our own ways,” but geez that’s a LOT of noise to tune out. There’s literally nothing about FS that motivates me to want to participate. Obviously at least 250 people disagree, so one of them can have my space.

*Key elements: good 4-season bike, quality clothing layers, a damned impressive Buffs and socks collection, a tiny audio system for those dark cold solo rides, and attainment of zen.
**Seriously, those of you itching to battle it out, why not just organize yourselves and make it happen?

[huskerdont]

judd;169029 wrote:

so i think the consensus here is that demerits should be based entirely on the number of hains points laps.

ftfy

[elizsnyder]

@UnknownCyclist 169032 wrote:

After twenty eight pages of looking downward, I can definitely say my navel remains an innie.

bahahahahaha….good one Needed that…working on my status report for work…tad mind numbing. reading these posts…pretty entertaining. Elizabeth I Like Wheels

[lordofthemark]

@Subby 169018 wrote:

Get rid of the individual leaderboard and just track teams. That seems to be most in the spirit of what FS has become (for the better, fwiw).

Just to note, I HAVE used the individual leaderboard (“I am no longer in the bottom third! I am now in the top half! If you double my points, its the same as some of the more frequent riders I hang out with!”)

Also I am sad that the reindeer games (which have been part of FS at least since 2015 when I first participated) offend people. Though we COULD stand to shorten the final happy hour presentations a bit

[ejwillis62]

I will ride with you if you go slow and if there is “Fireball” involved I will ride with anyone.
Liz

[Judd]

@huskerdont 169036 wrote:

ftfy

Bob Cannon sent me a PM that said doing laps alone in the dark was exactly what he had in mind when he created Freezing Saddles.

I am cool with Steve O’s forthcoming proposal that 10 Points be assigned for each Hains Point lap someone completes with me to encourage more social interaction.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Emm]

Throwing my 2 cents in–I like the idea of social points, and I agree that they should be capped so we don’t make it too much of an advantage to live in certain areas and have lots of free time. 10 per ride, and a max of social per week (20-50?) would help. That way those who don’t want to be social aren’t at a terrible disadvantage and can make up for it with extra miles, but it still encourages people to meet up with others and join a ride. The community building aspect is one of my favorite parts of freezing saddles, so I’m all for motivating people to go for a group ride

[Steve O]

My suggestion of using “rode together” was proposed because it’s something I believe can be tracked. There are lots of ways it’s not perfect, which many of you have pointed out. Everyone’s a critic! (and a sparse few have new ideas). I actually don’t think it’s the best way to include the “Spirit” of Freezing Saddles in the scoring; it just seemed feasible. If you have ways to improve on it, please continue to put those forward.

---

Since my stock in trade is ideas and I have a thick skin, here’s another:

What we are trying to capture, I believe is the “Spirit” of Freezing Saddles. Each of us has a slightly different take on what that means, but we can identify others who we think embody it. Maybe it’s hozn and jrenaut for the hard work they do behind the scenes, maybe it’s w&w’s clever limerick titles, maybe it’s Sunyata’s sock game or someone’s cool sock pic, maybe it’s Bob James’s cow pics, maybe it’s Judd’s awesome President’s Day Fun Ride, maybe it’s Eric Williams’s insane 600k up to NY and back, maybe it’s sclaeys beerneuring contest, maybe it’s that newbie you spotted on the trail because they had a hang tag…..
Each of us has a sense of it.
My idea is to let each of us decide that for ourselves and contribute points accordingly.

Acknowledging up front that I have no idea how this could be automated, here’s the outline:

Each day you ride, you get 10 points you can award to someone else (or spread among others) whom you feel embodies the Spirit of Freezing Saddles. They can’t be on your team, though; must be another team.

Use them however you like. If you like the idea of days and miles, then award your points to people with the most days and miles. If you like the idea of going to coffee clubs, then award them to people you see at coffee clubs. If you like beerneuring, then award them to people who are drinking beer. If you think the people offering pointless prizes deserve points, then give them points. If you just want to give them to your friend, give them to your friend. If you like that newbies are playing, then give your points to newbies. It’s up to you. Everyone can decide what they think most embodies Freezing Saddles, and their sense of it then gets reflected in the scoring.

If you ever read The Wisdom of Crowds by James Surowiecki, this has a bit of that built into it: no one person has much effect, but the “Crowd” is wiser than even the best experts, and ends up reflecting the optimal outcome.

[Author]

Posts