[GB]

@rcannon100 67817 wrote:

* This was really a community event of the forum. What made it fun was the banter in the cold of winter as we slogged our way through that 3 feet of snow last year. Recommendation: focus FS on the forum. Dont market it outside the forum. Assume participants are member participants.
….
* Late sign ups did not really work. The end result was the creation of an 11th team that never really got off the ground. We can just assign late sign ups to an N+1 team if we want – but I have no expectation that that team will be able to compete.

As a freezing saddles participant last year who wasn’t on the forum at the time, sorry for being hard to get a hold of. That said, it was my introduction to the forum. So do you really want to discourage that?

I was also a late sign-up (I know, I really messed things up last year), and from my perspective it worked just fine. So my team wasn’t competitive, I did my commute in the cold and was actually ranked fairly high in the middle of January (before audit busy season got into full swing).

Recommendation for this year – As a daily commuter with a 10 mile commute I thought that 10 pts just for riding on a day was too high relative to the 1 pt per mile. I suggest bringing it down to 1-5 pts just for turning on your Strava app.

[GB]

@hozn 67754 wrote:

I also really don’t like that Strava changes elevation numbers (from the Garmin). Makes sense for phones, but for devices that have altimeters/barometers it would be nice if you could assume that the number on the device will match what Strava sees when you upload it. And they keep redoing their algorithm meaning that my elevation for my commute (same route) ranges between 280 feet and 800 feet depending on Strava’s mood (!)

I think it’s fair for Strava to adjust the elevation (even if it’s less accurate) because you’re comparing yourself to other Strava users.

It is annoying that it changes the elevation for the same route – I just checked my rides for the past 2 weeks and there is a +/- 50ft swing, which isn’t terrible, but isn’t great.

[GB]

It was nice meeting you too culimerc.

Maybe next week you’ll join us for the Arlington loop or hills before coffee, and I’ll join you at FMCC I?

[GB]

@PotomacCyclist 67430 wrote:

The problems with the idea? There are a few that I can think of. It would rely on a power source, perhaps solar/battery or electric grid. If the power gets cut off, then the locks might be off-line too. The electronic component would make the locks more expensive than typical locks. The locks would also make bike parking more expensive to build and maintain than standard bike parking. The property owner or the local government would bear those greater costs. This could be a deterrent for widespread adoption.

But if those issues could be solved, it would be nice to have these heavy-duty in-place locking devices. Just as long as people remembered their temporary codes.

You can have a purely mechanical variable combination lock, so that takes care of all electricity related problems. https://kryptonite.zendesk.com/entries/21298956-Resetting-Your-Resettable-Combination-Lock

Cyclist could/should pay for the use of locks, maybe $0.25 per use, just like other lockers.

My guess is that bicycle theft isn’t a big enough problem to warrant this type of investment.

[GB]

@DismalScientist 67204 wrote:

There’s always the Peltzman effect, which hypothesizes that people take more risks when using safety devices.

I did think of that, but there is the off setting (not necessarily equal) effect which is that risk adverse people tend to be consistently risk adverse. Risk adverse people where helmets and ride safely. (I’m sure there’s an econ term for that.)

The great thing with the helmet problem (the problem is that people don’t always wear helmets) is that over time it should be self-correcting; in that only people who wear helmets will be left. Or put another less extreme way, it is self-correcting to the extent that it is a problem.

I say all that as an avid helmet wearer; it has saved my head from a bad bump or worse at least once. I still think that helmet use is highly correlated with bike safety, as it basically the only piece of safety equipment worn. However one would need a very large sample to see that because it only helps in accidents that involve the head, and it doesn’t help (enough) in all of those.

[GB]

@PotomacCyclist 67144 wrote:

(Yes, I know that’s a separate and controversial topic, whether helmets lower the rate or severity of injury.)

That’s controversial? I suppose there’s always someone who will disagree for fun. If there’s any evidence supporting the dangers of helmets please pass it along.

I think that the unreported cycling accidents have to be ignored in the same way that unreported car and running/walking accidents are ignored, unless there’s some reason to think that there are proportionally significantly more unreported accidents in one of these categories ignoring them all should still yield meaningful results.

Without having read the article I imagine that overall cycling safety (and cycling safety in any category of riding, from downhill mountain biking in the dark to slow city riding in the day) is highly correlated with helmet and light use.

I agree with the people that say safety measurements should be based on miles ridden rather than bike sales.

[GB]

Dirt – Is that a flask on the back of the orange bike? If so – excellent.

[GB]

@Tim Kelley 66543 wrote:

What kind of bike do you have and where do you like to ride it?

I have a Nashbar roadbike w/ 105. It’s my FAB (first adult bike) and I’m pretty happy with it.
A nashbar http://www.nashbar.com/bikes/Product_10053_10052_544341_-1___202613

I mostly ride to work. Always from Arlington and to either Tysons, Bethesda or Tenelytown (the next few weeks I’ll be working in Tenelytown). I’ve done a couple of the Tuesday Fresh rides and the BikeMS century twice.

Dickie – I thought we were going at your pace because I’m pretty sure I picked up some Strava trophies of my own; either way it was a nice ride.

[GB]

Can you post a map of the planned route? At the moment I don’t understand how it will be much different from the Capital Crescent Trail. But the CCT is a great trail, so having a second similar trail couldn’t hurt. Thanks.

[Author]

Posts