Weird

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle computer
into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed worked out
at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a week and I'd
have had a full house of thirteens :-)
It's been a great day for riding. I rode out to Wetherby, onto the old
A1, now the A168 and headed for Easingwold via Whixly, Great Ouseburn,
Aldwark Bridge and Alne before heading back to Meanwood via Knaresborough
and Harrogate. The roads were incredibly quiet. As observed in Norfolk,
there's a lot of ripe niffs in the air though none belonged to fermenting
road kill. Spotted a dead stoat on the Leeds side of Harrogate. There was
a plethora of pheasants and rabbits too.

Nice going :-)
I am still nursing a burst disc, so am watching the roadies with envious
eyes ;-) Still, I managed a "bench mark" 5 mile walk today to Waitrose and
didn't have to stop once to bend down. Two weeks ago I couldn't get to the
end of the street. Maybe I'll make that TT on Tuesday evening after all.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle computer
into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed worked out
at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a week and I'd
have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Alan

"Alan Holmes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle computer
into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed worked out
at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a week and
I'd have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Alan

You're clearly ignorant of the units of mesurement used by AudaxUK and its
dissonance with the imperial units favoured by those old enough to have been
educatated exclusively in imperial units.

I also think that you are a miserable git.

Alan Holmes said:

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Because the ride was listed as "100km" ?

"Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Nice going :-)

Thanks!

Quoted message said:

I am still nursing a burst disc, so am watching the roadies with envious
eyes ;-) Still, I managed a "bench mark" 5 mile walk today to Waitrose and
didn't have to stop once to bend down. Two weeks ago I couldn't get to the
end of the street. Maybe I'll make that TT on Tuesday evening after all.

How long do you anticiapate being off a bike? I can't imagine the pain of
ruptured discs though I've witnessed a few colleagues 'lock up' with their
back problems and it's looks like more pain than I can bear without the
benefit of copious amounts of whisky ;-)

I'm far from roadie fitness. I've too much lard to lose before having any
aspirations of maintaining evens for more than 10 miles on the flat never
mind a sub-hour 25. I'm happy to get the miles in whatever the weather and
benefit from the exercise. I'll be in your neck of the woods on 22nd April
doing the Three Bridges Audax. I've been meaning to cross the Humber Bridge
on a bike for ages. The other two bridges on the ride are Boothferry and
Stamford. Should be a nice imperial century ride - my first of the year.
I'll probably ride the 200km Hessle Audax on 20th May making that my first
200km of the season.

-=V=-

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Alan Holmes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle
computer into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed
worked out at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a
week and I'd have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Alan

You're clearly ignorant of the units of measurement used by Audax UK and
its dissonance with the imperial units favoured by those old enough to
have been educated exclusively in imperial units.

I also think that you are a miserable git.

He's wrong as well as miserable.
100 km = 62.137119224 miles.
He's probably jealous Vernon ;-)

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

Alan Holmes said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle computer
into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed worked out
at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a week and I'd
have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

because that would be 583 m of the mark?

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

"Richard Bates" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes said:

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Because the ride was listed as "100km" ?

Yes and if it was about "sounding good" he'd have said his average was
21.1306 km/h.
Although the "13 gag" wouldn't have worked :-)

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Nice going :-)

Thanks!

Quoted message said:

I am still nursing a burst disc, so am watching the roadies with envious
eyes ;-) Still, I managed a "bench mark" 5 mile walk today to Waitrose
and didn't have to stop once to bend down. Two weeks ago I couldn't get
to the end of the street. Maybe I'll make that TT on Tuesday evening
after all.

How long do you anticiapate being off a bike? I can't imagine the pain of
ruptured discs though I've witnessed a few colleagues 'lock up' with their
back problems and it's looks like more pain than I can bear without the
benefit of copious amounts of whisky ;-)

I'm actually back at work now (on light duties) and riding to work and back
as usual. It's basically slow steady progress. I did a stupid thing really,
I was on my summer bike which has the saddle set back and strains my
hamstrings somewhat. I got involved in a bit of bike rage and tore after
this car at 27 mph. This twisted my hips out of whack. That night I was in
agony as though a hot knife was in the small of my back and I couldn't walk.
Since then every day it has improved a little - but I can't complain. There
are people who are permanently disabled and far worse off, so I count my
blessings every day :-)

Quoted message said:

I'm far from roadie fitness. I've too much lard to lose before having any
aspirations of maintaining evens for more than 10 miles on the flat never
mind a sub-hour 25. I'm happy to get the miles in whatever the weather
and benefit from the exercise.

I'm not at roadie class yet. In our club league table, say out of 40 riders
on a 10 mile TT, I would hope to be 36th or so, judging by the people I
trained with over the winter. I'd be happy with a 26 min time this year,
anything faster would be a bonus, but at least I'm on the rung of the
ladder.

I'll be in your neck of the woods on 22nd April

Quoted message said:

doing the Three Bridges Audax. I've been meaning to cross the Humber
Bridge on a bike for ages. The other two bridges on the ride are
Boothferry and Stamford. Should be a nice imperial century ride - my
first of the year. I'll probably ride the 200km Hessle Audax on 20th May
making that my first 200km of the season.

I'll put the dates in my diary - maybe I can ride shotgun across the Humber?

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Alan Holmes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle
computer into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed
worked out at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a
week and I'd have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Alan

You're clearly ignorant of the units of mesurement used by AudaxUK and its
dissonance with the imperial units favoured by those old enough to have
been educatated exclusively in imperial units.

I am very familiar with the units used for distance measurements in this
country. and if AudaxUK, whoever he is, uses kilometers to meaure distance,
why does he confuse the issue by using mph as distance travel by time?

Quoted message said:

I also think that you are a miserable git.

That is very kind of you!

Quoted message said:

"Richard Bates" <[email hidden]> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes said:

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Because the ride was listed as "100km" ?

Why, when all the times are listed as mph?

"M-gineering" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle
computer into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed
worked out at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a
week and I'd have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

because that would be 583 m of the mark?

I think your calculator is not reading correctly, I've just checked it
again, this time using a calculator, whereas the first post was using pencil
and paper calculation, and it still comes out as 62.5 miles.

Alan

Quoted message said:

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

Alan Holmes said:

"M-gineering" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Alan Holmes said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
> permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle
> computer into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed
> worked out at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a
> week and I'd have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

because that would be 583 m of the mark?

I think your calculator is not reading correctly, I've just checked it
again, this time using a calculator, whereas the first post was using pencil
and paper calculation, and it still comes out as 62.5 miles.

Someone's been taking maths instruction from Bill Sornson over in
rec.bicycles.tech...

Alan Holmes said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

because that would be 583 m of the mark?

I think your calculator is not reading correctly, I've just checked it
again, this time using a calculator, whereas the first post was using pencil
and paper calculation, and it still comes out as 62.5 miles.

garbage in is garbage out. 100/62.5 =1.600000000000000000000000000. If
a conversion from one system into another gives such a nice round number
alarmbells should ring. An English mile is approximately 1609.347m

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

Alan Holmes said:

"Richard Bates" <[email hidden]> wrote in
messagenews:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because the ride was listed as "100km" ?

Why, when all the times are listed as mph?

Because those are the units Vernon uses in his computer.

--
Dave...

I find a similar disconnection in distancing when I read about travel on the
European continent where people record their distance in miles where every
"inch" is in kilometres. On my annual European tour I reset my computer into
kms on the morning I leave home and it stays that way till I get back home.
( and why can I only have a 24 hour clock on the metric setting? All my
digital display time pieces run on a 24 hour setting!)

I look at lots of the out of date touring info on the CTC website and cannot
understand why these are nearly always in miles and mph when travelling in
Europe. When you are sitting in the middle of France at a 5 lane rural
junction you just don't think in miles!

On a satisfaction basis, it is also just a tad more ego building, in my 70th
year, to cycle 2500 kilometres rather than 1562 miles! :-)

It always seem just that distances are longer when I get back home! It's all
in the mind but.................

I am long retired now but I spent my working life as a communications design
engineer working in metric units -- and also carrying around in my head lots
of "Imperial to Metric" conversion constants.

I am quite amazed locally when I hear local "yoofs" still talking about "ten
bobs" which disappeared long, long before they were born! There is actually a
sort of sub-culture here which still thinks it is a "mining community" which
died some 30 years ago. It results in all sorts of startling misconceptions
which reaches down even to the very young new generation. Even to consider
what a kilometre is -- despite metric teaching in school
.................................!!!

Having said all that I am a child of my time -- I take my measurements, for in
house DIY, in cms etc but I actually still think in feet and inches -- and my
100 metres estimate of distance ( I.e. 100 yards + a bit) is still based on
the length of a football pitch that I was told as a young Army Cadet -- is a
football pitch still about a 100 yards?
--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

"Alan Holmes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Alan Holmes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"vernon" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Just back from my thirteenth 100km BP Audax - this one was a DIY
> permanent. I've just entered the distance and time from my cycle computer
> into my ride log on the computer and the average riding speed worked out
> at 13.13 mph. My daughter reckons that I should have waited a week and
> I'd have had a full house of thirteens :-)

How do you relate 13.13mph with 100km?

Why didn't you cycle 62.5 miles?

Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?

Alan

You're clearly ignorant of the units of mesurement used by AudaxUK and its
dissonance with the imperial units favoured by those old enough to have
been educatated exclusively in imperial units.

I am very familiar with the units used for distance measurements in this
country. and if AudaxUK, whoever he is, uses kilometers to meaure distance,
why does he confuse the issue by using mph as distance travel by time?

Quoted message said:

I also think that you are a miserable git.

That is very kind of you!

Quoted message said:

M-gineering wrote on 06/04/2007 20:42 +0100:

Quoted message said:

An English mile is approximately 1609.347m

Statute or Nautical? ;-)

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

M-gineering said:

Alan Holmes said:

Quoted message said:

>
> Is it perhaps because 100km sounds better than 62.5 miles?
because that would be 583 m of the mark?

I think your calculator is not reading correctly, I've just checked it
again, this time using a calculator, whereas the first post was using pencil
and paper calculation, and it still comes out as 62.5 miles.

garbage in is garbage out. 100/62.5 =1.600000000000000000000000000. If
a conversion from one system into another gives such a nice round number
alarmbells should ring. An English mile is approximately 1609.347m

Where do you get the .347?

12*2.54*5280=1609.344.

1609.347 is right for the US Survey Mile...

M-gineering wrote on 06/04/2007 20:42 +0100:

Quoted message said:

An English mile is approximately 1609.347m

<pedant>

That is a US Survey Mile. The English Statute Mile is approx 1609.344m
while the English Nautical Mile is now exactly 1852m
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mile

</pedant>

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell