amature speeds

brooks829 said:

What speeds do you guy ride at. Just on a nice average training ride, not spriting or anything just on a flat road. I ride around 16-17mph not really humoin too hard, just kind of a good cruise speed.

I'm not going to comment on this because in order for it to be a meaningful comparison you would have to ride on the same course as everyone else with the same wind resistance, traffic, stop lights, hills, for the same duration, yadda yadda. These threads come up from time to time but there's never anything of value that can be said when you're comparing two different courses and an unknown time frame. It does, however, let us know you are new to cycling. 😉

Quoted post said:

Also does anyone ever get a day when you just cant muster up the energy or breath to train. I get some days when I ride or run it feels like I have never worked out before in my life. Is this common?

It's called a bad day. Everyone has them. Unless you're training for a race take a day or two off and you'll feel more energetic. Also, don't turn each day's ride into a time trial or watch your average speed. It's counter productive.

Are you serious Clark? Every post I look at for average speed, guys get the same [censored]. "depends on wind, rain, tire coefficient, phase of the moon, high tide low tide." I think guys want to look at a speed to get a good judge as of where they are at. I can tell someone who has never ran before that 8-10mph is a good speed to strive for. I don't consider yaw and trim and drag and g-forces. Of course a 20 mph head wind or riding up pikes peak is going to make me putt out at 7 mph. I don't mean to be shrewed by any means but when a new rider is looking for help I think you need to give it like it is, not all the science hogwash. I mean after all we are still riding a bicycle not flying a space shuttle.

In that case, my commute speed is between 18 mph to 20 mph, at upper zone 2 the most, under 190w. Flat road with some headwind. Commute in NYC. 😄 How fast I can time trial???? If the road is flat with little wind, about 24 mph average for 20 minutes. Seriously, average speed means NOTHING. If you want to train to go fast, you don't increase your average speed. You do intervals. You go ALL OUT for 5 minutes to 10 minutes, 4 times or more. Do these intervals for twice a week for 8 weeks and you would see improvement in your average speed.

brooks829 said:

Are you serious Clark? Every post I look at for average speed, guys get the same [censored]. "depends on wind, rain, tire coefficient, phase of the moon, high tide low tide." I think guys want to look at a speed to get a good judge as of where they are at. I can tell someone who has never ran before that 8-10mph is a good speed to strive for. I don't consider yaw and trim and drag and g-forces. Of course a 20 mph head wind or riding up pikes peak is going to make me putt out at 7 mph. I don't mean to be shrewed by any means but when a new rider is looking for help I think you need to give it like it is, not all the science hogwash. I mean after all we are still riding a bicycle not flying a space shuttle.

Maybe you do 18-24 mph through the Swiss Alps? I could go 20 mph all day on the flats with no wind.

The good doctor has a point

Scotty

Why would't increasing your average speed make you go faster? I understand that interavals will make you faster but as result your average speed will increase. A football player trying to get a 40yd speed average of 4.0 from 4.5 will have to run faster more often to decrease his time. Thus running faster. If a Nascar pack is running an average lap speed of 1:13 and Dale Jarrett runs a lap average of 1:14min/lap, he will lose. He' slower than the rest of the pack. If Dale increases his lap average to 1:10 he is driving at a faster speed average to make a higher time average, right? If he is 1 mile per hour faster that the rest on average he will win, given no accidents. In a four hour race one mile per hour faster is about 2 laps ahead of the rest of pack. So, I can't believe average speed is not important. If you want to do intervals and not worry about avg. your avg speed will come up as a result. It doesn't matter how you get there your over all objective is to get faster and an average speed increase is a result of getting faster.

That is what i'm saying riding down a flat road made from asphalt 75% MHR no wind sunny 72.2 degrees. Yes I know you will be faster if you sprint I am. i now if I ride up a mountain I am slower, so is the guy that lives down the street. If soemone ask me how fast do I ride I say 16-18 miles per hour average. Common sense tell someone that riding through mountains or down the side of one makes a difference.
If I ride through a creek in 3 feet of water, my average speed is what 1 mile per hour if that? But I'm not going to ask the guy just getting started if he going to be riding in 3 feet of water in creek in the mountains of France with 40 mile an hour wind in his face. Evidently when someone looks for a general catch all answer for a ballpark question he has to input 700 differnent calculus problems along with support from Dell.

Do I have to say this? Like beating a dead horse. Here it goes. Think cycling and racing. In a race, the pack average speed will ALWAYS faster than yours riding by yourself. You can try to maintain certain average speed but that average speed pace won't allow you to keep up with the pack. Second, in a race, surges happen a lot. Attack, counter attack, and counter-counter attack. These surges can easily exceed 30+ mph for couple of minutes. If all you do is to ride at your average speed, you will get dropped in a race in seconds. Once you are off the pack, your average speed fitness won't allow you to ride back to the pack. Average speed is only a by-product of surges and recovery in training and racing. They mean nothing. If you want to go fast, do intervals. Forget about average speed.

brooks829 said:

Why would't increasing your average speed make you go faster? I understand that interavals will make you faster but as result your average speed will increase. A football player trying to get a 40yd speed average of 4.0 from 4.5 will have to run faster more often to decrease his time. Thus running faster. If a Nascar pack is running an average lap speed of 1:13 and Dale Jarrett runs a lap average of 1:14min/lap, he will lose. He' slower than the rest of the pack. If Dale increases his lap average to 1:10 he is driving at a faster speed average to make a higher time average, right? If he is 1 mile per hour faster that the rest on average he will win, given no accidents. In a four hour race one mile per hour faster is about 2 laps ahead of the rest of pack. So, I can't believe average speed is not important. If you want to do intervals and not worry about avg. your avg speed will come up as a result. It doesn't matter how you get there your over all objective is to get faster and an average speed increase is a result of getting faster.

Now I'm just ammusing my self I guess, But in golf you have a handicap-your average score if you will. I live in the eastern US SOmeone that lives in South Africa will have a handicap too. To totally different playing enviroments but still we can tell how we are doing from our handicap. It is an average that it nothing more.

I'm not really concerned about going faster or how too. I was just interested in at what speed most people ride at. Like cadences 80-90rpm faster if surging but up a hill maybe a little slower but your average cadance is what 80-90. Why is a pack speed always faster than a single guy, wind resistance? That's my guess. If you are talking about elite riders I can see a pack speed that would be faster than a lone rider. But for the wee end guy it is possible to ride faster that the pack average. Why wouldn't it be? Sure it is probably tough or near impossible but it can be done. The lone rider just has to be in better shape and ride faster. You could take 10 truck drivers and train for a week and have Lance come in and still ride faster than there whole pack. Even though he is a lone rider, why faster.
Obviously someone in race that maintains the same speed will get lost in race while the pack surges. While they are surging and the other guy is not they will have a faster average speed than the lone rider. If the pack stops in the middle of the race for three hours there averag time will be slower than the guy that is riding at a constant 20mph. Even though they still sprint with high speeds. A faster average speed will always win.

BTW, I have been racing for 3 years and 2 years as a cat4. I am pretty sure average speed means nothing. If you want to train for your average speed, go ahead. My slowest average speed race was 20 mph. Race duration was 3 hours and 30 minutes. So, if you can sustain faster than 20 mph average speed, you think you can do well? Of course, I didn't mention that the race has over 5000ft of climbing and some 48 mph+ wicked, technical (wet and twisty) descents.

brooks829 said:

I'm not really concerned about going faster or how too. I was just interested in at what speed most people ride at. Like cadences 80-90rpm faster if surging but up a hill maybe a little slower but your average cadance is what 80-90. Why is a pack speed always faster than a single guy, wind resistance? That's my guess. If you are talking about elite riders I can see a pack speed that would be faster than a lone rider. But for the wee end guy it is possible to ride faster that the pack average. Why wouldn't it be? Sure it is probably tough or near impossible but it can be done. The lone rider just has to be in better shape and ride faster. You could take 10 truck drivers and train for a week and have Lance come in and still ride faster than there whole pack. Even though he is a lone rider, why faster.
Obviously someone in race that maintains the same speed will get lost in race while the pack surges. While they are surging and the other guy is not they will have a faster average speed than the lone rider. If the pack stops in the middle of the race for three hours there averag time will be slower than the guy that is riding at a constant 20mph. Even though they still sprint with high speeds. A faster average speed will always win.

brooks829 said:

Every post I look at for average speed, guys get the same [censored]. "depends on wind, rain, tire coefficient, phase of the moon, high tide low tide."

Why do you suppose that is?

brooks829 said:

I think guys want to look at a speed to get a good judge as of where they are at.

Newbies might, sure. Riders that really want to know how they compare enter a race and find out. Heck, you can even test yourself by riding a 10k route as fast as you can and ask for other people's times for that. Why compare your 'comfortable pace' with other people's 'comfortable pace'? We're all different in that respect. Doesn't it make more sense to compare ourselves at the upper limit of our ability?

brooks829 said:

I can tell someone who has never ran before that 8-10mph is a good speed to strive for.

I'd say 18-20mph for 2-4 hours is a good speed to strive for, if you are a recreational or club rider. That won't do you a bit of good in a race, though, as others have mentioned.

[quote="BlueJersey"]BTW, I have been racing for 3 years and 2 years as a cat4. I am pretty sure average speed means nothing. If you want to train for your average speed, go ahead. My slowest average speed race was 20 mph. Race duration was 3 hours and 30 minutes. So, if you can sustain faster than 20 mph average speed, you think you can do well?

If 20 mph was your slow average speed it was not your average speed. It would be in the middle of your slow and high say 22mph. If you rode faster you wouldn't have finished sooner and with a faster average speed? What point of riding at a faster pace makes one slower? I don't get it. The next time you race see what your average speed is. Then go find the race winner and see what his average is. I bet his is higher. Given neither of you wreck or have a mishap with your bike.

brooks829 said:

If 20 mph was your slow average speed it was not your average speed.

Believe he said that 20mph was the average speed of the slowest race he participated in last year.

Brooks, it appears that you have never ridden in a paceline with other riders and observed the aerodynamic benefits involved. That is the heart of racing and until you have experienced it you will not understand why people are reluctant to answer your question in the context you've provided. The reason is that most of us don't really ride in that context much (ie, solo ride, steady, comfortable pace), and certainly not at any time when we're trying to compare ourselves with others.

I am going to leave you alone and your "average speed" training.

[quote="brooks829"]

BlueJersey said:

BTW, I have been racing for 3 years and 2 years as a cat4. I am pretty sure average speed means nothing. If you want to train for your average speed, go ahead. My slowest average speed race was 20 mph. Race duration was 3 hours and 30 minutes. So, if you can sustain faster than 20 mph average speed, you think you can do well?

If 20 mph was your slow average speed it was not your average speed. It would be in the middle of your slow and high say 22mph. If you rode faster you wouldn't have finished sooner and with a faster average speed? What point of riding at a faster pace makes one slower? I don't get it. The next time you race see what your average speed is. Then go find the race winner and see what his average is. I bet his is higher. Given neither of you wreck or have a mishap with your bike.

Look dingbats, I'm not training to race or wanting too. I'm sure that there is someone out there that rides a bicycle to work by himself and probably rides at a certain speed not surging or climbing Mount Everest. That is an average speed that he rides at and that is all I wanted. If someone a "newbie" wanted to know what percentile he fell in he could make up his own mind of where he was at depending on someone else pace. I you ride at 30mph all out and I ride at 7 mph all out I suck. I know this by looking at what your "average" all out is.

How do you compare your self to determine if you can beat your arch rival? What do you train for? The whole concept of racing is to be faster than the other guy. How do you measure your self. It sounds like all that racing cyclist do to compare them selves is do more intervals than the next guy. You have to have something to compare your self to, speed, time. Unless racing with bikes doesn't involve the winner to be the fastest in time,speed or the first over the finish line then how in the hell do you win? If you say time or speed then you must have a previous time to compare to. If you have more than one time or speed you get an average. 7th grade math nothing more.This is what I was woundering, your average.
As fas as the aerodynamics is concerned, I am a aeronautical engineer so I must know what role aerodynamics plays

I got this from the TdF website:

19:16 - Awaiting Confirmation On Average Speed...
When Dave Zabriskie finished the 19km time trial, the average speed was said to be 54.68km/h. If this is accurate, today’s victory will be the fastest non-prologue time trial in the history of the Tour de France.
The previous highest average speed was 54.545km/h - set by Greg Lemond in the final stage back in 1989

Greg lemond had a average speed in the TdF, Why in the hell wouldn't you or me have one? If I rode in the same damn race right along side of greg back in 89 would I have recieved an average speed? Yes I would have. And If someone ask me what it was I would say 54.54km/h not tell them this question can not be answered. Sure it will differ for mountains wind so on so on. But that wasn't the question I was told by the french guy 18 to 20 mph was a good point to strive for. Thank heavens he could see through mountains and wind and give a ball park answer.

brooks829 said:

...Greg lemond had a average speed in the TdF, Why in the hell wouldn't you or me have one? If I rode in the same damn race right along side of greg back in 89 would I have recieved an average speed?

Yes you would have. However, therein lies the fallacy of average speed. The TdF changes every year. Some years they emphasise mountain stages. Occasionally they have a stage over cobblestones. They don't run the same course so even Mr. Lemond could have a faster or slower average speed from one year to the next regardless of how well he rode.

Even the stages in the TdF that are Time Trials are not the same each year. Sometimes they are uphill, then the grade and rider's fitness level determines what the rider's average speed is. The only way average speed will mean much is if you are on a closed velodrome striving for the hour record at sea level. Chris Boardman is the guy to beat in that department.

Basically, average speed on a bike while racing is not anything like average speed at the Indianapolis 500 where the guy with the best average speed wins the race. In cycling its all about surge and recovery, surge and recovery.

If you want a place to compare your average speed to others you could check out bikeforums.net. You'll get plenty of fish taking the bait over there. I used to post over there too but the discussions are usually (not always) more rational here and the long term members are pretty hard core and knowledgeable. I hate to say it but if you keep pushing the issue here you'll just get labeled as a troll. Calling the members dingbats doesn't help either, although I'm sure you meant it in good fun.

brooks829 said:

What speeds do you guy ride at. Just on a nice average training ride, not spriting or anything just on a flat road. I ride around 16-17mph not really humoin too hard, just kind of a good cruise speed. Also does anyone ever get a day when you just cant muster up the energy or breath to train. I get some days when I ride or run it feels like I have never worked out before in my life. Is this common?

"Average" can be be a worthless statistic at best, and downright misleading at worst.

I have a $100.00 Schwinn in my garage. And a $4000.00 Litespeed. So I guess my "average" bike is worth $2050.00. Except that neither of my bikes is worth anywhere near $2050.00. So that average is a worthless statistic.

Get it?

I do a regular training ride with a couple of buddies of mine. They tool along for 35 miles at a steady state effort and "average" about 18 mph. Meanwhile, I do intervals at 26 mph for 1--3 miles, and recover at 15 mph for 1--3 miles over the same 35 miles. When we meet up at the parking lot at the end of the ride, their "average" is about 1--2 mph faster than mine. That might mis-lead a newbie like you into thinking that those buddies are more fit than I am. They aren't. They can't keep up with me.

Get it?

You can keep beating this dead horse if you want. But "average" speed is meaningless.

Bob

brooks829 said:

How do you compare your self to determine if you can beat your arch rival?

By racing him, not by clocking him on a commute or training ride.

brooks829 said:

As fas as the aerodynamics is concerned, I am a aeronautical engineer so I must know what role aerodynamics plays

If that were the case, - or - if you had just read and understood the responses provided so far, then you would have your answer already.

I'll use a Nascar example, since you seem to know something about that. At Daytona, if Dale Jarrett is .3-.4 seconds per lap slower than the leader, will his average speed be .3-.4 seconds slower at the end of the race? No, it won't. Dale will be able to sit in the pack drafting even though his car is significantly slower, and will finish the race with an average speed almost identical to the winner of the race. His average speed is a poor comparison of his car's abilities compared to those of his competitors.