The Annual Lunacy (aka "I Don't Do Winter") Challenge Chatzone

[ColinJ]

Erm, probably? I'm really not mechanically minded and have no idea - anything more complicated than changing an inner tube and the bike goes to the shop!

Here's a photo of said crank, just before it completely detached:
View attachment 468040

As I said, it has happened a few times before and I've had to re-tighten it, but then it just stopped happening after a while. Now these original issues did happen not long after I had a crash, so that could have been when damage happened, but then that doesn't explain why it's been fine for over two years.

That's not square and it isn't very tapered either!

THIS will show you what they look like ...

 

[Aravis]

Rest up, stay fit @Aravis

The sentiment is clearly right, but it's not looking so good. The latest cold has led to an attack of vestibular neuronitis, an inflammation of a nerve in the inner ear causing loss of balance . Living in a constant state of motion sickness is proving quite restrictive.

It seems that it's likely to last weeks rather than days, so in the end I may be glad of the lunacy challenge after all.

 

[bluenotebob]

For this challenge I set my bar low at 70km for 2019. This figure was based as being above the distance of my 13th longest ride in 2018.

It’s “only” 27 May and I’ve already posted 5 rides in this challenge. I will be disappointed if don’t post at least another 10 rides over 70km before this autumn.

Can someone please advise me as to whether I just stop posting when I reach 13 qualifying rides, or whether I start to replace earlier shorter rides with longer ones? I would prefer to use this 2019 Lunacy Challenge thread to record my longest rides in 2019 .. but I won’t if it’s against the spirit (or rules) of the Challenge.

@ColinJ … can you clarify please?

 

[Sea of vapours]

You absolutely can do that and indeed should; I'm pretty sure we put it in the guidelines somewhere. Once you get to 13, any additional rides which are longer than the shortest of the thirteen replace that in the list. So post a new entry in the challenge thread, deleting your shortest ride and adding in the new one, when it happens.

EDIT:
From the first post in the challenge thread. Guideline number five.
5. Even once you have completed thirteen qualifying rides, you can keep posting new ones where your 'top 13' has changed. Just post your thirteen longest. At the end of the year, your thirteenth longest ride is your actual achievement for the year. NB If you keep cranking out rides exactly hitting your target, you would struggle to exceed it later in the year. For example if your first 10 rides were exactly 100 miles, you would have to do another 13 rides of 101 miles to increase your lunacy challenge achievement to 101 miles! If you like the idea of trying to beat your target, it is always worth adding at least a few miles/kms to as many of your long rides as possible throughout the year. In that respect, every duplicated ride distance is 'wasted', although each will qualify for the basic challenge that you set yourself.

 

[bluenotebob]

@Sea of vapours … many thanks for that swift and helpful response. That's all clear now.

 

[steverob]

If (and that's a big IF) I do manage to make more than 13 qualifying rides by the end of the year, I'll probably draw a line of dashes under the 13th and put the 14th below it, making it look like a league table and this is the ride that just got relegated to the division below!

 

[ColinJ]

If (and that's a big IF) I do manage to make more than 13 qualifying rides by the end of the year, I'll probably draw a line of dashes under the 13th and put the 14th below it, making it look like a league table and this is the ride that just got relegated to the division below!

That works if you display the rides longest to shortest. I can't make my mind up whether to do it that way or in date order.

 

[Fiona R]

That works if you display the rides longest to shortest. I can't make my mind up whether to do it that way or in date order.

I'm terrible, has to be date order or have 2 lists!

 

[Sea of vapours]

That works if you display the rides longest to shortest. I can't make my mind up whether to do it that way or in date order.

I've attempted to combine the two. My list is sorted by ride length, in descending order, so I can drop the shortest off the bottom if I do more than thirteen, but I'm numbering each line by ride order and emboldening the most recent one, so the list contains both sets of information.

I like @steverob 's idea of a dotted line delimiter. Whether I'll do more than thirteen is questionable though, as 150+km is definitely at the top end of what I want to do. 'A bit over 100km' still feels like my distance!

 

[steverob]

i'm terrible, has to be date order or have 2 lists!

I have my 50K challenge post in date order and my Lunacy post in distance order, so I've got both bases covered!

 

[Fiona R]

I have my 50K challenge post in date order and my Lunacy post in distance order, so I've got both bases covered!

Bonkers

 

[lane]

I have my 50K challenge post in date order and my Lunacy post in distance order, so I've got both bases covered!

This is what I have decided to do as well. Makes complete sense.

 

[ColinJ]

I've attempted to combine the two. My list is sorted by ride length, in descending order, so I can drop the shortest off the bottom if I do more than thirteen, but I'm numbering each line by ride order and emboldening the most recent one, so the list contains both sets of information.

I like @steverob 's idea of a dotted line delimiter. Whether I'll do more than thirteen is questionable though ...

That sounds like a plan - I'll go back and edit my last post in the rides thread!

I very much doubt that I will exceed 13 qualifying rides either. More likely, I will end up choosing 2 or 3 very easy long routes to cram in before the winter arrives, just to hit my target.

... 150+km is definitely at the top end of what I want to do. 'A bit over 100km' still feels like my distance!

Not entirely unconnected with most of those 'bit over 100 km' rides having 'quite a lot over 2,000 m of ascent'!

I will probably do more ascent in most of my 100-ish km rides then I will do on my 161-ish km rides, for obvious reasons!

Apart from the fatigue factor, I am also too slow these days to do long hilly rides in a reasonable amount of time. In 2006 I could do a 200 km ride with 2,500+ metres of ascent in 10 hours but those days seem to be long gone. (I'm not totally convinced that I couldn't get quicker if I got out on my bike more regularly and tried a bit harder, but I do know that I struggle to put that level of commitment into my cycling nowadays.)

 

[Sea of vapours]

Not entirely unconnected with most of those 'bit over 100 km' rides having 'quite a lot over 2,000 m of ascent'!

True; you have a good point there. And the 150s are coming in around the 3,000m mark which is pretty arduous.

Having said that, I've just designed a route in the North Pennines which comes in at 116km and 3,100m. I won't be adding 34km to that!

 

[Fiona R]

Apart from the fatigue factor, I am also too slow these days to do long hilly rides in a reasonable amount of time. In 2006 I could do a 200 km ride with 2,500+ metres of ascent in 10 hours but those days seem to be long gone. (I'm not totally convinced that I couldn't get quicker if I got out on my bike more regularly and tried a bit harder, but I do know that I struggle to put that level of commitment into my cycling nowadays.)

I'm basically 12+ hours elapsed time for 200km with 2-3000m of climbing. I've accepted it's a struggle and accept that if it's full value audax time that's OK. Two of them were skin of teeth jobs in challenging weather, if I'd been denied my brevet I probably would have given up cycling in a huff.