The great Strava moving time Con

[Rupie]

Went out on a charity ride today, horrible in the rain, many people had punctures. I was lucky and when I got home found out my official time, and posted it on line for other cycle friends to see. A group of other cyclists were 30 minutes behind me because they kept stopping for rests and one puncture. They then all posted their times via strava, showing that they got home at least 20 minutes before me.
What a con and very misleading Strava is. You could stop many times, have food and rest, in reality take a very long time but using Strava claim you took no time at all. Its your total time that counts, stops and all, specially on organised, chipped tides.

 

[S-Express]

You should write to your MP about it..

 

[Drago]

You should write to the Director General of the BBC.

 

[Crackle]

I'm slightly amused by this complaint given you were riding a charity event and have this on your profile

But it gives both total and moving time on Strava

 

[Milkfloat]

Strava gives you both moving time and elaspsed time so the fault is not with the platform.

 

[Tin Pot]

 

[Milkfloat]

To be fair to the OP, while Strava does give both moving and elapsed times, it only gives "moving" speed, not true speed. This is because Strava users can't handle the truth.

Even with my dodgy maths, I think I could do the calculation.

Personally to me moving speed/time makes more sense to compare my own rides, that way the effects of hold ups like traffic lights are somewhat filtered out.

 

[Tin Pot]

Even with my dodgy maths, I think I could do the calculation.

Personally to me moving speed/time makes more sense to compare my own rides, that way the effects of hold ups like traffic lights are somewhat filtered out.

Moving time is also useful when you're training, and your plan is time based.

 

[Too Tyred]

Ahhhh so it does!! I hadn't noticed it was anything other that total time. Is your average speed then taken from your moving time or elapsed time, out of interest?

 

[si_c]

Ahhhh so it does!! I hadn't noticed it was anything other that total time. Is your average speed then taken from your moving time or elapsed time, out of interest?

Moving. I try to minimise stopped time when riding longer rides. It's pretty much the only way for me to get faster.

 

[huggy]

But Segments are total time not moving time so you can't get a KOM up Holme Moss by splitting it into 20 sprints with 20 rests.

 

[Too Tyred]

Moving. I try to minimise stopped time when riding longer rides. It's pretty much the only way for me to get faster.

Good to know.

No mate you've got it the wrong way round... if you speed up before the red lights then slam your brakes on you'll spend more time stopped thus increasing your average speed! That's if you do a me and roll up to the lights as slow as possible to try and beat them haha. I'm definitely joking! Nobody likes a skidder!

 

[Globalti]

We have one Strava user in our little group of five and I have to admit that he is irritating; he will often say: "If it's not on Strava it didn't happen" and he will argue ad nauseam about times and distances and averages, saying Strava is the only true arbiter. From what I see Strava can be quite inaccurate especially on height measurement.

Mind you he also likes the smarmy wheel-sucker Alberto Contador. Say no more.

 

[Venod]

If you think Stravas odd try loading your rides to the free version of Ride with GPS they must assume anything below a certain mph that you are stopped, it certainly improves your average moving speed on the computer but doesn't reflect what happened on the bike, if anyone knows how to change this behavior please let me know.

 

[Banjo]

Free version of RWGPS also gives figures for moving and total pace but I dont know how these numbers are calculated .ie a 20 kph average speed ride will have a "pace" reading of about 3.