I've been looking up average speeds in a process of trying to discover how fast of slow I am. Most of the articles show that as an 80 year old I am riding above my age by a bit.

https://pedalstreet.com/average-cycling-speed-by-age/#Wind_and_Weather (suggests 11.5
https://ilovebicycling.com/average-bike-speed/ (note that Grand Tour riders average 25 mph for the Tour.)
https://www.cyclistshub.com/average-cycling-speed/


It appears that good riders at 60 can average about 90 watts of full time power. (That is as much power as you can generate for 20 minutes and is as meaningless a measurement as you can get) Power st this level dramatically slows you down in a headwind.

But my average speed is 10 mph almost exactly and on some 25 mile rides it has been as high as almost 12 mph despite a headwind Yesterday wrecked me at 29 miles including 1,300 feet of climbing with several spot of 9% for over 100 yards.

Garmin used to report maximum rate of climb but they don't do that anymore. And looking back to before my stroke, I was climbing more than twice as much per week and my average speed with the old software was often over 10 mph or 12-13 mph with this
software. And that was on a climb that went over 12%

So, as I say, I appear to be slightly better for my age group.

And it should also give you insight into people saying that I'm so slow and telling you that they've put in 600 miles this year with an average speed of 20 mph. Especially after they've told us that they are over 60.

Whatever they are using to report their speed is highly inaccurate.

By the way, that third reference gives a chart of average speed with level of ability but that is at about age 35 where your athletic/cycling ability is at your peak.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/14/2025 5:48 PM, cyclintom posted yet another slew of horse shit:

I've been looking up average speeds in a process of trying to discover how fast of slow I am. Most of the articles show that as an 80 year old I am riding above my age by a bit.

https://pedalstreet.com/average-cycling-speed-by-age/#Wind_and_Weather (suggests 11.5
https://ilovebicycling.com/average-bike-speed/ (note that Grand Tour riders average 25 mph for the Tour.)
https://www.cyclistshub.com/average-cycling-speed/

It appears that good riders at 60 can average about 90 watts of full time power.

Not from these links.
-first off, it lists 'average', not 'good'.
-Second, absolute watts isn't useful except as an individual metric. The valuable comparison metric is power/weight ratio (generally measured in watts/Kg).
-3rd, every competitive rider I know in my age group is able to sustain significantly more than 90 watts.

Here's a link for actual trained cyclists, not people who ride rail
trails every other weekend when the weather is good.

https://trainabsolute.com/training/cycling-ftp-by-age/

"While there isn’t an exact formula, rough cycling FTP by age
expectations (in watts per kilogram, W/kg) based on different age groups
look something like this:

50s-60s (Gradual Decline, But Not Drastic)
Elite: 3.5-5.0 W/kg
Well-Trained: 2.5-3.5 W/kg
Recreational: 1.5-2.5 W/kg

70s+ (Performance is All About Maintenance)
Elite: 3.0-4.0 W/kg
Well-Trained: 2.0-3.0 W/kg
Recreational: 1.0-2.0 W/kg"

Right now my FTP is about 3.25 W/Kg, which for my weight is about 220
watts. Trust me when I tell you that is _not_ impressive.

(That is as much power as you can generate for 20 minutes and is as meaningless a measurement as you can get)

FTP is the power you can generate for 60 minutes, not 20. It's usually
measured over 20 minutes then an offset formula is applied. Try reading
and learning for a change:
https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/is-my-ftp-too-low/

FTP isn't meaningless by any stretch of the imagination.

Power st this level dramatically slows you down in a headwind.

Thanks for displaying yet more of your misunderstanding of the laws of
physics. The slower you go, less your speed is affected by head wind.
It's the 'Square Law Effect' and it's exponential as a function of speed.

But my average speed is 10 mph almost exactly and on some 25 mile rides it has been as high as almost 12 mph despite a headwind Yesterday wrecked me at 29 miles including 1,300 feet of climbing with several spot of 9% for over 100 yards.

Garmin used to report maximum rate of climb but they don't do that anymore.

Yes, it does. You're just having more problems understanding how to use
your computer.

And looking back to before my stroke, I was climbing more than twice as much per week and my average speed with the old software was often over 10 mph or 12-13 mph with this software. And that was on a climb that went over 12%

So, as I say, I appear to be slightly better for my age group.

And it should also give you insight into people saying that I'm so slow and telling you that they've put in 600 miles this year with an average speed of 20 mph. Especially after they've told us that they are over 60.

Not really, except that your slow compared to someone who actually
trains. You don't train. You don't do structured intervals, you don't
threshold workouts or cadence drills, you don't monitor time in power
zones.
Lets look at some performance statics for older people who actually train.

https://usacycling.org/article/60-national-titles-awarded-in-albuquerque-for-masters-road-nationals


Master Men 60-64 Time Trial National Champion:
Robert Fisher (Monument, Colo.; Tierra Plan Racing p/b IntraNerve) -
49:40.5 (over 40K/25 miles, that's 30.2 mph)

65 and over did a 20K course:

Master Men 70-74 Time Trial National Champion:
Jerry Rome (Denver, Colo.; Wholesome Masters Racing) - 28:12.7 = MPH

Master Men 80-84 Time Trial National Champion:
S Durward Higgins (Chattanooga, Tenn.; Hammer Super Masters) - 30:44.3 -
24.42 MPH

Master Men 85-89 Time Trial National Champion:
Leon Malmed (South Lake Tahoe, Calif.; Alta Alpina Cycling) - 36:45.0 =
20.40 MPH

Looking at the 85-89 rider and punching some numbers into http://bikecalculator.com/, you get about 1.7 W/Kg, or about 150 watts
for a 200 pound rider.

For a comparison to your link, the 70+ national champion put out
somewhere in the range of 3.3 W/Kg, which is about 300 watts for a 200
pound rider.

FWIW - I could never have matched what the 60-65 rider did, even at my
most fit.

Whatever they are using to report their speed is highly inaccurate.

Yeah, because GPS is so easy to fake out. Let me remind you your the one
who claimed to hit 69 mph on a downhill recently.

By the way, that third reference gives a chart of average speed with level of ability but that is at about age 35 where your athletic/cycling ability is at your peak.

Yup, 35 is generally a physiological peak, and yes, your VO2x max will
decline with age.

So you ride about what your link says is 'normal'. Good for you.
You ride in the 'normal' range for someone your age after a (alleged)
stroke. Good for you.
You're still riding regularly at your age and after a (alleged) stroke.
Good for you.

Constantly claiming other people are somehow cheating because you could
never - in your entire life - ride at racing speeds - fuck off.




--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu May 15 06:46:48 2025 zen cycle wrote:

On 5/14/2025 5:48 PM, cyclintom posted yet another slew of horse shit:

I've been looking up average speeds in a process of trying to discover how fast of slow I am. Most of the articles show that as an 80 year old I am riding above my age by a bit.

https://pedalstreet.com/average-cycling-speed-by-age/#Wind_and_Weather (suggests 11.5
https://ilovebicycling.com/average-bike-speed/ (note that Grand Tour riders average 25 mph for the Tour.)
https://www.cyclistshub.com/average-cycling-speed/

It appears that good riders at 60 can average about 90 watts of full time power.

Not from these links.
-first off, it lists 'average', not 'good'.
-Second, absolute watts isn't useful except as an individual metric. The valuable comparison metric is power/weight ratio (generally measured in watts/Kg).
-3rd, every competitive rider I know in my age group is able to sustain significantly more than 90 watts.

Here's a link for actual trained cyclists, not people who ride rail
trails every other weekend when the weather is good.

https://trainabsolute.com/training/cycling-ftp-by-age/

"While there isn?t an exact formula, rough cycling FTP by age
expectations (in watts per kilogram, W/kg) based on different age groups
look something like this:

50s-60s (Gradual Decline, But Not Drastic)
Elite: 3.5-5.0 W/kg
Well-Trained: 2.5-3.5 W/kg
Recreational: 1.5-2.5 W/kg

70s+ (Performance is All About Maintenance)
Elite: 3.0-4.0 W/kg
Well-Trained: 2.0-3.0 W/kg
Recreational: 1.0-2.0 W/kg"

Right now my FTP is about 3.25 W/Kg, which for my weight is about 220
watts. Trust me when I tell you that is _not_ impressive.

(That is as much power as you can generate for 20 minutes and is as meaningless a measurement as you can get)

FTP is the power you can generate for 60 minutes, not 20. It's usually measured over 20 minutes then an offset formula is applied. Try reading
and learning for a change: https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/is-my-ftp-too-low/

FTP isn't meaningless by any stretch of the imagination.

Power st this level dramatically slows you down in a headwind.

Thanks for displaying yet more of your misunderstanding of the laws of physics. The slower you go, less your speed is affected by head wind.
It's the 'Square Law Effect' and it's exponential as a function of speed.

But my average speed is 10 mph almost exactly and on some 25 mile rides it has been as high as almost 12 mph despite a headwind Yesterday wrecked me at 29 miles including 1,300 feet of climbing with several spot of 9% for over 100 yards.

Garmin used to report maximum rate of climb but they don't do that anymore.

Yes, it does. You're just having more problems understanding how to use
your computer.

And looking back to before my stroke, I was climbing more than twice as much per week and my average speed with the old software was often over 10 mph or 12-13 mph with this software. And that was on a climb that went over 12%

So, as I say, I appear to be slightly better for my age group.

And it should also give you insight into people saying that I'm so slow and telling you that they've put in 600 miles this year with an average speed of 20 mph. Especially after they've told us that they are over 60.

Not really, except that your slow compared to someone who actually
trains. You don't train. You don't do structured intervals, you don't threshold workouts or cadence drills, you don't monitor time in power
zones.
Lets look at some performance statics for older people who actually train.

https://usacycling.org/article/60-national-titles-awarded-in-albuquerque-for-masters-road-nationals

Master Men 60-64 Time Trial National Champion:
Robert Fisher (Monument, Colo.; Tierra Plan Racing p/b IntraNerve) -
49:40.5 (over 40K/25 miles, that's 30.2 mph)

65 and over did a 20K course:

Master Men 70-74 Time Trial National Champion:
Jerry Rome (Denver, Colo.; Wholesome Masters Racing) - 28:12.7 = MPH

Master Men 80-84 Time Trial National Champion:
S Durward Higgins (Chattanooga, Tenn.; Hammer Super Masters) - 30:44.3 - 24.42 MPH

Master Men 85-89 Time Trial National Champion:
Leon Malmed (South Lake Tahoe, Calif.; Alta Alpina Cycling) - 36:45.0 =
20.40 MPH

Looking at the 85-89 rider and punching some numbers into http://bikecalculator.com/, you get about 1.7 W/Kg, or about 150 watts
for a 200 pound rider.

For a comparison to your link, the 70+ national champion put out
somewhere in the range of 3.3 W/Kg, which is about 300 watts for a 200
pound rider.

FWIW - I could never have matched what the 60-65 rider did, even at my
most fit.

Whatever they are using to report their speed is highly inaccurate.

Yeah, because GPS is so easy to fake out. Let me remind you your the one
who claimed to hit 69 mph on a downhill recently.

By the way, that third reference gives a chart of average speed with level of ability but that is at about age 35 where your athletic/cycling ability is at your peak.

Yup, 35 is generally a physiological peak, and yes, your VO2x max will decline with age.

So you ride about what your link says is 'normal'. Good for you.
You ride in the 'normal' range for someone your age after a (alleged)
stroke. Good for you.
You're still riding regularly at your age and after a (alleged) stroke.
Good for you.

Constantly claiming other people are somehow cheating because you could
never - in your entire life - ride at racing speeds - fuck off.

Flunky, you are nothing but excuses. I would be surprised if you could hold 90 watts. There has been nothing that you could do about your low performance except to lie about mine and to quote preposterous figures about yours. I do not think that my
performanc4e is anything other than slightly above average because of the years I've put in on a bike. But you want peop[e to beliee that you can put in 30 year old professional racer performance. I just quoted the numbers so the only thing you're able
to do is deny them. And that is exactly what you just did.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/15/2025 10:56 AM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 06:46:48 2025 zen cycle wrote:

On 5/14/2025 5:48 PM, cyclintom posted yet another slew of horse shit:

I've been looking up average speeds in a process of trying to discover how fast of slow I am. Most of the articles show that as an 80 year old I am riding above my age by a bit.

https://pedalstreet.com/average-cycling-speed-by-age/#Wind_and_Weather (suggests 11.5
https://ilovebicycling.com/average-bike-speed/ (note that Grand Tour riders average 25 mph for the Tour.)
https://www.cyclistshub.com/average-cycling-speed/


It appears that good riders at 60 can average about 90 watts of full time power.

Not from these links.
-first off, it lists 'average', not 'good'.
-Second, absolute watts isn't useful except as an individual metric. The
valuable comparison metric is power/weight ratio (generally measured in
watts/Kg).
-3rd, every competitive rider I know in my age group is able to sustain
significantly more than 90 watts.

Here's a link for actual trained cyclists, not people who ride rail
trails every other weekend when the weather is good.

https://trainabsolute.com/training/cycling-ftp-by-age/

"While there isn?t an exact formula, rough cycling FTP by age
expectations (in watts per kilogram, W/kg) based on different age groups
look something like this:

50s-60s (Gradual Decline, But Not Drastic)
Elite: 3.5-5.0 W/kg
Well-Trained: 2.5-3.5 W/kg
Recreational: 1.5-2.5 W/kg

70s+ (Performance is All About Maintenance)
Elite: 3.0-4.0 W/kg
Well-Trained: 2.0-3.0 W/kg
Recreational: 1.0-2.0 W/kg"

Right now my FTP is about 3.25 W/Kg, which for my weight is about 220
watts. Trust me when I tell you that is _not_ impressive.

(That is as much power as you can generate for 20 minutes and is as meaningless a measurement as you can get)

FTP is the power you can generate for 60 minutes, not 20. It's usually
measured over 20 minutes then an offset formula is applied. Try reading
and learning for a change:
https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/is-my-ftp-too-low/

FTP isn't meaningless by any stretch of the imagination.

Power st this level dramatically slows you down in a headwind.

Thanks for displaying yet more of your misunderstanding of the laws of
physics. The slower you go, less your speed is affected by head wind.
It's the 'Square Law Effect' and it's exponential as a function of speed.

But my average speed is 10 mph almost exactly and on some 25 mile rides it has been as high as almost 12 mph despite a headwind Yesterday wrecked me at 29 miles including 1,300 feet of climbing with several spot of 9% for over 100 yards.

Garmin used to report maximum rate of climb but they don't do that anymore. >>

Yes, it does. You're just having more problems understanding how to use
your computer.

And looking back to before my stroke, I was climbing more than twice as much per week and my average speed with the old software was often over 10 mph or 12-13 mph with this software. And that was on a climb that went over 12%

So, as I say, I appear to be slightly better for my age group.

And it should also give you insight into people saying that I'm so slow and telling you that they've put in 600 miles this year with an average speed of 20 mph. Especially after they've told us that they are over 60.

Not really, except that your slow compared to someone who actually
trains. You don't train. You don't do structured intervals, you don't
threshold workouts or cadence drills, you don't monitor time in power
zones.
Lets look at some performance statics for older people who actually train. >>
https://usacycling.org/article/60-national-titles-awarded-in-albuquerque-for-masters-road-nationals


Master Men 60-64 Time Trial National Champion:
Robert Fisher (Monument, Colo.; Tierra Plan Racing p/b IntraNerve) -
49:40.5 (over 40K/25 miles, that's 30.2 mph)

65 and over did a 20K course:

Master Men 70-74 Time Trial National Champion:
Jerry Rome (Denver, Colo.; Wholesome Masters Racing) - 28:12.7 = MPH

Master Men 80-84 Time Trial National Champion:
S Durward Higgins (Chattanooga, Tenn.; Hammer Super Masters) - 30:44.3 -
24.42 MPH

Master Men 85-89 Time Trial National Champion:
Leon Malmed (South Lake Tahoe, Calif.; Alta Alpina Cycling) - 36:45.0 =
20.40 MPH

Looking at the 85-89 rider and punching some numbers into
http://bikecalculator.com/, you get about 1.7 W/Kg, or about 150 watts
for a 200 pound rider.

For a comparison to your link, the 70+ national champion put out
somewhere in the range of 3.3 W/Kg, which is about 300 watts for a 200
pound rider.

FWIW - I could never have matched what the 60-65 rider did, even at my
most fit.

Whatever they are using to report their speed is highly inaccurate.

Yeah, because GPS is so easy to fake out. Let me remind you your the one
who claimed to hit 69 mph on a downhill recently.

By the way, that third reference gives a chart of average speed with level of ability but that is at about age 35 where your athletic/cycling ability is at your peak.

Yup, 35 is generally a physiological peak, and yes, your VO2x max will
decline with age.

So you ride about what your link says is 'normal'. Good for you.
You ride in the 'normal' range for someone your age after a (alleged)
stroke. Good for you.
You're still riding regularly at your age and after a (alleged) stroke.
Good for you.

Constantly claiming other people are somehow cheating because you could
never - in your entire life - ride at racing speeds - fuck off.

Flunky, you are nothing but excuses.

as is evidence by the lack of evidence I show to support my claims, right?

I would be surprised if you could hold 90 watts.

Read it and weep, sparky: https://www.strava.com/activities/13234838066/segments/3309306898642021622

I sustained 253 watt average for 15 minutes, with a peak at 357

HEre's another - The peak power I recorded on Zwift: https://www.strava.com/activities/13092735298/analysis

911 watts.

And yes, my trainer is calibrated. and no, these numbers are _not_ that spectacular.

There has been nothing that you could do about your low performance except to lie about mine

Please list one "lie" I've written about you performance.

and to quote preposterous figures about yours.

Quote, yes...With evidence. Preposterous? no. Preposterous would be
claiming my performance was equal to that of a well trained 30 year old.

I do not think that my performanc4e is anything other than slightly above average because of the years I've put in on a bike. But you want peop[e to beliee that you can put in 30 year old professional racer performance.

Funny, I've claimed exactly the opposite. From my link above:

20s-30s (Peak Performance Years)
Elite: 4.5-6.0 W/kg
Well-Trained: 3.5-4.5 W/kg
Recreational: 2.5-3.5 W/kg

As noted, my FTP is ~ 3.25, which puts me at the upper end of a
recreational cyclist in their 20's/30's. This is hardly a case of
'wanting people to believe I can put in 30 year old pro racer' numbers.

I just quoted the numbers so the only thing you're able to do is deny them. And that is exactly what you just did.

LOL...no, tommy, that's not "all" I did. I backed up my claims with hard
data.

You linked an article with suspiciously low numbers and no references. I
linked articles with verified data and statistics (including peoples
names and dates).

It's about time you accepted the fact that you really have no clue what
you're talking about.



--
Add xx to reply

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu May 15 12:13:46 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

Funny, I've claimed exactly the opposite. From my link above:

That Zwift "ride" is a "virtual ride".Anyone can fool that. Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

So your tears are all about telling us that you're really riding like a Cat 1 30 year old while the truth is something entirely different.

Meanwhile. I got two days of 7 and 8 hours of sleep and averaged almost 11 mph for a 30 mile ride. It was flat, but I'm not telling people that at 65 I'm averaging 20 mph for the year so far which for you is 600 miles.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu May 15 19:04:44 2025 cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 12:13:46 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

Funny, I've claimed exactly the opposite. From my link above:

That Zwift "ride" is a "virtual ride".Anyone can fool that. Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

So your tears are all about telling us that you're really riding like a Cat 1 30 year old while the truth is something entirely different.

Meanwhile. I got two days of 7 and 8 hours of sleep and averaged almost 11 mph for a 30 mile ride. It was flat, but I'm not telling people that at 65 I'm averaging 20 mph for the year so far which for you is 600 miles.

I should also add that those speeds are for the AVERAGE rider and you can expect a 10% variation among riders. Today, I had some sort of club come by. I was near my coffee stop and they were just heading out. They were all in their 30's and 40's and they
were making pretty good speed. On the way home I passed the same group on their way home. Their speed was considerably reduced and half of the pack was sagging off the back. I have no idea what route they took since the place I passed them on the way
home could have been a climbing course or a flat route. These guys were averaging just about what the numbers from my references said. But Flunky is averaging 20 mph over 600 miles.

Before my initial injury I was probably averaging about those reference numbers as well and at that time I was in the front quarter climbing with the club. When my injury occurred I was 65. I lost a little over two years to the injury before diagnosis
and treatment. Then it took me about three years to get back up to my level which was again in the front quarter of the club on climbs and dropping everyone by a LONG way on descents. Then I would ride with the back quarter on the flats.

Flunky, you know, a Grmain 830 can be had quite cheaply these days. So WHY don't you get one, record a ride and post it since whatever you're going does not match real life?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/15/2025 3:04 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 12:13:46 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

Funny, I've claimed exactly the opposite. From my link above:

That Zwift "ride" is a "virtual ride".Anyone can fool that.

Virtual or not, power is power.

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Because you're doing something wrong, as usual

So your tears

You're the one crying here, not me.

are all about telling us that you're really riding like a Cat 1 30 year old while the truth is something entirely different.

Please post any reference to where I ever claimed I was riding like a 30
year old cat 1.

Meanwhile. I got two days of 7 and 8 hours of sleep and averaged almost 11 mph for a 30 mile ride. It was flat, but I'm not telling people that at 65 I'm averaging 20 mph for the year so far which for you is 600 miles.

It's a good thing you aren't telling them that, because it wouldn't be true.






--
Add xx to reply

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/15/2025 3:28 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 19:04:44 2025 cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 12:13:46 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

Funny, I've claimed exactly the opposite. From my link above:

That Zwift "ride" is a "virtual ride".Anyone can fool that. Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

So your tears are all about telling us that you're really riding like a Cat 1 30 year old while the truth is something entirely different.

Meanwhile. I got two days of 7 and 8 hours of sleep and averaged almost 11 mph for a 30 mile ride. It was flat, but I'm not telling people that at 65 I'm averaging 20 mph for the year so far which for you is 600 miles.

I should also add that those speeds are for the AVERAGE rider and you can expect a 10% variation among riders.

That makes absolutely no sense. Have you been taking word salad lessons
from trump?

Today, I had some sort of club come by. I was near my coffee stop and they were just heading out. They were all in their 30's and 40's and they were making pretty good speed. On the way home I passed the same group on their way home. Their speed was

considerably reduced and half of the pack was sagging off the back. I have no idea what route they took since the place I passed them on the way home could have been a climbing course or a flat route. These guys were averaging just about what the
numbers from my references said.

I've ridden with plenty of pros taking it easy. It's called zone training.

But Flunky is averaging 20 mph over 600 miles.

Sure, in 1 to 2 hour segments. And?

Before my initial injury I was probably averaging about those reference numbers as well and at that time I was in the front quarter climbing with the club. When my injury occurred I was 65. I lost a little over two years to the injury before diagnosis

and treatment. Then it took me about three years to get back up to my level which was again in the front quarter of the club on climbs and dropping everyone by a LONG way on descents. Then I would ride with the back quarter on the flats.

Flunky, you know, a Grmain 830 can be had quite cheaply these days. So WHY don't you get one, record a ride and post it since whatever you're going does not match real life?

Oh, you mean like this?

https://www.strava.com/activities/14256779418
"Garmin Edge 530 "

Or this?
https://www.strava.com/activities/12716381377
"Garmin Forerunner 745 "

The tracking devices are listed on the right of the individual activity
page.

Before the Garmins I was using a Suunto Ambit3 https://www.strava.com/activities/5485198113

For a long while I was using a Polar 720 and posting to Strava with my
phone app.
https://www.strava.com/activities/1139611450

that's real life tommy - you should try it some time.

--
Add xx to reply

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:04:44 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Now, that's interesting. I thought that you no longer have a Strava
account:
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/27432450> <https://www.strava.com/athletes/114659696>
It would seem that you wiped all your data, but left the account in
place.

I recall that you intentionally closed your Strava account because too
many 20 year olds were ridiculing your amazing achievements. If so,
trying to login to your former account would result in something like
"account closed". A "blocked" account would be the result of having
Strava kick you off their system, probably due to some form of abuse
or misuse.

You can "block" any other athelete you don't want to see, but I don't
think you can block yourself:
"Manage Followers and Block Athletes" <https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918327-Manage-Followers-and-Block-Athletes>

Want to revise your claim that you are "blocked"?


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu May 15 15:39:58 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

On 5/15/2025 3:04 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 12:13:46 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

Funny, I've claimed exactly the opposite. From my link above:

That Zwift "ride" is a "virtual ride".Anyone can fool that.

Virtual or not, power is power.

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Because you're doing something wrong, as usual

So your tears

You're the one crying here, not me.

are all about telling us that you're really riding like a Cat 1 30 year old while the truth is something entirely different.

Please post any reference to where I ever claimed I was riding like a 30
year old cat 1.

Meanwhile. I got two days of 7 and 8 hours of sleep and averaged almost 11 mph for a 30 mile ride. It was flat, but I'm not telling people that at 65 I'm averaging 20 mph for the year so far which for you is 600 miles.

It's a good thing you aren't telling them that, because it wouldn't be true.

We've got you Flunky, you only tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Except when you're posting here.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu May 15 16:50:43 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:04:44 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Now, that's interesting. I thought that you no longer have a Strava
account:
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/27432450> <https://www.strava.com/athletes/114659696>
It would seem that you wiped all your data, but left the account in
place.

I recall that you intentionally closed your Strava account because too
many 20 year olds were ridiculing your amazing achievements. If so,
trying to login to your former account would result in something like "account closed". A "blocked" account would be the result of having
Strava kick you off their system, probably due to some form of abuse
or misuse.

You can "block" any other athelete you don't want to see, but I don't
think you can block yourself:
"Manage Followers and Block Athletes" <https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918327-Manage-Followers-and-Block-Athletes>

Want to revise your claim that you are "blocked"?

I don't know about those accounts other than I thought I needed an account in order to get into Flunky's reference. Maybe one of those accounts is the old original but the newer on was because I didn't have the account name and password so opened a new
one to look into Flunky'a reference. But no - it said that my NAME had a red light.

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles? Don't you know anything?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 16 May 2025 02:11:33 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On Thu May 15 16:50:43 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:04:44 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Now, that's interesting. I thought that you no longer have a Strava
account:
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/27432450>
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/114659696>
It would seem that you wiped all your data, but left the account in
place.

I recall that you intentionally closed your Strava account because too
many 20 year olds were ridiculing your amazing achievements. If so,
trying to login to your former account would result in something like
"account closed". A "blocked" account would be the result of having
Strava kick you off their system, probably due to some form of abuse
or misuse.

You can "block" any other athelete you don't want to see, but I don't
think you can block yourself:
"Manage Followers and Block Athletes"
<https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918327-Manage-Followers-and-Block-Athletes>

Want to revise your claim that you are "blocked"?

I don't know about those accounts other than I thought I needed an account in order to get into Flunky's reference. Maybe one of those accounts is the old original but the newer on was because I didn't have the account name and password so opened a new

one to look into Flunky'a reference. But no - it said that my NAME had a red light.

I don't think anyone cares about what you DON'T know.

I didn't mention your claim to have ridden 928 miles this year. The
number may have come from a different thread. I was commenting on
your Strava account(s) being "blocked" and your rather vague and
misleading error messages. You seem to have problems reproducing
error messages.

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles?

No. I think it's rather obvious that if Strava shows zero miles and
no other information beyond your name, you didn't record your rides on
Strava. If you have a different explanation for the absence of your
ride data, I'm willing to listen. Some proof that you actually rode
928 miles would be useful.

Don't you know anything?

Why do you care what I know? The problem is that you can't explain
things that are easily researched online and produce endless lies,
distortions and fabrications apparently for the purpose of salvaging
what's left of your reputation. What I know, or don't know, has
nothing to do with what YOU know. I could be a genius or an idiot and
you would still be the unchanged Tom.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/15/2025 9:36 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 15:39:58 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

On 5/15/2025 3:04 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 12:13:46 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:

Funny, I've claimed exactly the opposite. From my link above:

That Zwift "ride" is a "virtual ride".Anyone can fool that.

Virtual or not, power is power.

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Because you're doing something wrong, as usual

So your tears

You're the one crying here, not me.

are all about telling us that you're really riding like a Cat 1 30 year old while the truth is something entirely different.

Please post any reference to where I ever claimed I was riding like a 30
year old cat 1.

Meanwhile. I got two days of 7 and 8 hours of sleep and averaged almost 11 mph for a 30 mile ride. It was flat, but I'm not telling people that at 65 I'm averaging 20 mph for the year so far which for you is 600 miles.

It's a good thing you aren't telling them that, because it wouldn't be true.

We've got you Flunky, you only tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Except when you're posting here.

_especially_ when I'm posting here.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/15/2025 11:48 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2025 02:11:33 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On Thu May 15 16:50:43 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:04:44 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Now, that's interesting. I thought that you no longer have a Strava
account:
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/27432450>
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/114659696>
It would seem that you wiped all your data, but left the account in
place.

I recall that you intentionally closed your Strava account because too
many 20 year olds were ridiculing your amazing achievements. If so,
trying to login to your former account would result in something like
"account closed". A "blocked" account would be the result of having
Strava kick you off their system, probably due to some form of abuse
or misuse.

You can "block" any other athelete you don't want to see, but I don't
think you can block yourself:
"Manage Followers and Block Athletes"
<https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918327-Manage-Followers-and-Block-Athletes>

Want to revise your claim that you are "blocked"?

I don't know about those accounts other than I thought I needed an account in order to get into Flunky's reference. Maybe one of those accounts is the old original but the newer on was because I didn't have the account name and password so opened a

new one to look into Flunky'a reference. But no - it said that my NAME had a red light.

I don't think anyone cares about what you DON'T know.

I didn't mention your claim to have ridden 928 miles this year. The
number may have come from a different thread. I was commenting on
your Strava account(s) being "blocked" and your rather vague and
misleading error messages. You seem to have problems reproducing
error messages.

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles?

No. I think it's rather obvious that if Strava shows zero miles and
no other information beyond your name, you didn't record your rides on Strava. If you have a different explanation for the absence of your
ride data, I'm willing to listen. Some proof that you actually rode
928 miles would be useful.

Don't you know anything?

Why do you care what I know? The problem is that you can't explain
things that are easily researched online and produce endless lies, distortions and fabrications apparently for the purpose of salvaging
what's left of your reputation. What I know, or don't know, has
nothing to do with what YOU know. I could be a genius or an idiot and
you would still be the unchanged Tom.

He still doesn't seem to grasp the notion that he's only _claiming_ what
his ride stats are, then claiming I'm cheating when I post actual data.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/15/2025 10:11 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu May 15 16:50:43 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:04:44 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Now, that's interesting. I thought that you no longer have a Strava
account:
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/27432450>
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/114659696>
It would seem that you wiped all your data, but left the account in
place.

I recall that you intentionally closed your Strava account because too
many 20 year olds were ridiculing your amazing achievements. If so,
trying to login to your former account would result in something like
"account closed". A "blocked" account would be the result of having
Strava kick you off their system, probably due to some form of abuse
or misuse.

You can "block" any other athelete you don't want to see, but I don't
think you can block yourself:
"Manage Followers and Block Athletes"
<https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918327-Manage-Followers-and-Block-Athletes>

Want to revise your claim that you are "blocked"?

I don't know about those accounts other than I thought I needed an account in order to get into Flunky's reference. Maybe one of those accounts is the old original but the newer on was because I didn't have the account name and password so opened a new

one to look into Flunky'a reference. But no - it said that my NAME had a red light.

OK, let me get this straight. You can't get into Strava for whatever
reason - no account, account blocked, invalid credentials....whatever.

Yet you've spent the last two months claiming I posted a 200 mile ride
and that my stats are beyond pro level?

If you can't get into strava, you have no visibility to anything I've
posted except for time and distance for the rides.

IOW - all these claims that you saw 200 mile rides and pro-level stats
are complete fabrications.

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles?

Jeff might not be insinuating that, but I'm stating it. I've now caught
you in a blatant lie since you've admitted you can't see my account.
It's not a stretch that you're lying about your rides, especially since
you never post any tracking data.

Don't you know anything?

We know you incessantly lie about everything.


--
Add xx to reply

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 15 May 2025 20:48:14 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2025 02:11:33 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On Thu May 15 16:50:43 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:04:44 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Now, that's interesting. I thought that you no longer have a Strava
account:
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/27432450>
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/114659696>
It would seem that you wiped all your data, but left the account in
place.

I recall that you intentionally closed your Strava account because too
many 20 year olds were ridiculing your amazing achievements. If so,
trying to login to your former account would result in something like
"account closed". A "blocked" account would be the result of having
Strava kick you off their system, probably due to some form of abuse
or misuse.

You can "block" any other athelete you don't want to see, but I don't
think you can block yourself:
"Manage Followers and Block Athletes"
<https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918327-Manage-Followers-and-Block-Athletes>

Want to revise your claim that you are "blocked"?

I don't know about those accounts other than I thought I needed an account in order to get into Flunky's reference. Maybe one of those accounts is the old original but the newer on was because I didn't have the account name and password so opened a new

one to look into Flunky'a reference. But no - it said that my NAME had a red light.

I don't think anyone cares about what you DON'T know.

I didn't mention your claim to have ridden 928 miles this year. The
number may have come from a different thread. I was commenting on
your Strava account(s) being "blocked" and your rather vague and
misleading error messages. You seem to have problems reproducing
error messages.

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles?

No. I think it's rather obvious that if Strava shows zero miles and
no other information beyond your name, you didn't record your rides on >Strava. If you have a different explanation for the absence of your
ride data, I'm willing to listen. Some proof that you actually rode
928 miles would be useful.

Don't you know anything?

Why do you care what I know? The problem is that you can't explain
things that are easily researched online and produce endless lies, >distortions and fabrications apparently for the purpose of salvaging
what's left of your reputation. What I know, or don't know, has
nothing to do with what YOU know. I could be a genius or an idiot andont
you would still be the unchanged Tom.

Youse guys just like to spend money. I had a mile recording device
that recorded miles by counting wheel rotations (a known distance). So
time I got home less time I started divided into distance travelled =
average speed :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 16 May 2025 18:40:45 -0700, John B.
<jbslocomb@fictitious.site> wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2025 02:11:33 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles?

Youse guys just like to spend money. I had a mile recording device
that recorded miles by counting wheel rotations (a known distance). So
time I got home less time I started divided into distance travelled = >average speed :-)

I suggest you ask yourself "what problem is Tom trying to solve"
before providing solutions. In this case, the problem is that Tom has
no proof that he actually rode 928 miles over an unspecified time
interval. Without proof, I do not believe any number provided by Tom, especially those provided for self-aggrandizement. That's the real
purpose of Strava and similar online performance logging services.
There's a fairly good chance that the numbers displayed on the Strava
web site are real. There are ways to tweak the numbers in one's
favor, but why bother when there's no financial or competitive award?

Marginally related topic drift: I did my usual Friday morning walk
this morning. However, I left my smartphone at home and therefore did
not record my walk on Strava. So, no data and therefore no proof: <https://www.strava.com/athlete/training>
Maybe next Friday.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/16/2025 8:40 PM, John B. wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 20:48:14 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2025 02:11:33 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

On Thu May 15 16:50:43 2025 Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:04:44 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why does the Strava ride say that I am blocked?

Now, that's interesting. I thought that you no longer have a Strava
account:
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/27432450>
<https://www.strava.com/athletes/114659696>
It would seem that you wiped all your data, but left the account in
place.

I recall that you intentionally closed your Strava account because too >>>> many 20 year olds were ridiculing your amazing achievements. If so,
trying to login to your former account would result in something like
"account closed". A "blocked" account would be the result of having
Strava kick you off their system, probably due to some form of abuse
or misuse.

You can "block" any other athelete you don't want to see, but I don't
think you can block yourself:
"Manage Followers and Block Athletes"
<https://support.strava.com/hc/en-us/articles/216918327-Manage-Followers-and-Block-Athletes>

Want to revise your claim that you are "blocked"?

I don't know about those accounts other than I thought I needed an account in order to get into Flunky's reference. Maybe one of those accounts is the old original but the newer on was because I didn't have the account name and password so opened a

new one to look into Flunky'a reference. But no - it said that my NAME had a red light.

I don't think anyone cares about what you DON'T know.

I didn't mention your claim to have ridden 928 miles this year. The
number may have come from a different thread. I was commenting on
your Strava account(s) being "blocked" and your rather vague and
misleading error messages. You seem to have problems reproducing
error messages.

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles?

No. I think it's rather obvious that if Strava shows zero miles and
no other information beyond your name, you didn't record your rides on
Strava. If you have a different explanation for the absence of your
ride data, I'm willing to listen. Some proof that you actually rode
928 miles would be useful.

Don't you know anything?

Why do you care what I know? The problem is that you can't explain
things that are easily researched online and produce endless lies,
distortions and fabrications apparently for the purpose of salvaging
what's left of your reputation. What I know, or don't know, has
nothing to do with what YOU know. I could be a genius or an idiot andont
you would still be the unchanged Tom.

Youse guys just like to spend money. I had a mile recording device
that recorded miles by counting wheel rotations (a known distance). So
time I got home less time I started divided into distance travelled = average speed :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

+1
I don't have one on my bike but I do that regularly in autos:

https://www.yellowjersey.org/cars/malibu01.jpg

--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/16/2025 10:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2025 18:40:45 -0700, John B.
<jbslocomb@fictitious.site> wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2025 02:11:33 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Is it your insinuation that because Strava shows zero miles that I didn't do 928 miles?

Youse guys just like to spend money. I had a mile recording device
that recorded miles by counting wheel rotations (a known distance). So
time I got home less time I started divided into distance travelled =
average speed :-)

I suggest you ask yourself "what problem is Tom trying to solve"
before providing solutions. In this case, the problem is that Tom has
no proof that he actually rode 928 miles over an unspecified time
interval. Without proof, I do not believe any number provided by Tom, especially those provided for self-aggrandizement. That's the real
purpose of Strava and similar online performance logging services.
There's a fairly good chance that the numbers displayed on the Strava
web site are real. There are ways to tweak the numbers in one's
favor, but why bother when there's no financial or competitive award?

Marginally related topic drift: I did my usual Friday morning walk
this morning. However, I left my smartphone at home and therefore did
not record my walk on Strava. So, no data and therefore no proof: <https://www.strava.com/athlete/training>
Maybe next Friday.

"if it's not on Strava it didn't happen"

and yes, that's a thing

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/15588661221148170

"The purpose of this study was to explore the perceived psychosocial implications of Strava use among collegiate club runners."

And no, it wasn't published on April 1st.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 5/16/2025 9:40 PM, John B. wrote:

Youse guys just like to spend money. I had a mile recording device
that recorded miles by counting wheel rotations (a known distance). So
time I got home less time I started divided into distance travelled =
average speed :-)

FWIW: John's method is what I used for about 15 years, a
"tick-tick-tick" mechanical rotation counting cyclometer - with the
added trick that the number of wheel rotations in five seconds is very
close to the speed in miles per hour.

I think it was 1986 that I finally got an electronic cyclometer that displayed speed. It acted as a primitive performance motivator - as in
"I can't believe I'm not going any faster than that!!" It caused me to
push myself a bit more. Overall, I think it helped me stay in better
shape over the years.

For me it’s the navigation features I really like, I do look at speed and other data points during the ride but it’s not why I have the unit.

That it’s cable less, is a boon, I always hated the cables!

Roger Merriman

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)