Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

Finding location of my max speed on Strava.

  • 17-04-2021 4:13pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 15,937 ✭✭✭✭ osarusan


    Hi all, on a cycle today, Strava recorded my max speed as 74.2km/h.


    I very much doubt this is true, but in the past it has thrown up some unusually fast times and there are some steep hilly sections, so who knows.


    That speed doesn't come up in the results for any of the existing segments, and I even created a new segment for a particular downhill section I thought it might be, but it wasn't that either.


    Is there a way to find where it is?


Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    on the website (dunno if it's available in the app), click on analysis - top left, under overview - and you'll see a graph of your speed, and you can hover your mouse on this graph and it'll show the point in the cycle that happened at.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,183 ✭✭✭ Mercian Pro


    osarusan wrote: »
    Hi all, on a cycle today, Strava recorded my max speed as 74.2km/h.


    I very much doubt this is true, but in the past it has thrown up some unusually fast times and there are some steep hilly sections, so who knows.


    That speed doesn't come up in the results for any of the existing segments, and I even created a new segment for a particular downhill section I thought it might be, but it wasn't that either.


    Is there a way to find where it is?

    If you go into Analysis on Strava, it should show you a graph of speed over time. The 74kph spike should be fairly obvious. In the background you should see the profile of the saved ride and, from the time and profile, you should be able to work out what mountain or cliff you were coming down.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,937 ✭✭✭✭ osarusan


    Hey thanks both, never knew about that function and it's really useful.

    The spike was very obvious, but as it took place momentarily on the flattest part of the whole route, it was some kind of glitch sadly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,669 ✭✭✭✭ Wishbone Ash


    osarusan wrote: »
    ... it was some kind of glitch sadly.
    It sometimes happens if you enter tunnels or heavily wooded areas.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,373 ✭✭✭ G1032


    Strava seems to evaluate speed differently from other apps/sites and Strava always seems to be the odd one out. I've seen it throw up 70 odd before and Garmin Connect would report a max speed of something in the 60s. Same happens with Wahoo and Training Peaks. I don't know why Strava is always the outlier. So if you've used a Garmin or Wahoo or similar computer, check those stats for what is more likely a more accurate speed

    Edit. Just seen it was a glitch. Even so, would be worth checking as I said above to see what the other software reported.

    Edit 2 .Just checked back over a few rides there. Jan 30th this year, with data recorded on a Wahoo, Strava reoprts a max speed of 74.5km/hr but my Wahoo reports 51.7. Training Peaks also reports is as 51.7 also. This is a regular enough thing. Strava reporting is often miles out. I wouldn't ever pay much heed to it.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 287 ✭✭ uphillonly


    Note if speed is being recorded from a phone through the Strava app it’s often very inaccurate. A phone is measuring speed using GPS which often gets thrown by gradients, trees, buildings etc.

    Testing a phone against Garmin with wheel sensors, the phone often showed max speeds over 10 kmh higher.

    Similarly with altitude, metres climbed measurements are more accurate using atmospheric pressure readings than GPS. I think most bike computers default to pressure over GPS for this reason. The only downside I find is in heavy rain my old Garmin 810 pressure reading goes skewy from the moisture on the sensor. My newer Garmin watch doesn’t seen to have the same issue, so perhaps they’ve sorted that out.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭ smacl


    Speed computed using GPS can often be glitchy and needs to be smoothed. I've had undeserved top 10 short off road segment positions in the past because of this. Tends to be much more reliable with a wheel based speed sensor.


  • Registered Users Posts: 36,082 ✭✭✭✭ ED E


    smacl wrote: »
    Speed computed using GPS can often be glitchy and needs to be smoothed. I've had undeserved top 10 short off road segment positions in the past because of this. Tends to be much more reliable with a wheel based speed sensor.

    People have been asking strava to put a two or three sampling smooth on this value for yonks. Like a decade. Still broken. But hey we get local leaders or whatever they're called...


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    altitude using GPS is deliberately inaccurate, isn't it? latitude and longitude are about ten times the accuracy.

    i have a cheapo garmin with no atmospheric sensor, and i'd trust strava over it (from having looked at the open map elevation data on contour lines which strava may or may not curve fit to).


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    smacl wrote: »
    Speed computed using GPS can often be glitchy and needs to be smoothed. I've had undeserved top 10 short off road segment positions in the past because of this. Tends to be much more reliable with a wheel based speed sensor.
    GPS should be more accurate but less consistent.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,358 Mod ✭✭✭✭ smacl


    GPS should be more accurate but less consistent.

    GPS typically contains plenty of information on accuracy, e.g. HDOPs, VDOPs, error RMSs etc... but very many applications simply ignore it and ditch everything except position.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    what i meant was GPS might glitch occasionally, but for average speed is dependable; if it says you cycled 2km from A to B, your average speed should be pretty on the nose. whereas a wheel sensor won't suffer from glitches (unless you're moving very slowly) but can be inaccurate if you've not programmed a full wheel revolution into it accurately.


  • Registered Users Posts: 36,082 ✭✭✭✭ ED E


    Precisely what Magic says. If your HDOP is decent (signal is strong, not under a building) then you can count on GPS to give you a great avg speed over 100m but cannot count on it over 5m or 10m.


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,937 ✭✭✭✭ osarusan


    I'm back with a different Strava question. I was out for a cycle and looking at some segments after I came back, I noticed that on a particular segment (in Meelick, a small village in east Clare), in the Top 10 for the segment, the record for the segment is held by a guy from Corona, California, and also populated by people from Colorado, Georgia, England, Germany, and 2 from South Africa.

    What's the story with this? Are these guys doing some kind of virtual ride? I know that technology exists for stuff like the Tour de France, but for Meelick? Or are these guys just spoofers?

    EDIT: Never mind, I take all my accusations back, these guys were competing in the Junior Tour of Ireland 2018 and 2019. Both times Stage 5 took them through/around Clare. Seems strange that they would go down such narrow roads which, 2/3 years later at least, are in woeful condition...but then that's the only way to get to some of the steeper climbs.


  • Registered Users Posts: 824 ✭✭✭ mamax


    The junior tour has taken plenty of strava segments in Clare, the same anywhere races are held really.


Advertisement