![]() |
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894825)
Wrong. Again. He referenced it first. You've ignored his quote.
In these ways: This wouldn't be nearly as comical if you weren't snowballing your mistakes into even bigger mistakes, but you go from decrying the association with bike racing to then admitting you know nothing about bike racing while trying to argue against bike racing! It's hilarious. The doubling and tripling down on their ignorance is what makes so many posters on this site so entertaining. And you're the big winner this week! But yes, you are fully right, social media is full of people who are so full of themselves and their views they do get a kick out of doubling down on them when they are challenged. Your projection is hilarious. "New cyclist here. 19 years old. I got my first road bike about three weeks ago and have clocked up around 800km so far. I did an FTP test yesterday. It has my current FTP at 257 watts or 3.21 w/kg (since I weigh 80kg). What sort of level is this at for someone untrained with no previous cycling or endurance experience? Also, would anyone be able to point me to some resources or research on FTP or power training?" You immediately replied saying it is a beginner's level, because oh look, he is a beginner. So insightful. More than 1 in 3 are lower than that. But you say it is beginner level. The only way that that is possible is if 1 in 3 are beginners or cycling magically is the one sport where going from beginner to more advanced makes you worse. Even you can see how that isn't the case. |
A few related questions:
1) My nephew is 3 years-old and a pretty strong (st)rider. What would be a good FTP for him? (He weighs 14 kg.) 2) What's the best way to measure power on a strider bike? He's presently just using heart rate and perceived effort for training, and I think it's holding him back. 3) How do we explain what his zones are, since he hasn't learned his numbers yet? |
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894846)
Lmfao you're a sharlatan.
But yes, you are fully right, social media is full of people who are so full of themselves and their views they do get a kick out of doubling down on them when they are challenged. Your projection is hilarious. "New cyclist here. 19 years old. I got my first road bike about three weeks ago and have clocked up around 800km so far. I did an FTP test yesterday. It has my current FTP at 257 watts or 3.21 w/kg (since I weigh 80kg). What sort of level is this at for someone untrained with no previous cycling or endurance experience? Also, would anyone be able to point me to some resources or research on FTP or power training?" You immediately replied saying it is a beginner's level, because oh look, he is a beginner. So insightful. More than 1 in 3 are lower than that. But you say it is beginner level. The only way that that is possible is if 1 in 3 are beginners or cycling magically is the one sport where going from beginner to more advanced makes you worse. Even you can see how that isn't the case. Why do you keep ignoring the fact that he's asking about competitions? Your last paragraph doesn't make any sense. Try again? And it's "charlatan." |
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894846)
Lmfao you're a sharlatan.
On edit: Sorry, already noted ... |
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894838)
Tables have nothing to do with bike racing or the category in which you race. There may be averages that may be descriptive of certain aspects of categories, but neither race results nor categories are based on tables.
Much like FTP! Which is kind of the ironic point that you and the OP both miss. But he's a beginner, so that's fine. You're just ignorant and arguing about something you don't understand. What you are missing is that OP wasn't interested in your lesson about tactics but was asking about ftp and resources to train. That's a very clear ask. You could have said "ftp doesn't matter, learn to race first". But no, that's not what you did. Ps correct me if I am wrong but are you under the impression I said "having a certain ftp will put you in cat x determined by this table". Because that's what this post sounds like. And that is absolutely laughable. |
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894862)
Read the thread, I pointed out multiple times that OP is a beginner in terms of tactics.
Quotes, please. Multiple quotes. |
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894853)
We get it. You don't like people with beginner FTPs being called beginners. No one cares. Move on.
Why do you keep ignoring the fact that he's asking about competitions? Your last paragraph doesn't make any sense. Try again? And it's "charlatan." I quoted what he was asking about. It isn't there. You're the one bringing it in when it wasn't asked about. I guess if you need it more simple. ca. 39% of people have an ftp below 3.21. See source above. If 3.21 is a beginners ftp as you claim, that means 39% of people are at or below beginners ftp. Or somehow one doesn't improve when advancing. Do you see how ridiculous that would be? |
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894862)
Ps correct me if I am wrong but are you under the impression I said "having a certain ftp will put you in cat x determined by this table". Because that's what this post sounds like. And that is absolutely laughable.
Now you're dug in so deep you're adding post scripts about stuff you're trying to imagine other people saying, failing to realize why a specific point was mentioned in the first place. Hint: you brought it up... |
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894874)
I guess if you need it more simple. ca. 39% of people have an ftp below 3.21. See source above. If 3.21 is a beginners ftp as you claim, that means 39% of people are at or below beginners ftp. Or somehow one doesn't improve when advancing. Do you see how ridiculous that would be? Post the data, perhaps? Maybe a link to said data? |
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
(Post 21894852)
A few related questions:
1) My nephew is 3 years-old and a pretty strong (st)rider. What would be a good FTP for him? (He weighs 14 kg.) 2) What's the best way to measure power on a strider bike? He's presently just using heart rate and perceived effort for training, and I think it's holding him back. 3) How do we explain what his zones are, since he hasn't learned his numbers yet? |
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894879)
Can you elaborate on this?
Post the data, perhaps? Maybe a link to said data? |
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894876)
Nearly every response to you is a correction of some sort.
Now you're dug in so deep you're adding post scripts about stuff you're trying to imagine other people saying, failing to realize why a specific point was mentioned in the first place. Hint: you brought it up... I am asking you if that is what you meant. Because it is very much what it sounds like when you say "categories aren't determined by a table" (no **** sherlock). No imagining, but asking. Your projection is getting more and more out of hand. |
It's strangely fascinating to watch someone in a hole ask for more shovels.
|
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894882)
2nd time you are asking me for something you can find above in the thread. Do better.
It’s worth saying a few words about Cycling Analytics users, because they aren’t a perfectly random sampling of cyclists or people overall. The best term that I can think of is that Cycling Analytics users are “serious cyclists”. All the data here comes from people with power meters, and about half of Cycling Analytics users race regularly. |
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894887)
every response from you is hogwash
I am asking you if that is what you meant. Because it is very much what it sounds like when you say "categories aren't determined by a table" (no **** sherlock). No imagining, but asking. Your projection is getting more and more out of hand. That's what you said... |
Originally Posted by WhyFi
(Post 21894889)
It's strangely fascinating to watch someone in a hole ask for more shovels.
|
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894893)
But, you don't know anything about categories.
That's what you said... |
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894891)
I said a link to the data. Not a link to the calculator.
Again, you're arguing things you don't understand. |
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894897)
So you do think that I think categories are determined by a table?
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
and then I linked a table showing despite being a complete beginner to cycling, this dude is already above the cat 5 category.
|
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894899)
You're again showcasing both that you don't know what you don't know, and you don't know what it is you're asserting. |
Thanks for playing, ZHVelo.
|
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894894)
You still haven't been able to reply to me but think I'm the one digging?
|
Originally Posted by rubiksoval
(Post 21894914)
Thanks for playing, ZHVelo.
|
Originally Posted by WhyFi
(Post 21894916)
I'd consider it for someone less arrogant in their wrongness. You? Nah.
|
Originally Posted by ZHVelo
(Post 21894921)
Lmfao you ever say anything that isn't ironic af?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.