umd

wut

Pedaleur

If I have set out to do a century, whether 100 miles or 100 km, I'd do it. We don't know much about God, but we _do_ know he likes round numbers and frowns on people who don't ride a century at least once a year.

But I rarely set out to with this goal in mind, and in those cases I wouldn't. I distinctly remember one 99+ km ride where I just said "F it" and keeled over in the driveway anyway.

achoo

Significant enough to get you to post about it.

ridethecliche

Actually, miles and Km's are units

Slightspeed

I did 91 miles of a club century ride, skipping the last snack stop. When I got home, I did the remaining 9 miles, which made it my third, and last century. I just do 50s and metrics now. After 5 hours or so, the fun factor really trails off.

On a different direction, it's traditional to ride miles equal to your age on a birthday. It was a rainy, ugly day for my 70th birthday, so I decided to just do a 70 kph run (40+ something mph in real money) on a dry downhill stretch of road. Close enough.

Ogsarg

For 100km I wouldn't since I ride more than that almost every Sunday. If I'm riding less it's likely because I have some other commitment and have limited time. For 100 miles I would because I haven't ridden 100 miles yet so that would be a milestone. Once accomplished I probably would not go out of my way to do it again.

MoAlpha

As the OCD Society motto used to read, "Every member counts."

indyfabz

Cool story, bro. Was that last century before or after this thread was started nearly nine years ago?

CliffordK

Oh, wow, another old topic yanked from the grave!!!

It depends. Sometimes I will, sometimes I won't.

If I am mighty close, say within a mile or 2 of the "goal", then I'll often tip it over.

If I'm carrying cargo or towing, then often it is the straightest route home. Or, perhaps choose a route that is a little longer than my normal route, then straight home.

If it is an especially long ride, then I may be exhausted enough to just go home. Sometimes I think I can go home for a snack or drop off stuff, then go out again, but that going out again is mighty difficult at say 195 miles.

I'm with @Mr. Beanz. I'm more likely to consider 100 miles a threshold (although Strava considers 100km as their grand fondo. But, I'll sometimes tell myself it just doesn't matter.

WhyFi

Preface: I know that this is an old, old thread...

Really? That strikes me as unusual that 62+ miles is so routine but you've never done 100.

Cypress

I'm more concerned with how/why necrothreads gets bumped than I am with hitting 100 miles.

It takes special circumstances for me to care about centuries anymore. You've gotta be over 10k feet of climbing or have some extraordinary average speed/wattage.

Now, 200 miles... I'd ride an extra 20-30 miles to hit 200.

Rides4Beer

I was wondering the same thing.

Yes, as previously mentioned nine years ago, all goals are arbitrary, but that's the whole point, to have something to shoot for. There's nothing to be gained fitness wise between 99.9 miles and 100 miles, or 9,999 vs 10,000 miles for the year, but you can bet that if I'm that close, I'm gonna round it out. lol

That being said, if my goal is a century, then I'll plan a route that I know will get me there (usually end up with 101-105 miles), then I don't have to worry about it when I get back.

CAT7RDR

Since the thread is 10 years old, I will add it is no longer about miles but elevation gained. I would much rather do another loop to add a 1,000 ft then deceive myself thinking adding 1.5 miles is somehow a great feat to get to 100.

Now, a goal of 100 miles and 10K ft of climb is something I would do an additional climb just to give me a hard number I can feel good about.

MoAlpha

The last ten years have seen rapid improvements in number-rounding.

ksryder

Now it's all about how long you can hold 4.5 watts/kg.

WhyFi

Fake miles!

indyfabz

Since this one won't be allowed to rest in peace I might as well get in on the action...I used to be a century junky. Not anymore. I'd rather do a moderately long ride that is scenic and has some climbing. 100 for the sake of 100 doesn't interest me.

When I did a supported tour across PA back in 2008 a couple of guys did what is suggested by this thread. The penultimate day was about 97 miles and ended at a university. It had been a hard day, with cold rain in the morning and stifling humidity later in the day. Good amount of climbing as well. A couple of guys rode around in a damn university parking lot to make it a 100 mile day. I thought they were lost and rode over to them to show them where our dorm was. I did an eye roll inside my head when they told me what they were doing.

Cypress

I imagine that people obsessed about hitting 100 are the same ones that base ride difficulty on average speed.

BillyD

All you folks who profess no interest in 100 miles anymore, I wonder if you'd feel that way if we had an outstanding and competitive American pro cycling team like we did back a dozen+ years ago when a century was the standard for anyone who wanted to be considered a serious cyclist. Just saying, I think the pro scene has a large motivative influence over the cycling scene.

Cypress

I race P/1/2 domestically. I probably only need two hands to count how many 100+ mile races I've done out of literally hundreds of races. The 100+ mile ones are easier because they are relatively flat. Distance doesn't mean much when you're in a pack. A hilly 85 is twice as hard as a 110-mile flat race.

I don't remember there being a "standard" mileage at which a cyclist would be taken seriously. Even putting out big power numbers doesn't matter if you can't read a pack. I've seen a lot of strong guys fizzle out because they didn't understand the game.

TheDudeIsHere

Not all of them. I did an extra loop many times one year as I had joined a century a month club. Target 12 centuries, finished with 23 and every one of them was a full 100 miles.

One of the centuries I did with 12,000 ft of gain. 114 miles but if it had been 98 miles, I would have turned around somewhere to complete a full 100. I've done several flatter SOLO centuries at better averages (5:45 time) and those centuries were not as difficult as the mountain centuries so contrary to what your imagination tells you, not every person who feels the need to complete a solid 100 bases the difficulty of a ride on average speed.

mstateglfr 

Why cant there be multiple ways to view ride difficulty?

If I ride a route 15 times in a year across all conditions, I have a general idea of what to expect for speed. If I push myself one day, the ride will have been difficult compared to the normal experience for that route. Why would you not consider that to be a valid example of 'difficult'?
Overall distance can be viewed as 'difficult'. Average speed can be viewed as 'difficult'. Elevation can be viewed as 'difficult'. Wind can be viewed as 'difficult'.

I get it- you are experienced and laugh at the basics around you, but Im not sure why their view of what is difficult is meaningless.

indyfabz

fify

TheDudeIsHere

It only takes a little more than 5 hours to do a solo century. Done several in 5:45 and organized centuries in 5:30 with a couple of buds. And the last 30 -45 minutes is usually the biggest blast part of the ride, getting close to the finish.

Ogsarg

It is unusual I guess. I should perhaps add that when I started cycling just a few years ago, I had no expectation that I would be doing 70-80 mile rides. I had no goals whatsoever in terms of miles in a day / week / year, etc. I was just looking for something to help stay active that was more enjoyable than going to a gym or running.

I found I enjoyed it so much, I just kept going farther never really having a goal of any particular miles. I will probably do a century at some point and perhaps it will be just the scenario noted in the original post. BTW, I did not realize this was an ancient thread.