Machka 

+1

AdelaaR

Exactly.
If stops were allowed to not count in the time I would do a century ride stretched out over several years in which I would do short 100m sprints at max speed every time I felt like it ... then after a few years I could brag to my friends about my sub 3 hour century.

Machka 

Excellent example!!

Grumpy McTrumpy

I doubt it, but they could get close. 33.3mph is a darn fast average. Maybe a team time trial with aero help would beat that.

Here's a considerably longer race that was on pace to easily beat the 3.5hour century mark

https://velonews.competitor.com/2010/...results_145702

jamesdak 

But is in not silly to quantify something with some many variables like a century ride by only one factor, how the time is kept? I mean come on. I can do a relatively flat 100 miles or throw in the mountains and have the century include around 20 or 30 miles of climbing. And of course then there are all the weather related factors to consider, etc. Not to mention the fact that we are all riding different courses. How can anyone truly draw any real conclusions but what we all post from around the world.

hhnngg1

Total time for everything, not just centuries.

While the Garmin can indeed keep track of only moving time, I'm finding that even on a typical hour ride, with 2-3 minutes of stoppage, that's a big deal for those who are actively keeping track of improvement. I don't have a ton of lights on one of the rides I do here, but it's easily 3-4 minutes of stoppage per hour, which at 4mins/60mins, works out to a 1.3mph difference at 20mph, which is a very big difference for racing and training purposes. (Not a big deal if you're just out to ride.)

rdtompki

If you're looking for bragging rights in the purist form, then a sub-X hour century should consist of a solo rider, non-stop, no pacelines on a given course; a flat Florida course, no wind being significantly different than a mountainous course. Most of us who do organized rides or club rides use riding time just to measure fitness since stops are either inevitable (regroups) or desired (rest stops). It's all good if you're riding. Race if you want real bragging rights: same day, same course against your peers.

gregf83 

+1. Timing (ride time, elapsed time or moving time) a century or any ride other than a hillclimb is for your own logbook, not for comparison. If you want to compare you need to finish ahead of someone.

AdelaaR

Very true.
But still it doesn't make sense to say: "I did a 5 hour century ride" when you rode 50 miles in 2,5 hours ... then stopped for an hour ... and then rode 50 miles back in 2,5 hours.
That's not a century ride ... that's two 50 mile rides.

halfspeed

Exactly. It's an arbitrary personal milestone so however you want to measure it is fine.

halfspeed

According to whom?

AdelaaR

Logic.

kbro1986

+1

keepamonte

We have something here in Tulsa called "The Deuce" (during Tulsa Tough) where you get a jersey if you complete both back to back centuries in under 5 hours each. There is also almost 8k feet of climbing as well. Did it this year with a few buddies and didn't stop either day. Total time needs to be the measure in my opinion

bikerjp

I do the opposite. I set mine to auto pause so that I can get consistent metrics. Sometimes I hit more lights or make more lights. That affects my ride time and average speed making it hard to compare two rides. With the auto pause it's mostly (because starting and stopping still has an effect) comparable from one ride to the next over the same course. This makes it easier to see if I'm improving or not.

Of course this has nothing to do with how to measure time for a century, but I'm mostly interested in my own improvements over time and I don't take breaks outside stop lights.

jamesdak 

Actually, we are talking the same thing and I agree with you. My computer stops timing if I stop for the rare stop sign I encounter. I feel this is a more accurate portrayal of fitness also although there is the minor variable involved with each stop and start incident.

bikerjp

My bad. Read the "ride time" part wrong, but yeah I agree. Unfortunately, I have more stops than the "rare stop sign" but mainly on the leaving and return to the main part of town.

hhnngg1

You should include the lights if you want to really track how you're improving. It makes a big difference - you might think it's the same because you're cutting out stoppage, but that stoppage is big time rest, even if it's only 2 mins per 60 min total. I can ride a full 1.3 mph faster for the entire 60min average if I don't count the 2-3min of light stops. That's such a big difference that it's an entirely different class of rider.

jamesdak 

?? I must be missing something here. If the clock and speed calculation stops when you stop and then start again when moving how is this not accurate. My computer calculates average moving speed not an average based on overall time of the session.

AdelaaR

It may be accurate, although it really isn't because it also counts the parts where you come to a stop and where you pull up to speed again, but that's not the point.
If you stop at an intersection because the light is red and then one minute later you start again ... your lactate levels will be lower ... your heartrate will be lower ... your breathing will be more relaxed ... in one word: REST.
This rest will make you go faster after the rest, corrupting your overall data because you couldn't have gone that fast without that rest, which you didn't count in.

halfspeed

OK. Is it two rides if I ride 50 miles, stop for two minutes and then ride 50 miles back?

AdelaaR

Indeed.

curiouskid55

I would consider a sub 5 hour century flat...very flat.

hhnngg1

People ALWAYS underestimate how much stoppage time they have and how it affects their averages.

As I posted before, even 4-5 lights giving about 3-4 mins of stoppage time per hour will drop your net average speed by over 1mph, and closer to 1.3-1.5mph if you're going 20+mph. And remember, this is the average speed for the WHOLE ride, not just when you feel like hammering, so you'll often have to go 3-4mph faster on the fast segments to get that 1.3mph average. It's very significant. I used to do it like you and just measure moving time, but I was horrified when I did the actual time with lights and realized how much of a assist that 3-4 mins gives you.

Despite what you think, it's a HUGE advantage to have 1-4 mins of lights every 60 minutes.

Right Said Fred

How about one minute?