Quote Originally Posted by SadieKate
So, when MP and Nanci average only 13.5 miles an hour over a 600k, they're only beginning riders?

13.5 maybe slow for you on your course with your equipment, terrain, age, weight, winds, etc., etc., etc., It can be damn fast in other situations. When you can ride a 600K faster than that, let us know.

Sorry, but you sound like the Bike Club president who told me I wasn't a serious cyclist because I don't ride ultra-distance events. Well, I haven't noticed Lance riding brevets either. You start out your post by agreeing that the variables are critical, but you end it with implying that slow speeds make you a beginning rider. You want to re-consider?
No... I was not referring to long-term riders with the reference to beginning riders... someone in this thread - and I forget who - made reference to herself being a beginning rider...

Yes I know 13 1/2 mph can be damn fast - I too know what a head wind is like, and what nasty hills are like.

I suggest you go back to my post - I implied slow averages may be beacuse one is a beginning rider, or because one is a recreational rider (and yes, to many, riding a 600k to complete it is recreational, riding it to have the fastest time is a different motivation).

I also implied by my post that the same rider has different averages for different reasons on different rides.

Trying to suggest that to complete is a good enough reason.
Trying to suggest that to measure oneself against oneself is the most useful measure of increasing fitness.
Trying to imply that an average means nothing without knowing the variables involved.

I'm not reconsidering what I wrote, I stand by it.
I am sorry if it was clear not enough.