This morning I decided that the time had come to snag that cool gray jersey that Zwift awards you when you do a 100km ride. Here’s how I went about it.
Before I start, let me be clear that this post is not about preparing for a metric century in Zwift … you can prepare for it just the same way you’d prepare for an on-the-road MC. I’ll talk a bit about the difference between the “real” metric century and the Zwift version, but as far as preparation I think there are a lot of resources out there to get you prepared (including Zwift’s own Fondo training courses). This post is about the decisions I made about how to approach it in-game, and the experience of actually doing it.
I’m a 100 mile/week rider (if you count the Peloton in there) and have done a few centuries, both the metric and full 100-milers. I’d started a couple of Zwift rides in the past intending to go 100km, but for one reason or another I never actually went the distance. With the local weather somehow locked into a cold, rainy pattern for the past few weeks and not a whole lot to do at home during the lockdown, I decided that today would be the day.
The easy way or the fun way?
I had considered two strategies for tackling the MC in Zwift. One was to pick a longish course such as the Uber Pretzel and just ride it. That was how I had started my last 100k attempt, but after I saw how long it took me to do the first 30k or so I bailed out, figuring it’d take most of the day to do the rest. I am not entirely sure how long it would take me to do that ride… there’s a fair bit of climbing, but in the real world if you begin and end a ride in the same place the ascents and descents are literally equal so the extra effort going up is rewarded by rest coming down. I’m not sure that the same can be said for Zwift. I never really seem to coast through sections like Titan’s grove the way I can through similarly hilly areas near my home. I feel like Zwift cheats me on the downhills… not a big deal since I’m on the thing to train, but still I don’t think the ascents and descents cancel each other out on Zwift nearly as much as they do in real life.
The other approach to doing 100k, the one I chose, was to set things up for myself so that I could complete the 100k as quickly as possible. So the course I chose was Tempus Fugit, the flattest, fastest route in Watopia, and a favorite of people who just want to maximize their MPH (or KPH, as the case may be). 100k on Tempus Fugit has only about 500 feet of climb.
After selecting the course I had to decide on the bike, and I had a conundrum. Should I pick a TT bike for its aero, or should I pick a fast road bike and rely on the draft? You may be aware that in Zwift, you get no aero advantage from drafting behind other riders (they may draft you but you can’t draft them). So if you go TT you’re on your own. With other bikes, you can take advantage of a healthy aero boost when drafting behind a rider (and even more if the group is four or more riders), but that means that others dictate your pace to some extent. Today, being quarantine day #1zillion, there were so many riders on Fuego Flats it was, as they say, a conga line. Finding drafting partners would not be a problem.
After some thought and fruitless googling, I decided to go the TT route, just to simplify things. I selected the Cervélo P5 for the ride. Why that bike? It happened to be in my garage. It was probably the best bike I could afford the last time I did a TT ride and considering how few TT rides I do I wasn’t going to buy another just for this. So the P5 it is.
Getting ready
Although I generally don’t like to eat before a bike ride, most of my Zwift rides are an hour or less so it hardly matters. For what was fixing to be a 3+ hour ride, I was going to need some fuel, so I made myself a breakfast of oatmeal and an orange, and was ready to go. (NB: I am very far from being a sports nutritionist, but this worked for me).
Riding Fuego Flats on a TT bike is just about as dull as Zwift can get. Fuego Flats is, as the name would suggest, pool-table flat, with gradients between -1° and 2°. It’s so monotonous that I could actually feel the one degree changes in gradient, which normally are imperceptible. Add to that that the TT bike cannot draft behind others, and you pretty much can completely ignore the other riders. After all, you can’t crash into them, and you can’t draft off them, so it really doesn’t matter where they are. Riding alone or in a pack of a hundred riders, it’s exactly the same experience. Pick a gear, grind out the miles, and that’s about it. I chose a 33-34 kph pace so I could finish in three hours and settled in.
I took a break around the 50k mark. Just like in real life, I’m looking for a bio-break after about hour #1. I decided to hold out until I was past mid-way, because I wanted to have more behind me than ahead of me when I got back on the bike. I grabbed a bread roll (it was the only thing I could see in there that I could eat while on the bike) and got started again before I got too comfortable not pedaling.
Around the 80k mark, I opened up a pack of Gu. I’m not really into snacking on my ride, but it may just be that I don’t know what I’m doing. I did notice that my time on “Fuego Flats Reverse” seemed to drop about 2-3% each time through, so I was definitely running out of gas. Would the right snacks help? I really don’t know. I do like Gu, though, it’s like candy. My favorite flavor is Chocolate Outrage, but if you’re actually in the middle of a big ride it’s a little hard to get down, so I generally go for the salted caramel. (In case you’re wondering, I am not compensated by Gu for this mention, though at about $1 per gel, I certainly wouldn’t mind them throwing some free product my way)
The 100k mark came and went without a whole lot of fanfare. There was the usual blue banner saying that I’d gotten the badge, followed by the orange banner saying that I unlocked the Metric Century jersey (the whole reason I was doing this, to tell the truth). I was getting close to finishing the timed Fuego Flats Reverse, so I went ahead and finished that. Then I was close to getting 105 km, so I did that, too. (If it weren’t for completionism, I’d probably have half as many Zwift miles as I do!)
Final thoughts
So, after all that, how does a Zwift metric century compare to the real thing? I suppose in terms of effort, it was about the same. I live in a fairly hilly area, so the metric centuries I have done have usually had 3-4000 feet of climb to them, which both requires extra effort at times but also provides some relief. I’ve never just sat and cranked out three hours at a constant pace, and it’s hard to compare.
I think I found it a little less comfortable doing a distance ride on the trainer because the trainer has the bike more or less locked in place. On the road, the bike can sway just a little from side to side as you pedal. That’s particularly noticeable on hills but you still feel it on the flats as well. The trainer doesn’t give you the same jinba ittai that you get on the road, which is a shame. I am not sure I ever plan to do a full 100 mile century ride indoors for just that reason. Then again, if it doesn’t warm up soon around here I will probably be looking for new things to try.
One other thought: if you’re doing an organized event, then the rest stops are set at intervals of the organizer’s choosing, but of course on Zwift you’re making that decision for yourself (assuming you’re not in a group ride), and that may change things a little bit.
In summary, I think I can safely say that if you have completed a metric century in either Zwift or the real world, you probably wouldn’t have trouble doing one in the other. Jumping on your TT bike and heading for Fuego Flats is probably the fastest way to get in your 100k, but exciting it is not.
For your indoor-riding money, which is better: Peloton or Zwift? I have both, and although Peloton riders and Zwift riders each have more or less the same goal of getting a good cycling workout, they almost could not be more different. After about 1,000 Peloton rides (just about every day for a couple of years), I switched entirely over to Zwift a few months ago, but am now splitting my time between the two. I’ll explain why…
The Peloton Experience
For this comparison, I am going to by relying on my own history with both the Peloton bike and the Zwift experience, and talk about the pros and cons of each. You’ll see that sometimes the comparisons are apples-to-oranges (after all, one is hardware with streaming content and the other is an app to which you bring your own interface) but I think it is possible to make some valid comparison since at the end of the day it’s all variations on indoor cycling / spinning.
My Introduction to the Peloton Bike
I bought my Peloton bike a couple of years ago after hearing my brother go on and on about how the Peloton had improved his fitness. It was hard to miss that he’d lost 70 pounds in the year he’d owned it, and that summer when members of our extended family climbed Mt. Mansfield he certainly did seem to be up to the task (we rewarded him by making him carry the backpack). Even so, my friends who know me as a cheerleader for the bike that goes nowhere might be surprised to learn that I left my first visit to the showroom unimpressed.
In August of 2017, my wife and I went to our local Peloton showroom (yeah, we live in a place like that) where we got to sample the bike. The salesperson showed me that you watch the class on the screen and turn the resistance knob when the instructor tells you.
“If the bike knows the resistance should go up, why do I have to turn the knob?” I asked. This was a dumb bike. Nicely made, and super smooth action (thanks to a drive belt instead of a chain), but just plain dumb.
Eager to please, she showed me a feature called “just ride” that featured beautiful movies of rides on trails and roads that I could just follow, bringing my own soundtrack if I wanted to. “So, if the road goes uphill in the movie, does the ride get harder?” I asked. “No,” she replied. The fact is, the experience on the bike has nothing to do with what you see on the screen. Again, dumb.
My wife and I left without buying a bike. I am not sure exactly how she felt about it at the time, but I was disappointed. I wanted a bike I could ride in the winter, and this didn’t seem to be it. I had never taken a spin class and wasn’t all that enthusiastic to, either. And, for all the hype, the Peloton experience is just a spin class beamed to you over the Internet. I mean, let’s keep some perspective.
The Peloton is not a biking simulator
Over the next few days, I actually found myself starting to reconsider my first impression. I had been disappointed in the Peloton bike because wasn’t the indoor bike simulator I wanted, but then again, it wasn’t trying to be. I realized on reflection that a big factor in my disappointment was my expectations and not anything to do with the bike itself. The following weekend, my wife and I went back to take a sample class on the bike.
This time, I started to think of the Peloton as a training tool, a piece of equipment that could make me a better cyclist not though a true simulation, but by focusing on very specific elements of the experience, namely building up my cardiovascular endurance and my leg muscles. The Peloton bike is a direct-drive setup (like a fixie) and there is no coasting on the Peloton — something that took some getting used to… I felt like George Jetson on the treadmill sometimes! With no coasting, there really isn’t any “downhill” on the Peloton, either. You can lighten up the resistance to next to nothing, but you are still spinning even when your are in so-called “active recovery,” which is the closest thing to rest that you’re ever going to get as long as class is in session.
Given how happy I am with my Peloton bike today it’s funny to think that purchasing it was such a close call. Even after the second visit, I was still on the fence. After all, start-up cost for the bike was north of $2,500, and I’d pretty much agonize over that sort of spend if I didn’t end up using it. My wife seemed interested, though, and in the end each of us rationalized the purchase by telling ourselves that we were doing it for the other.
Does the Peloton really work?
Yes. Yes it does. You have to actually ride it, though. Get yourself on a schedule where you’re doing, say, three or four 45 minute rides a week and I can’t imagine how you won’t see a difference. And cycling is one of the lowest-impact exercises there is, so if you’ve got the motivation you can do it every day.
On the topic of the Peloton’s effectiveness, I’d say that for building cardiovascular fitness it’s probably even better than actual cycling out on the road. On the Peloton, there really is no downhill-as I mentioned before there is no coasting. You also don’t ever need to stop for traffic lights or stop signs or anything like that. It is one continuous workout. In fact, the only way I’d say the Peloton bike was easier than the road bike is that on the Peloton you choose your own resistance and can increase or decrease it at any time, whereas on the road bike the hills are what they are, and although you get to select your gearing you still have to get up the hills on your route.
So, if you love your Peloton, why did you pony up for a Zwift setup?
After about two years riding (generally daily) on the Peloton, I was starting to wonder if there might be more in life. We had a couple of great years, and at the end of it I was in excellent shape, maybe twenty pounds lighter, and able to keep up with riders half my age (and drop them on the hills — priceless!). The Peloton is a low-impact exercise and it’s something you can do every day, and I really couldn’t ask for more. Still, I had started seeing the Zwift demo bikes set up in the bike shop and was being bombarded constantly on YouTube by Zwift ads, and I started to think, “it really would be fun to actually do a bike riding / racing simulator.”
I didn’t take the plunge right away. After all, although I owned a road bike I didn’t have the other equipment needed to get started. For the uninitiated, it’s important to know that Zwift is an internet service / app(s), and not a hardware/software/service combination the way Peloton is. The hardware component of Zwift is BYO, and the cost can be significant, particularly if you don’t have a bike. (On the other hand, if you do have a bike some Zwift setups can be relatively inexpensive.)
Since I didn’t already have an indoor trainer, I used Zwift’s website for guidance and settled on a Wahoo Kickr / Wahoo Climb combo. I already had an Apple TV and (as I mentioned) a bike, so I wouldn’t have to purchase anything else, but the Wahoo gear ran north of $1500 all by itself. Zwift is a subscription service with a monthly fee, too, so if depending on what equipment you have already the Zwift experience cost can rival that of the Peloton (though over time the much higher Peloton subscription cost will make a big difference). Setting up Zwift wasn’t too difficult, but unfortunately that is only half the battle in this case, because the trainer itself needs to be set up. Getting my bike connected to the Wahoo (I bought the wheel-off model) and dialed in took a fair amount of time, so advantage Peloton in the “getting started” matchup.
Closer, but still not a perfect simulator
Although I enjoy the Zwift very much, it is sadly not a perfect bicycling simulator, either. Now, I’m aware that most of the shortcomings I’m about to detail have to do with the (Wahoo) hardware and not the Zwift program, exactly. But you can’t Zwift without hardware, and I’m using what seems to be their preferred setup, so at the end of the day I don’t think it’s really off the mark to call these things issues with Zwift.
The first shortcoming that becomes obvious is that there is no braking in Zwift. I think there’s a keyboard key for slowing down, but practically speaking there’s no braking. That’s not nearly as big a problem in the virtual world as it would be in the real one, because Zwift has no collision detection so there is no chance of colliding with your fellow riders or obstacles, and there is no chance of you not being able to make a corner due to excessive speed. Still, drafting is a thing in Zwift (and some opine that it’s an even greater force there than IRL) and it can be tricky to tuck in behind another rider when you can’t actually tap the brakes. Complicating things is the subtle latency between the trainer and the app, and positioning yourself for drafting becomes an art form.
Along the same lines there is no steering in Zwift. You can make route-level decisions such as turning left to go to the volcano or turning right to climb a mountain, but that’s as far as that goes. As I mentioned, there are no collisions in Zwift, so you don’t have to worry about steering all that much (in fact, sitting in the middle of a pack of fifty riders is no big deal in Zwift!) but as Zwift is trying to expand into dirt and gravel simulations, the lack of steering is a barrier to having any sort of technical riding. For road riding, I don’t find it a big deal.
Another shortcoming, and the one I still notice on a daily basis, is that the feel of the bike isn’t the same, particularly when pedaling hard. Because my bike is locked into the trainer, it has none of the natural rocking from side to side that is part of pedaling. This isn’t so noticeable at pace speed, but when sprinting or climbing it feels very restrictive.
Speaking of climbing, that, too, is somewhat unnatural. While I appreciate the Climb’s ability to raise the front fork of my bike to change the geometry for climbing, if I get out of the saddle to make it up a particularly steep grade the whole assembly gets to be a bit unbalanced, and sometimes the rear end lifts a little. It’s not terrible, but it’s not “normal”, either, and inhibits all-out efforts at climbing.
As I said before, these things could easily be called shortcomings of the trainer rather than of Zwift, but since they’re part of the Zwift experience I think it’s fair to include them. Wahoo has recently released their own Wahoo bike (which, at over $3000, is more expensive than my road bike!) and Saris (among other companies) have introduced wooden “bike surfboards” to allow for more natural motion, so it’s clear that the issues are known and people are hard at work trying to find solutions. Indeed, it seems to be a badly kept secret that Zwift is working on it’s own trainers, if for no other reason than to standardize a feature set. As of this writing, though, there is still work to do.
So, with those gripes out the way I have to say that I do love riding on Zwift. It doesn’t take the place of riding outdoors, but it’s a fun diversion. Zwift races are fun, and Zwift group rides (which everyone just understands are races, too) are great. I even did a “meetup” with about a half-dozen of friends from the cycling club and we ran one of the courses together (using discord to chat). It’s a great way to spend a couple of hours, and I am very much looking forward to seeing the platform grow over time.
Even though I’m really enjoying Zwifting, that doesn’t mean I’ve turned my back on the Peloton. In fact, in recent weeks I’ve been spending even more time on the Peloton than on the Zwift. I’ll explain below…
Why Zwift is better than Peloton
Zwift is more fun. I think I can say that without reservation. On Zwift you climb mountains (including a faithful reproduction of the Alpe D’Huez, which is close to an hour and half of unremitting uphill), ride underwater (through a see-thru tunnel, though I suppose in the game even that isn’t needed), past dinosaurs and volcanos. There is visual interest in the landscape, and it doesn’t get boring any more than your local outdoor rides do.
I also think that I work a bit harder in Zwift. On the Peloton, I may be asked to pedal for thirty more seconds at a high resistance, but on the Zwift I know I’m pedaling hard because I’m near the top of a hill — I can even see the mountain goats hanging out at the summit. On the Peloton, I may be chasing the person above me on the leaderboard, but it’s really just by following a number (the number of kilojoules they’ve output as compared with me) which is dry to say the least. In fact, Peloton very deliberately de-emphasizes competition while in Zwift even the group rides are races. And when you’re chasing someone in Zwift you literally see them up the road, and you can viscerally feel the gap closing or widening. Dropping a friend in Zwift is every bit as satisfying as dropping them in the real world.
So, if Zwift is more fun and I get a better workout, why ever go back to the Peloton? Well, Peloton does have its own strengths.
Why Peloton is better than Zwift
I find the consistency of the Peloton workouts to be an advantage. Although there are different types of rides (tabata, hills, intervals, etc), one forty-five minute class seems to me to be much like another, so I can compare outputs and distances across rides much more evenly. By contrast, on the Zwift, I might be trying to compare a thirty-minute climb of Mt. Zwift this week to an hour on the desert flats last week and really have no idea how they match up. On the Peloton bike, I find that the consistency of the challenge makes it easier for me to gauge my efforts and to track my progress.
I also find the Peloton experience a bit more civilized than the Zwift experience. Of course, my choice of bike and Wahoo trainer is not Zwift’s doing, but since I’m using the preferred setup I think a comparison can be made. The Peloton bike is heavy and sturdy, easily adjustable for things like seat height and handlebar height, and nearly silent in operation due to its belt-driven mechanism. By contrast, my Zwift setup seems exceedingly cramped and noisy. It’s my own bike that I selected and set up, so you’d think that’d be perfect for me, but because it is clamped into the Wahoo trainer it feels unnaturally rigid. The chain and derailleurs are considerably more noisy than the Peloton’s belt, and that noise is amplified by the indoor setting — I never thought of the bike as noisy when it was outdoors.
Another big advantage that the Peloton has over the Zwift is that there is less involved at the start of each workout. Even if I have to adjust the bike after my wife’s used it (sharing a bike is not really even an option in the Zwift world unless both riders are exactly the same size) I can jump on the bike and be ready to start a workout within a minute or so. With Zwift I need to turn on the TV, turn on the Apple TV, choose the Zwift app, launch the Zwift companion on my phone (because of the limited Bluetooth connections on the Apple TV), start my Kickr and Climb, pair the bike to the companion app, and choose a ride using the horrible Apple TV remote (which is a lot like dialing your phone from five feet away using a pool cue). It takes several minutes. And, because every Zwift “event” is a race, I’d better be good and warmed up well before the official start! What it all comes down to is that when I have limited time it is far easier for me to grab my chest strap and my shoes and jump on the Peloton. Sometimes, there is something to be said for freedom from choice.
So, Peloton or Zwift?
Not many people are going to want to invest in both Peloton and Zwift. After all, you are getting the same sort of exercise with each, and you obviously can’t ride both at the same time. I’m going to answer this question with an “it depends”, which feels like a bit of a cop-out, but I’ll try to explain myself.
The Pelotoner wants to work out. It’s a pure workout machine. It may not be as much fun as the Zwift, but there is an enthusiastic instructor and (hopefully) good music, and as long as you challenge yourself you can get the best bang for your buck for the time you have to spend riding.
The Zwifter is the cyclist, who is driven indoors either by weather or expediency. The workouts are quite varied, and some can be much more challenging than a typical Peloton class (and Zwift does have a “workout” mode with intervals pegged to different power zones), but it’s a little more difficult to do a Zwift workout if you have a hard stop at the other end (most Zwift rides are distance-bound, rather than time-bound).
So, if I had to choose, which one would be my pick? Because I ride outdoors during the season (and whenever I can), I think I’d pick the Peloton. It helps me maintain my fitness, and because the classes are all time-bound I can more easily fit the workout into my schedule. If, for some reason, I somehow found myself unable ride in the real world (which is what got me into all this in the first place), I’d pick the Zwift as the platform that can hold my interest better.
Final Thoughts
After I finished this blog post, I realized that there was one angle I really hadn’t discussed, and that is, which of these two platforms can best simulate the other? The answer, I think, is clearly Zwift. There is a training mode in Zwift which lays outs an exercise plan based on power zones, just like the Peloton Power Zone rides. There is an FTP test and then the zones are used for the training courses. In fact, the Zwift training courses have a cool feature where, if you are doing a multiple-workout course, after finishing one the next might not be available for a day or two, forcing you to rest (or at least encouraging it). There is also a limit to how long you can wait to do the next workout, so not only do you have to rest but you can’t rest too long and still complete the course as it’s prescribed.
By contrast, the Peloton doesn’t have anything that really simulates an actual bike ride, and because it’s up to you to set the resistance, it never will. It’s just not baked into the DNA. I am still a big Peloton fan, but the fact is it rather unapologetically does just one thing. If that one thing is the one thing you want, then there’s your answer to whether Peloton or Zwift is the right pick.
Among the metrics displayed on your Peloton screen is “speed”, presented in MPH with no explanation. I have been a daily Peloton rider for years, and I have always wondered how that speed is calculated. Recently, I though it would be nice to know how many watts I’d have to produce during a workout to cover a certain distance, and in order to do that I knew I would have to crack the speed code. Following is a rather lengthy examination of Peloton bike speed and a formula for calculating speed from output.
Speed is not simply how fast the wheel spins
My first thought when considering the Peloton concept of speed is that the speed of the bike should be calculable using the circumference of the flywheel multiplied by the RPMs, divided by time. It was pretty much immediately obvious that this was not correct. If it were, then resistance would have no bearing at all on speed; speed would be purely a function of cadence (a minute on the bike will be enough for you to see that it is not).
Conceptually, it’s important to understand that your Peloton bike is not simulating a fixed gear (“fixie“) bike, with resistance a substitute for hills. Looking at it, you’d be forgiven for likening the flywheel to the drive wheel on a bicycle, but that’s not the case. You can think of the flywheel as the chainring instead (even though the bike already has a chainring, er, “beltring”). The flywheel and the chainring are locked and move at the same relative speeds, so although when you look at the bike it seems logical that the flywheel is the drive wheel, if you can get your head around the idea that it’s the chainring, the rest makes sense. The flywheel is the chainring, and the resistor magnet is the rear derailleur. If that doesn’t make sense, don’t worry about it. You don’t really need to be able to conceptualize this if you will trust me that the flywheel speed is not the bike speed. So, let’s get on with it.
Speed and output are very highly correlated
Although Peloton has not shared with me the secret speed formula, my data suggests strongly that speed is a function of output alone. Basically, the harder you’re working, the faster you’re going. You can spin fast with a light resistance, or crank down on the resistance and pedal slower, but if you’re generating the same output, you’re going to be traveling at more or less the same speed.
Body weight’s role in calculating Peloton speed
It would seem that body weight, gender, resistance and cadence are not direct factors in the speed calculation. I mean, some are part of the calculation, because they factor into the output calculation, but it would seem that output is the only variable in the speed calculation.
The Data
I have put together more than a hundred data points (Peloton rides) from five riders of both genders, ages between 17 and 53. Observed wattages fell in the range of 20 – 281. The R2 value of over .99 indicates that the formula very accurately describes the relationship between output and speed for all of these rides.
The Formula
Working backward from a set of data points correlating average output with average speed, the formula for finding speed is:
V = 2.1w0.44
Where V is the speed in mph and w is the output wattage (the wattage at the moment of measurement, not the total output).
This is not a prank, this is actually what my data tells me. If you think this looks needlessly complicated, I totally agree with you. That said, the data correlates very strongly with this formula (R2 > 0.99).
Almostperfect
As I mentioned above, the data fits the formula very well, so it would seem like I can wish everyone happy riding and close this post. I have to confess, though, that I’m not entirely satisfied with the equation I’ve posted above. It’s just so messy! For one thing, those are some odd number to use (I’m rounding as it is), and for another, even with an R2 value as high as it is it still seems odd to me that the data points to map even more exactly to the trend line. This is an equation with only one variable… I would expect the points to be absolutely spot on, and they’re not, and I don’t really have a good explanation as to why. Perhaps the sampling frequency plays into it. I have also noticed that the Strava data for the rides varies slightly as to total output and average speed, so the whole data collection may be a little less precise than it seems like it should be.
If and when time permits, I plan to create a handy chart mapping output and speed, similar to the Watts/kJ charts that I’ve done. Meanwhile, if you have any comments or information to share on the topic of output and speed, please share. Thanks!
I wasn’t completely sure I was going to be finishing the French Creek Iron Tour until I passed mile 80. Around mile 70 the course heads out of the wooded hills into farmland where the sun and the wind start to make you think, “how much do I really want this?” I really do enjoy cycling, and I enjoy the long rides… there is a peacefulness that you discover after a couple of hours of riding that just can’t be found on shorter rides. That said, there comes a point after five or so hours where it ceases to be fun, and I was there.
So when I did finally reach the finish line, about seven and a half hours after starting, I was pretty sure this was going to be both my first and last 100 mile bike ride. As much as I enjoy a nice, long ride, there really isn’t anything (except maybe for sleeping) that I really want to do for seven and a half hours straight. Riding a century is like climbing a mountain: you don’t particularly enjoy doing it, but you enjoy the satisfaction of having done it. As such, it doesn’t seem like there’s a whole lot of incentive, once you’ve done a century, to want to do another one. (I’ve climbed a few mountains in my life, and I can’t recall ever climbing one twice).
Never Say “Never”
Still, within just a few days of finishing the French Creek Iron Tour, I found myself reviewing the way I’d prepared … my eating, my workouts, and most of all the tapering phase in the week leading up to the ride, and I began to wonder if I really had done it right. Specifically, I was surprised during the century that I didn’t feel a bit stronger early on. Some fatigue started to set in around mile 40 that I really didn’t expect until mile 60 or so, and even though I had done several rides longer than a metric century, I felt more tired at the 60 – 80 mile distances than I thought I would be.
Each time I set out to do a ride that is longer than the previous one I had trouble knowing how to prepare because I had no frame of reference to tell me whether I should be doing more or less of this or that. Even when I could call upon similar experiences, there usually weren’t enough of them that I could make any real conclusions. Still, now I had a century under my belt, and I began to wonder how much easier it would be, then, to do it again.
It just so happened that a friend wanted to attempt his own first century a couple of months later, so we signed up for the Penn State Chocolate Tour (so-named for the chocolate candies on hand at the rest stops — fitting for a ride in and around Hershey, Pennsylvania). I really didn’t doubt that I’d be able to complete this one … I was still in shape from my preparation for the first century and this one was significantly less hilly.
On the Road Again
In the end, I think complacency got in the way of my great experiment. My family had a great vacation in mid-summer away from the bike and by the time I got home there were only about three weeks before the ride, so there wasn’t really a chance to build up the long rides like I did the first time around. I also frankly wasn’t as driven the second time around — it’s hard to get psyched up to do something you’re about 99% sure you can do. Still, there were some lessons learned.
The first lesson is that although the Penn State Chocolate Tour isn’t as hard as the French Creek Iron Tour, it’s still not easy. Yes, there was no point during the second ride that I considered bailing out and yes, I was able to complete it in nearly an hour less time (due to it being a fair bit flatter), but it was still over six hours in the saddle and that’s a long time to be riding. There’s no way I’d consider doing a century, even an “easy” one, without some serious preparation.
I also paid more attention to my snacks during this second ride. I generally don’t eat much on a bike ride, and if the ride’s less than a couple of hours I don’t feel like it really matters that much whether I eat or not. (Of course, I have a little more “on-board” energy reserves than a pro cyclist, if you know what I mean). After a couple of hours, though, your body is scrounging for energy in a way it’s never otherwise asked to. Well, maybe if you’re starving, but I’m not really into starving if I can help it. So this time I made a point of snacking on a fairly regular basis… I had a pack of gummies and a couple of GUs with me, and after mile 40 I ate a gummy every ten miles and had a GU somewhere around 60 and 80 miles, I don’t quite remember. This is still a lot less than the packages say I should be ingesting (maybe a third of what they recommend), but it did seem to help me keep my energy up.
The GUs were a bit of a disappointment. Their chocolate outrage is a great flavor, and I’d recommend it if you are ever frosting cupcakes. If you’re really just eating for the energy, though, it’s actually way too cloying to be pleasurable. Mandarin Orange is my new pick for when I’m actually exercising.
What they don’t tell you about finishing a Century
Finishing a century is a very satisfied feeling. You’ve been on the bike for hours and hours, and just not riding is a joy in and of itself at that point. Also, you have just spent a hopefully pleasant day riding around seeing the countryside, and if you remembered to put on the sunblock you should not be too toasty at the end. Plus, your Garmin congratulates you on exceeding 100 miles, which is pretty cool.
Lest you start to feel self-important in your accomplishment, though, there is a harsh reality check waiting for you at the end of the ride. I first experienced this at the end of the French Creek Iron Tour, when I walked my bike out to my car through an almost completely empty field, but it was rainy that day and I just wanted to get home and I didn’t give it much thought.
There are no photos of me finishing either of these centuries. The fact is, the photographers had long gone home. When I finished the Penn State Chocolate Tour the only people to greet me were the EMTs standing around the mandatory ambulance. There were no spectators, no photographers. Even the inflatable start/finish arch had been packed away. The dirty little secret of these centuries is that everyone has gone home by the time you’re finished.
And let me be clear: I completed the 100 miles (and 4400 feet of climb) in about 6.5 hours at a pace of 16 mph. Not Olympic numbers, I acknowledge, but this is by no means broom wagon territory, either. I really have no idea where I placed relative to the rest of the field, but there were plenty of people finishing after me. Nevertheless, the food was pretty much gone (I grabbed a few slices from the last pizza to save for my friend, who I regrettably dropped somewhere around mile 40, but that’s another story), the event T-shirts were gone (unless you’re an XXL, but how many XXLs are there doing the 100 mile route?) and the whole thing was pretty much already in the history books.
The problem is that these events have multiple distances (usually something like 25, 50, 65 and 100, for example) and often, if they don’t start all at the same time they start close to the same time (maybe the century riders get a 1/2 hour head start). So the bulk of the event participants have finished hours earlier, got their t-shirts and pizza, and are already home. When I finished the French Creek Iron Tour, I got my buffet lunch (they did a much better job of catering to the late (ie: century) crowd) and sat down, thinking, “Last year (when I did the 50 mile route) they had a band”. Well, they had a band this year, too, but the band was gone by the time the century riders finished. As far as the Chocolate Tour organizers were concerned, the century riders were on their own. It’s not that we are doing it for the fans, but a bottle of water and a banana at the end of the ride would be nice.
One more for the road
My last big ride of the season was the Main Line Animal Rescue Gran Fondo (a mouthful… there’s something to be said for their original name, “Handlebarks”), and I tried to apply my learnings from the centuries to my training. Due to some confusion regarding road markings (I will not point fingers, but I have photos to back up my claims… I thought to take photos the second time I passed through the Birchrunville loop) we ended up doing about 66 miles and over 5600 feet of climb, so it was on par with the Chocolate Tour in terms of effort. For this last ride, I really didn’t do any tapering (I felt after the centuries that the tapering I had done the week or so beforehand actually made me feel a little de-conditioned when the big day came). I think I took off the day before, and my rides for the week leading up were a bit more relaxed than usual, but there really wasn’t any tapering per se. In the end, I think that worked best, as I felt the most “myself” for that event. Whether that’s really the right approach if I found myself attempting something closer to the limits of what I can do, I am not so sure. Unfortunately, there’s probably no good way to find that out without actually doing more long rides, so don’t be surprised if I have more posts in the future about century (and maybe even century+) rides, as I try again to crack the code.
This is an objective, non-compensated review of the Lumos Helmet, which was purchased at retail. I have no connection to Lumos.
Santa gave me a Lumos Helmet for Christmas last year. My last helmet, a Giro Atmos II, made the ultimate sacrifice in a high-speed crash last October. I was so impressed with that helmet and how well it protected both my skull and my brain, I went right out and bought another, but Santa thought I could do better.
The main feature (you can call it a gimmick if you want) of the Lumos helmet are the built-in lights, and there are a bunch of them. There are white LEDs in the front which will help you stand out in a dark space, such as under shade trees or in a tunnel. In back, there’s a triangle of red LEDs that do the same job. They’re no substitute for a headlight and rear tail light, but a little extra lighting can’t be a bad thing. I think there’s enough data out there to show that lighting beats reflectivity or bright colors for safety.
The real differentiator of this helmet are yellow turn signals, front and rear, activated by either a set of buttons strapped to the handlebars (boring), or activated by your hand signals, facilitated by your Apple Watch (nerdy-cool). Since you can’t actually see these lights when you’re wearing the helmet, it beeps to tell you whether the turn signals are switching on or off, and the beeps for left and right are different, although you should hopefully know which one you’ve triggered.
Apple Watch / Lumos helmet integration
In practice, the Apple Watch integration works fairly well, but not so well that you aren’t going to get a few wrong signals on each ride. You need to calibrate your Watch, using the same gestures that you’d use while riding (that is, arm straight out for a left turn, held up for a right turn). To turn off the turn signal, you shake your wrist. Running over broken pavement can also trigger the wrist-shake gesture and turn off the turn signal, whether you want to or not. I haven’t check this with Lumos, but I believe that the turn signal turns itself off after some number of seconds, so if you had a feel for that you could learn to signal at the right moment and it would time-out when you wanted to. I haven’t used it enough to get that sort of thing down.
Calibration is a little tricky, and it’s possible I really haven’t done it quite right. You need to be in the same position you will be when riding — if you sit up in the saddle you’re not going to get the same effect. Essentially, you need to be riding while you calibrate (or have someone hold your bike while you get into riding position), which is tricky. Lumos has some suggestions about how to gesture for a turn that works best with the software.
Needless to say, you have to wear your watch on your left wrist for all of this to work. It so happens that I broke my left wrist in the same crash in which I broke my last helmet, so I usually wear my Watch on my right now. I have to remember to switch the Watch to my left if I want to use it with the helmet, which isn’t so convenient (switching wrists with the Apple Watch involved changing a setting on your iPhone). Not much Lumos can do about this, but it’s something to think about if you happen to wear your Apple Watch on your right wrist.
Let me talk pros and cons before I tell you how I feel about the helmet overall…
PROS of the Lumos Helmet
Lighting: The lighting adds just a little bit of visibility, which can’t be a bad thing. In my humble opinion, the helmet is good looking and I don’t feel silly with a bunch of lights on my head. The designers did a good job. I think the turn signals do a very good job of alerting riders and traffic behind you (if maybe just for the novelty of it) but since you have to make the hand gesture anyway, are there really circumstances in which you’re really communicating new information via the helmet lights?
Comfort: SPOILER ALERT — this is probably the #1 reason why I’m still wearing this helmet. It’s actually really comfortable to wear. I read a review of the helmet online in which the reviewer said the helmet was heavy compared to others, and that sounds reasonable given the additional battery and lights that it has. In practice, though, I can’t tell the difference. I haven’t weighed the helmets, but subjectively it feels no heavier.
CONS of the Lumos Helmet
False signals: As I said before, it’s really nifty that with a properly calibrated Apple Watch you can trigger the helmet turn signals just by using the ordinary hand signals, but it’s not perfect. Usually the gesture needs to be just so, and it doesn’t work every time. I’ve even had the helmet signal the wrong turn, not to mention all the times that vibrations from the road canceled a turn prematurely. It’s good, but it’s far from perfect.
Battery life: After about 3½ hours, the batteries in my helmet die, and at that point it’s just a helmet.
Cost: As of this writing, a Lumos helmet costs about $180, which is somewhat steep for a helmet. One crash, and I suppose you need to pony up another $180 for a replacement. Lumos should have a trade-in program that would let you send in your damaged helmet and get the electronics transferred to a new shell. You’d think that would cut the price for replacement somewhat, and it’d help with customer loyalty, too.
Would I buy it again?
In summary, let me try to answer the big question: if I didn’t have one of these helmets, would I spend the money to buy one? I don’t know if I would. After all, I was completely happy with my Giro helmet which was far cheaper, and I’m not convinced that the additional lights are that big of a safety feature. Still, the Lumos helmet is pretty comfortable, and I was just out on their website and saw the new models which look pretty slick. If they’re improving the software as they refine the design of the helmet as a whole, I’d definitely at least give it a look.
One open question
There is a beta feature of the helmet that I’m getting ready to try out, a brake light. As I understand it, the helmet (or maybe it’s your watch) detects your deceleration and makes an appropriate signal. When I got my helmet, the existence of this feature was practically an Easter egg, and wherever I could find reference to it Lumos was emphatic about this being a beta feature. Because of this, I haven’t tried it out, but I really should. If the helmet can detect and signal that I’m slowing, that would be useful. Not everyone (particularly non-bicyclists) recognize the “slow” hand signal, and this would be a novel feature. If I can make a determination of its effectiveness one way or the other, I’ll update this post.
For my first century ride, I chose the French Creek Iron Tour. Of the local events I know about, this was actually the hardest (over 6,000 feet of climb). I picked it for two reasons: one is that it was fairly close to home so I didn’t have to get up too early on a Sunday morning, and the other is that the ride is difficult enough that if I were to actually finish, I wouldn’t be left with the feeling that it wasn’t a “legit” century. There are more difficult centuries out there, I’m sure, but anything with over a mile of climb is the real deal As far as I’m concerned.
Well, how did I get here?
The road to this first century ride began in July of 2017, when I visited San Francisco and was amazed to see so many cyclists tackling the many steep hills of that city. I myself probably wasn’t logging more than a couple hundred miles a year on my bike, feeling like the rolling hills of Southeastern Pennsylvania weren’t conducive to cycling. Of course, San Francisco makes the county I live in look pool table flat. So, with my attitude suitably adjusted, I resolved to get back into cycling more when I returned home.
Part two of the equation was my purchase of a Peloton bike in August of the same year. My brother (#CrunchyFrog) and brother-in-law (#SaucyDawg) had them, and were singing the praises of the bike (and, in particular, an instructor they called “JJ”) at our family reunion. Back home, my wife (#ExcellentBird) and I checked out the bike, but it took us more than a week, two visits to the showroom and a sample class before we talked ourselves into buying one (and we each probably did it for the other!). It was not an easy sale, but I rationalized that I was buying it for her, and she did the opposite.
The Peloton bike quickly became part of my routine. In fact, a day doesn’t feel complete without a ride. I’ll even come back inside after a road ride and get on the Peloton bike! By October I tried my first organized bike ride, the Main Line Animal Rescue Gran Fondo. Joining it was a bit of a spur-of-the-moment thing. I really had no idea what my abilities were, so signed up for the 30-mile course (and managed to raise $500 in a week) and completed it on my hybrid bike, which was the only one I owned).
I had a great time on that ride, and decided that it would be fun to ride with my friends from work. To do that, I figured I needed a road bike, so I bought myself a 2017 Fuji Gran Fondo in November, taking advantage of the end-of-season sales.
5,000 miles on a bike that doesn’t move
It was pretty much all-Peloton, all-the-time that winter, but when the warm weather rolled around I tried a few events. One was the 50 mile course of the French Creek Iron Tour, which was hilly but do-able. Near the end of the summer I was invited to join a team organized by my company to do a three-day, 160 mile ride in Cape Cod. Modesty prevents me from telling you how I fared, but let’s just say I didn’t have to wait in line at the buffet at the end of the ride.
It’s hard for me to express how much the Peloton bike did to prepare me for that ride. Each day I got up in Cape Cod I felt like I hadn’t just rode for hours the day before. I actually felt stronger each day. And although I try to take care of myself, I was never what anyone would call an athlete… it’s just not in my genes. Nevertheless, thanks to the daily Peloton rides, I felt unstoppable on the road that weekend.
The last ride of 2018 was the MLAR Gran Fondo again. This time I had recruited my brother and brother-in-law and we did the 100K (64 mile course). Well, we did 40 miles of it. Unfortunately at mile 41 I got tangled up with another rider and crashed out of the ride. I had surgery a week later to put some things back in place, but once the stitches were out I was back on the Peloton bike. It was slow going for a while due to some broken ribs, but each week was better than the one before and I was putting up decent numbers again by January.
In mid-winter I started the “Game of Zones” PZ challenge (Pelotoner’s will get that). After that, I signed up for “Zone Wars”. Completing these really made me feel like I was back in the game. In early spring, I did a ~30 mile gravel ride which I did not enjoy with a mountain-biking friend who also did not enjoy it. Somebody enjoys gravel riding, but I’m not entirely sure who that is. Anyway, like a lot of challenges in life, I’m glad I did it, and glad I never have to do it again.
It’s Century Time
So, after healing up I find spring around the corner and I need a goal. One of the things I love about the Peloton bike is it allows me to set goals and to measure my progress. Of course I have the goal of completing the unfinished Gran Fondo this fall, but after my experience in Cape Cod I was already pretty sure I could do a 64-mile ride. So I decided I would do a century. I really had no idea whether I was ready for a century, but it seemed like a good goal. I selected the Iron Tour partly because of its bad-ass name, and partly because I had done the shorter courses before and knew it to be a well-organized event with good markings and well-stocked rest stops (complete with cookies).
If you’re not into cycling, understand that the “century” is sort of a benchmark of legitimacy. Road riders can be grouped by those who have ridden a century and those who haven’t. It’s a bit like what marathons are to runners: either you’ve done it or you haven’t. (I don’t know how other people feel about it, but it seems to me that a marathon is a lot harder than a century, but whatever…)
I downloaded a chart from Bicycling.com that showed how much riding I should do each week leading up to the century. Oops! It’s an eight-week plan, but I only had four weeks. Still, at week 5 the long ride of the week was 40 miles, easily do-able, so I figure I was on track … it’s not like I was getting off the sofa at week 5.
A little help from my friends
At this point I got some valuable help from the West Chester Cycling Club. I joined their Saturday group rides and thankfully not only are the people really nice, and not only are they good cyclists, but they have a number of rides each weekend (and some during the week if your schedule is flexible enough) so you can pick your distance and speed. On successive weekends I built up from 44 miles to 49 miles to 64 miles and then, on the weekend before the Iron Tour, an 86 mile trip to Chesapeake Bay. The last two were somewhat tiring but still very do-able, so I still didn’t have a good sense of how much I could really do. Plus, even the 86 mile ride had only 4,000 feet of climb, so the Iron Tour would be not only longer but hillier (if that’s a word).
I took it easy the last week, resting up for the Iron Tour. I did short (20 minute) low-impact Peloton rides and even didn’t ride at all on two of the days (very unusual for me).
Tackling the Iron Tour
I suppose it was the right move to rest so much, but I really felt out of sorts on the actual Iron Tour. I figured I would sail pretty easily through the first two-thirds and then venture into unknown territory, but I was actually already feeling somewhat tired by mile 40. At mile 70 I really started to get unhappy — at that point the hills are long and rolling, but you’re out in the farmland where there is no shade and the wind was blowing very strongly (the volunteers at the rest stop at mile 80 were literally holding onto the tent so it didn’t blow over). And of course the wind was a headwind, did you even need to ask?
Come mile 80 I was actually happy to get back into the wooded hills, even though it meant more climbing. I knew I was getting pretty sunburned (I was about six hours into the ride at that point) and the trees cut down on the wind somewhat. Around mile 75 I started to question how much I really cared about finishing this ride, but after mile 90 I knew I was going to finish.
One of the things you learn on a seven-plus hour bike ride is how long all of the batteries in your various devices last. My Lumos helmet (with built-in lights, a gift from my wife after my crash) ran down after about 3 and a half hours. My rear tail light / radar died after about six hours. And, worst of all, my Garmin itself started giving me low batter warnings at mile 100 (of 101!). This was a serious crisis. If the Garmin doesn’t record your ride, does it count? Would I get Strava credit? Would I be able to “Relive” my ride?
So, although I had planned to basically declare victory at mile 100 and coast to the finish, in the end I feel the need to empty the tank in order to finish the ride before my Garmin crapped out completely. Fortunately for me, the last mile or so of the ride was relatively flat, and I crossed the finish line just about 7 ½ hours after I started.
It was deeply satisfying to have completed a century ride (and this one in particular), but I was ready to be done. I wrote in my Strava notes, “anyone who draws up a ride with 6,000 feet of climb is a dick”, and I’ll stand by that assessment. Still, as I write this a few days later, I have to admit that I really enjoyed the challenge and it probably won’t be too long before I try another century.
In fact, I hear there’s one out in Hershey, PA where they give out chocolate at the rest stops.
The Peloton leaderboard contains a great deal of information on how you’re performing, both against others who are taking / have taken your class as well as how you’ve performed in the past. It’s a fairly data-packed screen, so let’s get into it…
Exhibit A (above) is my own line item on the leaderboard, taken from a point in which I’m about 2/3rds through an on-demand ride. Let me start with the numbers (and other data you see here) before I go onto the leaderboard as a whole.
Personal Record Information
The very top line (that begins with a star) shows me my best effort for the length of class I’m taking. From this, you can tell that the screen shot is from a 45 minute class. The top bar shows my personal record for a 45-minute class (which is 512 kj). On the far right of the bar, you see the number 325. That number is a pacing number. It shows me what my pace was for the ride in which I got my PR. At this point in time in this ride (not the PR ride), I had made only 222 kj (see below for how I know that), so I know that I’m behind the pace for a PR (actually, WAY behind :).
If I am ahead of the pace for a PR, I’ll know it because this whole PR bar will appear below my status, instead of above it. This is handy, because you can tell at a glance if you are headed for a PR or not. Note that you have to have taken at least one class of the same length before you will see the PR bar.
Where I am in the Group
Next, let’s get into the status bar. The first number you see on the left (25) is my position on the ride. This may be my position overall, or it might just be my position within the filtered group (not enough information shown to know). Sometimes you’ll see your position number with another number below it in parentheses, and the number in parentheses indicates the unfiltered position. More on that later.
Moving to the right, you see my avatar. Surrounding my avatar is a partially complete white circle, going from the 12:00 position clockwise to about the 8:00 position or so. This is a visual representation of how far along in the class I am. When he clock is half full (that is, reaches the 6:00 position), I’m halfway through the ride. Note that this clock display of time is only available on on-demand rides — if you’re riding in a live class you will see your avatar but not the clock display.
Next to the right is my leaderboard name (LeftShark), with some information below it. The information below is my location label from my Peloton profile and also my gender and age group (you can choose to show or hide this through your Peloton preferences on your bike). None of these have anything to do with position, they just identify me.
Total Output
The big number on the far right, the one that really counts, is your total output. This number is the same as the one you see at the bottom of your data display (for information on total output and how it’s calculated, see my previous post: Your Peloton Screen). This is the number that determines your rank on the leaderboard.
Filters, Followers and High-Fives
Here’s a second screen shot that illustrates a few other elements of the leaderboard. First, instead of seeing all riders, you are looking at a list of those “Here now” (a distinction made for on-demand rides). Here now, as the name suggests, shows riders that are doing the on-demand ride the same time you are. Now, not all riders on an on-demand ride are at the same point of the ride, but we’ll get to that.
In addition to showing the “here now” riders, this list is further filtered to the subset of riders that I am following. In this case, the list is now limited to just two riders, myself and Mighty Unicorn. You can see next to Mighty Unicorn’s name the outline of a person (or, at least, a bust), which indicates that I am following her.
Before I look at what we can see in the other riders’ line, let me review my own data. I am in second place in the filtered list (of two riders). I am also 69th among riders who are “here now”. The clock circle around my avatar indicate that I have only just begun the ride (maybe a minute or so into it, it’s hard to tell exactly). On the right of my leaderboard line, the number 1 indicates that I’ve generated only 1kj on my ride so far.
Just above my leaderboard line is my PR line. It shows that my PR for this length of ride (which happens to be 45 minutes) is 512, and at this point in my PR-setting ride, I’d already generated 10kj.
Let’s take a look at what we see on Mighty Unicorn’s leaderboard line (again, left to right).
First, you see the number 1 and (29). That indicates that she’s in first place in the filtered list (of people I follow) and 29th in the list of people doing the ride at the moment. (For comparison, I’m second on the filtered list, but 69th in the unfiltered list. It is not shown on this display the total number of people on the unfiltered list.)
To the right of these two numbers is Unicorn’s avatar. Notice the hand icon superimposed on the avatar. This indicates that Unicorn has high-fived me. If I tap the avatar, I will high-five her back, and the hand icon will disappear. I can high-five Unicorn or any other rider –even if I haven’t been high-fived myself– by tapping on her icon. Once you have high-fived someone, there is a waiting period before you can high-five again. I haven’t heard the phrase “high-five spam” used, but that’s what we’d call it if it were a thing. The delay is there to try to help us avoid annoying each other with repeated high-fives.
You can also see that the white “clock” ring around Mighty Unicorn is much more filled in than mine. It’s hard to see exactly how filled in it is because of the hand icon, but it looks like she is about 2/3rds through the ride. So, how does my 1kj effort at, say, one minute compare with her 222kj at, say, 35 minutes? There’s no way to directly compare those, unfortunately, so it is difficult to tell how you’re doing against others in an on-demand ride unless you start at more or less the same time.
Decoding the Leaderboard
Finally, let’s look at the leaderboard near the end of a ride, and decode the information.
Again, I’ll start with myself, now in 44th position (among the riders “riding now”). The circle clock tells you I’m about 3/4th done with the ride, the 308kj I have generated is behind my PR pace of 396. (You can also tell at a glance that I’m behind my PR pace, because the PR bar is above my leaderboard entry.)
In 41st place, at the top of the image, is “harrydorn”, who looks to be just a couple minutes away from finishing. He’s 5kj ahead of me (313 vs 308), so will I pass him? It’s hard to say, but given that I probably have ten more minutes or so than he does left, my guess is yes, I will. I can’t be more exact than that. (Incidentally, if I click on harrydorn’s name instead of his avatar, I’ll see his current resistance and RPMs, which is handy if, say, I’m slightly ahead and want to make sure I can hold off a surge).
In 42nd place is “BGPackergirl”. You can see that there is a checkmark superimposed on her avatar. This indicates that she has finished her ride. Her final output is 310, and will not continue to increase. You can also see that her avatar is slightly dimmed, which indicates that she has logged out of Peloton. Note that you can high-five a rider who has finished (checkmark but not dimmed), but you can’t high-five a rider who has logged out (dimmed avatar).
Next is “SassfroMass”, in 43rd place. Sass (can I call you Sass?) also has 310 kj and looks to be just about finished with his (her?) ride. The checkmark hasn’t appeared, so he’s not completely finished, but the clock circle is complete so the end of the ride is probably only seconds away. Will he pass GBPackergirl to take 42nd place? Probably, but it’s not guaranteed.
Below me is “jholloway7”, with 307kj, in 45th place. Note that jholloway7’s clock is just about as complete as mine, which tells you that we started at more or less the same time and are on pace for a similar finish. My passing SassfroMass, GBPackerGirl and even harrydorn seems pretty much guaranteed, but I’m neck and neck with jholloway7 and if I’m watching the leaderboard he’s the one I need to keep my eye on.
One final note about leaderboard position on on-demand rides. Your position on the leaderboard may not be particularly meaningful, because you are being compared to other riders wherever they are on their own rides. A rider who started the ride thirty minutes earlier will probably remain ahead of you on the leaderboard up until just about the end of your ride (if you even catch them), and a rider who starts thirty minutes later than you probably will not catch up to you before you’re finished even if they’re significantly faster. The only real comparisons you can make are across riders who have all completed the ride.
So, that’s the leaderboard in a nutshell. If you have any questions or feel that I’ve left anything out, please let me know in the comments and I’ll try to address any loose threads.
Following up on my post about the Peloton display numbers (and a little arithmetic regarding Output), a visitor to the site asked about METs, so I thought I’d post a follow-up….
Calculating METs is unfortunately considerably more difficult than calculating output in kilojoules. Well, it’s not that it’s so difficult, it’s that the level of precision is much less. METs are fundamentally different from metrics like power and output. Power is power, regardless of who you are. Lifting a ten pound dumbbell a foot in one second takes about 13 watts, and it doesn’t matter who you are. Find any person or machine that can output more than about 13 watts, and it can lift the dumbbell. (More about power and output in my post about the Peloton metrics.)
Metabolic Equivalents, or METs, on the other hand, is a measurement of the amount of energy exerted, a more complex topic than merely work done. Remember when you first got your Peloton bike and you PR’d almost every ride? Part of that could be explained by a quick elevation of your fitness level (you ex-couch potato, you), but a lot of it had to do with your improved efficiency. You learned the bike and, as you got more efficient you could do more work with the same amount of effort (or, you were able to do the same amount of work with less effort.)
How to Measure METs
To really measure METs the way they were intended to be measured, you’d need to know how much oxygen you are consuming during the exercise. If you don’t have access to a lab, that’s not something you can measure directly. In that case, there are other MET calculators that substitute other metrics that can be used as proxies for oxygen consumption, such as calories burned (don’t get me started on calorie calculations! If I ever have enough free time I’ll do a blog post on that.)
I personally am skeptical about the ability to use METs for something like a stationary bicycle. Since body weight is a factor in the calculation, it would seem to me that heavier athletes have an easier time of things on a stationary bike as opposed to an actual bike. I’d suggest you stick with watts and kilojoules, which are much easier to measure accurately (if your bike’s resistance is calibrated, of course, which it’s probably not… but that’s my next post’s topic).
Formula for METs
I don’t want you to go away empty-handed, though, so I will offer a MET calculator that uses something that Peloton does give you to work with: Watts. It may not be as accurate a calculation as one that actually measures oxygen consumption, but it’ll work well enough if your goal is to try to track your fitness gains over time.
The calculation for (approximate) METs, then, is:
METs = 1.163 * watts / kg
(Kg being body weight in kilograms)
For the arithmetic-challenged, I offer this handy online form:
I’m not entirely sure how useful all of this was, but hopefully if you are really into METs and a Peloton rider, it’ll give you want you were looking for. Cheers!
Update: After this blog post was created, Peloton introduced their “Strive Score“, a metric that attempts to measure individual effort (as opposed to output). Check it out.
In this post, I’ll explain what all those numbers are at the bottom of your Peloton bike’s screen. Well, partly to share my zeal for the Peloton bike, but partly to draw attention to my fundraising for homeless animals. If you like this post, please consider a donation to Main Line Animal Rescue. Thanks!
Before I begin, a little disclaimer: I am not a Peloton employee, spokesperson or programmer. I am a computer programmer (for whatever that’s worth), and a total nerd. If I had any inside information into Peloton I would also have agreed in the past not to disclose or discuss it.
THE PELOTON DATA DISPLAY
Understanding the various numbers on your Peloton bike display is key to understanding how well you’re doing. You really can’t compare your numbers to someone else for various reasons (mostly having to do with the sticky issue of Peloton bike calibration), but you absolutely can compare your numbers to your own past numbers (assuming you’re on the same bike, again because of calibration.)
Since you’re reading this post, I’ll skip over the part where I tell you why I think it’s important to understand these numbers, and instead dive right in. I’ll go through the numbers in rows, left-to-right within each row.
CADENCE (the big number on the left)
Cadence is how fast the pedals are turning. It’s not a measurement of how fast the flywheel is turning (which is irrelevant.) A cadence of 90 rpm means that you’re turning the crank in a full 360° circle 90 times in one minute. Cadence in Peloton classes will never go over 120 (their lawyers don’t want you tipping over the bike!) or below 50 or so. (As an aside, it’s extremely uncommon to exceed 120rpm riding out in the real world.)
BEST CADENCE
“Best cadence” is how fast you were turning the crank at the instant you were fastest. It is not a particularly useful metric (IMHO), so it’s shown smaller than the current cadence.
AVG CADENCE
“Average cadence” is (as the name says) your average cadence over the entire ride. This number gives you a good idea about how fast you’re pedaling (more on the speed metric below). Note that some rides, such as interval rides, will have a higher average cadence that others (such as climb rides). Cadence by itself is not really a measure of fitness, but on the real road it’s good to be able to pedal fast, and as you spend more time on the Peloton bike you’ll probably see your average cadence increase across similar rides. The Peloton screen also sometimes shows green or red triangles to show if your average cadence is rising or falling over time (not over the entire ride, but rather the past few seconds).
OUTPUT (the big number in the center)
The “Output” calculation indicates how hard you’re working at the moment. It’s computed based on your cadence and your resistance (described below) and is measured in watts. Output is a measure of power, not work. Those two things may sound like the same thing, but they’re definitely not. When we speak of power, we’re talking about how hard you’re working at any given moment. When we talk about work, we are talking about how much you’ve done, total.
Output, here, is measured in watts, and is an instantaneous measure of how hard you’re working at the moment. To see how much work you’ve done since you started the ride, you have to look lower on the display. In the world of Peloton, work is what determines where you are on the leaderboard, and is reflected in Total Output. We’ll get to that (or just click the link and be done with all this preamble).
BEST OUTPUT and AVG OUTPUT
Just as with cadence, the screen shows you the peak and average power over the ride. Peak power might give you bragging rights in your family, but it’s not very meaningful for the Peloton rider. Average output is directly related to your leaderboard, but it’s easier to use Total Output for that purpose (the relationship between the two is detailed in the Total Output section below). As with average cadence, the screen will show green or red triangles to show you how your average output is rising or falling over the short term.
This is probably the least scientific metric on the board. Resistance reflects how hard it is to turn the crank. It is measured in percent, with 100% being the maximum. Theoretically, you should not be able to pedal at 100% resistance, but due to the magic of badly calibrated bikes, some people can put up huge output numbers doing just that. As I said before, you can track your progress over time, but you need to be on the same bike to do it (and the reason being the wildly varying resistance of each bike).
From a practical perspective, it’s pretty simple. A larger resistance for a given cadence requires more power, and that is reflected in the output numbers.
BEST RESISTANCE and AVG RESISTANCE
Similar to best and average cadence and output. Not much more to be said about this. Fun fact: if you push down on the big orange knob to stop your bike, you’ll also see your “best resistance” turn to 100.
SPEED
This number reflects an approximate speed over land if you were riding a road bike. You will see that it’s not merely a reflection of your cadence, but rather a combination of cadence and resistance. Just as you could put your road bike into a high (easy) gear and pedal your butt off without going too fast, or switch to a low (difficult) gear and go much faster while pedaling slowly, the speed metric here takes resistance into account. It’s approximate. (Anecdotally, many road riders (including yours truly) report that the Peloton’s reported speed –and, by extension, distance, are a little higher than expected.)
Although I have not nailed down the exact formula to my satisfaction yet, I’ve spent more than a little time contemplating and investigating how the peloton bike calculates speed.
DISTANCE
Shown in miles, and is a computed field reflecting speed x time. Straightforward, but only as accurate as your speed measurement.
TOTAL OUTPUT
Finally! This is the number that determines your leaderboard status. If there is a metric to track over time, it’s this one. Total output is the Peloton measurement of how much work you have done on your ride. For many people, this is the only number that matters.
HOW PELOTON CALCULATES OUTPUT
Where the big “Output” number in the middle of the screen shows your power at a moment in time, “Total Output” shows work. Work is power x time. Let’s dig into this (warning: light arithmetic ahead!) …
Your Total Output is shown in kilojoules. A kilojoule (“kj”) is 1000 joules. A joule is one watt in one second. So if you pedal consistently and have an average output of 100 watts, you will do 100 joules in one second.
100 watts x 1 second = 100 joules
A little simple arithmetic shows that you’ll do 1kj of work in ten seconds pedaling with 100 watts of power:
100 watts x 10 seconds = 1000 joules = 1 kilojoule (also written 1kj)
Double your power to 200 watts, and you’ll get that 1kj in only five seconds:
200 watts x 5 seconds = 1000 joules = 1 kj
So, you see, the work you do (the kj) is directly related to both how hard you’re working (your wattage, computed by your cadence and resistance) and how long you are working. You can increase your total output by working harder, working longer, or both. The Total Output number is shown both here and also on the leaderboard, and this is what determines your leaderboard position. (Note that the leaderboard value may lag just a bit from the number on the bottom of the screen, but that’s just because the leaderboard is refreshed less often).
CALORIES
Of course you want to know how many calories you’re burning! Well, good luck figuring out how this one is calculated. There is a special sauce here known only to the Peloton programmers, but they have told us that it includes (and I quote them): your age, height, weight, gender, and heart rate (if you use a heart rate monitor).
If you were a Pelotoner before October 2017, you’ll remember the good old days when you could burn massive numbers of calories on the bike. Early adopters soon realized that the Peloton calorie counter didn’t agree with people’s fit bits, Apple watches, etc., and Peloton felt compelled to change their secret formula to bring their numbers more in line. How accurate is it? I have no idea.
One important thing to know about calories is that your body weight is one of the factors in the calculation, so if you lose more than a couple of pounds while using the bike, you have to periodically go into your profile and update your weight there.
So, that’s it! Everything you wanted to know about all those numbers on the bottom of your Peloton screen.
Thanks, keep Pelotoning, and throw me a high-five if you see me out there!
Next time you’re in Manhattan, you really need to try out the Peloton studio, located in Chelsea. I headed to the Mothership this summer for my first in-studio ride. If you are anywhere near NYC, I would definitely recommend you give it a try, and if not, well, here’s at least one person’s experience…
I happen to live in the Philadelphia area (Go Birds!), so it was very easy for me to take the Keystone Amtrak train up to Penn Station. From there, it was maybe a 15 minute walk to the Peloton studio. Piece of cake. The funny thing is, when my wife (#ExcellentBird) was doing our advance scouting, she called the studio and was given the impression that it was a rather long walk and that maybe we’d want to get an Uber or cab. I would hope that anyone planning on doing a spin class can walk a half dozen blocks to get there.
The Peloton Studio
The studio is in the Chelsea area of the city, a fairly nice area as cities go, I suppose. I noticed that there is a macaron store and at least two donut shops on the same block as Peloton, so anyone who is interested in practicing self-licensing will have no trouble there.
We arrived about 45 minutes early for the 11:30 ride we planned to take. That’s earlier than anyone should need to come, but it’s just how it worked out with the train. At that time of day (at least, that day, a Monday), the midday rides were walk-in rides. You can’t make a reservation, but then again they didn’t cost anything, either. (In fact, a conversation I had with a fellow rider suggested to me that you don’t need to be a Peloton member to drop in for the walk-in classes. Free spin classes for non-subscribers seems like an incredible deal to me!) And since we were so early, we got the prime bikes to be seen on camera (that’s me, #LeftShark, front and center on Denis’ 11:30am 7/9 ride and again on JJ’s 12:30am ride the same day. #ExcellentBird is to my left).
You enter through a small gift shop, which features the same sort of Peloton merch you see offered on the website. You may wonder how much fashionable workout wear one actually needs considering that we’re all generally alone in our basements while spinning, but considering the prices in the shop (and the frequent emails we get showing off all the new styles) I have to assume that it’s a profit center.
Beyond the gift shop / storefront there is a reception area. This is a short hallway with a something like a concierge station on the right. Ahead of you is the blonde-wood wall with the Peloton logo cut out of it that you see in everyone’s photos (including the one accompanying this post). Turn to the left at the end of this short hall and you are in the waiting area.
On the wall to your left as you enter the waiting area, a flat-screen TV broadcasts the current ride in more or less real time (actually a second or two behind — you can hear the sound coming from the studio, and it’s a bit out of sync). There are few small chrome and black leather sofas in the room, and riders waiting for their classes sit here and there to kill the time. In the far corner is a table where you could set up your laptop and get a little work in as you wait.
The waiting area also has a bar that offers up all sorts of beverages with exotic (and probably caffeinated) ingredients. I did not avail myself of it (and I didn’t see it get much use while I was there, but then again it was mid-morning on a weekday) so I can’t really comment on the dining experience.
Beyond the waiting area is a hallway that leads toward the back of the building. On the left as you walk down are the large double-doors leading to the studio. On the right is the locker room, and at the end of the hall is the “staff only” door leading to, among presumably other things, the “green room” for the instructors.
Overall, the look is New York Modern, with a fair bit of Apple Store-style blonde wood, and everything seems to be well maintained. The locker room, in particular, seems to be fairly new and both clean and well-lit. It doesn’t have terribly high capacity, considering that at the end of class there are conceivably fifty people looking to shower, but it seems that many of the riders show up in their riding clothes and leave that way — perhaps they’re locals.
One thing that struck me when visiting was the number of people on staff at Peloton. I had really expected a much smaller crew: maybe one person in the room to hand out towels, another working the cameras, and the instructor. I didn’t make a count, but there was at least one person in the storefront, two at reception, one barista, and a half-dozen or more people with “staff” t-shirts doing everything from tidying up the locker room to standing watch outside the studio door. Understaffed this place was not.
The In-Studio Ride
About ten minutes before the class was to begin, one of the staffers at the studio door invited us in. We made our way into the room, which felt more 3D than I expected. The instructor’s bike is on a podium (I think that’s obvious to the at-home rider) and there are three rows of bikes (about fifty or so in all), with the back two rows also on risers. Again, you can see all of this on the videos, but the multiple levels is more striking in person.
The room is cold, which is no bad thing considering how many people can be in there and that everyone’s working up a sweat. It’s also as loud as a nightclub, and that’s probably the thing about the in-studio ride that surprised me the most.
Well, actually, the thing that surprised me the most is how small all of the Peloton instructors are. They’re teeny! I have taken a lot of Denis’ “beyond the ride” classes, and when he is standing alone in a room there are no reference points to measure size except his body proportions. I figured Denis was going to be a giant, when in fact he’s just about my height (5’8” or so). He’s pretty chiseled, too (and I’m not), so although I came in thinking that he was going to be huge, it turns out that he could probably effectively hide behind me. Strange.
Jennifer Jacobs was even smaller. And near the end of our visit, Jess King walked by me in the hallway, and I wouldn’t be surprised if she was the smallest of all. The way the studio and cameras are set up, it is very difficult to judge such things. I would have bet that all of the instructors were at least my size, but now that I know how tall I am relative to the cutout in the wall in the entryway I can see that at 5’8” I might just be taller than any of them!
One of the larger Peloton employees stood, bouncer-style, in front of the podium, with his back to the instructor. ExcellentBird said to me later she was surprised that it seemed that security was needed for the instructor, but I think what they’re really protecting was the timeline. After all, the instructors meet—unescorted— with riders after class, but in the studio they pretty obviously don’t want you trying to engage the instructors. They have a schedule to keep, and it’s pretty clear that time in the studio drives everything else. There’s more or less 15 minutes scheduled between classes, and that’s just about exactly how long it takes to get the last group out, replenish the towels and water bottles, get the next group in, and get weights handed out, etc. You can hear often in the on-demand rides an instructor talking about taking photos or chatting after class. The key word here is AFTER, once we’re all clear of the studio room.
I rode bike 7, the one you see to the right of the instructor (the instructor’s left). I can tell you that it is not calibrated like my bike at home. I did two rides that day, one was a PR and the other would have been. I don’t know if the bikes loosen up with use, but it was considerably faster than my bike at home.
The bikes in the studio are like my bike at home, though very well-used. The screens are similar to the ones the instructors used to have, considerably smaller than the ones on the at-home bikes. The screens show you your instantaneous cadence, output and resistance, but no averages, so it’s difficult to gauge your progress against your PR. You also get a leaderboard, but you only see the in-studio riders. I don’t remember if I tried to high-five anyone on the leaderboard, but my guess is that that’s not a feature enabled in-studio. In any case, you have no awareness of your overall leaderboard position or who is riding at home. (The instructor, of course, sees everyone, and can tell who is in studio because in-studio riders are listed in orange instead of white on their display).
Speaking of high-fives, one of the surprises of my trip was actually how little interaction I had with my fellow riders. My Peloton alter ego is a pretty outgoing guy, generous with the high-fives, following and followed by many. Oddly, the “pelo-fam” vibe didn’t really seem to carry into real life. I mean, this is New York, after all.
For one thing, the studio is very loud, as I mentioned before. There is no having a conversation with anyone but maybe the rider next to you. Also, there is no way to know who is who. On my second ride, I was a distant second to the top rider (whose name escapes me), and I looked around the room to see if I could figure out who it was but there are no clues to be had. Also, I didn’t recognize the other riders’ names. That shouldn’t be surprising based on the number of Peloton members I suppose, but I ride a lot, and I see a lot of the same people every day. I got the distinct impression that the in-studio crowd and the at-home crowd are not the same people.
I could be wrong about that, but this impression was reinforced by the one other rider that I did chat up while I was there. I made the acquaintance of Joe who, as far as I could tell, was the only other person doing the morning classes back-to-back. Joe told me he lived fairly close by, and didn’t really seem to me to be into the Peloton culture — he was just there to get some exercise. He did know all of the other gyms and competing exercise venues in the area. All in all a pretty pleasant guy, but not really what I thought I was going to find.
Our first ride was with Denis, and the actual ride experience was pretty much what you’d get at home, except that you really felt like you had to put some effort in (at least if you’re on bike 7 you do) because if you start phoning it in Denis is literally RIGHT THERE to see you do it. So my PR on the ride was due at least to the fact that I was front and center in the room, no doubt.
There’s no talking with the instructor, as you might have guessed, but they definitely can see at least to the first row and there’s more interaction that you might think. The instructors absolutely seemed to gain energy from the riders, which was pretty fun.
After the Ride
After the class was over we all made our way, post haste, out of the studio. Even the instructors seemed to be hustled out of the room — time is money, people! Once back in the lobby everyone could relax a little. We got a photo with Denis and chatted with him a bit, and I noticed that he hung around quite a while after the ride, talking to others in the lobby. Since I think part of the “journey to the mothership” is meeting your favorite instructor(s), it was nice to see that after all that he didn’t rush off to whatever else he was planning to do that day.
We hung around for the fifteen minutes or so and then went back into the studio where we were greeted with fresh towels and new bottles of water (I still have my “Peloton Water” bottle as a souvenir). Next up was Jennifer Jacob’s ride, which went pretty much by the numbers (the way Denis’ did). I was pretty gassed after doing Denis’ ride, and wasn’t able to top my earlier effort (though the second ride would have been a PR for me if it weren’t for the first ride). After our ride with JJ it was back out to the lobby for some photos and a bit of chit-chat.
Mission accomplished, we walked back up to Penn Station (stopping at Whole Foods on the way for something to take with us on the train). We’ve already planned our return trip… in early October, #SaucyDawg and #CrunchyFrog are joining us for a studio invasion.