Strava Boards.ie Club

on_the_nickel

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

If there's no hazard, report the mistake to Strava.

If there is one, hide the segment and replot it excluding the hazard.

No hazard, bike lane all the way up with no traffic lights or junctions til the roundabout at the top, and the segment ends before that.

I assume I just contact support? Thanks.

Chips Lovell

on_the_nickel wrote: »

No hazard, bike lane all the way up with no traffic lights or junctions til the roundabout at the top, and the segment ends before that.

I assume I just contact support? Thanks.

I think I see your problem actually. There seems to be a set of lights about 100m before the roundabout. In that case they're unlikely to unflag it.

I'd create a new segment up to just before the lights.

on_the_nickel

Sh!t, you're right!

I didn't even remember those lights as I've never seen anyone cross there, never seen them red as there's so few houses/pedestrians in the area.

I guess they may have been used by passengers walking to the airport before the Kinsale bus went in there, but now all services serve the airport too. I've sent in a ticket so will see what they say.

on_the_nickel

FWIW, Airport Hill was apparently flagged by accident and is now re-instated. However, there seems to be a big spike in the number of segments being flagged as hazardous. Some might be fair enough, some, to my mind, are absolutely not. Molls descent?

C3PO

on_the_nickel wrote: »

FWIW, Airport Hill was apparently flagged by accident and is now re-instated. However, there seems to be a big spike in the number of segments being flagged as hazardous. Some might be fair enough, some, to my mind, are absolutely not. Molls descent?

4 of those are basically the same descent - Foxes to Kilternan!
Actually one of my favorites but I suppose I could understand why somebody might think it was dangerous - I just don't understand why you would feel inclined to "flag it" rather than just slowing down yourself!!

on_the_nickel

C3PO wrote: »

4 of those are basically the same descent - Foxes to Kilternan!
Actually one of my favorites but I suppose I could understand why somebody might think it was dangerous - I just don't understand why you would feel inclined to "flag it" rather than just slowing down yourself!!

Some segments are stupid - anything with traffic lights in the middle are fair game to be flagged in my book. But the descent from Molls?

There have been 25 flagged segments in total since the last time I've run it (Sunday I think), and that's obviously just the segments I've been on. I'm based in Cork and when in Dublin/Wicklow tend to stick to the same routes, so there are probably a lot more.

ryan_sherlock

yeah - a lot of my favourite descents have been flagged (no traffic lights, no junctions) - pissing me off.

Zyzz

Yeh some of my favourite descents have been Ryan Sherlock'd - so annoying

Wishbone Ash

Have Strava stopped sending out some of the dreaded "You've just lost your KOM" messages?

I was relieved of 4 last week but was only notified about one. Just happened to discover the other 3 by accident! :eek:

Zyzz

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Have Strava stopped sending out some of the dreaded "You've just lost your KOM" messages?

I was relieved of 4 last week but was only notified about one. Just happened to discover the other 3 by accident! :eek:

I read that they don't send out the email if the segment has a gradient of 0.0% or less to try and discourage people killing themselves trying to get a downhill KOM

..not sure how true that is but Ive also lost a few and never got any notification I also lost 1 or 2 that I never knew I had lol

rab!dmonkey

Just re-create flagged segments as they were. If anything is going to kill Strava, it's allowing users to flag segments and immediately disable competition. If you think a segment is too dangerous to set a time on, just hide it.

detones

Does it only take one over safety conscious squealing tw@t to flag a segment? Surely there must be some balance on this ie. if 5% of riders flag a segment it's considered. Are there Strava mods for example.

ROK ON

Maybe some of the segments being flagged are not dangerous but simply copycat segments or close variants.

That Molls gap section flagged is a few km from where I live - it is one of about four or five very similar segments.
On the descent to Ladies View there were 3 segments I counted at the last time I bothered - all practically the same descent.

I would like to see flagging made easier
(1) there should be a simple button to press for repetitious segments,
(2) unnamed road climbs - even if not created by you I think that someone should be allowed to name the climb.

Just a thought.

rab!dmonkey

Anyone who has ridden a segment once can flag it and have the leaderboard removed. Strava support are great for fixing elevations and removing nonsense segments, but I haven't heard of anyone having much luck getting segments 'unflagged'. They certainly don't make it easy to appeal flags.

The answer to multiple segments covering more or less the same ground (i.e.: 'segment bloat') is to hide them - not flag them. To do this you open a ride with the segment(s) you're not interested in, scroll to the list of segments and in the column to the right of 'Time' there is a (rather aptly, hidden) 'Hide' button. Press this and the segment will no longer appear in your achievements or lists of segments under your rides. This allows you to clean up the list of segments without removing segments others find useful.

RyanAndrew

I'm sure it is being done , but just in case, be sure to let strava know directly of any suggestions for improvement you have as well as posting it here. I have always found them to be very responsive and interested in anything I have submitted via the support section. They can't always solve it but they do respond.

On this particular topic, they unflagged a route I queried- 4k uphill on a cul de sac - and said it had been flagged "in error" . And in response to my more general observation on seemingly frivolous flagging they replied "We understand that the current functionality of the Hazard Flag feature is limiting, especially after only one person flags a segment as Hazardous, and we are working on ways to increase this functionality" . The more people that tell them this is a problem the higher up the priority list it will go.

RyanAndrew

on_the_nickel wrote: »

FWIW, Airport Hill was apparently flagged by accident and is now re-instated. However, there seems to be a big spike in the number of segments being flagged as hazardous. Some might be fair enough, some, to my mind, are absolutely not. Molls descent?

On_the_nickel how did you generate this report? It's quite interesting to see.

Leroy42

I still don't understand why people flag any segment as hazardous. On many rides that I do there a loads of segments, which I pretty much ignore. If there a particular part of the ride, a climb or we pushed hard etc, I might look to see.

If some one has created a segment that I have no interest in I just ignore it. Seems to me, that people marking a segment as hazardous are really saying that (maybe quite rightly) they won't be able to complete on that segment due to the traffic lights etc.

on_the_nickel

ROK ON wrote: »

Maybe some of the segments being flagged are not dangerous but simply copycat segments or close variants.

That Molls gap section flagged is a few km from where I live - it is one of about four or five very similar segments.
On the descent to Ladies View there were 3 segments I counted at the last time I bothered - all practically the same descent.

I would like to see flagging made easier
(1) there should be a simple button to press for repetitious segments,
(2) unnamed road climbs - even if not created by you I think that someone should be allowed to name the climb.

Just a thought.

Agree with repetitive segments, but isn't the Molls Gap segment that's been flagged the "right" one - as in full descent?

on_the_nickel

RyanAndrew wrote: »

On_the_nickel how did you generate this report? It's quite interesting to see.

veloviewer.com, upload a new ride and you see segments on which you've gone up or down, new segments, and flagged segments.

Cookie_Monster

Leroy42 wrote: »

I still don't understand why people flag any segment as hazardous.

I've flagged one or two that on google or strava have the junction with you but in real life it has been altered to a yield.
No point having a segment where you should be stopping and don't for the sake of a few seconds.
I've also flagged a couple that are cat 3 or 4 climbs on strava but are flat or downhill, just due to ridiculously hilariously bad gps data.

Leroy42

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I've flagged one or two that on google or strava have the junction with you but in real life it has been altered to a yield.
No point having a segment where you should be stopping and don't for the sake of a few seconds.
I've also flagged a couple that are cat 3 or 4 climbs on strava but are flat or downhill, just due to ridiculously hilariously bad gps data.

I understand that some segments are actually hazardous, but why stop other people using them? If some person wants to have a segment that includes lights let them at it, what harm is it to you. simply stops at the lights yourself.

Apart from not being able to ge on the leaderboard (as others are breaking the lights etc) what difference does it make.

Next we should have an option on segments which are too hard, or climbs, I'm not good at them so mark them off. And what about descents. Not a fan of going ove 30kph so they should be marked off as well.

I can understand Strava giving the option as it makes them look like they are promoting safe cycling etc, but why anybody would actually bother is beyond me.

hueylewis

I don't think it's that odd. By disabling segments that genuinely encourage dangerous cycling, Strava aren't just pretending to promote safety, they are actually promoting safety (albeit reactively). Given that the option exists to flag segments, if a person believes a segment to be dangerous to cyclists or other road users, they might not be inclined to adopt the "nothing to do with me" approach and rather instead do something about it by flagging it - and why shouldn't they do that? The danger a segment poses doesn't have to directly affect or involve you for you to see the danger it could pose to other road users.

And no, flagging dangerous segments will not lead to people flagging difficult climbs. The current system is certainly open to abuse and needs to be improved, but lets not get carried away. (I'd make a joke here about slippery slopes and hazardous descents, but it probably wouldn't be very good).

wanderer 22

Leroy42 wrote: »

If some person wants to have a segment that includes lights let them at it, what harm is it to you. simply stops at the lights yourself.
QUOTE]

on the way into work this morning I stopped at a red light, guy behind me hits into my back wheel , then tells me that 'he didn't expect me to stop' :rolleyes:

For this and many other reasons RLJ'ers shouldn't be allowed Strava accounts..

mossym

hueylewis wrote: »

I don't think it's that odd. By disabling segments that genuinely encourage dangerous cycling, Strava aren't just pretending to promote safety, they are actually promoting safety (albeit reactively). Given that the option exists to flag segments, if a person believes a segment to be dangerous to cyclists or other road users, they might not be inclined to adopt the "nothing to do with me" approach and rather instead do something about it by flagging it - and why shouldn't they do that? The danger a segment poses doesn't have to directly affect or involve you for you to see the danger it could pose to other road users.

And no, flagging dangerous segments will not lead to people flagging difficult climbs. The current system is certainly open to abuse and needs to be improved, but lets not get carried away. (I'd make a joke here about slippery slopes and hazardous descents, but it probably wouldn't be very good).

define dangerous though? A tight bend at the bottom of a steep hill could be very dangerous to a new rider with little confidence. the same bend could be nothing to the same person once they have a couple of months of cycling under their belt. should everything pander to the lowest common denominator? I'm all for safety, but the removal of the segment on the judgement of one person is crazy

hueylewis wrote: »

And no, flagging dangerous segments will not lead to people flagging difficult climbs. .

have you met the internet? if it can be done, it will.

Chips Lovell

I suspect you'd be on a hiding to nothing trying to persuade Strava not to mark winding descents or segments including traffic lights as hazardous.

It's already attracted enough negative PR that I can't see it loosening it's policies.

mossym

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I suspect you'd be on a hiding to nothing trying to persuade Strava not to mark winding descents or segments including traffic lights as hazardous.

It's already attracted enough negative PR that I can't see it loosening it's policies.

i'd agree fully with that. while i might not like the current way i can't see it changing in any way. it allow some crazy decisions though, like this one

http://www.strava.com/segments/1077732

now, if it has been flagged for being short, fair enough, it that has been flagged for being dangerous, than all our bikes should never be taken off the turbos and used otside

Chips Lovell

You could ask them to reinstate it if it's been done in error?

mossym

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

You could ask them to reinstate it if it's been done in error?

tbh i'm not that pushed, just using it as as an example of how some of the decisions are beyond a little crazy

Leroy42

colm18 wrote: »

Leroy42 wrote: »

If some person wants to have a segment that includes lights let them at it, what harm is it to you. simply stops at the lights yourself.
QUOTE]

on the way into work this morning I stopped at a red light, guy behind me hits into my back wheel , then tells me that 'he didn't expect me to stop' :rolleyes:

For this and many other reasons RLJ'ers shouldn't be allowed Strava accounts..

Taking that Colm18 we should get rid of red lights! Whether he expected you to stop or not is irrelevant. Many things happen on the road we don't expect, everyone needs to be prepared.

I'm not saying that the Strava are not correct, from a corporate responsibility (and given their recent legal case) they must be seen to do something.

I just don't understand why anybody would flag a segment. Someone said that nobody would flag a climb, but what is someone thinks it just too hard, dangerous to your health. As pointed out a tight bend to a good descender is nothing, to many it is dangerous (if not done right).

A segment is only dangerous if you don't obey the laws and match your riding to the conditions. By flagging it you are really saying that you know best. (You being everyone not Colm18!)

hueylewis

mossym wrote: »

define dangerous though? A tight bend at the bottom of a steep hill could be very dangerous to a new rider with little confidence. the same bend could be nothing to the same person once they have a couple of months of cycling under their belt. should everything pander to the lowest common denominator? I'm all for safety, but the removal of the segment on the judgement of one person is crazy



have you met the internet? if it can be done, it will.

I'm not going to argue their system is perfect; like I said, it's open to abuse and needs improvement. In my experience though, there isn't an epidemic of spiteful people flagging difficult climbs or random pieces of road as hazardous. All the hazardous segments I've come across (all two of them), are fast and narrow downhill segments passing multiple residential entrances. If people are flagging segments that are clearly not dangerous (eg. uphill, no lights), then that's a problem that needs to be fixed.

As for what should be deemed dangerous - any segment that's broken up by traffic lights or stop signs just shouldn't be allowed. A segment like that just doesn't make any sense and until Strava starts using more detailed mapping data that includes all traffic signs and lights (so as to automatically disable segment creation accordingly), they need a system in place for people to flag those segments and have them reviewed. I think segments that pass through residential areas should be considered dangerous where there's a risk of cars blindly exiting driveways or children running out onto the road.

I don't think a change in the direction of a road qualifies as dangerous. I would be more concerned with situations where the likelihood of a collision between a cyclist and another road user/pedestrian is very high, and where the risk of collision and inability to react increases exponentially with the cyclist's speed. Situations where cycling ability doesn't really come into it, because cycling ability isn't going to reliably stop you from hitting a pedestrian crossing the road when you're running a red light at 50kmh.

I'm sure there'll be some disagreement here, but going back to the two hazardous segments I've encountered for real world examples - the parallel descents of Ticknock road and Kellystown road. Easily freewheel down both hills between 50 and 60kmh. Met an old lady blindly exiting a house towards the bottom of Ticknock one day forcing me to slam on the brakes (I was doing 45kmh), and met a lady reversing out of a parking space the other day while I was climbing Kellystown road. In the latter case, she reversed out onto the road with no warning, a few meters ahead of me on a very narrow road. Luckily I was creeping up the hill at a snail's pace, but had I or another cyclist been coming down the hill on the other side at full speed, there would have been no time to react. Yes, the driver was wrong for reversing blindly, but those incidents are much more likely to occur in a residential area like that. Kellystown road is narrow enough to begin with, and almost always has a number of cars parked on one or both sides as well. Plenty of cyclists will be smart enough to take care of themselves and cycle at appropriate speeds, but I think downhill segments on sections of road like Kellystown will encourage some people to cycle unsafely and cause an accident.