We had an interesting discussion on our ride yesterday… One of the guys who rode with us last week posted a rolling time of 4:47 for the century, and though he wasn’t with us yesterday, that was the start of a broader discussion. He started with us and was with us all the way to the 85 mile mark. I didn’t keep track of whether or not he finished with us, whether he stopped at the rest stop we did, or whether he just kept going. Let’s just say we went by rolling time, and we completed the hundred in 4:58. We rolled into the parking lot, a mile more down the road from the 100 mile mark, less than three minutes later. The chance he knocked off eleven minutes in just fifteen miles, when we were cruising between 23 & 26 mph, is impossible. He must have a magic computer.
That said, it was brought up on yesterday’s ride that we should go by ride time, rather than rolling time. It didn’t matter for yesterday’s ride, as they were the same. 56.5 miles in 2:52:10, a 19.7 mph average. No stops. Not too shabby.
The Assenmacher 100 was a different story though. Rolling time was 5:00:05 but ride time was closer to 5:40…
I go by rolling time for one simple reason. Normal cyclists have to stop. We don’t have a support staff to keep us rolling.
We don’t have people out there to hand us food or cars to draft behind to get us back to the peloton after a nature break… We can’t just whip it out on the side of the road like they do in a race.
So, for that simple fact that we mere mortals have to stop, it only makes sense to go by rolling time.
This is my position on the matter. Rolling time is what counts.