Cycling as a Game

When I was fourteen, I could ride a skateboard like a pro.

I pressed triangle to grind.

I could out-drive Sebastian Loeb.

Just press circle to handbrake-turn.

I could out-gun a repressive alien overwatch.

Right-click to fire secondary.

I'm still learning how to kill dragons, reverse time and fly helicopters every now and again, but there's only one high score I care about.

My Strava segments.

Pedal to go faster.

Strava is combination of one of the second or third wave of fitness-tracking applications, and one of the first wave of competitive augmented-reality games. The concept is simple - after recording a ride with a GPS device, you upload the data to the Strava site and it compares your route to segments of roads designated by users to be worth timing yourself over - usually hill climbs. You then get a ranking for that climb, against everyone who's ridden it so far, and a record of every time you've ridden it, so you can track your performance. The sections you are "King" or "Queen of the Mountain" on go on a list of palmares, and anybody who is following you gets to see a little crown on your ride summary, telling the world that "I'm the fastest person yet."

It feels good, getting one of these sections.

In Strava, we are seeing the beginnings of road cycling developing as not just a sport, but a game - something that can be picked up and played at any time, without organisation or pressure. Of course, cyclists have always enjoyed the not-a-race sprints and hillclimbs on a group ride, and knowing that they've beaten their previous best up their nemesis slope, but the formalism of the competition; the ability to compare yourself against anyone and everyone, from pro riders to that rider in the local club who took the sprint from you last weekend, opens up a new world of challenge and gratification.

Sounds good, right? Well, currently, it is, but it is our job as consumers and riders to make sure that this emerging "game" plays by rules we can agree with and adds to, rather than takes away from, the enjoyment we find on a bike.

Strava hit the headlines in the USA recently in the tragic story of a pedestrian in San Francisco being struck and killed by a cyclist crossing an intersection. The full details of the case are not fully nailed down yet, but what is known is that the cyclist uploaded the ride later to Strava, which showed him riding at 35mph through the intersection.

Some writers seized this information and used it to express discontent with the concept of Strava in general - http://bit.ly/IJ7SJI. A local blogger felt that Strava was encouraging inconsiderate and dangerous cycling.

There are two pertinent facts that should here be made clear - firstly, there is no Strava segment that crosses the intersection, or that runs into the intersection. Indeed, the only downhill segment in the area is currently under review as dangerous, which leads me into fact two - Strava provides a function to allow users to flag segments as dangerous, at which time they are immediately removed for review.

With those two facts out of the way, it is time to address some (but by no means all - it would take me many, many posts to dissect the lot!) of the concerns of the Marin County blogger.

There are undoubtedly cases where Strava sections may be set-up in inappropriate places, or places where at some but not all times, they may become inappropriate. I know of a few local ones which I would not challenge for to protect my own personal safety, and a few that I could see becoming dangerous. I might as well name one, so we can examine how we can control safety whilst allowing competition.

The descent from the top of the Crow Road south into Lennoxtown is part of a Strava segment that crosses the mountain. In my opinion, it is right that this segment should exist - the full traverse of the Crow is a well-respected ride with a long history. Whilst the descent is usually safe whilst ridden within the limits of the rider, there is one danger zone that would allow a reckless rider an advantage.

There is a sharp left-hander before the car-park that obscures view of hikers and dog walkers crossing from the car-park onto the mountain. Taking this corner at the limit of the bike's ability would give the rider seconds of advantage, but few options if they met a walker and an oncoming car simultaneously.

As a community, we need to decide what to do in this sort of situation, as more users compete and times get tighter. It might be easy for me to just suggest that riders ride safely and accept the unimportance of the segment, since I have access to organised competition to get my kicks, and I am capable of taking lower-speed, less dangerous uphill segments. It might be necessary to put non-timed sections in on descents like this, and this would seem to be the ideal solution.

What of those that think that competition outside of official races is a bad thing anyway? It's certainly true that as a young man, riding hard on a bike put me in some dangerous frames of mind, where the slightest transgression by another road user would send me into a fit of self-righteous rage.

But that was before Strava.

The issue with the hot-headedness of competitors isn't going to go away if you take away the competition. The solutions lie in sanctioned competition - more frequent races with lower cost of entry; and education - encouragement to bring young riders into the fold with clubs, where behaviour on the bike can be monitored and remedied.

It must be remembered that we are in a transition state, not just with regard to regular cyclists and new technology, but also with the whole country becoming more aware of cycling. With the World Champion racing for the UK, the Olympics looking good for the UK cycling squad and even a potential grand tour winner currently representing the state, as well as national cycling advocacy campaigns, we could be looking at a sea change in how cycling is viewed in this country.

Let the games begin.