Forum menu
What is this figure about and should it concern me?
Is it a percentage or what, or keeps increasing into the thousands?
Mine is 90.666, is this good? what's yours? wave it about if you have a big one and want to show it off! lol - how do I make it bigger?
It's the average of your 100 top segment pr scores (not including descents steeper than -1%)
If you're 1st out of 10, your pr score is 90.00
1st out of 10,000 gives you 99.99
So if your vv score is 90, then you'll typically be in the quickest 10% on your 100 best efforts
You can work out a vv score which includes proper mtb descent segments manually by exporting the csv and taking the average
96.163 here
More fun to try improving your VeloViewer Explorer Score.
just looked at mine and it said 26.454 🙁
then realised that was for walkin 😀
biking is 91.253
max explorer square is 10x10, i was beginning to struggle by then, then got bored
98.813 apparently.
97.277 - didn't know what it referred to until @oldjeans' explanation.
Max Explorer square is 16x16 but I've 11 of them! One square will take me to 19x19 then another 6 to 23x23. The Explorer score is a great way to search out new things, hence the name I suppose. Most people seem to get stymied by military installations.
99.474
it must be broken
96.127.
What are the squares about then? My very local patch is pretty concentrated, then rides string out in long lines with a lot of blank space in between. So max square is 7x7, max cluster is 95. I can see where/wha the max square is (a max oblong would be bigger - blue outlines, but what's the cluster? doesn't seem to be the tiles with blue shading - and what are those? Tiles you've ridden through more than once?
@nedrapier - the squares are the mapping tiles used at (I think) zoom level 10, they are almost the same size as an OS grid square. The max cluster is made up of those contiguous tiles that don't border a tile you haven't visited. Sorry for the double negative. What you should see is a "border" of visited tiles around your max cluster tiles.
cheers whitestone, makes perfect sense, probably could/would have figured it out with another few minutes of squinting, as per most questions I post on here! The light blue is the cluster, didn't look like as many as 95.
Here's mine. Some of those big holes are shooting estates that aren't exactly visitor friendly 🙁
Don't think I'm too fussed about pushing my explorer score, There's chunks of the map that aren't that interesting. I'd be taking the road bike out just to tick off squares in flat farmland.
Edit: posts crossed. That's an impressive amount of exploring!
I find the Explorer Square/Cluster to be the most interesting. Tracking down some of those elusive gaps has led me to finding all sorts; ancient/abandoned dwellings and tracks/unmarked waterfalls/a fantastic juniper "forest" etc.
I thought that as I typed! If you don't know hat's there, you don't know what's there. Which is rather the point of exploring.
That solitary square above the max square outlines is only doable by foot as the only path goes through farmyards at either end both with prominent no cycling signs 🙁
Some of the squares up in the Dales are along broad peat bog ridges. If there's a decent prolonged frost then I'll be up there on the fat bike 🙂 A canoe would be good to get the squares in the estuaries at the top end of Morecambe Bay.
@njee20 That says:
You've visited 2086 tiles (see earlier post as to what a "tile" is). The average distance to get each tile is 19.483 miles - basically it looks like you do the same routes a lot.
The biggest NxN square formed by those tiles is 12x12 and the number of contiguous squares that don't border an unvisited tile is the max cluster value of 437
You’ve visited 2086 tiles (see earlier post as to what a “tile” is). The average distance to get each tile is 19.483 miles – basically it looks like you do the same routes a lot.
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">I'd not looked at this bit. Mine is 1565 tiles, average of 2.958 mi per tile. I don't do a lot of big rides, but when I do they're off in different places. Local rides are shortish, so carry less weight than occasional big rides in new places? I guess njee's average per tile is high because he's got a big road commute?</span>
That solitary square above the max square outlines is only doable by foot as the only path goes through farmyards at either end both with prominent no cycling signs
Can't make head nor tail of that map! Where is that?
I guess njee’s average per tile is high because he’s got a big road commute?
Correct! 20-50 miles each way depending on my enthusiasm levels! That is pretty interesting.
Can’t make head nor tail of that map! Where is that?
Had to make the image fairly small 🙂 That square is the one just west of Winterburn reservoir - the track up to Weets Top skirts round the top end of it.
Ah yes. I've been given filthy looks for walking up that track!
99.959. What do I win ?
a broken steerer tube.
🤣
96.43.
I do a fair amount of road stuff and, frankly, just getting into the top 10% on an uphill road segment is something of an achievement for me, so I'm quite pleased with this!
I find the explorer strangely addictive. Trying to turn squares orange (visited) then blue (part of the cluster) has led to some "interesting" rides this year.
Have we talked about Eddington Numbers yet...?
35 for me, which I accept is pretty modest!
Have we talked about Eddington Numbers yet…?
Splutter! There's a VV thread on YACF and the guys there have Eddington Numbers well over 100!! Most are Audaxers though so I suppose it comes with the territory.
Mine is 71 but I'll do quite a lot of long road rides throughout the year. Need another five rides to get to 72.
55 Eddington score. I have no idea what this means either ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Eddington 66, but only 25 this year which is pitiful.
9328 tiles at an average of 4.722km per tile. I wasn't using Strava when I was commuting by bike though.
Explorer Square 14x14 (5 squares for 16 x16). Beyond that I get into the wilds of the Monadliath where it'll become increasingly difficult.
Largest Cluster 359 but I've been working on another large cluster and will be able to join the two soon.
My score is 89.295, the lower the number the better
(OK not really, I'm just slow and rarely smash it anywhere!)
My max square score is 17 though, I'm much more interested in that. 19 is on my radar with a couple of big rides at some point, but don't know when I'm going to have the time to do that
VV Score of 93.225, but that just increases as you ride more and more segments
Eddington of 70. Long term goal of getting to 100, but that will take several years.
Explorer of 21x21, but one more square takes me to 22.
This is the interesting one though. As others have said, it takes you to new places. Sometimes delightful, sometimes 'interesting'
Bob has some 'interesting' ones as he goes south into Calderdale....
Tell me about it Chew, those on Boulsworth Hill are patrolled by the ranger and those around Worsthorne are bogtastic!
I need another 67 century rides to get me to 100. That's going to take some time.
Some squares need military style planning to get to plus a good dose of luck. The difficult ones are either trackless boggy moorland or someone's drive.
55 Eddington score. I have no idea what this means either ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Eddington is one of those gloriously pointless ways to measure your cycling. If you've done one ride of at least one mile, your Eddington number is "1". If you've done two rides of at least two miles, it's "2". Mine is 35, which means that I've done 35 rides of at least 35 miles, but I've not done 36 rides of at least 36 miles. A reflection of my life as a mountain biker with kids, so my mileages have always tended to be lower.
As a note, Eddington tends to consolidate multiple rides on the same day, so if you do 2 x 25 mile rides in one day, that counts as a 50 for Eddington purposes.
One quirk of Eddington is that activities like commuting make no contribution to it whatsoever. If you've already got a score of 50, any sub-50 mile days don't make any contribution to it whatsoever. As a result, it "encourages" you to ride further, more often if you want to improve it.
VV score is 96.649 but is of no interest
Eddington is 54 and that does interest me. Set myself the target of getting it up to 50 by my 50th birthday, and just about managed it. OK not exceptional, but bear in mind I was well into my 40s before I did my first 50, and purely a mountain biker until until recently. Problem now is that, for some reason, I have loads of rides of 54 miles, so increasing is going to take some time. And you do find yourself thinking that rides that are just under your Eddington are worthless !
Also love the explorer score (17x17, 4613) cos it induces me to ride to new places. I do however include runs - some of the moors to the west of Sheffield would be a little too cheeky for me. Unfortunately, this means that expanding my square is going to involve some of the less than pleasant roads to the East
VV score is 89.355, which only really confirms what I knew anyway.....
I'm a bit fortunate in a way in that there's a plethora of lanes local to me that can be ridden relatively easily, hence my VV square is now 27x27, Aiming for 30x30 - hopefully by the end of the year.
Eddington is 54, one more at 55 for that to go up to 55. Let's just say that 100 is a long way off.
Just checked my Eddington score. 83. Been a big year for me ton wise, 24 up to now. The more 100 + rides I do the more the score increases I presume?
Just checked my Eddington score. 83. Been a big year for me ton wise, 24 up to now. The more 100 + rides I do the more the score increases I presume?
Basically yes. If you logged one 100 mile ride then your Eddington Score would be 1 because you've only done one ride of a mile or more. Do another 100 mile ride then your score is two because you've now done two rides of two miles or more. Repeat until you get to 100.
However, to get to 101 you'd now need to do 101 rides of 101 miles!
If you hover your mouse over each score on the Eddington graph it will show you how many rides you need to do to get to any given score.
Mine appears to be 99.559. Reasonably happy with that.
That is cool re: Eddington! I need 5 more days of 56 miles to get there. Best do some more winter commuting!
I've been looking at the squares I need to tick off to bump up my NxN and started planning about a couple of rides, then realised I could get to 10 or 12 quite easily, but that's hardly anything special and I'm not that fussed about the riding I'd need do to get any further.
However, there is a picture of a dragon in the trails which might be worth picking out with the right ride. I might have a bash at that next summer!
That's the first time I've understood the whole Eddington thing. Currently at 59 and need 3 more 60 milers to move up to 60.
My Explorer score is currently 17x17 but I've got a few routes planned to increase it a fair bit. It's not a bad thing as I've moved house recently so it encourages me to ride in some new areas rather than returning to the areas I used to ride in.
Just checked my Eddington score. 83. Been a big year for me ton wise, 24 up to now. The more 100 + rides I do the more the score increases I presume?
It depends how you got to 83. If your 83, 83 mile rides were all exactly 83 miles (unlikely, of course), then to get to 84 you need to do another 84 rides of at least 84 miles and the 83 x 83 mile rides you did before won't contribute in the slightest to this number. It's cruel like that.
Of course, it's more likely that a percentage of your 83 mile days were actually more than this and they will, of course, count towards your accumulation of longer distances. It's a cruel measure, but if you want to improve it, it's one that definitely encourages you to go out and ride further than yesterday!