First Race Questions

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

I started cycling about 8 months ago and just did my first race last weekend at the Mrytle Beach Marathon Metric Century Ride. I finished the complete route at 3:29:29. I thought I was doing well until I saw the final results which had the first place time at 1:16:52. Thats an average of 49 mph...is that possible? The problem with this ride is that the route overlaps a number of times with no timing check points throughout so its possible for riders to decide to end early but still cross the finish line and have thier time recorded. Being my first ride I was hoping to see where I stood amongst other cyclists. The ride is completely flat for the duration although there was a considerable coastal wind to make life more hellish. What's "good" for 63 miles and what should I expect from myself especially if I plan on doing a few full centuries in Colorado this summer?

49 mph? that sounds highly unlikely....

My husband and I can do a bit over 20 mph (ride time only - not counting rest/lunch) on a century with moderate climbs, working together - though I am not too much of a draft :rolleyes:

....I thought I was doing well until I saw the final results which had the first place time at 1:16:52. ....
That's either a time for a shorter course or just an error. Not even Armstrong, Lemond and Indurain working together (seems unlikely) as a team could average 49 mph for 60 miles unless it was downhill :)

Your 3 and a half hour time is great for a first metric century. If you're motivated you can get faster and shave some time off of that, but it's a very good time for your first one. Nice job!

-Dave

+1 ... 49 mph must be well over 60 kph.

That is an error or some of the people were riding motorcycles.

+1 ... 49 mph must be well over 60 kph.

That is an error or some of the people were riding motorcycles. Unless it was 49Km/h?

Which would be an elite TT time, but not completely impossible. Also I guess a bunch or team of strong guys could also pull that off.

+1 ... 49 mph must be well over 60 kph.

That is an error or some of the people were riding motorcycles. 78.4 kph

78.4 kphIf its a metric century, then that must be 100k. A time of 1:16:52. is a lot faster than 49kph as 49kph would be a tad over 2hours.

If its a metric century, then that must be 100k. A time of 1:16:52. is a lot faster than 49kph as 49kph would be a tad over 2hours.Very good point. It would indeed appear then that they were riding a moped / motorcycle.

Good effort by those publishing the results not to realise how unrealistic that time and speed is. Unless of course it was 100km descent. :rolleyes: