Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Okay, but lets be honest the climbs are all about 500m except for the one which is probably 800m?

Just because the one starts higher doesn't necessarily make it harder, in this case it does, but you also get flat races at high altitude.

Posted

Okay, but lets be honest the climbs are all about 500m except for the one which is probably 800m?

Just because the one starts higher doesn't necessarily make it harder, in this case it does, but you also get flat races at high altitude.

800m over 8km is still pretty badass - especially on foot since you can't freewheel down the other side.

 

There's a much bigger problem, though. The horizontal scale is completely wrong. Compare 80-83km and 33-40km, for example.

Posted

800m over 8km is still pretty badass - especially on foot since you can't freewheel down the other side.

 

There's a much bigger problem, though. The horizontal scale is completely wrong. Compare 80-83km and 33-40km, for example.

 

Which one is 40km?

Posted (edited)

Yeah, that elevation graph is not really a true reflection of the actual profile.

 

Edit: I think they should have stuck to intervals of 5Km and it would have a more accurate...

Edited by Tiny K
Posted

Edit: I think they should have stuck to intervals of 5Km and it would have a more accurate...

Hell, any interval would do so long as they stuck to the same one for the whole graph. You can't have 100px = 3km at one point and then 100px = 7km on the same axis.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout