Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

See some previous post. In order to compare apples to apples the regional
differences analysis was done only using single day rides. The pioneer rides
were in a different category. See my last post but if I remember there were
48 metabolic pull for a little over 1000 riders in single day rides. The
other riders were multiday. 

That was in the Lameness section, the metabolic was a typo. 

Truman

Jim Mitchell wrote:

HI Truman,

    Without pouring over your report in great detail, I have some questions.   In looking at metabolic pulls for the PS region in 2002 at rides of 50 miles to 99 miles from the yearbook, I get 51 metabolic pulls out of 1647 starts. That is a 3.1% pull rate. Where did you get numbers that made it 4.6%.  Were your numbers from something other than the 2002 yearbook? And if so why is the yearbook and your data so different? The same occurs looking at the SE region, your number is 3.6% while my number from the yearbook is 63 pulls over 1466 starts for a 4.3% metabolic pull rate. 

 

   Then I copy from your report below.  In the first paragraph you state this is a comparison of metabolic pulls in single day vs multiday.  Then in the 2nd paragraph below the data you state there is a significant difference in lameness pulls at single day vs multiday.  So which is it?  Is your data lameness or is it metabolic? 

   I guess us engineers like our data, but we like to check it too.

 

    Jim

  

Pioneer vs. Single Day Rides: The table below is the means and offset for the seven regions with pioneer rides. The comparison is between metabolic pulls in the single day vs. pioneer rides. The two regions without pioneer rides in 2002 were the SE region and the NE region. Region Treatment Rate (%) Offset >From Grand Mean

Region	Treatment Rate (%)	Offset from Grand Mean
Single Day	8.023	1.778
Pioneer	1.1807	-5.064

Grand Mean 6.244
Required F value for 95% confidence = 3.84
F value = 34.51

The value of the F statistic of this set exceeds (by a large amount) the threshold sufficient for a 95% confidence so the null hypothesis is rejected with a confidence of 95%. That is, there is statistically sufficient evidence that there is a difference in lameness pull rates between pioneer rides and single day rides. What the analysis shows is this difference is statistically significant ­ that is the trends of differences of lameness pulls cannot be explained by statistical variability of the underlying population.

Conclusions:The conclusions regarding lameness pulls of this study is that for the 2002 season there is statistically significant difference between the lameness pull rates of single day (distance less than 100 miles) endurance rides based on region. The same conclusion is drawn concerning pioneer rides and single day rides in those regions with both. The difference between the pull rates at pioneer rides and single day rides (in the seven regions that had pioneer rides) is statistically significant and could not have arisen (to a 95% confidence) from statistical variability