Unscientific bike racing survey results posted here!

October 7, 2015 § 19 Comments

A few months ago we did a SurveyMonkey questionnaire and got a whopping 634 responses.

The point behind the survey was to get some information that we could use to focus efforts in 2016, or at least to argue about. The methodology we used accorded with the Half-Assed Sampling Method developed by Reader’s Digest the year they predicted an overwhelming victory for Dewey over Truman.

The results are here; peruse them at your peril.

If anyone out there in Internet Land is a number cruncher, hit me up and I’ll provide you with the raw data so that you can tell us what it all really means, aside from GIGO.

END

————————

For $2.99 per month you can subscribe to this blog and occasionally see posts as short as this one. Not often, though. Click here and select the “subscribe” link in the upper right-hand corner. Thank you!

Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

§ 19 Responses to Unscientific bike racing survey results posted here!

  • Frederick says:

    It means two things. First, it means you are all freds. Back in the day, the ONLY consideration was PRIZE MONEY. If the P/1/2 purse did not have at least $20k it was not worth it to drive or fly to another state and we all know that SoCal racing ends in early May. Second, it means that you should all be competitive SWIMMERS. Swimmers DON’T CRASH and there has never, ever been a recorded case of a swimmer who doped.

  • davidsonchan says:

    Your sample was biased. It didn’t include my age group. I’m 79.

  • channel_zero says:

    What questions do you want answered that need number crunching?

    I crunch 3 or four whole rows of data sometimes.

  • Worldchamp says:

    You don’t need to number crunch. The data clearly indicates that the people answering the survey were lying. 🙂

  • Tb says:

    If we had a zip code for each respondent, we could have made some nice visual maps depicting where all these “Fred’s” are coming from to partake in these weekend rituals. It would become obvious, by combining event registration, we could see who is willing to drive x distance and waste $40 to race for 35 minutes.

    USA Cycling would never be this smart to review such primitive spatial statistics.

    Who am I kidding… Every cyclist is clueless and is willing to drive endless hours just to race in circles around an industrial park. Maybe USA Cycling is smarter then we think and are just milking all the riders.

  • Mike Hancock says:

    I saw no mention of hookers and/or blow in the survey, therefore it is invalid. I also saw no question about monthly “pharmacia” budget or expenses related to Joe Papp’s Injection-o’-the-Month Club. Foul.

  • HeidiC says:

    I’ll probably regret this, but if you seriously need someone to analyze it and can’t find a biased bike racer to do it, I can do it. Export “all individual responses” in SPSS format & send it to me. Would be helpful to know any specifics of what you’re looking for and the size of the group that was surveyed (for response rate info), or at least how people were recruited to take it so I can make a half-assed statement about how representative the sample is (or isn’t) of the So Cal racing community.

  • HeidiC says:

    Oh, sorry, thought you’d have access to it since I filled it out in the little posting form — obviously I don’t do the blogging thing. I’ll send it to your email address.

What’s this?

You are currently reading Unscientific bike racing survey results posted here! at Cycling in the South Bay.

meta

%d bloggers like this: