Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule.
Quote | Reply
In the book FASTER the author talks about the 10 watt rule when looking for gains.

Gains or loss of fewer than 5 watts is negligible because we can't be certain they are tied to anyone thing.

Also I can't find where he speaks about latex tubes. Tires and crr yes. Tubes no.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fishbum wrote:
In the book FASTER the author talks about the 10 watt rule when looking for gains.

Gains or loss of fewer than 5 watts is negligible because we can't be certain they are tied to anyone thing.

Also I can't find where he speaks about latex tubes. Tires and crr yes. Tubes no.

There are ways to both tie tests to one thing and to measure power differences of less than 5W.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hmmm.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In the bad old incandescent days, 10 watts would qualify as a dim bulb...
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He doesn't sound very smart.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [jimatbeyond] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I thought his book was considered pretty factual.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 I’m perfectly happy to make 5, 8-watt gains. And I’m even more happy when others aren’t.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [jimatbeyond] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jimatbeyond wrote:
He doesn't sound very smart.
My interpretation (based on the paraphrase above) is that you should focus on doing the big gain items before you worry about the small ones, because the validity of the latter might be questionable.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [MattyK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MattyK wrote:
You should focus on doing the big gain items before you worry about the small ones, because the validity of the latter might be questionable.

Sure focus on the big gains, but because the big gains are bigger than the small gains.

Race Director, Velo Club La Grange (http://www.lagrange.org)
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [MattyK] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MattyK wrote:
jimatbeyond wrote:
He doesn't sound very smart.
My interpretation (based on the paraphrase above) is that you should focus on doing the big gain items before you worry about the small ones, because the validity of the latter might be questionable.

I would not have gotten that. I just figured he was saying the guy was dumb.
His statement makes me think about things like latex tubes.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [refthimos] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's seams polar opposite of "Marginal gains"
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Marginal gains are what you chase after you've nailed the primary gains

Race Director, Velo Club La Grange (http://www.lagrange.org)
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
“Don’t sweat the small stuff, go for the big gains.”

Maybe this is out of context. Sure, go for the big stuff first. But also go for the cheap/easy stuff, even if the gains are smaller. You would be dumb not to.

The bigger question is where to draw the line on the very expensive marginal gains. That is dependant on your budget, and level of competitiveness.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [jimatbeyond] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I read his book when I started in the sport. The info was okay and most of the info easy to find if you are a geek. I don't think it influenced me much except holding off for many years before buying carbon aero rims. However, that was more confirmatory than eye opening.

I should review the book, but looking him up now there's something that doesn't vibe well with me. As a geek, I'm constantly looking for the most up to date info. He didn't continue that. It seems like he disappeared. He deleted his twitter and doesn't have anything new posted online except this: http://jim-gourley.blogspot.com/
His velopress bio, it states he his a multiple ironman finisher. I can't find one finish. He keeps bragging about being a rocket scientist. His bio reads like he is twisting the truth. I could be wrong. Since he graduated with a degree in aerospace engineering, he might be working on something top secret.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [hubcaps] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would think they checked his background before it went to print.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [hubcaps] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
hubcaps wrote:
it states he his a multiple ironman finisher. I can't find one finish. He keeps bragging about being a rocket scientist. His bio reads like he is twisting the truth. I could be wrong. Since he graduated with a degree in aerospace engineering, he might be working on something top secret.

Omg Hambini is the author
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [iamuwere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What does that mean????
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I always add 10W to my FTP and subtract 10 minutes from my IM splits whenever I post on ST. After all... it's within the margin of error.

Fishbum wrote:
In the book FASTER the author talks about the 10 watt rule when looking for gains.
Gains or loss of fewer than 5 watts is negligible because we can't be certain they are tied to anyone thing.

Also I can't find where he speaks about latex tubes. Tires and crr yes. Tubes no.

What's your CdA?
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [trailerhouse] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
U wouldn't be the first 😂
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [trailerhouse] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That is solid gold.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In manufacturing, it's often stated that nearly 80% of a process is either non-value-add or "necessary" non-value-add while only 20% of the process is value-add.

If you think about this rule this way instead of using it to de-legitimatize small gains, it would make sense.

In other words, focus on the 80% losses first. Then the 20%. Not the other way around. There's folks out there buying $3000 in wheels who don't keep their chains, rings, sprockets perfectly cleaned and lubed and have horrible positions on the bike. There's folks talking about 5w things that are making 20w mistakes.

On a bike, that would mean first focusing on the huge human shaped blob sitting on the bike first. Then looking at the next largest contribution, then the next.

Also, lots of decent testing of small gains does do what a manufacturing environment would do to prove something works..........you make the change, see the improvement, change it back, and see it go back, then change it to the improved state again.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
burnthesheep wrote:
In other words, focus on the 80% losses first. Then the 20%.

Can you do both? Is that allowed?
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I understand all that. And certainly making changes to ones fit that results in a 50 watt gain you're going to see a difference. But let's say for instance you change tubes and save 3 Watts between the two wheels combined then you put on the aerocoach chain guide and supposedly see 2 Watts then change out a front brake and gain another couple Watts if they're each three and in theory going to be nine combined are you actually going to be able to test this and verify that those changes are the reason you are now 9 Watts faster? And it's possible that I'm not doing a good job of asking my question.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That is why you do testing in incremental changes.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [turdburgler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But the same statement goes for losses. What if you make the change and see a loss. Doesn't mean it was the new equipment.

I guess the bigger question is can we trust anything that is not tested by an outside independent company.
Quote Reply

Prev Next