I vote +10!
Brilliantly done Sir!
I vote +10!
Minus 5 for misspelling Cotty, though
Corrected. Thank you!!!
And I forgot the front-door brag… The 2021 ToS set me up for training that allowed me to qualify to represent the US at the 2022 world champs in my age group (for duathlon). I plan to use the 2022 ToS to try and qualify for 2023 worlds!
Totally agree - certain days are a no-go for me (work, family). I’d like to block these out completely and adjust the plan around the days that I can commit to.
Also, what would be great - multi sport extensions to the training plan: I’d love to combine a half decent rowing workout as cross training during the week.
My tuppence worth as a generally glass half full entitled white male. This doesn’t really add anything for me. I use rollers and I’ve been suffering since 2011 thereabouts. The pro rides don’t work on rollers so there’s that. I understand that things need to develop to attract a bigger audience and there are only so many workouts and versions of same, but you need to keep the core customers happy. I’m part of the core and a lot of effort seems to have been made without considering existing core followers too much.
I have read that the targets in some of the videos have changed. That is very disappointing. I have been using those targets for a long time and now have to evaluate how I am affected by this. I think the science is undermined. If folks are getting turned off because they are unable to hit the numbers they need to HTFU or grow up. Don’t tell GVA but we all have off days and may miss our numbers during training for multiple reasons. That should not mean the goalposts are moved (I know that’s football, not cycling).
I liked the quirkiness and the humour. I am not interested in triathloners or pandering to them. If you were into SUF like I was/am you should be upset because it is being softened and marginalised. Clearly. It’s been hived-off into a separate folder like the family eccentric so as not to upset the posh relations when they drop by. Or subscribe to being lame.
Teal? Like WTF? It’s a colour couchlandrians use for soft furnishings. Some of the above is tongue in cheek. But not all of it.
Bold statement, kodus for that!
Anyway, I think I disagree with the idea that everyone and every place must be open without any restrictions in order to be generally open to diversity. I consider myself a very open person with respect to cultures, nationalities, religions, sexual orientation,… you name it. However, I do not believe that there is anything wrong with having a certain space, a certain organisation, or whatever it may be, that attracts one group of people more than another. As long as you make sure there are sufficient places or organisations, and these place between each other are diverse enough so that every person, every orientation, every background can find their little niche, their little place, that they feel attracted to and happy with. As long as this organisation does not strictly refuse a certain group of people, as long as it is simply more attractive to some than to others. A chess club will not be very attractive to a darts player right? Does that mean they have to put up dart boards in the chess club’s rooms?
In our example, I don’t believe there was anything wrong with the Sufferfest attracting a certain group of people with a certain mindset and at the same time looking a bit intimidating to another group of people with a different mindset - ethically speaking. And I don’t think the diversity argument applies here, for the reasons I pointed out above. Financially speaking I do see what was wrong with that. Which brings me to a certain conclusion…
As I said in a former post, I do NOT say that I wouldn’t have done the same thing in your position… One thing I’m struggling with is this intransigent removal of Sufferlandria from the equation. I think I can say, I wouldn’t have done THAT. But that’s a different topic.
@RenAn Constantly updating a software platform, developing new content, maintaining a sports science team, maintaining IT security and supporting all of the technical needs of ever increasing connected devices demands lots of resources. To me scaling the platform is a solid path to increasing the velocity of revenue so that more resources can be used to meet those needs as well as additional demands from the customer base. The connection to Wahoo’s hardware sales further drives potential revenue for the platform by creating cross sale opportunities and the ability to better manage brand loyalty and the customer experience.
Sufferfest and Sufferlandria continue to exist - just as a channel within a larger platform that will help it stay vibrant for the long term. Long live Sufferlandria!
And I agree with all you’re saying. I just think ethical ideas like diversity had little to do with it. That is speculation of course, none of us attended the meetings that lead to all these decisions.
If you’re referring to my last statement about erasing Sufferlandria from the equation, the involvement of Wahoo and broadening of the team and SW base is something I’ve welcomed. What I don’t understand is for instance why all the Sufferlandria stuff on the internet was taken down.
But again, that’s a different topic.
Can I just check, as these posts are losing context - are you referring to the post *screenshot attached?
If so, then are you disagreeing with the writer (David McQ) response to the complaint (previous) on semi-wokeness?
If so, then I couldn’t disagree with you more, based on my understanding of wokeness and how it relates to diversity
Yes Martin, I do refer to this original post.
But no Martin, I do not disagree with it. Disagreeing with it would mean, that I think his statement was intrinsically wrong. That’s not the case at all.
I’m all for diversity, in all its forms, no exceptions! I also gave him my kudos for making such a bold statement along the line of, if you don’t like a more open more diverse community, just leave, we don’t need you here. All my respect for this!
I got the feeling though that there was an implication in his statement that tried to say that diversity was the main driving factor behind all this change, and in order to represent all sorts of people, there was no other choice but to take a step away from Sufferlandria. If this was just in my mind, and not intended by the author, I apologise.
I just genuinely believe that there were other interests playing a much bigger role. And I believe that being attractive only to a certain group of people is NOT against diversity. Not as long as you don’t think, feel or talk in a negative way about people who do not feel attracted by your group.
That’s all I wanted to say, it is a personal opinion, not more, not less.
Again, my greatest respect for making such a bold statement and looking at it as it has been made (without seeing any messages in it that might or might not be intended) I can do nothing but second it!
The problem I have is, I want to play chess…and some people go out of their way to make that uncomfortable for some of us.
I think what @David.McQuillen.KoS and Wahoo have done is awesome.
Being badass is not the exclusive domain of “some” or only “some cyclists.” I’m all for sharing the suffering. It means more competition and I have to train harder. It means more awesome people in my sport. It means more for everyone. It means having choices to still ride or move my body differently when I’m ill, or injured, motivation is down or I’m just having a dark day. It’s about trying different
things. It’s about being open minded. It’s about embracing different ways of doing things. Diversity is not only about race, or gender, or age, it’s about ways of thinking.
Who knows, maybe that darts player has a focus breathing exercise the chess players can benefit from. AND, they don’t in any way stop me from playing chess, or the type of chess game I like most. Their presence in no way detracts from or limits what I do in my chess game. It’s not even like this is Zwift and they can watch you play chess.
This conversation is interesting in a sense, as when I read your replies, I’m getting the feeling we all don’t disagree. I feel love for all you guys are saying.
I really appreciate the way they opened up the workouts, improved the app, all that. I welcome every new member, tougher competition, people coming in with a different background, different skills, a different mindset…
What I’m not getting is why - except for the SUF videos - all of Sufferlandria had to disappear. This entire framework was so full of wit and created a certain spirit.
Removing everything that made something special, just because somebody else might be intimidated has nothing to do with opening up to diversity. It’s a business decision. That’s all I’m saying.
That’s an opinion. And obviously you can have a different one, nothing wrong with that.
It’s also JUST an opinion, so let’s not fight over it. I have no intentions to let this become a big argument. As I said, I find it hard to disagree with anything you’re saying. It just doesn’t get exactly to my point. Never mind.
You realise WE are Sufferlandria. It’s the people
We’re still here cracking the nail chair jokes. I for one don’t need a website to help me chat to @Glen.Coutts about sharpening nails or lowering drawbridges or shredding chamois. That “stuff” wasn’t in the old app. It’s the PEOPLE who make it special. Not the website. The Legend of the Bookcase in Roller-gate is a classic example of Sufferlandrian-lore that was never on the website, or the app, it was here, where we talk. Unfortunately I think our typical Suf-humour is being diluted by everyone saying it’s gone. We can’t be heard over the roar of people complaining that we’re gone. We haven’t, but perhaps people have stopped listening.
The nail chairs are not a joke.
Well they’re funny when you pull them away as someone is sitting down and they end up on the softly carpeted floor instead!
Thanks a lot for the considered thoughts on the recent changes. Really appreciate them and this kind of conversation always has me thinking about how we did things and how we communicated and are managing the changes. I’ll just mention a few things in terms of clarity for everyone since these kinds of comments have come up a few times:
- The decision to make SYSTM , and not The Sufferfest, the overarching brand was about growth. The Sufferfest brand was holding us back. If we didn’t change, and held on to The Sufferfest as our market-facing brand, we would slowly die. That wasn’t something I wanted to have happen as I - and I believe all of you – would rather have The Sufferfest around but under an umbrella brand, than not at all. Anyone who suggests that The Sufferfest could have just continued as it was is, simply, wrong.
- Having The Sufferfest as it’s own category under SYSTM allows us to build on and embellish The Sufferfest brand rather than dilute it, as would have happened if it had remained the umbrella brand. As we had wanted to release so much new content, we would have had to further strip back The Sufferfest messaging, tone, etc. in order to make it ‘open’ to all these other new categories. Now, we don’t have to do that and The Sufferfest can just be The Sufferfest, rather than try to be things it’s not.
- Diversity was not the main driver of change, but was an important factor in our growth – I think my original post lays out the suite of reasons quite clearly and openly. We could have easily gone to market with images of just all white, serious-looking (middle aged) men, but that’s just not reflective of the world. I want people of all shapes, sizes, colors, genders, fitness levels etc. to recognize themselves in SYSTM. My response to the individual who didn’t like our diversity was not implying that it was the main or only reason we changed. Rather, it was implying that diversity is just the right thing to do and was a factor among many in our decisions. It also quite clearly stated, rather than subtly implied, that anyone who doesn’t like that can just get lost.
Thank you @David.McQuillen.KoS , I think that’s a really good summary.
Personally I really like the way that Suf sits in its own stream below the larger over-arching brand. I couldn’t give two hoots about branding itself, but it makes complete sense to me to do it like that.
I know people who refused to even look at Sufferfest purely because of the name. They wouldn’t even let me show them and wouldn’t even entertain a free trial. But I suspect that they would look at the wahoo syst(e)m and once inside that if they find a door from behind which comes screams and groans, then maybe they’ll open it and see.
hammers self harder onto nail chair and glares
Thanks @leebo you get me!