Thank you for your efforts thus far. Naturally, we'll be monitoring this closely.
JBW-Florida (he/him)
STRAVA | Occasional User
👍
Maybe running segments that would set a new world record should be auto-flagged. I see a few around me that are claiming 100m in under 5 seconds
https://www.strava.com/segments/24076980
https://www.strava.com/segments/8095524
update, I flagged a few and they have disappeared from the leaderboards already 👍
These are old activities. It will take a while for the leaderboards to be cleaned up.
Is the upgraded auto-flagging system already working for new activities?
‘With an upgraded auto-flagging system, we’ll be able to remove even more impossible efforts.’
I hope the above isn’t active yet as frustrating having to keep flagging activities like in my screenshot when obviously in a vehicle.
Cheers
Good to see you are making some improvements. I realised something must be going on when I noticed that a Segment I created a while ago has disappeared !
I have created many Segments in the last 6 years (several thousand) and I like to think they have been done with care. Occasionally I see a badly created Segment (poor GPS, starting just before a junction or finishing after a junction, etc.) and I create a new (improved) version. I don't know who created the original (so I can't ask them to modify or remove it) so I keep the original name and append the reason for the new version, to make it clear what I have done. In the example I noticed this morning I had created a new version of a Segment that was a few percent shorter than the original and appended "safer finish" in the name (it had finished just after a junction). This has clearly been spotted by Strava - my newer version has been retained but given the name and number of the original (the newer number redirects to the older one). Even though I created the remaining version I am no longer the Owner (I can't update it, even though I created it).
This is mostly OK, although if my version has been retained (with a different number) shouldn't I still be the owner of it ?
I see that you plan to remove "unused" Segments - what does this mean ? Will you remove Segments where there are fewer than a minimum number of efforts ? I have created a few obscure Segments where I am the only person who has attempted them - would you delete them ? Even though there is no competition with others (yet), I still find it interesting to see, for example, if I can beat the time I did last year, so I would prefer any such Segments are not removed.
We use segments at my work to do "monthly challenges" where a group of runners all do a new segment each month to see who is fastest. These are typical routes that have been run for the first time to setup the segment and are run a lot in that month but not at other times or existing routes with a new segment that is similar to other segments/routes. Will the new segment tidy up features affect this use case?
There's problem in Finland with the new segment system where it doesn't allow you to create segments on certain areas. This area I tried to create a segment in is not restricted area and is under the common every man's right law but it says it's restricted. This is not a good change. It's only going to make Strava worse for segments than it already is with the minimum length requirements. Blocking segments from being made is just a hindrance as a user and is reason to look for other services. You are really only shooting yourself in the foot by stopping segments from being made. You can't expect to understand how laws work accross the world and have the system work correctly. That's just a problem of having it be correct in a static state but things change so staying up to date is another problem. Trying to restrict segments from being made is just a giant leap backwards.
Yeah just tested it and it appears segments just can't be made anywhere.
Further to earlier comments, I noticed that a Segment I had created a while ago has been removed. The one I created was intended to replace one that finished just after a junction, making it unsafe. I was wondering earlier how your algorithm to remove duplicates would distinguish between "poor" and "improved" versions of a Segment - in this case it has picked the wrong one.
I had a go at recreating the safer version of the Segment, however, I get a message saying...
"Segment creation in this area is disabled because it has been identified as private property, having restricted activity access, and/or other reasons."
This is very frustrating - it seems that your algorithm is determined to force its preferred version of of the Segment on local users, who undoubtedly have better knowledge of what is appropriate (and safer).
Please reverse this part of the new functionality (I still support the objective of removing duplicates, but this isn't the right way to implement it).
For the record, the poor version of the Segment involved is 30505191 and the safer version was 31238451
As Ian replied, rather than have a forced culling of segments by some random algorithm, allowing local advocates to identify duplicative segments for removal seems a far better option. Make it similar to "flagging" an inappropriate activity:
e.g. <Mark segment as duplicate> button.
URL of segment to keep:
URL of segment to remove: <prefilled>
Reason:
[ ] Segment being removed ends at a dangerous intersection
[ ] Segment being removed adds a specific feature not included in the duplicate (e.g. hill finish)
[ ] Segment being removed is an exact duplicate of an existing segment
[ ] other...
Segment creation in this area is disabled because it has been identified as private property, having restricted activity access, and/or other reasons
Well done, as previously identified. Been creating segments for a while, no problem. NOT private property... NOT restricted access so what are the other reasons as it is a standard small lane in this country (GB) that has been used by many athletes. If these lanes are deemed not fit for segments I may as well chuck in my membership.
Not sure how Strava knows whether a segment does cross private property or restricted access??? Trying to run before they can walk or cycle!
The question is if private/restricted is the real reason for denying segment creation or if those ominous "and/or other reasons" are behind it. Reading the article for the changes regarding segments maybe these other reasons contain things like imprecise GPS or that a duplicate segment exists already. Just a guess, of course the error message should be made absolute clear instead of being vague when someone made the effort to contribute a segment. And if some assumed private area is really the reason this blocking "feature" must be of course removed asap as Strava can't possibly know anything applicable about the local rules.
There are way too many "duplicate" segments being deleted in my area that aren't duplicates. How do we get them back?
I saw a comment that the new algorithm will consider the number of people who have starred a Segment when removing duplicates. In my experience very few people use the star function - I looked at popular Segments in my area that have all been done by 10,000 to 18,000 people - most have been starred only 10 to 20 times, so about 99.9% of the people have not starred them. I found one Segment that has been attempted by 10,000 people and it has 1 star ! (there's nothing wrong with it).
In my experience, where there has been duplication people tend to hide all but one of the duplicates. Hence considering how many people have hidden a Segment would seem to be a better factor than the number of stars when doing some de-duplication.
Yes, 'created' the segement I was trying yesterday. All that seems to have happened is NO segement created and this time the message 'Segment creation in this area is disabled because it has been identified as private property, having restricted activity access, and/or other reasons' has seemingly removed. So they let you think the segment has been created but not really!! Amateur hour? Who are these so called software gurus?? They do not deserve our subscriptions.
As I said, how on earth can a global software company define what roads/tracks are private property or restricted access across the world. My segment is a road cycling activity let alone the likely more obscure MTB and running segments.
Revert the changes, please.
With regards to duplicates, surely contact the person that created to let them know it is being deleted and why. The algorithm is probably something basic like out of the two or three duplicates the slightly longer one will remain. Just off to star all of my segments!
Created a few route options this morning and absolutely no segments showing?? Another change for the better? Although it was 'working' yesterday.
Well done Strava 👏 now cannot create ANY segments and also cannot FLAG any wrong rides!! Amateur script kiddies strike again!!
Do they actually test anything or just a hit and hope. Maybe just blinkers on testing what they think they might have 'improved'.
Given that when I create a segment I am offered possible duplicates which often include ones going the other direction... whats the betting??
Yo Strava Peeps....I appreciate the effort, but these changes seem to have broken segment creation. Segments that aren't duplicates are getting deleted, and attempts to create new ones are blocked with vague or nonexistent error messages. It feels like the algorithm is making arbitrary decisions, especially in cases where local knowledge of safe or better routes is being ignored. This is a major step backward, and it's frustrating for those of us who rely on custom segments for challenges and tracking improvements. Please rethink this and give more control back to the users. Removing 'unused' segments is a really bad move also. Many users have private routes that they run or ride exclusively, and just because they're not widely used doesn’t mean they’re not valuable. Deleting these segments without considering personal use cases undermines what makes Strava great for individuals who like to track their own progress over time and not always for the social aspect. Please reconsider this enhancement and allow users to retain their less-traveled segments. I would highly recommend a roll back and more testing.
I’ve noticed a number of my created segments have been marked as “Consolidated” and clicking on them takes you to another existing segment.
Unfortunately the segment that remains is often inappropriate (silly start / finish locations) or the title completely unidentifiable.
Please can we have our segments back?
Surely it would have made more sense to do a mass effort to make them private rather than removing them. This isn’t a good move
It appears most people are pretty supportive of these changes. However, my concern is that it may cause more harm than good... hear me out:
LEADERBOARD CLEANUP: I ride really hard to get KOMs (its a fun challenge for me). Nothing is worse than coming home to see that my effort was auto excluded, or deemed by the algorithm as a duplicate. I've seen duplicates and as much as they do clutter, you can have two people with two separate CRs. who gets the kill? Hiding segments is BETTER.
DECLUTTERING: Also, the auto flag is possibly worse. If people care enough about the KOM they've earned, they can flag it.. it is easy to tell when some guy forgot to turn off their garmin, or hopped on a bus, or got picked up by the sag car, or went 40mph for 5 miles, etc Flagging is BETTER
VERIFIED SEGMENTS: also, when someone stars a segment, it does not mean the necessarily "like" it, it is now just activated it for live segments. so i unstar a segment if i am navigating a course and am not making an attempt. Its not a vote to be verified.
Exactly my thoughts on the random algorithm. I've suggested many times that regional moderators should be the ones in charge of monitoring segments. Just as they are on Trailforks. In our local area we have so many duplicates of segments and segments within segments its extremely annoying.
When can I create a segment? How long to wait?
👋 Hello,
For those who are unable to create segments; we are aware of this issue and are working on solving it as quickly as possible. You can follow along on THIS POST where we will add any updates that we get from our team.
Thank you for your patience!
