Riding time vs elapsed time

[hhakker]

I noticed looking at my PR's today that my 100K was third place with 23.5 km/hour. and the time was the total time inclusive coffee and cake. I think there is something wrong (bug) in Strava. Cause my real average was 28 km/hour. 

[Jan_Mantau]

That's deliberate, segments and distance splits like 100 k always use elapsed time instead of moving time. The right decision if you ask me.

[hhakker]

Oke, I find that strange, but if that is the case, it is fine by me. I won't drink coffee anymore.... Thnx.

[ActivityFix]

Using elapsed time makes sense in this case. If you take an extreme example, imagine if you did a 50k hard effort, paused your ride, went home and went to sleep and recover. Some time later (maybe the next day) you unpaused and did another 50k hard effort. Using only moving time you'd have a 100k effort/time which you probably could never have done in one ride. With elapsed time it ends up being a very slow effort and won't count as an achievement/PR.

It does suck when the pauses are just for lights and traffic but even short breaks do give some recovery.