New Run Activity Pages

Please leave us your comments and feedback for the new Run Activity pages here.

Great news, runners: your new run activity page on Strava.com is now live. We spoke to tons of you about what is important when viewing your activities and those of others, and have incorporated your needs and experiences as runners into this new page. 

Some of the new features:

  • Social Bar: We added a social bar to the top of the page, putting your activity title, description, comments, kudos, Instagram photos, and other athletes on your run front and center.
  • Sharing Module:  Easily share your run to Facebook, Twitter, Google+, email, or embed in your blog from the sharing module located at the top, left-hand corner of the page.
  • Key Stats: Distance, time, average pace and elevation are located between the Social Bar and Elevation & Performance Chart. Your mile/km splits from your run are located on the right-hand side of your activity map.
  • Top Results: Get a snapshot of your achievements for the run, including any goals you have accomplished, PRs for best efforts, and segment achievements. 
  • Elevation & Performance Chart: We’ve vastly improved the visual interaction for reviewing and scrubbing all your activity details. Use the cursor to look at your pace, elevation, grade adjusted pace and grade at any point during your run.
  • Premium Analysis: We've rolled out changes to the Pace analysis and distribution, including the new analysis specific to a race. Now you can designate a run activity as a "Race" and get interactive and granular data such as race splits and projected finish times. 
  • Segment Efforts, Stats & Comparison: We’ve optimized the Segment Efforts within your activity so you can quickly scan your most meaningful achievements. We display key stats of your effort along with your leaderboard ranking. And when you’re looking at another athlete’s segment effort, you’ll be able to compare your PR against theirs.

Some of the changes: There are aspects of the run activity pages that are not currently available, with some of these aspects scheduled to return, redesigned, at a later date:

  • Viewing the Performance Chart with 'time' as the x-axis: The new performance chart is set with 'distance' as the x-axis, and we plan to re-add the option to switch to 'time' in the near future (coming soon). 
  • Lap data from a Garmin device: Will now be visible underneath the Segments view in the left sidebar for Free and Premium users.
  • Segment Comparison: The ability to compare your segment effort with your PR and/or the CR for the segment has been removed, and will return after a redesign incorporating the features from http://raceshape.com/.
  • Run "Score": The run intensity score that appeared previously under the Analysis tab is no longer available, but will return when the calculation is more accurate. 
  • GAP for mile splits: We're currently working on our algorithm for GAP. Once the algorithm is improved, GAP split data will be displayed on our new Premium Pace & Race Analysis pages.
  • Best Efforts: The technology available used to generate Best Efforts was not up to our high standard of accuracy. Due to this, we will continue to display any PRs you receive for the next few weeks, but then we will turn off Best Efforts in its current form. Over the next few months, we'll continue to explore innovative and relevant ways to bring this feature back to all users once it has reached our high standards of accuracy. We apologize for this change.

Some Known Issues:

  • FIXED Performance Issues: We're hard at work improving the performance issues that have been reported. Improvements coming soon.
  • FIXED Hidden Segments: Hidden segments will be re-adding this week (we still need to add the ability to hide and unhide segments)
  • FIXED Elevation Correction for your Run: Will be re-added very soon.
9

コメント

502件のコメント
  • Roll back........................?

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Can we just have the "broken" best distances back? I never had a problem with them. They are incredibly motivating. I always thought you should have expanded even more on them, yet they were taken away completely? I don't understand. 

    Still love Strava but it used to be one of the main reasons that I'd get out the running shoes and hit the pavement. Now it's just something that I load my runs into afterwards just out of habit. It's lost the "It" factor. The thing that made it special.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • When I tell people about Strava, explain to them about going on a ride or run with a Garmin device and uploading the data, they stand there listening, seeming to wait for the point of it, why am I so keen on it, why am I telling them this.  It is when I get to the point of saying that parts of the route are marked as segments and there are leaderboards for the segments, suddenly they move, you see the recogntion and understanding in their face, NOW they know exactly why I am so excited about this website!

    As other people here have said, the segments are "the thing" about Strava, what makes it unique and great.  They are the reason the competitive people are here.  The people who aren't too concerned about segments can use other sites!  Strava should accept that it will never take over the entire market, it needs to be the best in its niche (luckily a big niche).

    The old running pages, like the ride pages, focus on the segments.  The first thing you see is an elevation map with segments highlighted.  The design is better, easier to use, doesn't have tiny maps that are hard to see and loads of bugs.  It really is better.  Why not just revert to the old version, fix the best efforts checking algorithm and add the new premium features into it?

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • The main disappointment for me is the disappearance of the elevation gained per lap. It wasn't perfect (I would have preferred to see ascent and descent separately), but it was an important information when doing hill runs. 

    I really don't see how you can describe the disappearance of features as an advantage - if you try to make Strava look as simple and sleek as possible, at least offer an "advanced" mode where these stats are available for those who use them.

    At the moment, it looks like Garmin Connect has a lot more useful features for runners, even compared to the premium version. It may still look a little less sleek, but rather than catching up, Strava is falling further behind.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Strava have gone silent again and I am getting incredibly bored.......

    I'm now going to spend my evening uploading my runs to one of your competitors. Words cannot describe how totally and utterly disappointed with Strava I have become in the last month something 2 months ago I never thought I'd be saying.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Strava have gone silent again and I am getting incredibly bored.......

    I'm now going to spend my evening uploading my runs to one of your competitors. Words cannot describe how totally and utterly disappointed with Strava I have become in the last month something 2 months ago I never thought I'd be saying.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • To Quote Rachael Parsons (head of customer support and marketing) higher up in this thread:

    "Regarding some of the changes we made and why - we will never diminish the free experience as a way to get people to upgrade.  We don't bait and switch, that's not how we do things.  Our company philosophy is that our free experience should be absolutely amazing and that Premium should offer even more. We want both Free and Premium users to be delighted with us."

    After almost a calendar month the new run activity pages are missing what I believe to be core functionality:

    - Best efforts
    - GAP and elevation change with mile splits
    - etc etc etc

    I don't need to list my complaints again as pretty much everybody commenting here is unhappy with the new UI experience, and the missing features we have grown to know and rely upon.

    This thread (at the time of writing) has 274 comments. That is more than 10 people per day taking the time to comment. Imagine all the other users who don't really like the interface, but haven't bothered to get involved here. The acid test will surely be the interface being rolled out to cyclists.

    Strava, if you truly believe your new interface offers an improved experience, then roll it out to cyclists. I'd be incredibly interested in seeing their feedback.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Matt, me too.  Thought people were being unreasonable a week ago, but changing my mind now.  It just sucks when I can go to my Bike pages and feel good about the product, then go to my Run pages and feel a headache coming on because I need to dig to find the information that I want.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • You know that scene in Jurassic Park?... The one where that Nedry guy breaks the whole system and then runs away?... Then nobody knows how to fix anything? Then he gets eaten by that bearded Dino that spits...

    Maybe that's EXACTLY what's happened here. Strava employed one fat, non running, bright bunny with a screw loose and on some idle Tuesday he decided to screw up the run system while he made off with some Dino eggs. Now everyone left is clueless.

    All is not lost though, in the final act we get to see; Raptors! (Everyone loves Raptors)... Sam Jackson doing his shouty voice.... Jeff Goldblum being.. well, Jeff Goldblum... May is going to be a good month.

    Ach. I'm just p1ssed off with the company. An analysis system that's now beyond broken. Good data presentation is an art. To take multiple data sets and display relevant information as one is KEY to it being worth anything.

    Strava at one point had a reasonably good work up of HR, Elevation, Pace/GAP on one graph, that you could use to INSTANTLY spot decent trends. ie;

    - On a slow, gradual climb, my HR jumps roughly XXbpm, per minute spent climbing
    - On a steep, severe climb, my HR jumps roughly XXbpm, per minute spent climbing
    - My HR takes 10 minutes of flat land to equalise after a long climb if I run at X speed. It takes 5 minutes at 4/5's of that speed. 

    Using that data you can judge an effort, Learning the relationship between perceived effort and hard numbers. You could spot weaknesses, yadda yadda.

    Now? Now we have some floaty lines in space with no Graph axis labels. Are you guys thick? That would sound insulting but I do wonder. You have messed things up, you've gone silent, and it's a joke. Even if you roll out some magic fix in another 4 weeks, you're still morons for not swallowing your pride, rolling back, fixing things behind closed doors, then going again.

    Anyways, enough babble about not a lot. I'm out.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Dances, if this was the Rome show you'd be "Racked"!  

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Echoing much of what's been said here, but I think the repetition is necessary to get across the magnitude of the screw-up. Some of it has been fixed.  Some of it remains unfixed.  It's still a less useful site than it was a month ago.

    The best efforts had problems that I complained about, namely that whatever algorithm had issues actually detecting a best effort for some devices (I was told that this was due to 'errors' in the data, although it did a reasonable job when simply re-uploading the GXP file exported from STRAVA, suggesting that you *DO* have the ability to 'fix' the files--the data wasn't that erroneous). But removing the ability to show them completely was a mistake. 

    The lack of y-axis labels stinks. That's basic.  That can and should be fixed immediately.

    Another rather annoying bit of the graph:  The speed as measured on the Y-axis is displayed for pace per mile.  Consequently Faster performance shows up as dips in speed.  Yes, that's what the 'numbers' are as mile pace, but it's counter intuitive to look for dips in the graph to signify increased speed.  Running 6 minute/mile pace should show up higher on the graph than 12 minute/mile pace.  Is this so tough?

    I was offered a free month trial premium membership that I took that's largely overlapped with the new look for runs.  It's unfortunate for the biz dev people that this happened when it did. The poor performance of the site and the terrible, terrible new design definitely discouraged me from renewing the trial. I'm not sure I'd have continued as a premium with the old site, but the new site was sealed the deal.  The regressive 'upgrade' ain't worth a dime.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • @Brett - No idea what that means fella... I work in bad movie analogies from a land across the pond.

     

    Though I should really say that using the words 'Moron' and 'Thick' doesn't sit well with me... But what can you do? It's rarely the nicest part of your meal that gets stuck in your teeth I guess.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • I love the analogy @Dances.  Rome is a radio show here in the states where callers who do well get "Racked".

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • I've just uploaded my first cycle ride for a while and viewing it in the old interface its instantly reminded me why Strava is so cool. It was like making up with an old friend who I had argued with. :-) Its dead easy to see all the key data with minimal clicking and searching.

    Seriously please don't muck up the cycling pages. I will pay a second time for my subscription just to keep them as they are. 

    It would be good to hear from Strava again about what your plans are. I feel a bit in the twilight zone at the moment - I'm going through the motions of uploading runs just in case something good happens but currently not getting much out of it.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • BUG : Uploaded a ride recorded on my Forerunner, was detected as a run (I guess only because I used a watch instead of a bike computer - though the downhill speeds were much too fast for a run) but that is not the bug.  I correctly selected activity type as ride before saving the activity.  The bug is that when Strava then took me to the activity page, it still appeared as a run.  I went to my activity feed and saw the activity was there, listed as a ride, and showed up as a ride when I clicked on it, so that proves that I had selected the activity type correctly in the first place.  The bug is only that Strava first sent me to a page showing it as a run when it already knew it was a ride.

    I feel a bit strange continuing to report bugs in this new version while I am sure the best solution is to go back to the old version.  It seems futile and a waste of effort typing out bug descriptions and methods of reproduction.

    I find it interesting that so many different types of runners find the new pages awful.  It's not just one feature that has been messed up or removed, but nearly all of them, so no-one is happy!

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • I’m a huge fan of strava. It’s currently the best site out there for what it does – and even the free features are amazing. That said…

    Looking at this upgrade as a software engineer I find it to be a great case study on an upgrade failure (and I can admit I’ve been a part of similar fiascos). Users typically equate change to upgrade - not always a fair assumption, as sometimes what’s going on under the hood must be completely changed to account for the backend now doing things it was never designed to do. That said, I haven’t seen any mention of that – just a reference for getting ready for the marathon season…

    It seems to me that the underlying problem here is managing how you do your upgrades - and based on all the comments I think most every runner would agree that this one was a bit of a failure. In several projects I’ve worked on significant engineering time went into enabling users to switch between old/new versions of the software. This has been done on a web level and on a desktop level. There was an upfront engineering cost, but it paid dividend in the end. Google has been doing this for years with Gmail.

    From what I remember of the previous running page, it doesn’t appear there is any new data being presented – which leads me to think this was a pure UI level change. That said, it should be very easy to have a “use old version” link. Also, each page appears have several semi self-contained UI controls, with a call back to enable one control to alter another control. Have you thought about enabling selection of various versions of those controls? Have you thought about putting those controls into your public API? Have you thought about defining the interface for a said control (such as the map control, or the segments-completed-for-this-run control)? Microsoft’s Visual Studio and the Eclipse IDE are good models for this. I’ve written a few data analysis tools that had similar functionality for testing upgrades of individual controls. The cycle time for user input was amazing. Folks that like to bleed from using the cutting edge stuff can do so, and folks that have no reason to change don’t need to – at least not until the new stuff has been fully vetted. I’m sure you’ve had these discussions in your design meetings, I’m sure this is not a new discussion for any strava developers, and I’m sure the marketing team has been involved in said discussions. Hopefully this post will add a point to the importance field of your planned implementation of above discussed functionality.

    I look forward to your future changes. Keep up the good work. Also, congratulation on all your comments regarding this upgrade. The pages of passionate posts is a true indication of how important your product is to people.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Can we please toggle the old interface back while the issues are being sorted out?  It is a bummer that this change happened right near the end of my marathon training.  I've stopped trying to look at the runs in strava since the lap data is gone (and wrong for elevation since it always says 0 for me, even when it shows the whole run as non-zero).  The lack of axes on the plots (and to a lesser extent not being able to overlay them) makes the pages nearly useless for me so now I'm mainly looking at runs in other software / websites.  None of these are new revelations, but I guess I hope by echoing these concerns it is clear it isn't just isolated to some users and that maybe a response / plan will be posted.  It has been over a month now and it has not grown on me.

    Please don't do this with the cycling pages.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • I forgot to mention the inability to compare performances on segments, that is what prompted me to come back over here.  That was such a great feature that I can't see how anyone would decide to just remove it before a replacement is in place.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Please roll back, stop this usability test, it is horrible and became exactly like any website which provides the gps tracking. The strava identity is gone! Want to bring value, add features like load training plans, nutrition and event goal focused training.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Without any melodrama... A small piece of me dies every time I check out one of my friends ride pages and I see clear data, laid out nicely, with everything working so well.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • The classic ride pages are soooo sweet!

    I feel for runners who have lost this UI. I can only echo many here and say please don't do this to cycling! We like it as it is...and was.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • We spoke to tons of you about what is important when viewing your activities and those of others, and have incorporated your needs and experiences as runners into this new page. 


    Just stopping by to call bullsh1t on this line.

    That is all

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Sorry, wasn't patient enough to read through all the comments pages, but as with some others I did see, VAM and HR statistics (where's the max? - even the HR analysis page doesn't have avg or max) are key facets of my Strava (Premium subscriber) use.  The "upgrade" is a huge retrograde step.  I'm fairly tolerant of changes to UI and format changes, adapt quickly, but this is clunky and moves me a long way away from what I liked about (and was willing to pay for) Strava.  I suspect the issues with this upgrade will take some time to iron out, but I'd even like to see Biggest Run and Biggest Climb statistics on the running side-by-side comparison, just like cycling.  Just like riders, not everyone only loves the flatlands!

     

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • I think strava could be more transparent as to the "irrationality" (apparent) of pushing this "upgrade" while many (most) runners see it as a (big) step backwards ....

    could there be legal issues involved preventing a rollback? patents or copyrights, linked to "segments" or "garmin-laps" (as they call them)? i have no idea, but I definitely don't get it .... why would a business managed by seemingly level-headed people carry on with this inferior and subpar interface is beyond me ....

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Try doing this: 

    1. Click on full-screen map

    2. Now double-click on map, OR

    3. try moving the map

    another window opens over the top of the first.

    Annoying.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Please roll back. I'm happy to pay for my premium membership, but not without getting the product I initially bought or some improved version of this. I've been reading these pages since the change/wrecking and was optimistic in the beginning. Now my excitement have been lost to. I'll check back in a couple of weeks, if the old version is not back or major improvements have happened, then I'm out. Sorry to make thos threat, but it's as simple as that. I won't pay for a product I don't want.
    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • Well, over a week now since the last update from a Strava person, and absolutely no improvements to the run pages.  What a joke.  Nearly 300 comments on here, and not a single one is chiming in supportive of the "exciting new features."  I've been reading these comments for nearly a month now and nodding in agreement with everyone's assessment of all the lost functionality and deterioration of the user experience. I've been dutifully posting my runs and hoping that things will get better, so I can get some benefit out of the remaining 6 months in my Premium subscription.  

    Segment and lap details were all I cared about (and still care about).  The old format had a crisp, click-free summary table for each that showed total time, elevation gain/loss, average pace and average heart rate for both segments and laps -- and the new format lacks most of this info.  The lap table has been displaying a bunch of zeroes since it was introduced (how is that even remotely useful?), and the segment table fails to include average pace and average HR data.  Sure, I can see it for the segments, but on a run where I hit 15 segments, I don't want to have to click through each one to get the information I care about.   And charts without y-axis labels, that's just flat-out annoying.

    And all of this for a new "race analysis" feature that, as far as I can tell the only interesting thing about is the "predicted finish time" that seems to look at about your last tenth of a mile and projects that exact pace for the remainder of your race -- without regard to hill profile or anything.  Not all that helpful, frankly.

    Please, please, please either roll us back or get these things fixed, and not at some vague future date.  I know we're just a small subset of Strava users -- runners -- but we deserve better than this, especially those of us who have paid.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • I'm repeating these because the issues seem serious enough and I fear that without repetition, Strava is simply ignoring the apt criticism of their terrible new interface.

    The roll-out of the new run design overlapped with a period where I had a trial premium membership.  This coincidence is rather unfortunate; the severe degradation of site quality has all but assured that I will not renew and pay for what has become a dramatically inferior product of late.  The shortest path to some remedy would be to immediately revert to the older format while new features are implemented and tested thoroughly.  I’ve heard no word that this is in your plans, and as such, my plans do not include parting with any of my money for an inferior product.

    To summarize the most serious problems that discouraged me from renewing and give me little confidence in Strava as a company producing useful tools:

    1. A worthless best effort feature and problems finding best efforts. 

    Best effort hasn’t been removed, but it’s been downgraded so that it is now both inaccurate in its assessment and annoying to worthless in its presentation. 

    The run best effort was, previously flawed.  It seemed to readily fail to identify the I had reported this before, receiving a response that the GPS readings I had uploaded had ‘errors’ that prevented the best effort from being detected, though exporting the .gpx file and re-uploading the file often fixed the issue.  I had mentioned this in my response.  It could have been forwarded to the engineering team.  Why this could not be done automatically, or why an option to ‘rescan for best efforts’ that used a similar process to fix could not be implemented is beyond me. 

    The initial release of your new run page indicated that the best efforts, being flawed (to put it politely) was going to be moved out until it was fixed.  This hasn’t been entirely true.  What remains is more flawed.  Now some best efforts show up in the top achievements, indicating that the algorithm is still running, but the link to show where in an activity this occurred is no longer active. 

    Further, it’s given erroneous reports, reporting what I know to be a best effort as a 2nd best.  For example, in my run early today (http://app.strava.com/activities/52321803/overview) I was told that my 10 mile was a 2nd best.  I’m rather certain that I haven’t uploaded a 10 mile stretch that has been faster.  Is it inaccurately counting a ride?  I manually scanned my +10 mile runs and could not find one where there was a faster 10 miles.  This was an annoying endeavor, but the interface doesn’t leave any other way to find the best, or what Strava is considering the best other than manually looking at activities. An athlete’s profile shows a limited list of (alleged) bests, but in mine, the 10 mile isn’t among these. If there’s a way to get to the bests lists for other distances, this method is obfuscated.  This seems like a simple feature, one that would be easy to implement.  It would have given more value to the site than the ‘redesign’ layout that has made it more difficult to navigate and provides no new information.

    2. The new graph presentation is terrible.

    The graph has an elevation axis, but it lacks axes labels for speed and for heart rate.  The old layout had these.  It’s a simple fix, but in a month there’s been nothing despite numerous calls from runners about this serious error. 

    The “Grade adjusted pace” was probably flawed as well, but while flawed, now putting it entirely below normal pace when displayed makes the information completely useless. 

    In the older version, it was easy to select and zoom to a portion of the speed/heartrate/elevation graph.  That is no longer possible.  It was a useful feature and you have done away with it.  That’s a regressive “upgrade” and the sort of development that will not cause me to subscribe to your service. 

    Rather importantly, speed now seems to be inverted.  Slower pace now shows up higher in the graph than faster times.  This is the opposite of how it used to be and opposite of how cycling graphs still are.  9 min mile pace is slower than 7 minute mile pace, but shows up higher on the Y-axis. I realize that it is likely that the plotter is looking at the pace number and seeing that 9 > 7, but this is both counter-intuitive to someone looking at the graph.  Combine this with the complete lack of speed axis labels and we’re left with a confusing jumble that has no value in conveying information.

    3. “Pace analysis” is inaccurate and worthless. 

    Whatever algorithm you are using to identify time at certain pace is not accurate.  Again, to use my run today (http://app.strava.com/activities/52321803/pace) the calculation says that I spent slightly more than 5 minutes in Z4 “Intensity”, running faster than 6:31 miles.  This seemed completely off, given that my run was largely one of even pace, quite a bit slower than that threshold.  Scanning the graph, and once again noting that faster times paradoxically show up as dips in the speed plot, there are only 4 points where the graph drops into that pace range.  In two of these cases, at 11:49 and 12:14 into the run, the preceding and following plots (5 seconds apart) are slower than the 6:31 marker.  The other two points are adjacent on the graph but in this case the window where the graph shows me to have passed the threshold is, at maximum, 20 seconds.  It is also at odds with your own “pace analysis” graph (http://app.strava.com/activities/52321803/pace-analysis) that does not indicate any such sustained speed.  Your site further reports that I exceeded 5:41 pace for 30 seconds.  I know this to be false. That’s possible over perhaps 20 yards while crossing a street, but no such burst show up in the pace analysis indicating that I was running that fast.

    Incidently, the pace-analysis graph does appear to be reasonably accurate for this activity. This smoothed display is the *only* improvement I’ve noted.  It does appear to be a part of the premium version, but given the other fatal flaws, it’s certainly not worth paying for.

    4. Erroneous elevation. 

    In the past the initial elevation report was, at times, not correct.  However, the old version had an option for “elevation correction” that tended to better reflect reality. This appears to have disappeared from the run page.  Given that my run today has a low point on the graph of 4 feet above sea level and ended at 120 feet above sea level, the elevation gain of 91 feet is impossible –  I did not teleport and there were no worm holes on the course.


    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • First off, I'm a cyclist. I don't even think about running unless it involves saving a life or such.

    I just happened across a friend's run this morning and took a look at it, and was SHOCKED. Definitely one craptacular display of information.  Please, please, please, do NOT make the same changes to the cycling pages.

    Oh, and also please look at your user browser stats. I know there's not many of us, but not everyone uses a super-huge monitor to view web pages. Those of us still on a very capable laptop with a screen only 1024px wide do plenty of side-scrolling. Not fun. And those of us on netbooks with even smaller displays (1024x600) are moving all over the place. Why do I bring this up? Because the size of the layout is even larger, and thus worse, with this new running layout. I don't stand a chance of seeing more than a few parts of the page at once.

    And also to echo previous commentary, if you screw the cycling side up too much (since it sounds like a change is coming anyway), have fun with the resulting maelstrom.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink
  • I was just about to sign up for a year's premium before this run upgrade but today I decided to cancel the free trial. I'll now wait for the new cycling pages to be unveiled before I think about committing. I'm afraid I really don't like the look and feel of the run page, and there is definitely way too much clicking involved to get to segments and leaderboards. Here's hoping we can all get back to where we were.

    0
    コメントアクション Permalink

投稿コメントは受け付けていません。

お探しのものを見つけられませんでしたか?

新規投稿