• Get Started
    • Get Started on Zwift
    • Zwift Course Maps
    • How to Race on Zwift (Setup, Strategy, and More)
    • Links Every Zwifter Must Have
    • More “Get Started” Posts
  • Tips & Tricks
    • Kit Unlock Codes
    • Training & Nutrition
    • Racing
    • Zwift Hacks
  • Reference
    • How Zwift Works
    • Course Calendar
    • Smart Trainer Index
      • Top Wheel-On Trainers
      • Top Direct-Drive <$900
      • Top Direct-Drive >$900
      • Exhaustive Trainer List
    • Achievements & Unlocks
    • Frames & Wheels
    • Routes & Maps
      • Master List of Routes
      • Downloadable Watopia Map
      • Rebel Routes
    • Speed Tests
  • News
    • Events
    • Game Updates
  • Shop
Search
Logo
Logo
  • Get Started
    • Get Started on Zwift
    • Zwift Course Maps
    • How to Race on Zwift (Setup, Strategy, and More)
    • Links Every Zwifter Must Have
    • More “Get Started” Posts
  • Tips & Tricks
    • Kit Unlock Codes
    • Training & Nutrition
    • Racing
    • Zwift Hacks
  • Reference
    • How Zwift Works
    • Course Calendar
    • Smart Trainer Index
      • Top Wheel-On Trainers
      • Top Direct-Drive <$900
      • Top Direct-Drive >$900
      • Exhaustive Trainer List
    • Achievements & Unlocks
    • Frames & Wheels
    • Routes & Maps
      • Master List of Routes
      • Downloadable Watopia Map
      • Rebel Routes
    • Speed Tests
  • News
    • Events
    • Game Updates
  • Shop
More
    Sign in
    Welcome! Log into your account
    Forgot your password? Get help
    Privacy Policy
    Password recovery
    Recover your password
    A password will be e-mailed to you.
    FeaturedReferenceHow Zwift Works

    Power-Based Racer Rank: Proposing a New Categorization Scheme (Part 2)

    Neil Townsend
    By Neil Townsend
    July 12, 2022
    39

    The goal is to get a better way of ranking riders for Zwift races without the need for a complete race result-based ranking system. In these two articles, a way of doing this using existing power data is being explored. The outcome will be a score for each rider, between 0 and 1000, with each 100 representing approximately 10% of the cycling population, by sex. That way race organisers can set categories to suit their target riders.

    In the first article the data from a recent race series was examined to show that each of the eight power measures on Zwift Power influences the race outcome, and that simply looking at one is imperfect.

    As a reminder, in that article eight measures of power were compared against race outcomes. The measures were: 15-second power, 1-minute power, 5-minute power, and 20-minute power, each in both watts and w/kg. The final conclusion was that the influence of each of the eight measures on race outcomes was something like this:

    To turn this information into a rider ranking, it is logical to make an assumption that there is a link between high power in one measure and high power in another. The analysis so far has not removed this. For the sake of simplicity, we may assume that about half the “shared percentage” in the bars above is highly correlated. Removing this “shared contribution” (and re-setting the percentages so that they sum to 100%) means that the different contributions are accentuated a bit, but none is ignored, and gives this:

    Turning Power Into a Rank

    For any rider, for any of the power measures, that power can be turned into a rank by comparing where that power is compared to the power data for all riders. For example, if you have a 5-minute power of 4 w/kg, you are 46.5% of the way up the list of male cyclists. If each of the measures we have is turned into a position value using this approach,  then each rider can be given 8 “position” measures between 0 and 100, one per power measure.

    To get the final ranking, simply take each of those 8 positions and multiply them by the “percentage influence” from above, add those results up, and then multiply the total by 10. For example:

    MeasureValuePositionInfluencePosition x Influence
    15s watts62141.011.1%4.555
    1 min watts43957.012.3%7.010
    5 min watts32464.112.2%7.850
    20 min watts27061.77.3%4.504
    15s w/kg7.6732.213.1%4.222
    1 min w/kg5.4243.514.8%6.435
    5 min w/kg4.0046.517.4%8.091
    20 min w/kg3.2641.011.7%4.813
       Total x 10:475

    So that rider would be welcome, say, in a 400-600 category race.

    Final Thoughts

    This would provide individual riders with a much clearer sense of their ranking. Race organisers could easily construct their race categories, focussing on different groups of riders with confidence. It could also be extended to specialised classifications (eg for crit or iTT), by varying the influence values.

    What do you think? Let me know in the comments below!

    Postscript

    There is a better way to remove the “shared influence” of the measures, rather than assuming half as above. The approach is to get all the correlations between each pair of coefficients for all the data, and then identify the least correlated pair. Then convert the correlation of that pair into a corrected “shared percentage”, and remove that rather than the 50% assumed in this article.

    Postscript 2: Data Sources

    The power data used in the original analysis is all available to any Zwift rider who connects with Zwift Power; it has been anonymised in the processing as can be seen. The race data for the original power analysis is from the Dirt Racing Series (who have explicitly given permission for anonymised data use for this analysis). The power to position data in the table above is my personal power to position data from intervals.icu.

    Related Posts

    Facebook
    Twitter
    Pinterest
    ReddIt
      Neil Townsend
      Neil Townsend
      Neil got on Zwift in early 2021 when he got home from a (solo) IRL ride unable to feel his toes. As his Strava entry shows, his attempts to ride faster are generally stopped by real life luring him away for a few days here and there, generally with cake. He is very occasionally on Facebook (@neil.townsend0) and Twitter (@neiltownsend).

      39 COMMENTS

      Subscribe
      Log in using
      Notify of
      guest

      Log in using
      guest

      39 Comments
      oldest
      newest most voted
      Inline Feedbacks
      View all comments
      Johan
      Johan
      1 month ago

      Will this eliminate the people who use weight to gain an advantage?

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Johan

      The only way to do that would be to only use the watt (and not the w/kg) measurements. But by having a score which is less affected by weight doping, and by having clear categories which are harder to “game” it should help significantly.

      0
      Reply
      Terry
      Terry
      1 month ago

      The only comment I’ll make is if you break Zwift events into more than 4 categories you are going to have really small fields in each. Which are to small already.

      I probably race 4 to 5 times a week and if you get 12-15 Cs that are on Zwiftpower in that race that’s a good field but it still sucks because it’s only 12- 15. Adding more categories than the 4 will make fields of 6-8 which would not be fun to race against.

      2
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Terry

      The goal isn’t to make them smaller, but to make for fairer, more fun, racing. I agree that small fields don’t necessarily make for a great race, but neither do large fields where 70% of the riders stand no chance. Hopefully having a clear score will give race organisers more flexibility – you could have a race for everyone between 200 and 700 if you wanted a larger race which self separates into groups, or you could have a very focussed “500-550” which was smaller and very balanced.

      7
      Reply
      Keep trying
      Keep trying
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Neil Townsend

      It is not difficult at all to give yourself a 1.2 or 2 times more watts.

      0
      Reply
      Adam Dawson
      Adam Dawson(@adamjmdawson)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Keep trying

      Where do I find these 2 times more watts?! That sounds amazing

      1
      Reply
      Emilio
      Emilio
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Adam Dawson

      Training very hard, I’m guessing

      0
      Reply
      mchritton
      mchritton
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Terry

      You are absolutely right about small fields, especially folks who are on Zwiftpower. Frustrating.

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  mchritton

      I feel your pain!

      0
      Reply
      Courtney Trabon
      Courtney Trabon
      21 days ago
      Reply to  Neil Townsend

      Also women specific fields which are small already.

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      21 days ago
      Reply to  Courtney Trabon

      Yes! Hopefully a better ranking scheme could help with this, especially if the event organisers are free to set the boundaries for the categories for their event,

      0
      Reply
      Taylor Gonsoulin
      Taylor Gonsoulin
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Terry

      It there were less events to pick from, the participation in the remaining events would increase. There are times where a dozen events start within 10 minutes of each other.

      Last edited 1 month ago by Taylor Gonsoulin
      4
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      21 days ago
      Reply to  Taylor Gonsoulin

      I suspect that (a) Zwift are hoping that some lesser attended events will get pulled by the organisers to save them having to and (b) everyone is waiting for northern hemisphere winter to see what happens them in terms of usage and participation …

      0
      Reply
      Adam Dawson
      Adam Dawson(@adamjmdawson)
      1 month ago

      It’d be great if race organisers could experiment more and find out what works. I like this system because you can vary the boundaries. 500 might be at the pointy end of abilities in one race, but low-mid range in another, and riders can also use that to choose what sort of challenge they’re after.

      2
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Adam Dawson

      Thank you!

      0
      Reply
      Jordi
      Jordi
      1 month ago

      When this will be applicated? It seems very interesting.

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Jordi

      I’m not Zwift or Zwift Power so I can’t say, but I’m more than happy to work wtih them, or any race organiser, to refine and implement it.

      1
      Reply
      Emilio
      Emilio
      1 month ago

      Hi Neil Nice copuple of artivcles. I’m gessing that probably you are looking for a simple way of getting some “messurement” for race categories. Because the first thing that come to my mind, was wy not do a principal component analysis. As a D rider, I’m going to ask somethig related to us. My w/kg is almos 1.7, so in theory, I shold be close to the middle of the pack in my category (being D category from 1.0 to 2.5). But my experience is quite diferent, normally I’m last, or second last, or a bit more higher, but far… Read more »

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Emilio

      There are a number of other analyses that could be done, both technically (PCA does sound like an interesting one!), as well as seeing if the current different categories have different “weights” on the different powers. In the races I had easy access to, C and D were combined, perhaps precisely because of the issues you raise. My hope is that a better categorisation scheme with much more flexibility than D to A+ could allow for some great racing at every level.

      0
      Reply
      David Galbraith
      David Galbraith
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Emilio

      Edited because I can’t read, apparently 😅

      Last edited 1 month ago by David Galbraith
      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  David Galbraith

      Didn’t quite follow that, but as more data is available (ie more D and low C racers engage because the races improve for them), then it would be appropriate to revisit the weightings to check that they still work for everyone. It’s a bit chicken and egg, but do-able I think.

      Last edited 1 month ago by Neil Townsend
      0
      Reply
      Yousif
      Yousif
      1 month ago

      This is downright genious. It would be interesting if this was used on your entire power curve. It would be even cooler if they used this kind of data to rank riders for different race types. Climbing versus time trialling versus punchy races and so on.

      1
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Yousif

      Thank you! And yes – I would love to see each rider given, say, 2-4 “Rankings” for different race type. More than that might get confusing, but to have say,”iTT”, “Crit” and “General” rankings could provide race organisers with great tools.

      3
      Reply
      Neil Owens
      Neil Owens
      1 month ago

      Great analysis but in a game where people can cheat relatively easily any power or WKG numbers can’t be relied on. Just use race results. Super easy to understand, if you cheat eventually it will catch up with you.

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Neil Owens

      I’ve no objection to using race results at all, and there are a number of scheme out there for sports which have large participation and lots of people who need to be ranked against each other but who rarely, if ever, race against each other (eg the British Rowing approach). In the absence of something like that, this is a proposed way of improving power based ranking with some actual analysis behind it. Let’s all keep pushing for better!

      1
      Reply
      AerobicAndrew
      AerobicAndrew
      1 month ago

      Does this not allow for the ‘skill’ element of Zwift? Sitting in? Drafting? Judging when to attack, when not? The ‘art’ of it? (Or is it all science?) I gotta believe I can outwit my race compardries with my puny 15sec/1 min power!

      1
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  AerobicAndrew

      It depends what portion of races are won by skill and what portion by physiology. That will impact the setting of rider scores one way or the other. Ideally you would run the scheme for a trial period (once you had done the analysis on a larger data set), and the data from those races would be used to refine the weights, say every year. That would meant that any biases are gradually weaned out, or made sufficiently obviously that they can be mitigated against.

      2
      Reply
      mchritton
      mchritton
      1 month ago

      I’m always interested in hearing about ways to make the racing “more fair”. It’s surprising how few folks participate in races and I wonder whether this was never something that interested them or they’ve just given up after a few bad experiences. Thanks for your efforts.

      That said, I went into journalism because there was no math requirement so much of your analysis was waaay over my head. To quote the Bard (Barbie, in this case) “Math is hard. Let’s go shopping.”

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  mchritton

      Let’s spend some of those drops 🙂

      0
      Reply
      Anti Sandbagger
      Anti Sandbagger
      1 month ago

      Not sure how much you’ve kept close the conversation a lot of people had on Zwift forums, but the general consensus was that any ranking that’s not based on results will fail to create competitive categories. Results based ranking is really the way to go because results will sort people with respect to their strengths and weaknesses. The only place power-based categorization is useful is when people don’t have enough races under their belts.

      4
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Anti Sandbagger

      I have no objection at all to a results based system! If this article is keeping people talking and working towards a better ranking systems, whether it is a better power based on or a ranking based one, I’m happy! Let’s keep developing ideas that are easy to pursue and together we’ll get there!

      1
      Reply
      luciano
      luciano(@luciano-pollastri)
      1 month ago

      Great posts!! It makes definitely sense. To make it even more efficient I would combine this with a results based ranking. Otherwise sandbaggers would reverse engineer one way or the other and remain under the thresholds of any algorithm. In any case, it is super interesting. We should create a common research group for that topic, many people are sharing ideas here, combining some of them might make the competition fairer.

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  luciano

      I would be more than up for continuing the discussion. One of the key steps would be to be clear on all the trips of cheating which occur, which ones might be addressed though ranking systems, and which ranking systems are better or worse for that. For example, cheating by lowering you weight does gain you wkg (but not watts) and allow you to position yourself at the top of a fixed category. The system proposed in this article mitigates (bot doesn’t totally not eliminate it) in two ways: by including watts in the ranking (not just wkg), and by… Read more »

      0
      Reply
      Jonathan
      Jonathan
      29 days ago
      Reply to  Neil Townsend

      Agree 100% on the fixed nature of the categories facilitating sandbagging. Even with the system we currently have, we could have events that used different w/kg breakpoints, but the 2.5/3.2/4.0 breakpoints have become institutionalized across just about every event. This strands riders at the low end of their categories at the back of their fields forever, and incentivizes those at the upper end of their categories to find ways to remain there. I would love to see some events using (for example) 2.0/3.0/4.2 or 2.0/3.5/4.5 breakpoints, but this doesn’t ever seem to happen.

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      28 days ago
      Reply to  Jonathan

      Yes – hence the articles to try and create a metric that was more representative of the kind of racing done on zwift and one which made having bespoke boundaries for event categories more intuitive. And you are right – even varying the current boundaries could really mix things up and give more people a stake in their race

      0
      Reply
      Martin M.
      Martin M.
      1 month ago

      Nice system! But the real question is if zwift is interested or actually working on developing the category system, or is it a lot of talking for nothing?

      The user communication of zwift in this kind of topic is really bad I think…

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Martin M.

      I have no idea what Zwift are or aren’t doing – I’m a user with an idea! As I said in a previous comment response, I’d be more than willing to work with them to implement this.

      0
      Reply
      Nick Taylor
      Nick Taylor
      1 month ago

      I’m afraid that Zwift comes over to many users as a (sadly typical) “Big Tech” company that has its hands on its ears when users/subscribers are talking. They’ve developed this amazing software that everyone wants so they must know best right?

      In the absence of credible (i.e. sand-bagging-free) results for ranking this system sounds good to me.

      0
      Reply
      Neil Townsend
      Author
      Trusted Member
      Neil Townsend(@ntownsend)
      1 month ago
      Reply to  Nick Taylor

      Thank you!

      0
      Reply
      wpdiscuz   wpDiscuz

      Free Zwift Trial

      Create Account

      Newest Featured Posts

      All About Zwift’s New HED Vanquish RC6 Pro Wheelset

      Speed Tests

      WTRL+Zwift Roll Out TTT Experience Upgrades

      Events

      All About Zwift Academy Road 2022

      Events

      Support This Site

      Contribute a post, shop through us, make a donation, advertise on this site. See how you can support Zwift Insider!

      This community-driven site is maintained by Eric Schlange and a team of Zwift enthusiasts. Zwift Insider is independent of Zwift corporate (www.zwift.com), although Zwift does provide funding to help defray site costs.

      This site contains affiliate links to Amazon, Wahoo, and other brands. Zwift Insider makes a small commission on purchases made from these links, so please shop through them to support our efforts.

      Terms of Use/DMCA Copyright Policy

      Privacy Policy

      [email protected]

      Latest articles

      All About Zwift’s New HED Vanquish RC6 Pro Wheelset

      WTRL+Zwift Roll Out TTT Experience Upgrades

      7 Deadly Wins, Week 5: Playing the Hand You’re Dealt

      Popular Categories

      • Racing887
      • News699
      • Training & Nutrition566
      • Interviews435
      • Events400
      • Routes & Maps288
      39
      0
      Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
      ()
      x
      | Reply
      Comment Author Info
      :wpds_smile::wpds_grin::wpds_wink::wpds_mrgreen::wpds_neutral::wpds_twisted::wpds_arrow::wpds_shock::wpds_unamused::wpds_cool::wpds_evil::wpds_oops::wpds_razz::wpds_roll::wpds_cry::wpds_eek::wpds_lol::wpds_mad::wpds_sad::wpds_exclamation::wpds_question::wpds_idea::wpds_hmm::wpds_beg::wpds_whew::wpds_chuckle::wpds_silly::wpds_envy::wpds_shutmouth:
      You are going to send email to

      Move Comment


    • Related Posts