On July 31st, Zwift released the latest version of its Cycling Esports Ruleset governing a small number of high-level racing events on the platform.
The current ruleset is always available at zwift.com/p/zwift-cycling-esports-rules
While these rules don’t apply to the vast majority of races on the platform, it’s interesting to track their evolution and see loopholes which are being closed and rules which may eventually trickle down to the Zwifting masses.
Zwift summarizes the changes in the latest version as follows:
- Clarified minimum age for event and event series participation.
- Smart trainers/smart bikes must have manufacturer claim of power accuracy of at least +/- 2%.
- Equipment and techniques not permitted or effective in IRL cycling sport are prohibited.
- Rules applicable in IRL events of a particular format shall be applicable to Zwift Cycling Esports version of that event format.
- Revised performance verification process.
- Pre-race test data must be submitted at least 14 days before the applicable event.
- Updated pre-race test course instructions
Here are a few comments and details pertaining to some of the latest changes.
+/- 2% Trainer Accuracy
First Zwift required direct-drive trainers (because wheel-on trainers are notoriously fickle when it comes to power accuracy). Now they are requiring “a manufacturer claimed power reading accuracy of +/- 2% or better”. This is a logical next step as Zwift seeks to require more precision for top-level racers, and smart trainers continue to improve.
Which direct drive trainers are now ineligible for Zwift Cycling Esports events? A surprising number, actually. A quick look at our Smart Trainer Index of current models shows the following disqualified direct-drive trainers:
- Elite Suito (+/- 2.5%)
- Elite Zumo (+/- 3%)
- JetBlack Volt (+/- 2.5%)
- Kinetic R1 (+/- 3%)
- Magene T100 (+/- 3%)
- Tacx Flux 2 (+/- 2.5%)
- Tacx Flux S (+/- 3%)
- Thinkrider Power (+/- 3%)
- Xplova Noza S (+/- 2.5%)
Notably, the flagship models of two smaller manufacturers (Kinetic and JetBlack) are disallowed. Additionally, there are some discontinued trainers which no longer qualify:
- CycleOps Hammer (+/- 3%)
- Elite Direto (+/- 2.5%)
- Magene Gravat (+/- 3%)
- Magene Gravat2 (+/- 3%)
- Saris H2 (+/- 3%)
- Tacx Flux (+/- 5%)
The rules also state:
Zwift reserves the right to prohibit the use of smart trainers or smart bikes for which the manufacturer does not currently provide product support. For purposes of this section, “product support” shall mean software or firmware updates, troubleshooting, and help instructions.
This would probably rule out the use of any BKool trainers, since they exited the smart trainer business in late 2019.
With this rule change, Zwift is drawing a line in the sand with smart trainer manufacturers. If you want your products used in Zwift racing, you’ll need to ensure at least +/- 2% accuracy. Because yes, these rules only apply to top-tier Zwift races… but the racing community as a whole will follow the lead of the top racers.
Equipment and Technique Restrictions
New section 2.5.9 states:
Riders shall use equipment in a manner that is consistent with Zwift Cycling Esports events being cycling events. Use of techniques or equipment (other than a smart trainer or smart bike, or those relating to body heat management – fans, towels, etc.) that would not be permitted, or not be effective, in real life cycling events, shall be prohibited.
Note: This rule is not intended to prevent innovation, but simply to avoid the exploitation of “non-sporting” loopholes presented by the nature of esport. This includes, but is not limited to, exploitation of disconnections / lag / dropouts / software bugs, unusual pedalling styles, or use of equipment that is beyond what might reasonably be considered “sporting”. Any riders who
are concerned that an innovation may be limited by this rule are strongly encouraged to seek the advice of Zwift before using it in competition.
This is Zwift tightening the rules to discourage the actions of a few bad actors. Most interesting in paragraph two is the restriction of “unusual pedalling styles”. This is doubtless refering to exploitation of Zwift’s “sticky watts” issue wherein a rider can pedal hard for a few strokes, then stop pedaling and effectively “coast” at a high wattage for a few seconds.
The interesting thing here is that, as far as we know, sticky watts is only an issue if you’re using an event-based power meter as your Zwift power source. But racers in these top-tier racers are required to use their smart trainer (which are typically time-based) as their primary source, so sticky watts would seem to not apply.
In the wild west of Zwift community racing, though, this rule could clean up a few sticky watters. Perhaps this rule will have some effect in those circles as well.
IRL Rules + Zwift Events
New Section 2.6.1 states:
Unless otherwise explicitly communicated by Zwift, the results of a race shall be judged by the standard real-world rules of racing for the applicable format of a race. For example, in a Zwift Cycling Esports event that takes the format of a Circuit Race, standard In Real Life Circuit Race rules and regulations (such as lapped riders not being permitted to interfere with the leaders) shall apply.
This is interesting, as there has been discussion in Zwift races about whether IRL rules should apply on Zwift. Generally the understanding has been “if you’re able to do it on Zwift, then it’s allowed” – because it’s simply too difficult to police such actions.
But Zwift is saying that, at least for its top-tier races, standard IRL rules will now apply. This is especially important in shorter circuit races as mentioned in the rule, where it’s easy for riders to jump back in when they’re lapped, and begin to affect the race. This is no longer allowed.
Revised Performance Verification and Pre-Race Data
Zwift (ZADA, actually) requires a substantial amount of information from riders before they are able to race. They may also do performance verification after a race.
Performance verification hasn’t really changed much in this latest ruleset – just a flowchart update to clarify precisely how the process unfolds, by the looks of it.
The more substantial changes are on the pre-race side of things. These changes are too detailed to lay out here, but racers are encouraged to read the rules document in detail if they’re looking to participate in a Zwift Cycling Esports event.
Your Thoughts
Share below!
Are all three smart bikes allowed? Wahoo, tact neo, wattbike
Yes. Also the StagesBike SB20.
Although they’d definitely fall foul of the “not being effective in real life cycling” haha 😂
No more 3 sisters test? It seems it’s now called “TEST course”?
Also>>> Where is the list of board decisions and sanctioned riders stated ? Sees very obscure to hide this information.
Ya no more 3 sisters. It’s now a workout that you have to do. There are more details of the workout in the official rules.
List of sanctioned riders has always been available on the ruleset page: https://www.zwift.com/p/zwift-cycling-esports-rules
What about the supertuck position in Zwift considering those new rules (mainly the ”EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUE RESTRICTIONS” part) ?
I assume it’s fine as you are not actually supertucking on the trainer but your avatar in game is. All you are doing is stopping pedaling witch is permitted on downhills irl
LOL. Good point!
I don’t think Zwift is going to enforce UCI rules, per se. More like generally-accepted rules like not getting lapped then joining back in…
I know it’s silly, but that was my first thought as well when reading this and seeing things not legal in real life are no longer legal in Zwift races. No way I could survive if you take the supertuck away from me.
Does 2.5.9 prohibit rocker plates?
Based on how it’s worded, it could be interpreted as prohibiting them, yes. But I’m sure Zwift doesn’t want to prohibit rocker plates. As the rule explains, it’s about prohibiting “non-sporting” loopholes. Using a rocker plate isn’t non-sporting.
Yeah rocker plates would surely fall under that part that mentions checking with Zwift for confirmation, and I can’t imagine they’d say no, especially since my understanding of them is that they make indoor cycling not only feel more like road cycling but also a bit harder than riding without a rocker plate (as opposed to making it easier!)
I can’t see this having too much effect on ZRL season 3. Like who’s got a spare £750+ for a new trainer that’s reading more accurately I sure don’t have the available funds for a newer improved trainer.
I assume you won’t be racing in the premier devision so these rules will not affect you
As long as you’re not in the premier league, can’t you just get a pedal-based (or crank-based) powermeter and use that as your power source instead of getting a whole new trainer (PL need to use trainer as the power source, but I don’t think the rest of us do). Not that it’d be that much cheaper.
I’ve seen a number of riders I know, who I believe are completely legitimate, be serially reported (I believe by members of a rival team) and be suspended by Zwift, or threatened to be if they keep racing. Whatever changed in the last few weeks looks worse than the mob rule on the ZwiftPower forum before the Zwift takeover, at least at first glance.
I love my Kickr and Zwift but would I enter a serious competition using it? Not without commisars in the same room as all competitors! Great for trading great for fun racing but anything else too easy to cheat sorry.
Sticky watts applies to some direct drive trainers as well. I’ve proof of mine doing it using a particular connection method and not doing it when connected a different way.
Which trainer/connection method, or do you not want to encourage other people to do it?
I was in two minds if I should identify however it occurs on the default connection type so loads probably do it without realising. Direto MK1 ANT+ FEC (one of the models no longer eligible for PL anyway). If you use ANT+ PWR for power and cadence it does not occur (FEC fine for controllable). This is on windows with an ANT+ dongle. If you can be bothered to look up my ZP profile I posted a comparison that shows it. I know of another user who has proved it occurs on their setup as well. It is nowhere near… Read more »
I have a zumo and although it claims to be +/- 3% it is about 10% off!
I use my own power meter pedals (assioma duos) would they be allowed or is it purely down to the trainer you use?
I am unlikely to ever race so doesn’t affect me but seems unfair when my pedals are likely much more accurate* than a lot of the trainers that are allowed.
*I have tested them against numerous trainers and other pedals and they all agree.
For whatever reason, Zwift requires racers in top level competitions (but only in the top level competitions) to use their trainer as their power source even though a secondary power source (usually required in those competitions, but again dual recording is only required in top-level races) is more accurate. Just they way that they do things in the elite-level races. For regular races, your setup would be fine if you select your duos as your power source. I race on rollers and in the past used a powertap wheel until I got hit by a car and the wheel got… Read more »
that’s a lottttt of trainers getting #banned. you’d think they’d keep it to +/- 3% or something to make it more accessible. oh well. also RIP super-tuck 😀
I don’t see any mention on the controls and verification of data being entered. In the end 1% on a trainer is nothing compared to somebody “incorrectly” stating their data i.e weight and height. What is Zwift doing to mange the data and verify its correct over time?
You have to supply weight and height verification videos.
I’ve favored using my decade old Computrainer simply because of its reliable manufacturing and research worthy power accuracy. But the product is no longer actively supported by RacerMate. If Zwift reserves the right to ban trainers without active support, does this mean Computrainer is on the hitlist as well? Regardless, I don’t worry now but hoping this doesn’t trickle down into the Zwift Racing League among non-A cat cyclists.
Interesting how the Elite Direto (late 2018/2019) models onwards have a Manufacturers claimed 2% but as we all know perform better than this. Direto’s all share the same torque (actual PM) through the range. Also note that no Kickrs all gens are allowed
So upon reading this, the new Zwift Classic/Hub trainer would not be eligible for esports racing? That’s a bummer. Looks like I’ll be upgrading to a Direto XR-T.
The top-end Zwift esports events (like Zwift Grand Prix) now require 1% accuracy. So only the very best trainers qualify.
But this doesn’t apply to the vast majority of Zwift races. Zwift Racing League, for example, doesn’t require that.
Just so I’m clear on this, is it acceptable to race in eSpot events at Cat B with a power meter as the primary source, or must one have an approved direct-drive smart trainer?
There are no events that allow cat B racers which are governed by Zwift’s Esports rules.
The Esports rules referenced in this post are only for the very highest-level Zwift events… basically, just the Zwift Grand Prix right now. They applied to UCI Esports Worlds in years past, etc.
The rules for the upcoming Echelon Racing League Championship series state that ALL RACERS must be on a smart trainer/bike with equal-or-better than 2% accuracy. I assume this means Zwift categories A, B, C and D.