In my past articles looking at the development of racing on Zwift, we’ve considered matchmaking, looked at what developments to the platform as a whole could enhance the experience, and considered what fairness means and how it can be improved.
It’s been over 6 months since my last update, so let’s take a look at the latest developments!
There is a thread on the Zwift Forums containing a huge amount of discussion (2700+ posts) on what developments would really help improve racing, and how these developments should be prioritised to bring the biggest rewards for the smallest efforts. The discussion is sometimes heated, sometimes off-topic, and sometimes repetitive, but as time has gone on, a general consensus has been achieved as to what the 3 key development steps should be.
This is my take on the consensus. Please leave a comment if you feel this misses the mark!
Step 1: Pen Enforcement First
The first change is to enforce the existing categories. This means that the Zwift system will understand your category, and stop you from entering a pen for a category lower than you are assigned.
This immediately tackles the issue of sandbaggers – riders that race below their assigned category in order to do well. Whilst there are obvious flaws with the existing categorisation system, this fundamental step will drastically improve the racing experience for many riders.
Step 2: Race Organiser Toolkit
The reason step 1 is named pen enforcement and not category enforcement, is that there can be many ways to determine which riders should go in which pen – not just the traditionally-accepted ZwiftPower w/kg categories. By giving race organisers a toolkit to determine how the race pens should be divided, they have a platform to innovate – something CEO Eric Min has repeatedly mentioned he wants to see more of. Races with the most interesting formats, or races which are deemed ‘fair’, will naturally do well and be successful.
The Clubs functionality is soon to be rolled out wider, and this brings event creation to the masses. There can then be a natural progression of great race formats and leagues from the Clubs platform to the public Zwift event calendar – all surfaced via the new homescreen of course!
Here is an example of the configuration options that could be available to an event organiser when creating a race and determining the boundaries for each pen:
- Watts (5s, 15s, 3m, 5m, 20m)
- W/kg (5s, 15s, 3m, 5m, 20m)
- Autocat (does the work for you via an algorithm of different metrics)
- Age
- Ranking
Separately, the organiser can set the rules on pen enforcement:
Enforced / Not enforced / Can only enter prescribed pen or higher
After determining the metrics to be used, the race organizer can set the boundaries – so there is no longer a consistent category system. What this means is that pens are dynamic and not static, which ends the problem today of ‘Cruisers’ – riders that deliberately manage their power input to stay in a particular category where they do well.
Step 3: Global Ranking System
You may have noticed that in step 2, one of the inputs that could be used by a race organiser is ranking. A global ranking system would be the primary racing reward system, as you try to improve your ranking in every race.
Thanks to the new dynamic race formats from step 2, in some races you may be one of the strong riders, some races mid-pack, and sometimes at the bottom. This differs from today, where riders tend to consistently be either strong or weak within a category. The ranking system will mean that even if you are dropped early in a race, you may benefit from a ranking improvement if you beat the riders around you.
There is already a ranking system on ZwiftPower, as Eric has written about recently. However, it is quite basic, constrained by the existing categories, and does not deal with new riders well. There are a number of solutions available which are used in the wider gaming industry that could be used, including Microsoft’s TrueSkill or the iRating system used by iRacing.
This ranking, as the primary progression metric, should be attached to a user’s profile, and can also be used as a way to sort pens if the race organiser chooses to.
Zwift HQ Interactions
Zwift have openly recognised the need for development in this area, and have agreed with the community that pen enforcement is the first step.
A recent post from Flint on the forum has explained what is coming and when:
We’ve got some dates now. I’ll have more details for you all in the coming weeks, but here is what I’ve got for you so far:
- When: week of 21 Feb (still tentative, but looking good for now)
- What it will be: 3-7 days of single events, with relatively easy courses with the explicit goal of testing the beginning of broader race rules starting with category enforcement. In other words, putting a floor on categories you can join below a set minimum, based on power curve data.
- What it won’t be: Autocategorization or matchmaking. It is also not a GC event.
- What we’ll need from you: Feedback! I’ll have a form made up and ready to go as well as an in-depth post explaining the finer details.
Two things I want to call out specifically here:
Simply enforcing a floor on categories may seem like very little after so much time has passed. The reason for this is called out in the above bullets: this is the foundation for broader rules that can be applied to events when needed. We’re not just building category enforcement.
The values we will use and the ways we can enforce categories are not permanent, these are merely what we feel will be the most beneficial ways to implement this in an early version to produce meaningful feedback, data, and – most importantly – race experiences.
It’s great news that pen enforcement is on the agenda, and we have a date for when we will see something we can test. It’s also great that clearly they don’t see the categories as permanent or static. Something that I am passionate about personally, is that race organisers should not be constrained – allow for flexibility and configuration, and you will be amazed at what the community can create.
Zwift also has an open position for someone to head up racing development, and there are some interesting points in the job description:
“We are looking for a highly accomplished Lead Game Designer to expand & evolve Zwift’s racing & competitive features. The ideal candidate has extensive experience designing PvP and Team v Team game systems including stats tracking, matchmaking, rewards progression and leaderboards, and has tuned these systems through ongoing live operations. We’re looking for someone with proven leadership skills and a highly collaborative approach in partnering with all disciplines.”
Is all of this moving too slow? It’s certainly been a long time since we have seen any real improvements to the racing experience on the Zwift client itself, but at least something is happening, and we have a date for when we can see the first fruits of some labour.
Your Thoughts
What are your thoughts? Do you agree with the priorities above? Please comment below.
A great addition would be a live leaderboard for Points Races like the ZRL showing FTS and FAL points as the race progresses – this could tie into the Race Organiser Toolkit when determining what type of race it is.
I also suppose it depends on where Zwift see itself in the market – is it an e-racing platform, a training platform or a free ride computer game – this will determine where they focus their resources moving forward.
Great new, thanks zwift, looking forward to the new developments!!
I disagree with Step 3. As you say, there is a Ranking System in Zwiftpower and I think it works very well. It is like you said: If you compete against a strong field, you will earn an improvement of your ranking, even if you finish in the midfield. I am a B rider at the upper end of the category, in some races with splitted categories (B-/B+, A-/A+ and so on)I have to compete in the low A category. There I get completely under the wheels and I am very happy if I finish in the better midfield. My motivation in this races is always to improve my race ranking, thanks to the ZP system I fight for every position. I think that is exactly what you said in your text, but in my opinion this exists already and works very fine. Or what exactly is not working well with the existing system? Greetings from Germany and sorry for my English, Simon
You are right, the Zwift Power ranking system works, but it has some significant flaws – particularly in how it manages new riders, and how long it takes to put a rider in to an adequate ranking reflective of their ability. There are already systems out there that manages all of these aspects well, like the 2 examples in the article, so why not use one.
It seems that a simple-ish fix would be to put new riders in at a specific point value related to their Cat. D would still start at 600, C maybe 500 or 450, B maybe 350, A at whatever is appropriate and then have them move up and down from there. Maybe that starting value should expire after 30 rather than 90 days (or as soon as 2 other race values are added), so that it doesn’t artificially keep someone at the wrong spot.
I also think the USAC points as implemented in ZwiftPower is pretty good. It needs a bunch of tweaks. It was implemented years ago and then never really adjusted. It awards ranking points based on finish order instead of points for points races, it awards points for TTT (an issue that could be resolved by the race organizer, I think), and while we’re complaining about things, it’s pretty simplistic on strength-of-field calculation – best 5 ranked riders of top 10 finishers.
I have once got points from the race based on points race points. So I think that is an organiser choice – they should do it for ZRL too, but I don’t think they will ever bother as they do their own results management.
That’s great news (finally!). Is this Feb 21 update available for everyone or only for selected beta testers?
What I’m also missing in races where all categories start together is a live position in your category. I want to know that I’m in 2nd place, not in 42nd place with 40 A’s and B’s in front of me.
I tend to avoid races with all cats starting at the same time for this very reason. It allows the big watt guys, in absolute terms, to cling on to faster higher cat riders. These races are rubbish.
As a just promoted B racer (3.3 w/kg), I especially search for these mixed category races. Alone with the B’s I don’t stand a chance. In a mixed category at least I can ride with people of the same level.
I find open category races to be immensely fun. There is always someone to race and push yourself against (unless, I suppose you’re already at the pointy end of the pointy end), and it doesn’t matter which cat you are. As long as you’re not expecting to win, I find them to be the liveliest races and the ones I am most likely to increase my FTP in. Not expecting to win means I will push myself a little harder to stay with a group that’s just beyond my abilities a little longer because I don’t care if I blow up. When I do inevitably fall off the back of my group, there is almost always another group chasing behind to latch onto soon enough (or I can try fighting it out to stay away from them in no man’s land). So much stuff to work on. After it’s all over, it’s fun to go and see if the people around me were the people I “should” have been racing (or at least it’s fun when I find out I’ve been racing faster people regardless of whether they’re in my cat or not), but the real fun is just that it’s about trying things and pushing myself to my limits.
That’s funny, because as a bigger rider, I’ve always found the mass start races to favour lighter riders because they can hide in the bigger pack yet survive up the hills.
the lighter riders have to work a LOT harder to stay in those packs… i think zwift has been quietly nerfing the lightweights
i am lightweight and find it hard to stay with the pack; if i join a 2.0 w/kg event i always have to produce more (e.g:2.5) to stay with pack, and then i just get dropped down hill…..
Agreed, often feel like I’m smashing myself just to stay in contention. I know they can’t mimic real life exactly but in real races this isn’t the case for me. I can keep with the pack without a problem (most of the time). Surely they can work to close this gap…
It’s actually the opposite. Heavier riders of the same height have to use less watts to stay in the group. The reason is that it’s actually w/Cd (watts per frontal drag) that determines speed on flats. w/kg is what determines speed up hills.
So if you want to win be light and short, or at least pretend to be. From my casual observance of Zwift Power, it seems 65kgs is optimal. I’m not so clear on optimal height
I agree we should just all avoid these types of races. Race organizers need to decide is it a bunch race or a category race. This mixed category is no fun at all.
Agreed. I would race these types of races a lot if I could see where I am in respect to my category. I like pushing myself to stay with better riders, but I also want to know if I should try to bridge a gap early or not.
Hi Maarten,
This is available already but you might not know about it because it is subtle. You need to open ZwiftPower in your browser and click on the race you are in. Then click the ‘LIVE’ text where you will see (in almost real time, I think every 30s) exactly where everyone is on the leaderboard as well as on the course profile. This list allows you to sort by your group, so you can see exactly where you are vs. your group. One thing: If the rider has not registered on ZP, they are not always in the list. So you know if someone from your group flies off the front but are not on the list, you can just ignore them.
Sandbaggers hate the mass start races because to do well they need to put out w/kg that will expose them and Zwift will change their FTP if they compete at the front.
You can see it in Fondos or other longer races for example when the bunch takes off from the start at 4-6w/kg splits and a gap of 20 or so seconds forms instantly yet a few km’s later on the next flat section the second group will catch them as the sandbaggers have to watch their w/kg with ZAP or a Garmin head unit set to average w/kg.
Next big hill the sandbaggers light it up again…
Hello -I would be a big supporter. If this was moved ahead it would be a fantastic first step. A huge change.
This all sounds great to me! As a bottom-half-of-my-category racer, I can’t wait!
Doesn’t matter how strong I appear at 64 I cannot compete with anyone in higher than “D” categories. They are simply able to accelerate quicker and recover quicker. so in a long non-dynamic effort I may hang on in 99% of events I don’t stand a chance.
Age related events are thus crucial to any pen enforcement
JC Coach I am 60 and competing in B category. Still getting beaten by 70+ year old in age related events.
At 67 I am still a mid to upper b category racer and the few age category races I have seen appear to be populated with some VERY strong riders. I suspect that anyone still racing seriously in their later years has a lot of experience and will be super strong, I would rather see a category system as in real life races where results bump you up a cat, and then have the categories rigorously enforced
Are you on a wattbike atom? Or on a calibrated power meter?
As a 73 year old triathlete I am completely comfortable with age group racing. Without it rider attrition it too great. There might be really good 70+ Riders but very few of us still racing.
The start of a single sign on between Zwift and Zwiftpower is also a good first step (though late in coming). Hopefully, it leads to auto-enrollment of all racers in Zwiftpower (and/or full integration of Zwiftpower into Zwift) as a stepping stone for both pen enforcement and more/better data for the race organizer toolkit you mention.
Great changes 👏🏻, I would like to see a 10seconds gap between each pen setting off in races to avoid lower cats hiding in with the higher cat riders or have the A starting pen at the front rather than the back so you don’t have to fight through loads of riders to get to the front
This is actually configurable today by race organisers
Fingers crossed that their upcoming change to use a single log-in for both the Zwift app itself and also ZwiftPower will also be part of this transition to enforcing a lowest Cat you can join since it should ensure that all new Zwift users and existing ones without a ZP profile should end up getting one auto-created and storing power data
Categories would be more representative if based on “w/(kg including bike)”, for both obvious physics and fair racing reasons. This would solve the mismatching of v light/young riders and avoid the need for the abrupt minimum power criteria in ZP categories, without which 30kg kids or 50kg lighter riders get put in a crazy category they have no chance of staying with. Otherwise, will Zwift respect the often forgotten ZP minimum power bands?
Those minimum power limits are one of the worst parts of the current categorization. Sub 50 kg riders have such an insane advantage on climbs, and they also win Tempus Fugit time trials.
Aye, good point, works both ways. Including a typical bike weight would avoid the need for the them. Without the bands one of our riders would be in A category, with them they are in D (just under 150W), and adding bike weight would put them in a more accurate B or C category.
Nice write up.
Do you find it odd that these are all features that take about 10 minutes of software development time and were supposed to be rolled out ages ago?
Does this update actually do anything to improve racing? Sure some autocat feature can ensure someone who hops into a C cat race and does 6wkg normalized power for an hour (at 50 rpm, of course) is forced to race in A cat races. But how exactly does this prevent blatant cheating in the first place? As a friend of H. Davies I was just curious.
Cheers,
tyrel
The big one to improve racing in my opinion is point 2 – the toolkit for race organisers to split pens in different ways (and enforce them). It means for a given race, sometimes you will be the hammer, and sometimes the nail. At the moment your racing experience is nearly always the same based on where you sit in the category. e.g. a top B rider will always be in the front pack of a B race at the finish. A bottom B rider is likely dropped most the time or too worn out to try a move or contest a sprint. If those pens become dynamic, every race is a new experience. You may be the strongest in the race and be able to compete for the win, for once. I am a bottom to mid Cat A, but in the FRR series with unique category boundaries, I found myself near the top of the field. The race experience was completely different, instead of hanging on for dear life I was attacking, bridging, leading over KOMs. That variety is great.
In terms of cheating (for this I am not talking about sandbagging or cruising, but about data not being accurate) there is not a lot you can do other than investigate and penalise after the race. The way I see it as a cat A, is if I am racing someone who’s trainer is overreading by 10%, so what. Whether they are really that strong or not is not that important in the grand scheme of things. Of course at A+ / prem level when there is money / status involved, there needs to be an additional level of rigour. I would like some kind of independent test facility with a Zwift stamp of approval, maybe in bike shops, where you can validate your numbers now and again and have this certificate attached to your profile.
Think that’s a bit of a daft thing to say regarding the 10% power difference at A. Those are the riders that can stop the legit riders from making the next step up to prem. It should be fair and sorted across the board or what’s the point? There are many div 1 riders who have the power and discipline to be in the PL but are getting scrubbed by suspect riders. 10% difference on a PM is huge! Would you be happy if your PM was reading 10% lower or higher IRL in a race or TT?
I’m not saying it’s fair, I’m saying it is practically impossible to solve outside of independent hardware / neutral venues. There is dodgy power still getting through at prem level with all of the checks. What would your suggested fixes be?
Would suggest zwift take the complaints and concerns more seriously. Some extremely dubious numbers being produced across the board. Riders complain but nothing seems to get done.
As for the prem level dodgy checks, agreed, some are still getting through the checks. But this is where we need to be stricter on things like…..videoing for evidence of….
Weigh in on day of race, calibration of turbo on day of race, second source calibration, height video. If someone is still suspected by officials then maybe they should be requested to stream race so it can be monitored and cleared of suspicion?
What about these riders (Thom Thrall) who freewheels and his power doesn’t drop for ages? Can zwift not fix this “glitch” “cheat”?
I too would be interested to see why this glitch appears to happen. Seems to be a unique glitch to thrall? Poor guy
Not really – that’s a part of how some power meters work. Same functionality that allows ‘sticky watts’ – but there isn’t much that Zwift can do about it.
Just came here to say I love Holden aka captain America aka former world number one zwifter.
You’re an idiot.
On the face of it, using other parts of power curve to determine in-race category, depending on race type, sounds like a big improvement. A lot of races (looking at you ZRL) suffer at the moment from being a cruise and smash fest that is won and lost on 15s to 2min power, but which are categorized on the basis of 20min power, which no one ever has to push (until the epic in the ZRL, but even then expect Bs to go up in less than 20!). Would see far better competition, imo, if the category could be race dependent to some extent…
Fully support steep 1, I am less engaged with the other 2 issues. Riding against lots of sandbaggers is the single thing that I like least about Zwift racing so a fix there would be excellent!
Hi. When will something be done with guys messing with the trainer with a tea towel or paint roller for extra watts. I’ve been used that much I’m falling apart.
In my opinion one of the most important features of race management was lost when zwift removed the ability to comment on races afterwards in zwiftpower, it gouged the racing community from the inside out.. if someone was doping in some shape or form you could flag it and at least others would see they weren’t alone in thinking something wasn’t right in a race on the message board… what has replaced it is not close to serving that purpose and there is no feedback as to what actions have/have not been taken
These changes will definitely help in making a fairer racing experience, but until their is a way ( which is highly unlikely) to make all trainers have an accurate power output on the zwift platform racing can never really be fair. I can instantly add 30 watts by swapping back to my old direct drive trainer. If my goal was to win races this would be an easy solution, but not fair.
The dual power requirement for A races helps organizers moderate this issue. For categories below A, does it really matter?
Yes, I think we have to accept that unless you are racing at elite category the results have to be taken with a pinch of salt. My first smart trainer was an Elite Rampa, which was a wheel on trainer. I tried very hard to get it to record accurately, but it was giving me an advantage of about 10%. I got rid of it as I found it embarrassing that I was beating riders who were clearly better than me. I suspect I sometimes get beaten by riders in a similar situation, who aren’t deliberately cheating, but if they don’t compete outdoors, might not even realise that their figures are inaccurate.
If the wins bumped you up a category (which in any sane system would be the case) then it really wouldn’t matter a great deal until you got to the elite level.
James, thanks for sharing your insights. And for organizing the unique
and fun ‘Traditional British Hill Climb’ event on Fridays, 1945CET / 1345EST.
Curious as to the length of time that Zwift position has been open…
What about measures against Zpower riders? They can really mess up a race. We probably all have had multiple races where this happened. By changing the risistance of their trainer, they can alter their power curve at will.
By Cat. enforcement they might get promoted to the next Cat., but at which Cat. does this end? Should Cat. A be prepared for an influx of Zpower riders?
I would add that it would be nice for Step 2 to also have ‘trainer type’ as an option.
I don’t want to have to sign up for zwift power and ZRL to just race fairly. Would be great to see that all integrated into the zwift interface under 1 single functioning account.
Any improvement is greatly appreciated!
There are some “cruisers” I would like to see scrabbling around to find races that suit their “skillset” if any of this becomes a reality
Yes indeed!
How about making riders (esp A/A+) back up their claims with IRL performances?
What if they don’t ride/race IRL?
Wow. What a bunch of whiners. 90% of these comments are “the race isn’t fair for me” “make it harder for others”, “Zwift should do more to make it fairer for me” “ w/kg is fair/unfair because I’m small/big”. It’s not real world. You win nothing but fitness!
Cheating goes on in the real world too.
It’s much harder to cheat in the real world. You can’t pretend to be much lighter and smaller than you really are for a start. Maybe one way forward is to correlate outdoor performance on Strava segments with Zwift performance. Ok, not every once cycles outside or on Strava, but many many do.
Not much talk here about how different courses impact rider categorisation. You wouldn’t bet on a sprinter in a mountain stage so why does the 80kg+ 1200w guy retain his A cat on a mountainous course Vs the 55kg lad who can easily climb away. Something dynamic here would increase competition and encourage riders to try a variety of courses outside of those they are most suited to.
Secondly the categories today just reward raw power and not race craft. You shouldn’t just need a big 20min wkg to define you as a rider. Those of us not blessed with that top threshold power need to ride in different ways to be successful, hence finding a way to utilise an improved race ranking to drive parity would lead to more interesting racing.
That’s where point 2 (race organiser determines how the pens are defined) comes in to play – you can mix up the dynamics based on the course.
The categories reward power to weight, not raw power. And Zwift still favours power to weight (or power to size) on the flat. I remember doing individual time trials through the desert (as flat as it gets) and still losing to lighter / smaller riders pushing out significantly lower watts. I suppose it’s a game and should not be taken too seriously.
I wonder how other people find Zwift TT figures compare to real life. I am short and light 165cm & 61Kg give or take 1kg. I have found that I can’t achieve the times on Zwift that I can in real life, I thought Zwift would be faster as I have better bike and wheels, plus don’t need to slow for roundabouts or bends. My power performance is almost identical inside & out. However there seems to be very few people breaking 20 mins on Zwift, so maybe everyone is slower.
It would be great to see the toolkit factor in connected trainers or difficulty. The yo-yo effect of rolling courses from those working against the gradient and those that don’t takes away from the in moment experience.
It would be interesting to have races where you can’t see competitors’ positions or power numbers. It would make races more dynamic and potentially promote break always and better sprints.
There were quite a number of HUDless events when that feature first came out, now, not so many https://zwifthacks.com/app/events/?key=61e97fdb8832e though these also loose the distance to go so maybe not exactly what you are asking for.
I’m glad they’re open to constructive criticism and respect the amount of time it takes to put new things in place sometimes. My main concern as someone who’s currently in the grey zone between levels is that I’d like to be able to race at different levels depending on length. For example I could likely level up on shorter crit races but on longer rides I’m mid pack the level below.
I still don’t understand why Zwift doesn’t use a cat system like USAC (1~5, Masters etc). Everyone starts in Cat 5, you win races, you move to Cat 4 and so on. You have to earn your way to Cat 1. The only way to stay in a lower Cat would be to not win. In USAC you can’t just hang out in Cat 4 winning races for years but in Zwift you can do exactly that. Why is this not on the table? Why is Zwift racing based on w/kg and not performance? You win, you move up until you stop winning or you get to Cat 1/Pro.
I’ve been zwifting for a month, I’ve done 3 races. But IRL I’m a mountain biker with decent power.
I went straight into the middle of B category based on w/kg and tend to finish bottom third in category because I have no idea about race craft and I dont know the courses.
How many D cat races would I have to easily win before moving to a C?
And how long in C cat would I spend getting beat by canny racers putting out 100W less than me but knowing how to draft and pace themselves?
Then weeks or months later I’d finally get to B and get to treat it as a fun unpredictable workout like I do now, knowing I have no chance of winning.
Andy, my answer would be “if you started racing IRL how long do you think it would take you to go from Cat 5 to Cat 1”. I help with a IRL Jr racing team. Those kids work hard and race a lot just to try and get to Cat 3. USAC allows you to move from 5 to 4 at will (Zwift D to C for example). To move from 4 to 3 in USAC you have get 30 points in a year or 3 wins in a race with like 21+ people racing.
This system address both your points – you will have to race and learn “how to race” and as you do, you would move up to the next category. Points are awarded to about top 10 so as long as you’re finishing in the top 10, you’re working towards the next Cat. If you’re not finishing in top 10 then you’re where you probably should be. You can’t “sandbag” in this system. If you win 3 races in your Cat you MUST move up, USAC just automatically moves you. In Zwift you can just sit in Cat B or C for years winning as long as you know how to play the game with your power numbers.
Check out the system:
https://usacycling.org/about-us/governance/policy-viii#roadupgrades
That’s interesting Adam. The off-road world in the UK is a bit different it seems. The events/categories I enter in both XC and Enduro racing (which are at my appropriate level, I normally am about mid pack) usually it’s called ‘sport’ or ‘open’ or it’s just age categories with a separate elite for the good people. I can enter these events with no race license, no qualification and no previous results.
This is functionally similar what James is listing in step 3. He’s proposing something a bit more dynamic than the traditional USAC style categories though. You win, you move up the rankings, and you have to race against other people of similar ranking. It’s just that the lines between categories don’t need to be fixed like they are in a USAC cat type system. So say you have a ranking score of 123. One day you may be racing against a range of 200-100, another day 150-75. Some days you’re the hammer, others the nail…
I agree to pen enforcement being the top priority. Just before a ranking system that will work without the need to publish each ride (to the entire world, inside and outside of Zwift). The ZP, WTRL, Zwift ecosystem is a nightmare when it comes to privacy.
… and (as it turns out, when you make your way to the forums to check for something completely unrelated) it is also somewhere in the twilight between unprofessional and criminal. Glad I quit racing a while ago after first experience with the WTRL hobbyists.
https://forums.zwift.com/t/wtrl-now-part-of-zwift/573651
Don’t know if I want to laugh or cry.
How about start with fixing the dropout issue that plagues Kickr users by supporting the Direct Connect? Racing isn’t fun when a half the time you race, a dropout hits you during the race. Yes, I’ve tried to address interference issues as much as I can… but I live in the city. People have been asking for Direct Connect support for over a year. There is no excuse.
I am having lots of trouble logging onto zwift power. The location of zwift id is not as straight forward as you think and when I did logg in my zwift id apparently I was logged on as someone ffrom a different country. Can you please make this easier please. Many thanks Alan
Nothing to do with this post, but this is changing to single-sign-on today/tomorrow.
Instead of adding limits based on times, the CP model has only 2 parameters:
So if I want to set a limit, I can set these two parameters. Or, the system can just use 2 minutes for the second parameter.
Then for ALL durations of effort t produced by the rider, and the time Pmax which is the maximum power produced, I can calculate a CP value for that t:
CP(t) = Pmax(t) / (1 + t / 2 minutes)
Take the largest CP(t) value and that’s used to rank the rider’s effort.
Why do it this way? Because maximal efforts rarely align with some nice round time duration. Do might do an Alpe event and get a really good 50 minute power, but not-so-good 20 minute power, and poor 60 minute power, out of that. The algorithm should figure out the best time to use.
Zwift has absorbed ZwiftPower way more than a year ago and we still have to wait until February to see pen enforcement? I am no programmer, but if it’s easy to block me from accessing, say, a women only event, it should be easy to block riders from registering under a lower category.
Well, let’s take the positive side of it and wait just a few more weeks…
Using Zwift Power to properly evaluate a riders power curve and categorize them would fix everything. Cat B riders shouldn’t be able to do 5-7 minute climbs at 5+ w/kg or hold 6+ w/kg for 2 minutes. That’s why if you base everything off of 20 minute power it’s very easy to hide your true abilities. Elite 2-5 minute power does not correlate with slightly above average 20 minute power. I do think the pack dynamics have improved dramatically…watts in the draft are substantially more similar across riders. I got tired of light riders holding 170w in the bunch while at 77kg I had to hold 230w while sitting behind them….IRL everyone in the bunch on flat roads is + or – 5w’s. Things are improving and there are a lot more classy riders who just let the cheaters go.