Zwift Chat

[<Tommy>]

Love the comments on the link ... everyone who has been upgraded doesn't like the system lol

Of course, if I get upgraded to A now, then the system is definitely flawed

😄 I can only imagine.

In my opinion forcing people to stop going into lower categories can only be a good thing. And it’s ridiculous it’s taken them this long to trial something that is so obvious.

But the second part. Designating cat boundaries based on power numbers is still seems deeply flawed and open to abuse.

Taking guesstimates on vo2 max too? Not sure how helpful that is…

 

[BurningLegs]

I'm open to anything that makes the racing fairer. If this is it then I'm in favour, and will applaud them for doing it. But I'm sceptical that it will actually help (my gut feeling is that people will just need to learn how to sandbag on the new system) and this is "future works" - so still coming zoon...

I wonder why they're trying so hard to get a system to work based on power numbers? You'd think they'd just adopt the points based system that's been tried, tested, and proven in the real world for decades and spend the brain power and development time going into this on something more innovative?

This new category enforcement (or any other system) is probably still years away. Wasn't it November or December that they said the new UI had been ready since before Covid lockdowns but they paused it to spend effort onboarding new subscribers and were now launching it to all users???

 

[Norry1]

😄 I can only imagine.

In my opinion forcing people to stop going into lower categories can only be a good thing. And it’s ridiculous it’s taken them this long to trial something that is so obvious. Agreed.

But the second part. Designating cat boundaries based on power numbers is still seems deeply flawed and open to abuse. What would you suggest?

Taking guesstimates on vo2 max too? Not sure how helpful that is…

 

[bridgy]

😄 I can only imagine.

In my opinion forcing people to stop going into lower categories can only be a good thing. And it’s ridiculous it’s taken them this long to trial something that is so obvious.

But the second part. Designating cat boundaries based on power numbers is still seems deeply flawed and open to abuse.

Taking guesstimates on vo2 max too? Not sure how helpful that is…

My only hope for this new system (and they do stress they're still at testing stage and it's not finalised) is that they're taking into account more data than just 20 minute power like Zwiftpower does for categorisation.

This means they may well be picking up those people who are cruising most of the time in their designated Cat to keep their 20 minute power down, and then launching huge sprints or attacks at key points to keep winning races (I think this happens quite a lot in Cat D and C in particular), and putting them in the next Cat up. I think that would be a good thing, if it works.

In theory I would prefer a points based system really like many of us, where you would move up the categories based on results, but the problem with that would probably be a constant stream of new to Zwift racers coming in at the lower categories and destroying them until they gradually move on to the higher categories?

 

[straas]

Unless all new riders had to start in A

 

[Norry1]

I agree Points based sounds ideal....... but in the real world, if we take our Team as an example....

Say the points cut-off was 300 for the top group, Lee and Paul would not make it, but Al and Carl would.

 

[bridgy]

I'm open to anything that makes the racing fairer. If this is it then I'm in favour, and will applaud them for doing it. But I'm sceptical that it will actually help (my gut feeling is that people will just need to learn how to sandbag on the new system) and this is "future works" - so still coming zoon...

I wonder why they're trying so hard to get a system to work based on power numbers? You'd think they'd just adopt the points based system that's been tried, tested, and proven in the real world for decades and spend the brain power and development time going into this on something more innovative?

This new category enforcement (or any other system) is probably still years away. Wasn't it November or December that they said the new UI had been ready since before Covid lockdowns but they paused it to spend effort onboarding new subscribers and were now launching it to all users???
View attachment 631109

At least we now know the new UI does exist and can see what it looks like from those who've had early access - hopefully it will be rolled out to the masses soon. Also, to be fair Zwift said the new UI they were getting ready to launch pre-Covid was completely abandoned and they decided to start from scratch and be a bit more radical in the changes. I do agree though - significant change does seem painfully slow at times

 

[Legs]

i think saturdays PB farked me up , took sunday off then repeated it yesterday .
i was dropping 15 seconds per turn up till turn 5 when the body say "nah " and i was dropping over a minute per turn then spent the rest of the day feeling rough .

Don't set any store by how long it takes you to get between turns. It's pretty clear that your trainer is not giving reliable, repeatable results. Didn't lubricating your trainer put you backwards by 10 minutes?

As a guide, a 43-minute Alpe ascent is about 2 minutes faster than @berty bassett, which puts your w/kg head and shoulders above anyone else in the CycleChat group - a very solid A-category rider, probably winning a fair few races. You probably shouldn't expect to be actually at that level when you find yourself on accurate equipment; there's a reason that ZPower riders are excluded from official Zwift race results.

If you were to get on a Neo and find that your true performance level is, say 51 minutes, how would you then regard your 43- and your 47-minute rides?

 

[BurningLegs]

I agree Points based sounds ideal....... but in the real world, if we take our Team as an example....

View attachment 631111


Say the points cut-off was 300 for the top group, Lee and Paul would not make it, but Al and Carl would.

That's an interesting table!

I don't think it means much when racing in category boundaries that aren't dictated by it?

If it were an open field and Lee, Paul, Al, and Carl were all in the same event then the table would sort itself out and be representative, wouldn't it?

 

[cyberknight]

Don't set any store by how long it takes you to get between turns. It's pretty clear that your trainer is not giving reliable, repeatable results. Didn't lubricating your trainer put you backwards by 10 minutes?

As a guide, a 43-minute Alpe ascent is about 2 minutes faster than @berty bassett, which puts your w/kg head and shoulders above anyone else in the CycleChat group - a very solid A-category rider, probably winning a fair few races. You probably shouldn't expect to be actually at that level when you find yourself on accurate equipment; there's a reason that ZPower riders are excluded from official Zwift race results.

If you were to get on a Neo and find that your true performance level is, say 51 minutes, how would you then regard your 43- and your 47-minute rides?

im happy just to be turning wheels , as soon as i can ride outside again i will be cycle commuting and back to club run sundays ( which used to be a metric century in under 3 and a half with a cake stop ) so zwift is liable to be cancelled

 

[<Tommy>]

@Norry1

I think the only solution is a points based system. If people do well in races they move up. If they do badly they move down. That’s not to say the current points system works. I personally think it leans far too heavily in favour of people who race most. But an emended point system is far less open to abuse than the current system. And even if we ignore that element. The current system is often not a true reflection of the races people are best suited for.

 

[bridgy]

I agree Points based sounds ideal....... but in the real world, if we take our Team as an example....

View attachment 631111


Say the points cut-off was 300 for the top group, Lee and Paul would not make it, but Al and Carl would.

Well, a points system doesn't have to be exactly the same as the current one on Zwiftpower if it was actually being used for categorisation, which it isn't. It will certainly have its flaws though too, no doubt.

 

[BurningLegs]

It is great that you're using it to come back from your injury @cyberknight - good luck getting back out there in the summer

I think what @Legs is trying to say is don't feel too beaten up or downhearted if you get an odd result and bleed time like that on some ascents of the alpe, and also don't be too elated if you get a huge boost one day. Unfortunately your equipment makes it difficult to directly compare times/efforts.

Still a good workout, still great for recovery, and will certainly help get you back to your 3.5 hour rides in the summer

 

[cyberknight]

It is great that you're using it to come back from your injury @cyberknight - good luck getting back out there in the summer

I think what @Legs is trying to say is don't feel too beaten up or downhearted if you get an odd result and bleed time like that on some ascents of the alpe, and also don't be too elated if you get a huge boost one day. Unfortunately your equipment makes it difficult to directly compare times/efforts.

Still a good workout, still great for recovery, and will certainly help get you back to your 3.5 hour rides in the summer

haha i intend to go faster all being well !
Just have to find people to ride with as the club is still a saturday club and the nearest other local club is more a 20 mile ride with a cake stop

 

[Legs]

Unless all new riders had to start in A

...which would be really funny if it weren't what they're actually doing!

In mitigation, they're also taking into account all Zwift ride data from the past 60 days in the categorisation.