To my simplistic head, it feels like it would just require x number of individual races set up per team within the same race if that makes sense? You would see other teams in their race, but they would be invisible for all other purposes (chat and drafting).
I’m still hoping that at least the ZRL PD TTT(s) would be run as separate events for each individual team… Last season the margins were already getting so small that the impact of fluctuations imprecisions from the start procedure and overtaking are becoming significant, and if proper TTT functions are on the inshallah roadmap, separate races would be a reasonably easy way (mainly just a little extra work for the stream production crew) to get back to better accuracy.
As far as I am aware every event is manually added by Zwift. 4 pens per race, that would be hundreds of events manually set up on a Thursday.
Automated data processing. I hear that’s something computers are good at…
… unfortunately, that’s something that Zwift programmers aren’t good at.
That can all be scripted, and if you had users pre-reg for the event it would make things a little smoother - probably isn’t that much different to the scripts WTRL have running for the leagues tbf…
I know it CAN be, pen enforcement should be easy too, I’m just putting it in the context of zwift development.
Indeed. As you say, Cat enforcement is the key - without it, we’re not even on the first step
We still do because it’s the first step to get the cat enforcement process off the ground. But with so many people overcomplicating it and going in circles nothing got done.
Our very simple request was to just implement a auto cat system, once that works it can be optimized to ranking or age groups or whatever a race orginizer want.
Keep talking amongst yourselves guys, I’m sure someone from Zwift or WTRL will be along shortly to answer all your questions.
Surely you are not suggesting that Zwift HQ are stringing this out and paying lip service to their customers, whilst telling them they ‘hear them’ and will improve their communication by communicating absolutely nothing for months on end…
Nah, professional organisations wouldn’t do that, I dont believe you.
Anyway, im sure there will be their monthly car crash along in a week or 2 to take everyone’s mind off it.
Hahaha mother fudging Boost mode. It always comes back to Boost mode for me - it must have been a really complex bit of development that no one asked for and now seems to have disappeared.
Headline recent ‘feature’ was a funking route progress bar. You got to laugh.
According to Zwift hacks, there is not a single boost mode event scheduled
Im actually doubting myself and checked to see if I had left a filter on of any type…
I think ZHQ FutureWorks Crit City Race - Anti-sandbagging is a more relevant example. It was a good idea but got over complicated, if that was just a Auto cat system it would have been a huge improvement.
I’m using fact resistant for the rest of my life.
Thank you Andreas.
Heavy riders always say the same drivel… hills, power, yadda yadda.
Lighter riders say flat, power… yadda yadda.
Everyone sees racing from their own unique perspective. Nobody cares about the other riders experiences. They are trying to beat them. They just care how they are incredibly disadvantaged. The poor souls…
There’s no way to make it perfectly fair for all shapes and sizes, on all terrain, it’s IMPOSSIBLE.
Do people seriously think that every cheap mass market trainer gives the same power measurement? You’re utterly delusional if you believe this. Do people think that everyone inputs their actual weight. Dreaming.
This entire fictional fair racing dream is built on a house of sticks and crappy power meters. It’s make believe. It has almost no bearing on reality.
All we want as a community is the ‘feeling’ of fair racing. Where we race against riders that are better or worse than ourselves, but similar. Are any of them real performances? That’s also impossible to say. However, if it feels real. We’d take it.
I don’t know what the solution is. Cheating is RAMPANT. It’s a truly ridiculous percentage of the lower category racers.
I think we simply enforce the current category systems on entry, that will go a fair way to reducing some of the cheating.
Then, later, much later, we delve into the complex physics of attempting to even up the playing field between riders of different weights on varied terrain.
Oh, and Andreas is right. Flat races are WAY harder for lightweights. To comment differently just shows someone’s total lack of experience in Zwift. Thinking on it, how could a 100kg rider possibly understand? They cannot lower their weight to 60kgs and experience it, because they are HUGE. They produce huge watts.
I weigh 60kgs. I am a lightweight.
I’ll explain it simply for the heavies. In real life, in a pack I ride happy with everyone else. Happy days. I get massive draft.
I have lower overall watts and a I lose a greater percentage of those nano watts to rolling resistance and mechanical resistance. However, if I’m smart and stay out of the wind. No problem.
If it’s flat, it’s rider watts vs CDA. Not w/kg. Basically, watts vs air, rolling resistance and mechanical resistance. Generally, larger riders are at a significant advantage on flat roads. Due to the ratio of muscle mass vs frontal area being less of a penalty. Yes, some very powerful and very aero small riders like Remco Evenepoel can make up this deficit because of their debatable physiological advantages of being small. However, these riders are rare. The bell curve is heavier riders, fast on flat. Not even a debate.
In Zwift the pack aero dynamics have no bearing on real life. Maybe, they modelled them on Venus?
The draft is MASSIVELY less than in reality. So, in Zwift a smaller rider with a lower total of watts loses a far greater percentage of those watts, in a blob. A lightweight may be riding at 3.5w/kg to hold position, while the heavy is holding 2.7w/kg. It is a very significant difference.
Now, do we want it to be the same as real world racing? Maybe, I don’t know. Andreas makes a good point. The w/kg cap then becomes a problem for lightweights. As they cannot stay within cat restrictions just riding in the group.
Do I want this changed. I don’t really care. It’s a game, it’s massively flawed on a million levels.
When Zwift has somehow managed to daily verify riders weights globally (impossible), daily verify riders power meters (even more impossible), I’ll care…
Until then, let’s just start with enforcing category restrictions on entry.
How hard is that.
And yet, your post focusing purely on w/kg shows how fact resistant anybody can be!!! Hilarious.
The thing is, you really don’t need to do this at all. This is, I believe, partly why the cat system has gone nowhere, and also why (this aspect of) the autocat experiment was such a dead end.
You just need results-based ranking. That’s all. Really. Promote winners (and high finishers). Relegate losers. Repeat.
That, plus cat enforcement, is all that is needed, and it’s pretty trivial. Sports organisations around the world do this sort of thing IRL, and have done for decades. It works, provably, not just in theory but also in practice.
But instead, we get stupid attempts to model rider performance which combine inaccurate/incomplete biophysical measurements with extremely simplistic (and sometimes just plainly wrong) assumptions about how riders do or should perform, that give utterly ridiculous results (like putting Daz Carter in the 2nd division autocat races where he made mincemeat of the opposition week after week), and everyone throws their hands up and says, oh no we need to fix this anomaly, or that anomaly. Zwift racing isn’t fair! It must be really complicated, let’s use more data and a more complex calculation!
Results-based ranking generates competitive racing despite all the anomalies and inadequacies of zwift physics. Daz would have been quickly promoted, end of story. It wasn’t his fault, of course. I’m only picking on his example because it was so blatantly obvious.
Is there any reason the existing ranking / points system in Zwiftpower was ignored by Zwift / WTRL?