I would appreciate it if Zwift auto-assigned people to the appropriate race category (A,B,C,D) rather than letting the individual choose. It’s been my observation that a good portion of people choose categories that are inappropriate for strength-to-weight ratios, making the racing categories somewhat pointless and making racing a bit less fun.
For example, I joined a race tonight as a B category rider (power-to-weight ratio of 3.2 to 4.0 w/kg). When the race was done, I had an average of 3.2 w/kg which means I fit into the B category by the skin of my teeth. However, when I looked at what other riders were registered as in comparison to their power-to-weight ratios, I’d say at least 1/3 of the riders were in the wrong category:
At least 10 people who finished in the B category could’ve easily been in the A category.
Almost all the C category riders should’ve been in B or even A category.
A good portion of those registered as D category riders should’ve also been in B or A!
While I understand we all have good days and bad, I wonder why we don’t allow the software to choose categories rather than leave it up to the rider to guess. After all, we are in the age of “AI software”, so solving the issue of auto-categorizing riders shouldn’t be out of reach. Even without AI fanciness, I’d suggest the following “rules” as starters:
Require a rider to perform an FTP test before racing to give Zwift a baseline to work with.
If a rider has never raced before, assign the rider to the category that fits their FTP wattage divided by their weight.
If a rider finishes 3 races outside of their initially selected category, notify the rider that he/she is going to be bumped into a more appropriate category based on the current fitness level. For example, if I am auto-selected to be in the B category, but fail to complete 3 races in a row with at least 3.2 w/kg average, then put my in the C category for the next race until I get stronger.
Allow an override (maybe) with a big 'ol warning message. When starting a race, notify the user which category has been auto-selected for him or her along with an obvious “override” button. If the user chooses to override the auto-selected category, display a warning message such as: “Zwift has determined your optimal race category based on your FTP setting, weight, and previous race history. Choosing to override the selected race category means you’re probably a big 'ol cheater and trying to game the system.” Well, maybe make the message a bit more politically correct than that
This is one of @Gerrie_Delport most requested feature (next to more leader controls), let’s hope that Zwift hears the users requests and makes it a feature.
Thanks @Paul_Allen, Yes I agree this should be the way all races should be run at minimum.
This change will take away 90% of the complaints about Zwift Racing.
I will also add that a ranking system is a lot better than w/kg system, that mean someone has to develop a system, ZwiftPower has something we could use but not every one is on ZP. What if we have ZP ranking for some races and if you don’t have a ranking you will be in a w/kg group one level higher than you normally race in.
It’s blatant that race categories in Zwift don’t work very well, at best. And that the w/kg approach triggers the worst cheat instinct in so a lot of people.
Maybe a ranking system will do a little better but I’m skeptical about. Why in the world people need to cheat with Zwift is, of course, a different matter.
Anyway, I do remember very well when I was a runner, a top-class runner, nobody would ask me ‘how strong are you, please’, before to start a race.
What against a ‘line up and go’ approach like in running, cross-country skiing, open water swimming, rowing and canoeing etc. etc.? And if really you can’t survive without categories, are not age-based categories an option?
Agree.
W/kg system is really not a perfect one. What if someone could race at 3.3w/kg (Cat B) for 5km or 10 km race, but for most common race of 30-40 km he’ll do about 2.7-2.8w/kg (Cat C). So it should be something more smart than just straight w/kg for 20 mins effort.
The categorization should be made on multiple types of data that includes: the common w/kg for 20 mins effort (how many times the same user repeated the same effort? if it only once - is it enough to place him straight to higher category?); race difficulty (including type of users in the race, type of route with distance; type of route with incline; number of races vs positions vs race difficulties etc…
…well, as already mentioned here and in different topics, those things mostly already exist in Zwiftpower as a racing rank - so it might be a good idea to implement something similar to Zwift directly and use this rank system to place users into the categories.
@Adam_Qwert_Nayana_WA : Yes w/kg is not perfect, but it is at least a starting point. But ultimatly ranking is the way to go, and there are different ranking systems, so there is no gold standard.
But please Auto-Assign race Categories, this will improve racing.
Even if not an actual auto-assigned category, at least have Zwift display a pop-up that says something like “You’ve just entered Category D for this race, but we think based on your FTP/previous race results* you should be in Category B. Are you sure you want to stay in this category?” (* depending on what system they choose to use)
That way no-one can claim ignorance of what category they are entering, but at the same time they can still override it if they have reasons to (whether those reasons are valid is a whole other discussion!).
Was the race an hour long? Not sure why you think w/kg as FTP should equate to the w/kg you average during a race?
If I said, “let’s go for a ride for fun and we’ll ride at 2-2.5 w/kg” then sure - that’s when you say “Hey, you’re riding too fast!”, but a race isn’t something where you all agree to ride at a pace is it? You’re racing.
If the race is under an hour expect to be riding over your ftp for most of it - and expect to ride well above it at other parts. And that’s when you realise you need to do more than just average a particular wattage like you might on a group ride or during an FTP test.
The system makes no sense at all. Well, I guess if you race in A or join races that are E then you’ll probably be ok. The other categories make no sense. It’s not rating riders by racing performance if that’s what you thought it should be doing. It just makes no sense.
To categorise cycle racing you need to start everyone off in the lowest category and move people up based on their race results - not their weight or supposed FTP.
It may make sense to have some separation based on things like age and gender (hot potato this one though) but I think most would be in for a rude awakening if their thought process after installing zwift went something like “Hmm, my FTP is 3.1 w/kg so I should do really well in a C race”
I would not say it make no sense, it is a crude way to determine race categories, is it perfect NO. But this is the best we currently have. We started that years ago even before Zwift had starting pens or events. We would just lineup on the start line and someone would could and of we went.
A ranking system like what we have on Zwiftpower will be a lot better and then a system to Auto-Assign Race Categories.
IMO, it makes no sense to ask for features to auto assign to a category system that’s not a good category system. You’d be better asking for the better category system.
But, even before you did that you’d be better to ask for features that actually make the riding and racing better imo.
Like, the physics should be better. It’d be better if, say, aerodynamics and cornering were realistic and your avatar slowed so you had to push hard after a corner to get back up to speed. Like crit riders do IRL - and then a tight twisty course is different from a straighter one. Similarly for descents and whatever.
And a business model that makes sense. I’m teetering on the edge of going all in on zwift, getting a better trainer and a bigger screen. But I struggle to explain to anyone why I don’t just cycle outside and how come it costs more than netflix per month. Especially given that Netflix invest billions in new content.
Don’t they have more employees than Valve and they’re writing one game with graphics that are just programmer art? What are they all doing?
I imagine a fair chunk of people only sign up for a couple of months of winter. But, they could have a discount for buying 12 months.
Yes there is lots of things to improve like everything else in the world.
So we ask for small changes, like auto Assign, that will already make racing a lot more fun because of people entering the wrong cat. Then we can work on ranking, then game physics.
Yes some people only use it in the winter but most use it year round, I do 95% of my riding on Zwift. 9 hours a week. I have a busy schedule and a family so if I want to ride I have to ride between 5am and 7am.
You can set your bike up in-front of Netflix and watch shows. I used to train in the winter watching Cycling reruns but that was not as much fun as zwift where I have friend riding with me.
But, if you believe w/kg means A racers are better than D (it doesn’t - otherwise a lady would win the TdF every year) then unless you enter A races you’ve already lost to everyone in those races.
So what difference does it make if you lose a B race or not? You’re not first place if you win a B race or a C race.
It’s like if Chris Froome turns up to your local 10m TT, he wins it. But if he doesn’t turn up and you “win” you still lost to Chris Froome.
Thus ranking is mostly meaningless and pointless.
Running doesn’t have it. The guy wearing the big ben costume is in the same race as the Kenyans who decided to take a rest day, cut short their usual 60 mile run and win the London Marathon.
The only real difference with cycle racing is drafting and grouping. But, unless you get dropped then you’ll be riding in a group with similarly paced riders - that’s your category right there - what you can actually do on the day. Not some theorycrafting.
The rest is just trying to carve up the results so you can lose but still kid yourself you won. Like, if you factor in age, height, eye colour, whether you used to smoke, people whose names begin with M eventually I’ll be the winner of that category. But I’m not really, it’s just something so I can pretend I didn’t lose - and a faster racer in the race is, just that, a guy that’s faster. If he picks ‘D’ to race instead of ‘A’ he’s losing to everyone in A, B and C the same as everyone else in D. Putting him in A doesn’t change your placing, you’re still behind him.
It does yes. They aren’t based on w/kg though are they?
Plus they seem reasonably interested in making sure you can actually ride the bicycle which isn’t really a concern for zwift.
Zwift would work just as well if you just created races with 1 category. The winner would be the first over the line (modulo actual cheating) and everyone else would lose - boo hoo.
You could arbitrarily chop up the results anyway you liked by drawing other finishing lines and adding other criteria as I said to make yourself or someone else who lost into a winner if you liked but the guy you want to disqualify for being ahead of you would still be ahead of you and if his way of carving up the results meant the first 15 people over the line didn’t count so he was the winner, well he wouldn’t really be the winner either - you both seem to share the same goal though - turning losing positions into winning ones.
Yes that is why we have cat 5 - but the others are so that the sport stay competitive and interesting.
No IRL don’t use w/kg but that is what we currently have. Once Zwift start to auto-assign Categories and it work we will start to ask them to start a ranking system like IRL.
What is the point of this. Were is the sprint for that group or the race tactics.
Maybe Zwift could start by making “Category Automatically Assigned” an option for the race organizer – similar to “Full Draft”, “No Powerups”, “Allows Late Join”, etc.
Is it too simple to use the idea for the lower cats that if you win race you get points and every month riders get moved up or down depending on their performance points?
Points given for the first 10/20 places?
Being moved up or down could add an extra dimension to the racing maybe?
Some of the lengths riders go to, just to be another looser who get a trophy is sad.
If as a C rider, a Zwifter can ride with the “B’s” and thereby win the C event, then ride
with the “B’s” be a “B” rider and be proud of it.
There is only one winner and that is the A+ rider, ex pro, at the front. Fair play to them.
Racing can be fantastic fun wherever you are in the race, countless mini races all rolled in to the main event. Lets improve it somehow, keep it honest and keep it fun.
w/kg is a good starting point. That is why we suggest we start with it. Yes a points system will be a lot better but we need to start somewhere.
Yes that is true but it does not mean people in the race cant also feel the Adrenalin of racing even if it is for 47th (or 1st in D cat)
Even Cycling in real live have different categories or groups that people compete in.
But it will be more fun if the mini races are against riders of your own cat, not people of higher cats that cruse with lower cats and then sprint for the line.
