IF literally tells you hard someone worked… Though I think we are on the same page…
(Some) People race indoor to improve outdoor riding, some people solely race indoor… zwift for me is a training tool, I want to be on the edge of that PB every race… zwift tactical racing doesn’t mean much, nor does winning zwift races… 1/5/20 etc power numbers matter more than a digital trophy…
Taking the intensity out of the race isn’t a good thing for everyone…
It will be interesting to see how it plays out… The option to race up needs to remain.
IF still relies on the expectation that the rider gave absolutely everything in an FTP test (or whatever is being used to calculate it) though. The main purpose of all this is to try and make it more difficult for the people that knowingly - or otherwise - undersell their maximal efforts to game the system and spoil it for others who are in fact trying their best. Comparing IF may therefore tell us nothing at all, if someone keeps their ‘maximum effort’ artificially low.
As you say, people race for different reasons. You like the workout and don’t mind about the results. Personally I like the fact a race pushes me harder than I could alone, but I also enjoy the competition aspect. Some people will only care about the results and try to win at all costs. Some will deliberately take it easy in a race because it’s a just a bit of fun (and full of cheats anyway, right?), unwittingly affecting it for others. There’s no right or wrong answer on what racing is for. It should just be harder for people to spoil the experience for others, and this is a step in the right direction.
Thanks for the continued discussion, questions, and feedback, everyone!
I promise you this thread is still getting watched by us, and we’re just looking for the biggest main points you all surface, be they good, bad, or middling.
Your feedback helps the system get tweaked and the race experience get better. Keep it coming, and we’ll keep watching as well.
Ultimately isn’t this system still using fitness as a metric for categorisation, not performance? That will always allow people to ‘cheat’ by purposely underperforming. As a new user there are no safeguards to stop them taking their ‘qualification’ race easy allowing them to be assigned a lower cat and then just sprinting and winning every time.
Yeah, I mentioned a bit further up that this won’t (can’t) truly resolve the issue. Only a results-based system can do that, then the people who play the system to make sure they win get moved up by definition.
I don’t have access to the algorithm but if a 4w/kg rider cruises around at say 3w/kg and then sprints for the win at the end, how would the system know to re-cat them?
But this is just the start of something bigger. I would think the top 2% (or some magic number) of the event will get some time bonus that might push them to the next cat.
I was once again frustrated with my C4 placement and its overall race today. I am a C level racer on ZP and I was left for dead once more, as the “Autocat” system placed me in an event that I had no business racing in today. C4 was predominantly B level racers. During the event, I gave serious thought to just taking a casual pace to “game the system,” so that maybe, next week, I might drop down to C5, but my pride wouldn’t allow for it and thus I rode by myself, time trialing Harrogate. It’s a shame that I even had those thoughts while trying to do my best in a race. A result-based categorization must be a major determining factor in the process. Out of 105 racers today, I never got above 85th place! Ultimately, I finished in 90th - I didn’t even see my results on ZP! Last week, during the Autocat C4 test event, I was at the very bottom of the results as well. Today’s event was not fun at all nor worth racing for when it comes down to it. I really had faith that the Autocat would realistically position me based on my past events. I am a solid C level racer and all I ask is that Zwift make sure that I have a fair chance to compete against likewise athletes in my same C level category. If by chance I am placed in C4 next week, I will assume the Autocat is total rubbish.
We’ve got to give it a chance, it’s just starting out. For what it’s worth, I just finished my C4 race and it was pretty much as you described for me (I’m also usually okay in traditional C). Though I stuck with the front group for a while before getting annihilated.
I haven’t finished yet according to ZP, I assume it needs to catch up. I’m not sure why the results board only showed the top 20 finishers on the game at the end though. Pretty demoralising if that’s deliberate?
I bailed after two laps in C3. Held the front pack for the first, but had blown my legs up by then. Nothing to do with the system, but a lot to do with my fitness.
In terms of pace, it felt a lot like the top division Cat B races in ZRL season 2. To be honest I can’t really comment on the impact of removing sandbaggers, as most of my racing has been in the ZRL, which achieves this anyway. If I was fit, I think this would have been roughly the correct category for me.
Really it just feels the same as what WTRL had with the ZRL anyway, only now there are 6 categories and those cats are slightly closer together in terms of ability. As has been discussed to death, for solo racing a rankings system applied to any ‘jump-in’ races is the key development. I’m not sure 180 racers on Crit City is going to be a lot of fun.
By the sounds of it, you might be in that ‘unlucky’ group where the current cats suit you as you are at the pointy end… the new cats will bring in half the cat above you and things will get a bit tougher…
I was in C4 at 18:48 UK time and, with the joint lowest FTP figures before the race, I didn’t expect to do that well, and I ended up about 95th out of 120ish, which wasn’t too bad. What felt different was having the knowledge that something was being done to make it fair, even if I was being fairly beaten! I’ll hold out judgement until I’ve done a couple of these races.
Biggest disappointment for me was that Zwift crashed after I’d finished, and I lost the ride, which is something I haven’t had before. No ride on Zwift Companion, no data in Zwiftpower, and I’m not even on the results in Zwiftpower yet. Fingers crossed at least the ZP result will appear.
I think one guy has slipped through the autocat cracks. In C4 Eastern Australia the winner averaged 4.2w/kg 294W for 42 minutes and managed to finish 25 seconds ahead of the rest while riding most of the second lap off the front solo.
Another brutal start to the race with the first 5 minutes at 4w/kg. I lost a bit of time on the KOM but somehow managed to get back with the leaders before the sprint. Stayed with the front but the second time up the KOM was too much for me.
Looking at the results the w/kg for the riders in the top 49 are mostly around the 3.1 to 3.4 range but there is a 6 minute time difference between 2nd and 49th (not sure why ZP only shows the top 49, I could’ve sworn there was 70 odd in the event, was Zwift counting the mens and womens fields for its numbers?). It just shows that if you can’t stick with the leaders during those critical points your whole race can be over before you know it. It will be interesting to see how the flat races play out.
