Category Enforcement - How is my category calculated? [February 2022]

But given how in that FAQ, VO2 is lower than MAP eg. B is 50+ and 200W+ for VO2 and 55VO2+ (4.2W/Kg+) and 200W+ for MAP, then presumeably VO2 is a longer duration than MAP.

‘they’ certainly didn’t. I made the most of the available information to say how best to work out your own values to explain the CE results.

The OP is no longer valid. The rules have now changed.

The use of VO2 at all is absolute nonsense. VO2 max is not a power/duration value. They have only used it to try and link a pretty round number to the MAP result.


Confusing because it was changed. Back in May, I was a B in cat enforcement as I did a 6 minute race and got 4.1 W/kg, which put me over 50 VO2. Now the threshold for B in CE is 55 which is ~4.35.

That I can get my head round. I have no idea how MAP works at all.:joy:

1 Like

I’ll go back and edit that then. Was sure I’d seen Zwift publish a plug for though. Perhaps that was after your initial post?

Just me I think (I’m a bit of an fanboy)


I might be wrong but I suspect @xflintx asked staff to update this FAQ chart and they updated as he asked but put new VO2 figures in the wrong column. I think VO2 figures were originally only shown under the VO2 max column not the MAP column.

1 Like

they should replace the CE faq page with that picture, scribbles included


CE numbers got changed to match ZP tolerances for some reason to give some leeway, now, I have heard people saying it was because there were certain zwifters who would be bumped out of B and into A, probably inaccurate but still, but I think the change was done to lower the number people asking why they were upgraded, the slight leeway doesn’t get them upgraded and thus less support for Zwift to deal with

should have just gone with pen enforcement as that was what was requested initially to stop people screwing races up by entering lower pens but Zwift went in a whole new direction and have now figured that after 10 months of it being in use and being tweaked/changed etc its still not fit for purpose and are looking at a ranking system, 10 months of resource management that could have and should have been used in a different manner, very similar to to hardware venture that ended up being so successful


I don’t think this was wasted effort. We still need a good system to deal with people that has no racing data.

Few quick fixes that would go a long way to sorting this :poop: out:

  • Use Compound Score and get rid of the raw watt floor
  • Show your MAP and CP values on a web page after logging in
  • Show your calculated category based on those values

it does but if pen enforcement had been put into place as requested by the majority on here, which would have taken less than a week to implement as the code already exists to shut users out of certain pens, the rest of this time and those resources could have been used to come up with a better system, that’s all

I believe CE is still better than ZP categories since it uses all your efforts (not just races), it doesn’t rely on a 20min power (which you’ll never max out in a typical race), and it does lock you out of categories you shouldn’t be in after only one effort.

That said, the tweaks they made to stop people from complaining about upgrades, and to reduce confusion with ZP have watered it down a bit.

I’m really surprised we still don’t have the ability to see your CE category, and the MAP/CP values, and there’s nothing at all about it on your ZP profile so of course there’s still going to be confusion with ZP categories. They released it, then mostly gave up on it, and we don’t have a better replacement at this time.


I don’t think they need to tell all details (such as MAP and CP) as long as they’re able to tell us which cat we belong to. If they show all details, people immediately start gaming it, holding back to stay within some limit, and so on.

However, it might get confusing to list this category in your Zwiftpower profile whenever/if CE is used in different ways depending on the race type. E.g. if it’s sometimes based on age and gender instead of power, or if it’s a dead flat race and the categories are only based on W and height and not weight, and so on. Then it might be better not to list category at all.

Agree that category shouldn’t be listed once pens can be determined in different ways (they can’t right now, so it’s unimportant), but the output should. The whole idea is that it should not be easy to game because it takes all activities in to account.

Just popped in here to say….


Metric that takes into account all activities - Great
Enforcing a minimum pen based on a category/grouping - Great

Only doing both of the above on a new categorisation - Complete failure.

Upgrading existing categorisation with the first two als have been clear and tangible wins. With much lower effort than what was pursued now. Not making it available for other categorization but forcing upon everyone a new one with some weird effects but above all lack of visibility and transparency is just a failure.

Zwift should build tools that community can use. They went around this the wrong way. Especially number two, pen enforcement, onto a wide range of possibilities (and give some organisers access to a testbox with sample data they can use to test new categorizations which then can be applied at Zwift to enforce pens) of grouping would do wonders.

Instead… We are here. 2023 is near and nothing really moved forward for years, besides half-assed attempts that die slow deaths.


Spot on.

What, no ROTFL emoji ?

Apologies if this has already been addressed somewhere in the above 1548 posts…

I’ve been off Zwift for the summer and have lost my category classification. What sort of ride profile is the quickest way to get a category assigned?

Would the FTP Ramp Test cover all bases?
Does the ride need to be a minimum duration?
Would a single “E” category race do the job? (What if that race is only 5 km long?)

The best would be Climbers Gambit hitting the 3 climbs max effort :crazy_face: