A post was split to a new topic: Race Ranking
Fair enough. I enjoy E races, but wasnât sure if that was what you were suggesting.
4 Likes
If it is of any consolation you are not the only one in this situation. Hopefully we will not be the only ones in this situation on Mondays event although we might be near the back of the group.
I get your frustrations, we are both now at the bottom end of the classification, looking up at a big wall to climb in terms of performance improvement.
I am not getting away from the fact that for me it feels very daunting and frustrating.
The positive that I am taking is I can clearly see where my performance is lacking and can focus on my 3-8min to help me improve.
I guess I will only find out in time if I do improve but at least I will be riding with the right classification of riders, not those hiding their real ability.
1 Like
No there isnât so long as some races are pancake flat and others end with a long stretch of 7% or more. Any lighters rider who can handle the former will dominate heavy riders on the latter. Conversely, any heavier riders who are close to coping with the latter will dominate lighter riders on the former. Itâs just physics. I mean, you could try to adjust the pen boundaries to cope with course type but really thatâs a whole rabbit hole of stupidity when results-based pens are the correct solution anyway.
2 Likes
Absolutely
Mathematically there is a big difference between
(4w/kg And 250W) OR (x w/kg MAP) - Doesnât help light riders(with a MAP over x w/kg)
and
(4w/kg OR x w/kg MAP ) AND 250W - certainly helps light riders
Adding extra category criteria means getting AND and ORs in the right place.
5 Likes
Amazing.
I think this point is worth emphasising. The new categories should be weaker, perhaps noticeably so, as âsandbaggy/cruiserâ people are getting pushed up for their short-term efforts. (Iâm not accusing the people concerned of necessarily doing it deliberately, itâs a consequence of racing and physics combined with the old 20 min cat system.)
In fact: Exciting news!
I have just looked at the entries for the first race which are available on zp now, and a whole lot of âstrong Bâ have indeed been placed in the A pen, and some Cs in the B pen (and no As). So B will definitely be a much softer ride.
4 Likes
Yeah, so in your wifeâs case, what would you do? Add a wattage floor or leave it as it is? Itâs all about balance I guess.
1 Like
In terms of âpen enforcement testâ it needs a wattage floor or else itâs just screwing lightweights the way the original attempt was screwing heavyweights. As for a permanent solution, that has to be results-basedâŚwhich it means light riders will tend to do better on hilly courses, and worse on flat onesâŚ
2 Likes
Youâre right. I was looking at it as if a wattage floor was missing for the MAP element, but actually this sorts it. I feel super stupid now.
@xflintx I think the above is the solution to the lightweight problem?
Sometimes itâs good to actually read posts properly and consider the point, rather than continually posting the same angle over and over. Thanks @Ian_Attoe
2 Likes
consider my suggestion for a watt floor. it will not affect most female riders negatively since 300-310w for 5 for a lightweight is reasonably strong for either gender but not so high that it will allow lightweights to just gain 40s on a 5min climb either
1 Like
See above. I donât think a wattage floor is needed for MAP, it just needs the ANDs and ORs switched around.
1 Like
Right, I like to call a spade a spade.
A pen is where you gather or hold things - like sheep or racers
A category is how you categorise things - like saying âthat sheep is big enough to send to market,â or âthat one needs feeding upâ.
You categorise things (or Zwifters) before you put them in pens.
Correct me if Iâm wrong but youâre not saying âno categoriesâ, youâre saying âno fixed categories - lots of different ways to categorise or separate peopleâ.
So if one race organiser wants to categorise their flock of Zwifters by size, they could do that. If another wants to categorise by how fast they can sprint, they could do that.
???
1 Like
Thanks for your reply, really appreciate that you spend time looking into this. 5W difference is actually 2% at 250 , and as we are âracingâ to win that is then important in my view. I would be called all sorts of thing if I suddenly dropped my weight 2%, and top racers are requested to make wight-in videos. You are right that iâm âcloseâ to A and by ZP standards that is 6W off from the 250 FTP limit, but as Iâm sure you are aware; being 60,5kg and doing 250W in a TTT or any A race you will be dropped when the big men puts the hammer down.
I donât really believe in any of these fixed limits and would prefer that is was a ranking system also taking into account your Zwift skills (how to draft, how to read the map, how to fuel etc). But as the system currently think that fixed limits is the way to go, there needs to be transparency, and openness so we can check that the numbers are right. If the âMorton 3-parameter CPâ model from Intervals (that even is including my all-out test efforts) is below the Zwift CP then Iâm very suspicious of the Zwift CP calculations, and would like that the numbers and formulars are disclosed.
I see the thread have progressed after my answer and Iâm looking forward to Zwift looking into the ââŚvery light riders are being pushed up higher than expectedâŚâ , but I donât know if Iâm included in the âvery lightâ category. Can you tell where the limit is for that, is it below/above 62,5kg? for those light riders that maybe also is affected by this, my ZP-profile can be found here remove the â_â:
h_ttps://zwiftpower.com/profile.php?z=3119146
2 Likes
I just dont get how some of these are in C, when others are in B, seems odd use of metrics really
112.0kg Vet 184cm 3.3 wkg 358 w 9.1 wkg 1,002 w
vs
77.1kg 50+ 183cm 3.2 wkg 266 w 8.2 wkg 692 w
for someone in B
72.9kg 50+ 174cm 3.2 wkg 243 w 6.2 wkg 471 w (mine in B)
Include the punch rating, as a rough guide my feeling is the ones promoted are all 90%+
(Nothing technical in this statement, a shot in the dark on my part)
1 Like
Some thoughts Iâm sure can be computationally looked at, though itâs difficult without prior âCPâ benchmark data;
- Is a ârawâ wattage floor on the 3-8 minute level as big of a problem as it can be on the 20min/CP level?
- What happens if you were to change the w/kg boundaries to something slightly more conservative.
- As per the above comment, change the AND and the OR and determine what happens to some dummy cases. This may very well be a good solution.
Does this allow some (lightweight) border cases that were not yet competitive in their category to stay put, or does it then also prevent upgrading the riders that were competitive? This is quite difficult to assess from the outside without knowing which riders are upgraded because of what metrics, and how this matches with their performance. A bit of computational exercising on ZP dummy profiles should provide enough insights both on the lighter-weight and the cruiser side. But again, Iâd rather start somewhat more conservative and tighten the ropes than demoralizing riders before they have felt they were competitive in one category.
1 Like
Everyone asking to see how zwift is doing their calculations so they can figure out how to manipulate their profile to still stay in a preferred category 
Or I only had a 1 off exceptional performance that was because [insert excuse here] that has skewed my category
7 Likes
ist there any Garmin App on the Connect IQ Store to have a Live View? asking for a friend.
1 Like