Category Enforcement Test Events - 21-28 Feb 2022

[Donald_Munro (Donald)]

Just did my test race 6:00PM EMEA on Figure 8:

1. I still got dropped from the leading group but much later than I normally would and ended up in a group that matched my abilities not to far back
2. Finished much closer than I normally do (less than 2 minutes behind the winner) .
3. Found the start to be as hard if not a bit harder, but the hard pace did not last as long - just about 2 minutes or so compared to often having to hang on at (my) VO2 pace for 5-8 minutes.

Unfortunately I won’t be able to do anymore as I’m doing the FRR flash tour on Fr-Sun and would prefer to keep my legs in a non-toasted state.

Now I’d better go do the survey so as not to incur the wrath of Bailey.

[rue]

I stopped reading somewhere around message 650, I assume it was mostly talk about how the system that incorrectly categorizes people categorizes people incorrectly between there and here?

[rue]

There’s one other thing about cycling as a sport that I think is being highlighted a bit, and it’s reflected in the numerous comments about ‘the same people’ staying at the bottom or top of categories.

While different courses, different lengths, different fields, and even variability in how pens are bracketed will influence that substantially, it’s still fundamentally true that you can roughly say most individual riders will consistently place in the same top, middle, or bottom third.

But cycling… cycling is a team sport.

[Basti_R2 (Basti)]

short in my case: 100% perfect cat, chosen by algorithm. Race was fun and very hard.

[TheBandit]

Cheers David.

This whole discussion was supposed to be about SANDBAGGING and to a degree, CRUISING. How that would be improved by using CATEGORY ENFORCEMENT.

Thank you very much for posting. The scale of the problem in D is incredible. It’s far less of a problem as one moves up the grades. I almost feel like the only people we should be listening to at this point are the D and C grade riders.

The insanely biased moaning for race winning high cat riders is very disappointing. This is not the problem we’ve all been trying to stop.

It’s blatant cheating. This new system is vastly improved. I think it is a huge move in the right direction.

Please please ignore the vocal minority that are upset that they’ve been upgraded. The horror!

Yes, it’s horrible to be pack fodder. No, a four pen split is not the best solution. It will need further pens, variation and a global ranking system.

THAT"S NOT THE ISSUE.

Were there any sandbaggers in your race?

No.

Feedback. Thank you Zwift, we’ve finally begun to fix a huge problem.

How was your race?

I didn’t win.

Here’s a lollipop…

I’m going to quit Zwift and never race again.

After one race… are you 12?

Please, focus on the steps friends.

1. Stop sandbagging
That’s the step we’re commenting on here, we haven’t even begun to work on step 2 yet, but folks are having a melt down. Disappointing, very disappointing.

I vote, yes. Huge improvement already. Keep it coming Zwift.

[gloscherrybomb (James)]

@rue

I assume it was mostly talk about how the system that incorrectly categorizes people categorizes people incorrectly between there and here?

No. It was mostly talk about how the system correctly categorised people and they need to accept that, interspersed with some very positive feedback from people who are no longer having their races ruined by sandbaggers and cruisers.

[Michael_Sparshatt (Michael)]

Well said. It’s a really positive first step in what will hopefully be many more positive steps. Things are moving at a much faster pace than many of us were expecting which is also really pleasing, after such a long period of stagnation.

[Mark_Crane_TOG_G_65y (Mark)]

I rode the Figger8 C cat 6am PST event this morning and had an absolute blast! Good hard start outta the blocks and managed to stick with the lead blob. I’m not in the best of shape right now so putting down 3.5w/kg for a coupla minutes was no mean feat. I burned up about half the book of matches maintaining contact the first time up the KOM and hung on through the second circle of the 8 until the second time up KOM and even having a feather PU didn’t help me enough to stick with them up that little hill. BTW, turn off XP Power Ups in races please. I’m an XP PU magnet…

I got all kinds of excuses: The Four Horsemen on Sunday was still in my legs. I put on 12 pounds since last November. I’m not in good shape cuz I’m recovering from the crash…blah, blah, blah… it’s all BS. This was how racing in C should be. If I was up to speed, I “probably” woulda hung on to the end but I didn’t. Still, it was as hard as it shoulda been and I was right there. If D was approaching this experience, I am so stoked.

This kinda sh*t NEVER happened in any race without some form of Category Enforcement. I’ve had it once in the Absa Cape Epic races last year with an informal CE and this was better. Way Better.

Bring. It. On.

[Andreas_Traff]

@gloscherrybomb

The truth is, I just can’t work out what your point is, because it’s surrounded by so many… words. I’m probably just not smart enough to digest it, but I’m not spending 3 hours doing an A-level English literature dissection of The Handmaid’s Tale just to conclude that you think there should be 5 categories instead of 4.

Yes, you are smart enough, don’t try to hide it. My point is:

What’s up with you guys? You’re just so relieved by not having the sandbaggers around that you don’t see the problems with the test model that we’re gonna have to live with later? I feel the need to act now, on the double.

I get the impression most of the people active here are in tech one way or the other, so I don’t have to tell you the below but I will anyway:

I think it is highly unlikely that we will have momentum like this again anytime soon, to get another shot at improving fairness/soundness in racing, at having any kind of impact on further development in this specific area. And this has nothing to do with any Zoon jokes or past experiences of Zwift responding zwiftly to our pleas. It’s just how tech heavy companies tend to operate and for good reason.

(Not so sure we have much of an impact right now either, but if I don’t say what I think, then I’m actively and publicly approving of their solution since I have been an active participant in-game. I don’t. We needed cat enforcement but it’s not enough, it was always just the first step to me, and I also don’t think the new categorization is sound.)

The thing is this test is a big project. I don’t know how they are organized but this is probably a cross-team epic. We have not been rewarded with a Zwift Racing Dept permanently staffed with a bunch of devs with a trimming of middle management. They are not “here for us” from now on (neither have they said so). A part of the resources poured into this project is probably going to be diverted to some other area soon because they have to, regardless of what the people involved in the project might think or would like to work on next. Upper management may see the need to reallocate resources into something else than the cat system, the very last thing that got quality time centerstage in the limelight.

Where to next? Well, there is probably lots to do in all areas. There always is, and so you have to prioritize. One thing they have mentioned that does actually still involve racing is adding more variety. I interpret this as inventing new game-like forms of racing that has little to do with RL racing. I’m not against. It’s a good way to engage subscribers who aren’t attracted to RL style racing but are still looking for fun and excitement. Who knows, I might enjoy them myself.

But… once they have the impression that the test is good enough for a push, I’m sure they will push. And after that the window will close, if it wasn’t closed to begin with. And the open channel will go silent again.

So if you guys see the test model as the be-all end-all solution to Zwift racing, if you can see yourself racing just like this test for the next few years, then sure, it’s happy-clappy time for you. But if it’s just a start to you, then you have to say something. You have to let them know. So think hard and think ahead when you do the next test race later this week.

[Gerrie_Delport_ODZ (Gerrie)]

@Andreas_Traff

then you have to say something

So what are you suggesting.

[Dave_ZPCMR (Dave)]

@Andreas_Traff

if you guys see the test model as the be-all end-all solution to Zwift racing, if you can see yourself racing just like this test for the next few years

You should probably stop writing and start reading.

[Andrew_Nuse (Andrew)]

Did you look at my actual stats?
Do you see anywhere that says yes I should be a B?

My FTP is sub 200, putting w/kg at 3.17
Reminder the Categories state Cat C is up to 3.19w/kg
According to how this should work, I’m not a B; but it’s the only choice I get.

The point is for me to race. Getting dropped at the start line isn’t racing.

So I’m asking the devs the question; because the system seems to not actually take hundredths into account, will I be forced into Cat B, and be dropped at the start of every race I sign up for?
Or will the system ever comprehend that I am incapable of racing in B.

Would I be competitive in C?
Based on the numbers I should be, sure!

Would I ever even hit podium in C?
That will never be determined, because I’m not allowed to find out.

This isn’t about just me.
This is about literally everyone LIKE me, in all categories. Be it D-C, C-B, B-A.
Getting shoved into no mans land because lack of calculated digits, and forced to compete with people averaging far above my limits.

This is purely an issue with limited calculations, and too few cats to allow for competition, plain and simple. Almost exactly like what people have been saying about Pace Partners.

I’m hoping I’ll recover enough and have the ability to do a race with more hills, and pray double draft is disabled, but I guarantee I’ll still be dropped very easily within the first mile or two; and for me this experiment will end there; because that isn’t competition.

And assuming this stuff stays the same, and it goes out to event hosters, and they enable it; it just means I will be forced to ignore those as well, to know I’m unable to compete in the category it’s putting me in.

If I have anything positive to say about the “sandbagger” filled races, at least I had a choice, and had competition; again, even if I never was going to win (which I’ve never come close).

Instead this system, based on these cats, puts me on a one way street.

And the only options I have are:

1. Don’t register anymore until I’m reasonably stronger; aka… don’t register for probably another year+
2. Register, be dropped same as always, and make every single “race” a TT event…
   That’s not racing; and that’s not what I’m signing up for; so return to #1.

You have to realize not everyone is blessed by being available with a popular time zone…
When I go to choose events, I look over number of people registered first and foremost, if it’s too few, I won’t do it. And I very much imagine this is a similar case for most people. To make that point seem reasonable; as it stands there are less than 30 people registered TOTAL for tonight’s race that I can register for.
Meanwhile it seems the people that had a great time seem to always been in the events with 100+ people.

Because… they GOT to have a fair race.
Because there was probably at least one other person in that 100+ that was of similar pace.

Meanwhile, those of us not working from home or Europe time, get … 30 people for all 4 cats.

If I actually have anything to whine about; it’s this.
And it’s not something everyone has to deal with, because they get to do the 100+ person events.

The results and sampling are skewed by people like you, who think every race / event has tons of people, and “there has to be someone your pace”
But believe it or not, not everyone gets to ride at the same time. Unthinkable I know.

So where again does all this ranting leave me?

• I either wait for an event with a reasonable 100+ number of people (if that ever happens for my timezone), deal with being in Cat B and hope the field is mixed enough (which… see top of post… I’m… not still not actually Cat B, there are my numbers to prove it, they’re free for viewing on ZP)
• Or, I continue to ignore this whole system and go back to non-racing.
• Or go back to the anti sandbagging Cat C, race my heart out, and at least see people during the race, and land up somewhere mid/aft pack, but at least be happy I got to have competition.

Sorry for long reply again; this is what I have to deal with when the forum says I’m not allowed to post all day because I’m ‘too new.’

Meanwhile, I’m stuck with smaller groups due to my time zone, so yes… everyone has their biases when it comes to “how much fun they had”
Because if you’re experiencing 100+ other people in a race, I can assure you, not all of us get that luxury!

My race last night had a whole 31 people in it, me being that last one of course.
Tonight’s class A and D have a whole 6 people in them.
For anyone that’s edge case like me, I assure you… they won’t register if there’s only 6 people racing and they know they aren’t mid/high pack at minimum.

[Andreas_Traff]

@Gerrie_Delport_ODZ

So what are you suggesting.

That they keep cat enforcement but pull the new cat model.

Not that it’s worse than what we have. It isn’t. Of course it isn’t. But I don’t dare to call it an “improvement” because that will get misinterpreted as “solution”. It’s not the solution. It’s splashing paint on a rotting building. It will last a little longer in the meantime, while you figure out how to rebuild the house. I don’t think I’m alone in seeing it that way. But I also don’t think there is any “meantime”. This is it. “Yay, we showed the subscribers that performance-based categories actually work after all! High-five!” No, you didn’t. And people easily confuse it with the necessity of enforced categories since they tested both at the same time (they really shouldn’t have).

To pull the model (not that I think they would, to lose face like that) would be a symbolic mutual recognition that this area needs further work and soon. If they push the model we can forget about that. Then we are probably looking at zoon with regards to any further development.

Now, what do you suggest they do.

[Gordon_Rhino-Racing (Gordon)]

@Andreas_Traff

That they keep cat enforcement but pull the new cat model.

Why would they pull the model when it’s proofing successful? We might as well keep moving forward taking a backwards steps now when we have made some ground going forward would be a poor choice.

[Mike_Rowe1 (Mike)]

@Andreas_Traff

Now, what do you suggest they do.

Allow Flint to continue this project, i think you are jumping to major conclusions.

@xflintx

What we’re going for here in the long run are three things:

1. A system that is easy to make changes to relative to how we’re choosing categories (ranges/limits in terms of VO2, etc.) for future events under future definitions of categories, whatever those may be;
2. A system which we can easily apply different category rules per event to if we want in the future;
3. A system that we can easily provide transparency with about the different rules we apply, though we decided not to do that in this first iteration to collect feedback (which I see was an error).

[Gordon_Rhino-Racing (Gordon)]

@Andrew_Nuse

My race last night had a whole 31 people in it, me being that last one of course.
Tonight’s class A and D have a whole 6 people in them.
For anyone that’s edge case like me, I assure you… they won’t register if there’s only 6 people racing and they know they aren’t mid/high pack at minimum.

Nobody is expecting cat enforcement races to run after testing is complete it will be added to the busy community events to improve them. I know I’ll be adding it to my race series as soon as possible.

Also the behaviour you are describing is exactly what a lot of riders do now is avoid races because of all the sandbaggers this new system is still a step forward although I know might not suit some edges cases that were used to winning to now find they are towards the back of a race

[Andrew_Nuse (Andrew)]

Do you not find that solution confusing to the mass majority of simple users that don’t realize the Cats change the meaning and or purpose of an event?

See: everyone during Tour Du Zwift that registered for D/C events because they refer to themselves as D/C riders.

Because they didn’t realize that the seriously confusing system could actually also mean different distances for the cats.

Please don’t use the predefined ABCDE cats to mean more than they already do; because they’re already too confusing for so many of us.

@Gordon_Rhino-Racing

Also the behaviour you are describing is exactly what a lot of riders do now is avoid races because of all the sandbaggers this new system is still a step forward although I know might not suit some edges cases that were used to winning to now find they are towards the back of a race

Exactly!
I WANT this to succeed…
but if it keeps people like me from registering in the first place because we’re edge cases, and NO AMOUNT of losses and drops is evidence that we don’t belong in that cat…
Then yes, IMO, the system has failed.

[Mike_Rowe1 (Mike)]

@Andrew_Nuse

because they’re already too confusing for so many of us.

they really arent confusing at all as long as you read the event descriptions. If you choose not to pay attention to the rules then you cant complain when you dont follow them and are penalized. Have some personal accountability please.

[Andrew_Nuse (Andrew)]

shhhh!
I’m trying to make it easier for the people that can’t read!

Seriously though; a different system should be used to define different things.

Like a distance / time based event shouldn’t use the standard ABCD
Make it use 1234 or… ZXYW or whatever.
would it really be that hard to help make things more clear for average end users?

Having the same colors and letters define many a lot of things is just seriously poor UX design (granted I guess that’s a familiar sentiment for Zwift users it seems)

[Mike_Rowe1 (Mike)]

Reading comprehension skills are a serious problem around here