In that scenario I wouldn’t bother with PPs, just free ride instead.
1 Like
This would probably upset a lot of folks because it would drastically slow down the pack, people used to going 44km/h on the flats with the PP would be not so happy with 0 draft in a large group I imagine 
1 Like
I agree, because you lose all the dynamics that vary within larger groups from drafting. I suppose this would be a half-way point between where we were: no dynamics, constant wattage but with draft dynamics, and now: current dynamic wattage based on terrain but we’d lose the draft dynamics.
2 Likes
if it’s the wind in your hair feeling, folks could just turn up their fans 
1 Like
I wonder what % of their Zwift time people under level 50, or 60 now I suppose, would dedicate to Pace Partners IF they didn’t get double XP (edit: meant Drops not XP)?
You don’t get double XP from a PP, just increase in drops. I mean you do go faster, so you get more XP from doing more miles, but it’s not really double XP.
2 Likes
What is the point of riding in a group if there’s no group dynamics.
2 Likes
Quite true, there would be a riot!
I remember when pace partners lost the ability to draft - it was incredible how slowly the Coco group went. Instead of the usual 40km/h average it used to do. People went a lot slower for their 100km ride. People then swapped to the Bowie group.
No double XP for pace partner rides, just double drops if you stay with the bot for long enough.
Level 57 here, and 892,000XP before the reset.
Exactly… that’s the whole crux of this entire thread. Though, there seems to be a viewpoint that having dynamic paces driven by whether you are going up or down a hill is bad, while any dynamics introduced by riding in a pack that has a variety of draft effects is just fine. Hard to make sense of what exactly here is being argued.
So you argue to remove draft from the PP that has nothing to do with the dynamic pacing. 
This is not my thread, but I’ll make an attempt to describe it to see if it resonates with the OP.
There are a certain set of folks who found pace partners a good way to ride at a relatively steady wattage in a social setting on-demand. Personally I used Coco for longer more boring Zone 2 rides, but that’s just an example of the use case.
Before dynamic pacing was introduced there was already some degree of dynamic pacing just given the weight deltas between the PPs and people. For instance, if Coco was 64kgs, and you were 90kgs, Coco would put out a consistent w/kg, which would translate to more wattage needed for the 90kg person on the uphill, less on the downhill etc.
That wasn’t quite so noticeable on flat routes, but on a route like Sand and Sequoias there was already some level of dynamics. But, for some people even on Sand and Sequoias you could keep your ride within a certain Zone. You would push a bit harder on the hills if you were heavier than Coco, and would push less on the downhills.
Now, with dynamic pacing, it doesn’t take too much of a hill to create more significant wattage swings. You noticed the example from Gerrie where with Coco going uphill he might need 275W, while on the flat it would be closer to 190W. That’s a pretty big swing. If Coco is on a very flat route (Such as Tempus Fugit) you can basically hang out with her at a steady pace with no problems.
So, now it is really dependent on the route whether or not you will have swings in power that will take you out of a training Zone. At present you don’t need really long hills to do that. If you used to use Coco for a steady state workout, that now is less easy to do, and more dependent on the route. Flat routes are still pretty good for steady state efforts.
So, some people preferred PPs the other way.
On the other hand, a lot of people (I think it’s the majority) prefer the PPs to feel more like a group ride (which is what Dynamic Pacing helps with - feels more natural to push on a hill, hold back on the downhill), also, there were apparently issues where people were dropping the PPs on hills and decents, or getting dropped etc. Dynamic pacing helps with those issues. So, this is what the Pace Partners are tuned to.
Personally I plan on using PPs when they are on very flat routes and using endurance workouts when they are on hilly routes because I just don’t get the ride I want out of a PP on a hilly route anymore.
1 Like
Sorry, typo (brain glitch), meant drops 
1 Like
No, I’m not arguing that draft should be removed. I’m suggesting that draft in itself does yield a degree of dynamic pacing. As SeattleSauve also mentions, weight differentials also have always introduced a degree of differing dynamics amongst the individual riders.
If there’s a contingent of folks that want no ‘dynamism’ at all so they can ‘train’, then removing draft would remove some amount of dynamics. I’m actually perfectly fine with the way the bots are right now so don’t advocate removing draft – it would be like I said, a measure to eliminate one type of dynamics from a PP ride.
I don’t understand why dynamics induced by draft effects was, with this contingent, perfectly ok previously, but dynamics based on gradient is not ok. A perfectly non-dynamic group ride would have no draft effect and swirl, and also no gradient-based power adjustments being required. And this type of ride would be perfectly boring, but would meet the requirement of those who want a steady-state and non-fluctuating training ride. Not to rehash the argument, but that’s why there’s a whole custom workout functionality that Zwift provides.
So, from my perspective, what was there before was ok. It was not “perfectly stable” at all. But it didn’t fluctuate as much as the new dynamic pacing does on hills. For instance, for me I am fine with sitting between 175W and 220W in terms of 30s average power. That’s a pretty sizeable range. It does not require “perfect” non-dynamic pacing at all. But what sucks with the new dynamic pacing is if the flat steady state is 190W with Coco, the 30s average on hills is in the 230s-240s for me which is well above what I’d want…
Again, it’s not about needing a “perfect” steady state, but more not wanting huge swings in power.
1 Like
Exactly! @Gerrie this is the issue —> too much variability within a ride
1 Like
Yes the dynamic pacing is more variable than the original PP rides and dynamic PP is what Zwift decided they wanted.
The dynamic PP works as Zwift intended them to work so there is nothing functional wrong with them. There’s probably more people that like this new dynamic PP thm people that don’t. If the numbers that use the PP went down Zwift would probably change it back.
What you are saying is you don’t like the new PP. That’s fine lots of people don’t like it but there’s more that prefer the new dynamic PP.
So for us that like steady Zone 2 rides there’s the option to make a steady Zone 2 workout. You can look at my rides most are steady workouts.
I thought the dynamics on bots were to add only 10% more power. So if your flat power is 190, then roughly 210w should be needed uphill? This doesn’t seem to be your experience however, correct?
That’s not what I’m experiencing. I’m seeing 30s average power spike within the 230-250W range on the hills when I’m trying to stick close to cadence. Pretty sure if I held 210W (or even 220W) on the hills I’d be dropped - though I can do that as an experiment - for science. I’m not sure if that’s due to a weight difference between cadence and I (I’m a bit heavier, but not a lot since she gained weight to 75kg), or if it’s due to pack dynamics where it seems sometimes people tend to all go ahead of cadence on the hills possibly pushing the pack a bit faster and making it easier to be popped off the back at the top of the hill if you sit behind cadence.
Next time she’s on a bigger hill I’ll join her and see if I can hold onto the pack holding between 210-220W uphill. I do think I’ll get dropped though, but will be a good experiment.
It’s 10% to the PP power…
You riding will be less than the advertised pace due to draft unless on a tt bike.
For the B PP…
It’s advertised at 3.3wkg @ 248w
As a rider, to sit in its draft, I need to hold, 210(ish)
To go up hill, PP increases 270(ish)
As a rider I need to go up towards 290w.
That’s a 80w increase or roughly 25/30% increase in power…
There should have been tapering applied to dynamic pacing as the bot got stronger…
(I cant be bothered to do the exact maths & grab the power avg from Training peaks etc but the point stands)
3 Likes
A quality steady state training ride with friends. If you want group dynamics there are group rides and races for that. 
2 Likes