Many races require riders to wear a heart rate monitor, and those who violate this rule will be excluded from the Zwift Power results, but is this rule still necessary?
When dual records were not common, I think the only way to determine if a rider was cheating was by having an abnormally low heart rate relative to power. However, how many such irregularities have been detected in recent years? I don’t see any statistical analysis of heart rate and power data, except in big races, do you?
For serious riders, I think wearing a heart rate monitor is normal and not a hassle, but for me, a heart rate monitor is something I wear only to be on the results in a race.
It seems like a very big loss if it is a barrier to races for beginners and riders like me. Maybe this rule could be removed for smaller races?
So why should it be a hassle for you, I don’t race, and I always wear a heart rate monitor, whether I’m on Zwift or out on a real ride, I mean it takes a couple of seconds to slip on your arm, wrist or chest, and what better way to track your fitness
My husband only discovered his atrial fibrillation because he’s always using a HRM on Zwift. Might have saved his life as he had no symptoms at all.
But I understand that people don’t want to be forced to wear a HRM. On AppleTV it can be a real issue as you are limited to two pairing devices, so for example you cannot use a HRM if you want to combine a controllable trainer with a pedal power meter.
Making HR compulsory makes it pretty clear that the winner of a “C” race with a HR of 125bpm probably isn’t a legit C. It does “try” to make racing fairer.
Yeah but everything is dependent on actual enforcement. Like the dude that does regular 6w/kg 20 min efforts with average race HRMs of something like 110bpm… that Zwift somehow won’t sanction.
I think the thought was that for more casual riders, a HRM is another purchase, another barrier to entry, to yield readings on something they don’t (yet) have an interest in tracking. Of course if you have one, it’s not a big deal slipping it on.
I was kinda annoyed because I had an Apple Watch for HR, and that just doesn’t work well with Zwift so to race I had to buy yet another. I got a Tickr, and while people say chest straps are much more accurate than the watches I find the ticker often just doesn’t work reliably, and when it does work it pretty much matches the Apple Watch, so I end up using the tickr so I can race in Zwift, but the Apple Watch seems to drop out less and tends to be more reliable for me.
Anyhow it was a slight annoyance to have to buy another thing to race when I had something that worked well enough for me before.
Think I’m on the latest but I’ll check in as soon as I get back home - currently on holiday in Costa Rica with no bike, or Zwift so putting on some weight
I realize it is too late now for you, but this may help others reading this thread.
It is possible to use an Apple Watch as a heart rate monitor in Zwift. I do it all the time. Google “How to pair Apple Watch with Zwift — Step by Step Guide.” I use the second option described in the article. (I wasn’t allowed to insert a link directly in my response.)
As I understand it, the point of the HRM requirement is that if there is any doubt about a given performance, by quickly eyeballing the HR and power curves, you can see if there is the kind of a correlation between the two that you would normally expect (increasing power makes the HR rise with a delay and vice versa). The absolute numbers themselves aren’t that important.
Of course, Zwiftpower is full of performances with unrealistic(ally low) HR readings, presumably mainly due to unreliable optical sensors, so the effectiveness of the requirement is rather questionable.
… 3 grand on a bike, 800 for the trainer, 1000 for the computer (screen plus device running zwift) , + fan, +the actual zwift subscription… … those 20 bucks for the HRM are really going to be a deterred?
Zwift could handle this better. For instance, HRM need not be a requirement to race, but if you don’t use one, you have an asterisk by your results. Its not about the cost, its about all the bs hardware you have deal with. I have a Galaxy watch for HR and it works great on Strava, but Strava doesn’t work on a stationary bike and Zwift can’t pick up the Galaxy watch. I just want to ride with my friends and Zwift’s rule makes it harder.
The vast majority of races do not require a HRM for entry (ie, they do not use the Hardware Enforcement feature to prevent you from joining or kick you out if the HRM dies). You can race, you’ll be in the in-game results, and later be excluded from the results on ZwiftPower. That is the asterisk.
Some Samsung watches can also be made to broadcast HR via Bluetooth by using the HR2VP app. Have you already investigated that?
I did look into that, it got horrible reviews. Honestly, the HRM requirement is such a turn off and the rest of my Zwift experience had been sub par that I’m returning it (from delivery to hardware). Apparently, my zwift play unit has been sitting in a usps locker for 3 days. I was never notified, I don’t know where the lockers are. The larger, heavier kicker came right to my door.
I’m still using the yellow Garmin HR monitor that broadcasts via ANT+ or Bluetooth. It gets daily use for more than 350 days of the year according to the stats of my riding last year and never gives a problem aside from needing to replace the battery occasionally.
Of all the things used with Zwift it is one of the easiest.
