I had a mooch around on the Facebook Zwift Riders page. I’ve not been on there for a while and it seems that the same old moans and groans are there, specifically no ride leader, and higher Cat riders riding at double the wkg and breaking the hearts of the riders that want to ride at the advertised pace. While I understand there’s an argument to let them fly, why not just turn on the fence by default or as some have pointed out, using the rubber band to group everyone by default if no nominated leader turns up? It would solve a lot of issues, and those who don’t like it can ride through the Fence into oblivion or just jump off onto something that suits capabilities.
I think the way the fence works, it’s based on the leader’s position. So if there’s no leader it would have to be based on someone else. If it were to not be based on someone else, then you’re really asking for a Bot to lead, or the equivalent of a bot-calculated fence.
1 Like
Rides without a leader is no fun, but you are suggesting the wrong solution.
Zwift should monitor rides without leaders and remove them form the calendar to make space for leaders that want to make new and fun rides.
6 Likes
When I join a group ride and the leader doesn’t show up, I quit and do something else, unless it’s a fondo ride like BMTR Fundo that is designed intentionally with no leader but has enough participants to have a good experience at any pace.
2 Likes
The motivation for this feature request and the posting, makes me wonder if any/some of the group rides are sponsored events that can’t simply be just removed. The ride in question has 3 large cycling-related company names (Garmin/Tacx/BMC) as part of the name. I see Giant Bikes seems to get their name on some of their rides, and random other companies here and there thru the events calendar – that otherwise you don’t know how they were granted a slot on the public calendar? Garda bike hotel, MAAP, etc, for example.
I assume Zwift could/should monetize access to the events calendar for some entitities?
1 Like
You’re right. After looking at the practicality mentioned by you and a few others I’ve changed the wording. 
I’ve wondered this as well. The Trek, Specialized, and Thompson Bicycle Tours group rides are all calendar-stuffing rubbish in my experience. Does a bad group ride experience make for good advertising though? I heartily recommend that everyone avoid those rides.
We also do our very best to ensure all rides have a leader and are extremely active in many directions as well, almost treating it like [the best ever] part time job (not that we get anything out of it for ourselves for the record), but, Giant does allow us to do giveaways on some specific rides as well, so they’re more than just a house name for the sake of it. “We” [read: not me specifically], works with some heads at Giant and grants us to do these things that we enjoy; and haven’t skipped a beat on in terms of ensuring there’s a ride leader for all of our rides; it’s not a complex machine, but we do our best to stick to what we’ve spec’d for the ride, which includes always having a leader… and the only time I can think of when we fudged a leader was Halloween (last year?) and I forgot to set myself as a yellow beacon; but at least was there for the ride as a red beacon 
It does go further though with events such as Ride Like King, which have been a bit of a mainstay now with Giant and Zwift for some time now.
As far as the ties between Giant / Giant USA and Zwift however; I have zero insight, as I’m a nobody in the grand scheme of things.
I did see the post OP is referring to, and James’ response as well.
That said I understand the sentiment; as an example, there is Giant Camden which have been leader-less for, at least ever since I started Zwift… which I believe are tied to a shop in the UK as far as I’ve been able to work out; not to mention being a mostly dead ride with solo or no riders each week… how or why that ride still exists, I’m not sure.
Frankly I’m not entirely sure which is worse, a calendar full of empty events that are supposed to be lead events, and joining it, and finding out they are a, “pointless”, free for all with zero guidance; or finding that out, doing a warmup with a RP, joining, and then basically realizing it after the fact… when that time could’ve been spent staying with the RP or otherwise.
Alternatively, Zwift can be like “look at how many events there are each day!”
Which I hope that isn’t what they’re after, because it’s a cheap look… I almost imagine it being like a spin class or live online spin program and the leader doesn’t show up, that’s gotta be a bummer.
Regardless; why ZHQ isn’t taking care of this autonomously already is a little weird and annoying to say the least.
If a ride is supposed to be a lead group ride, it should be marked as such in their system, and if there hasn’t been a leader for (insert whatever number you like here, 30-60 days I guess), that ride should go on probation and be de-listed until whoever hosted that ride sends an email to Zwift Events to bring it back online.
Zwift themselves locks us out of multiple worlds so they aren’t “ghost towns”
And yet… they allow these events to run like ghost towns without question.
I don’t get it.
The Trek ride I know was always well run and had good ride leaders. It was led by people from a Trek bicycle shop in Victoria, Australia if I’m not mistaken.
My experience was a leaderless smash fest with a small group quickly exploded in an event with an unmet advertised pace. I guess that’s all it takes to lose the interest of someone who regularly does leader paced group rides.
I agree, if your ride has no leader two times in a row then it should be removed from the calendar.
And if the club/ride running it has custom kit, then the custom kit is withdrawn also. Or is that too tough?
Usually the Trek ride I’m thinking of goes through the desert, through Titans Grove then at the end of that the ride leader calls a stop and for everyone to regroup and continues on. It’s a Saturday morning only ride if I remember correct.
We could be thinking of different events.