Your problem is that you want a system for real race ranking to be designed around the tiny race series
1 Like
The points award issue is also playing into this, there are a number of issues that all need fixing:
Seed score being reduced by 15% allows racers to race down a category compared to where they should be.
Riders who win popular races see a minuscule increase in points for winning - so good sprinters continue to win after win and see minor increase in ZRS.
Riders can tank their score with ease, and therefore keep their score low.
All in, zwift hq have created a fantastic new system to support those who want to sandbag and they are fully aware they have done this, but don’t appear to be fixing it any time soon.
There was a chance this could have worked, turns out Devs and PMs who don’t understand their product tend to not get things right for the end user.
It’s still probably better than CE (just) (maybe, probably)
3 Likes
It applies to other races with different Racing Score ranges, but in Tiny Races.
In pen C (350-510?), there will be some racers who have a 100% seed score of up to 600 that have dropped their Racing Score to the 85% seed score floor, which according to ZWIFT ZRS v3 by VirtuSlo is…
55Kg at 289W for 5mins
65Kg at 327W
75Kg at 365W
85Kg at 402W
95Kg at 439W
That’s going to make a huge difference on essentially flat routes like yesterday’s Tiny Race quartet, where even in pen E, no incline took more than ~1min30sec.
Also worth mentioning turnouts for yesterday’s Tiny Races were very low compared to recent weeks (eg. ~30 pen E instead of 80-90), so bigger score changes after races due to really silly logic of system.
Tiny Race quartets are very rarely balanced to give sprinters, puncheurs, climbers and all rounders a decent chance of the overall victory. You would need a quartet of something like…
Ven Top 3-6Km
Tempus Fugit
Rooftop Rendezvous full lap
Jungle Curcuit descent
Nope. Just want a ranking system that establishes categories based upon the parameters that win races. I’m not suggesting short game should be weighted more than long game or even half of it but it needs to be taken into consideration. 30 second power is too short for that. Needs to be 1-2 minutes and probably 30% of seed. 5 minute is too short for long game, should be 10-15 minutes.
Seems like most of you all here are sprinters or at least have some semblance of a short game. Take a look at the race results in Zwiftpower. Most of the winners have pretty solid punch. If you don’t have enough 1-2 minute power, you can’t stick with the pack on the short climbs or sprints. There needs to be balance and we don’t have it here.
And this is all BS with us arguing amongst ourselves with anyone who matters at ZHQ completely ignoring our ranting and raving. As @Lee_H points out, you can tank your score if you want, (although speaking for myself I’ve never been able to do that cuz when I get into a race as hard as I can every single time) and nobody’s the wiser. My buddy Harry, the Tiny Race Champion of yesterday, apparently does this regularly so his score stays low even though he has the potential to do better on a regular basis. Just brings it out once in awhile to validate himself…
Don’t think a 13w/kg sprint with a racing score in the top end of the 400-500 ZRS range is particularly out of line. Such a rider would likely not contest sprints that often, due to being dropped, but would be at the sharp end if they did hang on until the end.
I recently noticed that more than top 50% received an up arrow but myself and 2 others were right on the line and we had up arrows but a 0 ZRS change.
Yes up arrow and 0 ZRS change means your race result score was >0.00 and <=0.50, I think.
I was just pointing out why it appears more than 50% will get an up arrow.
I sort of guessed that - but might you not expect, roughly, an equal number of 0 race score changes with a down arrow?
My score change was only -1 for what it’s worth
It has always been more than 50%. When I kept track a while ago it was just a little over 60% getting a ZRS raise.
Finally upgraded above 510! What a system. Only took 5 straight wins to go from 469 seed. (There were 50 finishers in the advanced race)
2 Likes
did the zwift games race earlier in 390-510 pen and came 72/102 according to the website, dropped a whole 1 point…
for context, what is your score?
was 505 now 504
I would’ve expected a much lower score based on the fact you only lost one point for coming in the bottom 30% of finishers… great system!
I would have also but hey ho, zwift obviously think otherwise
Go all the way back to the beginning of this thread. The supposition is that Up/Down and scoring adjustments is based on the number of signups. 125 signups in your cat, putting the halfway point at about 63rd place where down arrows and score movements would start.
Not that this makes any sense… but it describes what happens.