Can someone explain Lead-in Distance? I tried searching for it and see a bunch of folks discussing it in forums in terms of unexpected time they used up but no clear explanation of what it actually is?
Thanks,
R
It’s the distance from the start pen to the finish line on the course that you are racing. For example, it is about 4 miles from the start pen to the start/finish line on the Classique course in London.
Lead ins are really confusing the first few times you have to deal with them. Every event course has a determined start/finish line. The problem is that events start in the pen. The lead in is the distance from the pen to the start of the course start/finish line.
IMO events should start at… you know… the start line.
4 Likes
Is the ”Lead In” part of the actual race/results?
Yes. Almost every race starts from the gun so the lead in is included.
I’m sorry, but these explanations about what Lead-in Distance is make no sense to me. What’s the point of it?! Why not simply call the pen the starting line, eliminate having a confusing lead-in distance, and call it a day?! What am I missing here?
1 Like
The listed loops in the race description many times don’t start at the pens even though the race does start right away. So the lead in distance gives you a heads up as to how the race is going to go. This was huge in one stage of the Tour of NY were the lead in went up 2 climbs and was very hard - then the laps started. Surprised most everyone.
Completely lost in translation!
I put your aswers in Google Translate and the result in french makes no sense at all.
So I still have no clue of what the Lead-In distance is!??!
“…distance from the start pen to the start/finish line”… What are you talking about? What’s the “pen” (I usually use a pen to write on paper…).
I think I might need someone to draw me a picture… 
Pens as in holding pen, where you wait for the race or event to start while riding on a virtual trainer.
From the spawn point to the start of a route is know as a lead in. It can be a very short distance or up to a few kms. In the game, when you choose a route from the menu a map with a white line follows the route on the right side of the screen. If there is a blue line at the beginning that is the lead in. The lead in is not included in the route distance, it is extra, but once you start the route it will end at the correct distance. Almost all route start and end at a sprint, downtown, or KOM banner.
4 Likes
It’s in the “Select Route” dialogue which does not list the total distance of a route and elevation totals, that I find most offensive. If I’m badge hunting, I can easily stop short of earning a badge. Considering that Zwift knows the totals they MUST display them. Stop making it my responsibility to go here and there just to know the distance I need to ride to complete a route. Or a simply “Distance left” countdown counter.
Words much worse than asinine cross my lips, on the occasions that I stop short of completing a route, through no real fault of my own. Zwift has a long, long way to go to achieve a professional level of usability. Their lack of attention to the many major interface holes make them ripe for someone to eventually steal their cliental especially as the “game” looks are substantially behind the general video game industry. I think of Zwift as the cycling equivalent of “MySpace” before their demise.
RD, you have freedom of choice as a consumer, if you do not like Zwift, stop your membership, quit Zwift. This will be your way to express dissatisfaction. Good luck with finding anything better that is on the “professional level”, though.
Lead-ins for all routes are easily available on third party websites, it takes about 30 seconds to find this information in Google. You would find this information faster than it took you to write your post. I copied two links to two different lists below.
Route ends at a very clearly marked finish line, and a banner pops up when a badge is earned. It is impossible to miss them. The majority of lead-ins are a couple of km or less. There is always a lead-in, one can consider it a warm-up time if one wants to track the time which it takes to complete a route. Hunting for badges is not the main purpose in Zwift, the main purpose is to train and to get better, and the best metric of it is how well one does on a certain route. There are only several routes which have lead-in in the ballpark of 10-12 km with a significant altitude gain, so one is rarely wrong with the assumption that the actual riding distance will be 2-5 km longer than the length of the route itself.
If someone is into bade hunting, the first link contains a printable PDF document with a list. Badges are useless, but bonus XPs for completing a route for the first time help to move up the levels faster, and the list is a good means to explore all roads available in Zwift.
Having said all that, Eric Min, Zwift CEO, emphasized in his recent interviews that developing a simpler interface is on top of his priorities list. He clearly recognizes that some users do not like to explore and find hidden treasures. For many of us (Zwift users), the fun of the “Easter eggs hunting” (finding not so well known features and unlocks in Zwift) is as much a part of the fun and of the game as riding itself.
1 Like
Unless your being paid by Zwift, then Zwift is not a tribe, you are not a native, you are a subscriber of the most expensive product in this consumer space. Every paying consumer has the right to push for the best value for their money. In my country Zwift is the same monthly price as Netflix which allows four concurrent, different streams (think rides) at an identical price. I think Netflix calls it a family plan?
Note that the UI hole that prompted this exchange can be corrected with a TEXT EDITOR, no harm would be inflicted on any Zwift code.
Cracks in the Zwift customer’s blind acceptance exists from those with a bigger voice than myself. See Shane Millers comment from April 22nd, 2021.
Your dead wrong on what Zwift is (“the main purpose is to train and to get better”). Zwift is an interactive cycling simulator offering a monthly subscription to a collection of features to anyone with the supported equipment. The paying subscribers can and should use those features as they see fit. Like RGT offers BOTS versus Zwift’s group rides, training is only one aspect of their offering. Criticizing me for liking to “Badge Hunt” is like raising your pinky while drinking tea. I’ll remind you that Zwift promotes achievements as a product feature. Stop being a snob, I pay as much as you do for the Zwift experience. Further more wake up to the fact that the cycling world is being flooded with potential Zwift customers, not all of which want to be as limited in their use of their subscriptions as you have proposed.
Instead of telling me “like it or move on”, start to critically thinking about the product you enjoy and push the company to have user driven priorities. They clearly have money enough to do right by their customers (events, celebrities, regular YouTube productions…). Even Apple (“You’re not holding it right”), focuses on the best UI design that they can come up with, this has dragged the rest of their industry forward (e.g. Android).
While I applaud Zwift’s last big UI change (ride without needing to exit and an OSD on/off toggle), you just have to read the Zwift UI user thread to see that those two changes were repeatedly requested, years ago. As for the next anticipated UI change it’ll need to be good as a read through the Zwift UI thread reveals a company that has not prioritized their paying customers desires.
As for moving on I already subscribe to RGT, tried OneLap, and am a beta tester of both Veloton and CADEsport. All Zwift users owe themselves the experience of trying RGT’s simulation engine. Specifically a sophisticated draft effect and auto braking when cornering at an unrealistically speed. What a joke the Zwift “look Mom no hands” cornering is today. Wow, look at my max speed 
I’m likely come at this reply from a different perspective as I’ve recently retired as a software design and developer. At one point in my career, I had actual, real life, usability experts working for me, so know what the impact of a tuned to task UI can have on the user experience.
As a clear eyed critical consumer, of a product a product that has merit, I have an inexpensive, cost saving suggestion. Zwift needs to provider an open source API which allows customers to integrate an alternate XML based OSD of dynamic ride data. Then provide a web based repository for those XML OSD’s. A custom OSD community so to speak.
I’ll guarantee that brilliant, useful OSD displays will be created and allow Zwift to carry-on with what ever development priorities they choose. Yes, I’ve worked many, many hours on FOSS (free and open source software) projects. There is already some thinking along this line but it is hampered by the need to reverse engine Zwift’s proprietary server, client data exchange and limited ways to integrate with the apps OSD. Look up the ZwiftGPS and ZwiftMap hacks. Just think of how many user requests can be addressed almost free of charge.
You’ll be happy to note that I’ll not be responding to any further reply as we are definitely of two minds about consumer products and the limits of customer loyalty.
1 Like
I am not paid by Zwift and not affiliated with it. Zwift is not the most expensive product in this area - TrainerRoad is more expensive, and that is really 100% focused on training. I am not even mentioning subscription price which Peloton owners pay. I subscribe to Zwift, Rouvy, and The Sufferfest, and keep on coming back to Zwift, barely using other platforms. Zwift is a private company which decides on their own how to develop their software. If they were bad, they would not be growing at a rate at whicht they grow. I agree with you that they are very slow to change and slow to incorporate users feedback into their software.
I also tried OneLap, RGT - and found both a total disaster. They are not even comparable to Zwift, it is a different league. FulGaz was very nice but was very buggy at the time of my trial, I hear they now have a fully rewritten version which must be better. None of other apps has the gaming component of Zwift. I am not saying it cannot be improved, it has a long learning curve, but after several months one learns how to navigate it and finds that it is a fun environment, on many levels and in many respects.
Lead-ins are a nod to stage racing in some ways where the stage starts bejhingd the commisaires car to let the cyclists get rolling and organise themselves before the flag drops. On Zwift the longest of these are found on routes with loops where events might consist of several loops of the same track. The lead-in gets participants sorted out before starting on the first loop. That way the loop is what is repeated not the lead-in whicgh tends to be flater(not always). To have this start from the pens on events where there might be rows of cyclist this works better on a lead-in than on the first lap itself. It would be nice to have a control that allowed missing the lead-in but there is not. On a free ride enjoy the lead in to get warmed up, get your cadence and form settled and manage your heart rate.
Greetings, time-traveller Geoff 
2 Likes