: I have been asking over a year and a half that you all adjust your mileage stats to show two places example 51.56 instead of 51.6. This will allow users to see a little more accurate mileage statistic. Will this ever be done? This is an example per the stats provide by Zwift , on 5/19 I road 12.2 miles and another ride at 28.10 then on 5/20 19.7 and 5.56 total miles in those 4 rides was 65.56 yet you all rounded the mileage to 66 miles. In reality, my ride was over stated by .5 miles. if this happens each time i say ride for ride and ride an average of 20 rides per week my mileage will overstated by 2.5 miles for each 4 rides. This is significant. you have the data in Zwift why not display it?
Are you sure about that? Isnât Zwift only rounding the total mileage? So if you rode 24.56 miles each day for 4 days,I think youâd see 24.6 miles after one day, 49.1 miles after 2 days (not 49.2), 73.7 miles after 3 days (not 73.8), and 98.2 miles after 4 days (not 98.4).
I have found that the mileage more resembles the way I explained it. What confuses me, why is it stuck a big deal to show two decimal places in the mileage. This totally is beyond my comprehension.
It is beyond comprehension why they might want to show a rounded number in the user interface? I mean they could show to 300 decimal places, so at some point they need to concat it.
3 Likes
Record in kilometres. Then the rounding will be less âwrongâ.
You have a choice to display it in Miles or Kilometers, I selected Miles. All I want for them to do is to have the data that has to be in their system, to display it. I donât think that is such a huge ask. Programmatically it is a simple step to have it display. And yes, LOL the rounding would be less wrong but still wrong. I do appreciate your feedback about this especially because it shows me people are at least listening. If only i could get a programmer to tell them what I already know. it is a display issue, round to two decimals and all is good.
Why would it be âgoodâ at two decimals? Why not go to three? Or 7? Or 200? A choice has to be made somewhere, at that choice appears to be 1 decimal place. And I still donât think itâs as âwrongâ as you seem to think.
actually Nigel, 3 places would be the best. Look, I am an accountant by trade, I donât just look at the numbers and assume they are correct, When adding up what Zwift riding app show and you go to Zwift and look at the totals they do not always agree. I just think they have a great app but are sloppy on the milage and elevation side. All my ask is to round it out farther than 1 place. Truely not a big ask. Thanks for your response. Zwifters are great,
donât ever compare your zwift rides to IRL outdoor ones then⌠you are getting a very generous assumption of speed on Zwift so the distance is already overstated when compared to reality.
1 Like
I, too, am an accountant by trade, and my opinion is that 1 decimal gives enough accuracy, without trying to be too accurate. 