Yep, that’s right.
On the Alpe climbs, I had it set to (eg) 100w to provide a warm up and then an extra 100% for anything of 2% or more.
1 Like
Being a glutton for punishment I tried the same Pace Partner Chase Race today, but revising my tactics, as you suggested, to remain in the draft rather than sticking my nose out in front.
Well, a very different outcome! I finished with the Pace Partner, so it can be done. However…
The event description clearly encourages riders to pull the PP, not the other way round. Yesterday I tried to obey the spirit of the ride and I failed. Today I took the lazy option and succeeded, but sitting in and “coasting” isn’t the objective of the event as described.
Also, yesterday there were some big Watts up front and the pace was 96 seconds quicker than today. Today the Watts were all down compared to yesterday and the PP did nearly all the work. In other words nobody actually did any real pulling, so nobody actually followed the objectives outlined in the event description.
So, a much better and more inclusive experience today than yesterday, and my Garmin FTP bumped up by +5W. 
By the way, love what you’re doing with the PPs. Dynamic pacing is much more fun and natural - far better prep for riding outdoors than the fake steady Watts. If people want steady they can create a custom workout.
P.S. Yesterday the PP was styled in the smokey black “ghost” outfit. Today we had a bright green jelly baby. Do they give increased draft? Surprised to see green for the C PP.
3 Likes
There’s an issue currently with the creation of Pace Partners and their colouring. Should be fixed for all new PPs from middle of next week onwards.
Thanks re feedback on the copy, probably doesn’t need to be worded like that as it should really be a group effort rather than one particular person doing the pulling.
Glad it went better today!
Re - Tim’s experience. I raced in the same event and I have to agree with Tim’s initial post. I drafted at nearly max effort for the first 20 minutes (180 W) and then was dropped at the start of the hill. I’m a solid D rider (2.4 W/kg, profile 636022) and have never had an UPG disqualification while racing D. With category enforcement I’m now mandated as C rider and am simply no longer close to being competitive. (Yes, I realize that someone will have to finish at the rear.)
At least for this race I knew up front that I would very challenged against a 3.2 W/kg pace partner but I wanted to try this new race type. I’d like to try this type of race again but not much point if I’m most likely going to be dropped from the pace partner and end up riding alone without a draft.
I like the concept of category enforcement but perhaps some recalibration is needed. At least categories based on W/kg were simple to understand. If nothing else, I hope there will soon be an easy method to actually determine one’s own enforced category.
Thanks Don - This is a fair balanced comment. Iagree that we need to do more in terms of allowing people to see what category they are in and why. I promise it’s something that we’re working on.
3 Likes
As an Apple TV user I still don’t have access to the non-Watopia PPs unless they’re on the scheduled world rotation. I know the Home Screen roll-out is not your project, but boy I wish Zwift would get its act together. …and please don’t say it’s coming soon, it’s over six months and counting.
Yep I know. I believe we had hoped to have it complete by the end of August. I’ll see if I can get an updated timeline.
2 Likes
agree with what you have said re: the improvements to PP.
my FTP was around 2.8 so I entered the Chase Race with intention of solely hanging on and drafting but it was an excellent workout and i also gained +2w FTP.
i thought the event worked brilliantly. If they have dynamic pacing, that will be interesting and I’m certainly not pushing for that yet as appreciate this format needs testing in meantime.
2 Likes
I honestly dislike the dynamic pace partners, the very reason they were so popular originally is that they weren’t like a group ride. You could choose a pace partner that was riding the zone you wanted to target as it was guaranteed to be that zone (group rides can be hit and miss as the leader goes off script). It makes zero sense to INCREASE the pace partner power on climbs as the draft is DECREASING, there was already a natural lift in effort required compared to on the flat if you truly want to ride at the minimum power required.
Now they have become interval training rides, and there is no substitute for the even paced rides that we loved when the bots hit the hills.
1 Like
@James_Zwift re: ‘I chose the top end of the category for the pacing as I felt that a) most of the category would be able to draft (sorry this wasn’t the case for you) and b) to try to ensure that the Chase Partner wasn’t dropped.”
Could be worth testing having the pace partners sit in the middle of the range, to allow a mix of riders both faster and slower than the average pace? Especially if there’s a possibility that the riders at the top of the range get bumped up to the next category and then end up being at the bottom of the range again.
Personally, I can say that racing with a partner at mid-range would be super motivating as it would mean having to push, but with the partner at the top of the range there’s no way I’d be able to hold on based on the current numbers.
1 Like
It would be nice if there was a Pace Partner free world where Zwifters who don’t like the feature can escape from the inane banter and ride with real people.
There are may routes that does not have PP on them. I rode this morning for almost two hours in Watopia and only saw two PP’s and both times they were going in the opposite direction. London was also available today and there are no PP’s.
1 Like
@Meg_Brown I understand your point. But the idea of a race is to go as fast as possible, if there was no PP then the front of the pack would also be going at the upper end of the category range.
1 Like
@Gerrie_Delport_ODZ Completely fair point. I also think given this is a Futureworks feature there’s room to experiment and test and see if it changes the experience or attendance in positive ways. And if it doesn’t, no harm done, and we’ve learned something through testing it
2 Likes
I don’t understand this bit… Eg. 2.5w/kg is 2.5 w/kg if pretty much everyone in the blob is getting draft and this is the PP target. Draft benefit decreases uphill, but that’ll equate to speed changes, but 2.5 w/kg remains the same?
1 Like
“We” I suspect that you’re speaking for yourself. Personally, I find dynamic pacing more realistic. When I ride outside it is normal to increase power output on climbs and decrease on descents.
4 Likes
Increasing power already happened when the pace partner stayed the same power on climbs - because draft effect decreases.
John Wannie - look at 90% or riders power graph when Bowie rode “sand and sequoias” - it would be more like 3wkg on the flat, and then 3.3wkg on the climbs. The only issue was Bowie would make you pay attention on the rolling descents, but it was a great lesson in working the zwift pack momentum.
Now there is a huge jump up in hills, and while this may look great to some, it’s removed the awesome steady endurance riding that is the real quality work. If I want to do intervals, I’d do a proper structured workout, if I wanted race efforts, I’d do a race. Now if I want a solid steady endurance ride, I hope that the pace partner that suits my zone isn’t on a hilly route.
A bot used to be great, now she is pointless with the jump in power required on the hills to flat being extremely polarised (not the same as polarised training*).
I had this happen earlier too but closing the app solved it for me.
6/8 of the routes are going to be flat. Pick and choose which one suits you best.
Whilst I don’t agree with what you’re saying, but kinda get the point you’re making, we’re still going to be keeping dynamic pacing.
4 Likes