Yes, I think this is essential. Clearly stated, what zFTP is and what it isn’t.
Else we’ll have another Trainer Difficulty on our hands. 
1 Like
Thanks for the replies - appreciated 
I do agree that if FTP and zFTP are within 1 or 2% there are both correct when it’s out by more than 10% using the exact same set of data it’s a bit more off - maybe intervals doesn’t use my 30-40 minute efforts and Zwift is and that accounts for it? Don’t need an answer.
SO ranking system any idea on timeline 
Can CE just be enforced across all events as its now as finished as it will be and every rider has the data in their profile page of why and which Cat?
this 
I explain this weekly to team mates and they still don’t get it.
1 Like
in theory it could. But some organisers don’t want it.
Documentation? No one is going to read that.
This is the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and singing “la la la la, I can’t hear you”.
2 Likes
We already have documentation on Trainer Difficulty, but users are still confused because they just go off the (highly misleading) name, and they don’t read the documentation.
1 Like
Maybe we will record it, using one of those sexy podcast voices. That way you don’t have to cover your ears.
5 Likes
If we do, it came years after it was actually needed. The notion it was a “gearing adjuster” was too deeply embedded before any documentation to the contrary came along.
Indeed. They’re going to pull down one of the Zwift (Z) FTP tests from the training options, do the test and get a number. And then ask why it’s different than what their profile zFTP number says.
1 Like
How about instead of enforced, just on by default with option to turn off?
I appreciate that some organisers might not want it. But there is also a tranche of racers who definitely don’t want it. 
I guess what most racers would love is ZRL to use it - pigs might fly
1 Like
This is all correct, and everyone here accepts this, we’re just telling you that Zwifters will be (already are) confused, and a simple name change could make things a lot easier to digest. Documentation doesn’t solve it. You can chose to ignore the point, but we’re really trying to make your life easier. It sounds like this is the start of a pretty unique Zwift rider profiling system, which sounds very promising, so why not make the most of an opportunity to define (and name) a new metric.
5 Likes
I’m thinking part of the complexity problem is that there are way too many ‘profile’ pages in Zwift. Isn’t there a way to consolidate?
Eg. upper right of this forum page… I see my profile photo, I can go to preferences, but no access to a profile, yet I’m on a zwift[dot]com page. Certainly looks like I should be able to go to a profile underneath my profile thumbnail photo.
Likewise, I go to the .com homepage for US. Here in the upper right there’s the Account section and then a profile section under the /settings sub-url. This is a different profile section than referred to in the OP of this thread. Here, age, weight and height are entered/captured.
Then there’s the profile page linked at beginning of this thread, which is available from the /feed section. This profile page contains some different info about me than the what’s in the account profile page, including the new power ratings.
Then there’s the game app profile. Where some of what’s been entered in the /settings profile has been migrated (height, weight, birthdate). However this is where you enter (or has been populated by a test?) an FTP value, as well as a Max HR value.
The Companion App profile seems to emulate the /settings profile, so therefore doesn’t show any of the new power data.
There’s also the ZP profile page, which of course is a whole other animal.
6 Likes
So let’s try this the other way.
320W @ 5W/kg (64kg rider)
400W @ 4W/kg (100kg rider)
Compound score says they are the same, but everyone knows the lighter rider will be faster on the flat and far faster up any hill. Therefore compound score is rubbish. Using W/kg on the other hand orders the riders correctly.
(If you don’t believe me about the flat, try it and post your results. Weight has a significant effect on drag in zwift, and if the 100kg guy is taller than the 64kg one, as seems likely, the speed differential will be even greater.)
1 Like
Thinking about how I would want ranking and pen enforcement to work ideally. This may reflect my ignorance as someone who doesn’t organize races.
- Ranking and pen enforcement become completely decoupled.
- When a rider signs up for an event, Zwift consults the ranking system configured for that event, which returns a list of allowed pens.
- The ranking system configured for an event is exposed to the user. A link is provided if the user wants to understand more about their ranking or why they were directed to a certain pen.
- Zwift CE is one ranking system of many. Zwift may operate more than one (eg, CE and ZwiftPower). 3rd parties would provide others.
- Zwift puts a sunset date on the ZwiftPower ranking/category system and organizers that care deeply about preserving it can implement something similar and run it themselves.
- Results given in game and in the companion app are described as provisional with a link to the source of truth for that event.
[quote=“David P., post:284, topic:596058, full:true, username:DavidP”]To be honest, and to be scientifically correct, I wanted to introduce zFTP as a zone and not as a single number, because the experts out there should know that FTP is more of a zone and not a single number where everything changes.
[/quote]
Love this idea. Basically make it a Z4 almost, and your actual FTP will fall somewhere in the range.
I would (me and 3 others but …)! Rather than try to read all the posts … not being snarky I promise! Having official documentation of of how things are defined and used would be very helpful.
Instead I’m back reading things in the forum to only now understand some of the excellent things @Gerrie_Delport_ODZ was telling me that I was debating against but the killer was when I realized it doesn’t matter what I know about MAP, CP, FTP or anything really in this area if I don’t know which Zwift is using, how they may have adapted some standard things their own way, and how are they weighting the different factors.
So here I am. But reading these forum posts I see ‘nah we really want to focus on our own ranking system’ which sounds great. Because I don’t want to have these confusing discussions if it’s all moot (hopefully sooner rather than later, but ultimately) than try to guess from anecdotes and tea leaf reading what’s going on and having people annoyed st me, Zwift, etc.
You don’t want documentation? In my work there are policies right? No one or few read them but I crest some of them and read many others and it’s not an ‘educational intervention’ but having an agreed upon point of reference is a crucial step towards people understanding things or as you said I think at least not being confused. If I don’t know (just a longtime zwifter) how these cats work … I mean it’s complicated enough for people to just get rolling … simple is good, something to refer to for those who wish to is important (or at least clearly stated ‘there’s a black box here’s in general how it works’ to a degree that … these posts feel more moot
. e official documentation even if most don’t tear ot at least it can be referred to. I spent a lot of time totey saying ‘black box’ or mix of lots of metrics which I don’t know deadly how they’re determining them and what country or doesn’t. Yo says I’ve been in Forkin’s since Feb 2015 I also just saw
And here we go…
ht tps://forums.zwift.com/t/auto-set-ftp/597371/5?u=wannie
1 Like
Perhaps rename “zFTP” to “raceFTP”?
If “FTP” is in the name it’ll always cause confusion.
Call it ZTP
1 Like