Removed ride ons in Companion?

I’ve seen this before, and had the time to ask. Why do ride on numbers decrease for previous rides? Can people remove 'ride on’s, and why? Just curious. I’ve tried to remove a ‘ride on’, and wasn’t able to do it. How does the count go down?

Maybe given by folk who’ve totally closed their zwift accounts?

I reported this a while ago but can’t find the thread. I routinely have post-event ride-ons going down, then up again. It often goes down by a considerable number, like dozens, before creeping back up again. It’s been like this for a long time.

1 Like

:roll_eyes: :crazy_face: I remember one ride that dropped over 50% of the earlier reported 'ride on’s. It was still in the single digits, but there have been some with over 50 that have nearly halved the count.

I’m trying to get motivation here, and thinking people are saying ‘Wow, for an old fart, he’s kicking butt :hot_face:’, only to have double digits disappear? :flushed: Pull the rug out from under me. I hate to sound vain, but this stuff seems a lot easier for the younglings, I need all the help I can get some days. :thinking:

I wonder if it’s possible to end up giving someone two, and then one gets cleaned up later. Say if I’m riding and pass someone I am following and I throw them a thumb. I end my ride, then see on Companion App that they are riding, and I hit the button to give them another thumb. Pretty sure I’ve been able to do that before–I wonder if one of them gets removed later when the system sees I’ve given two for the same ride.


Hmm. Maybe… It must be on that list like the ‘YOU’VE MET YOUR 8 HOUR GOAL FOR THE WEEK (or whatever)’ thing.

I wouldn’t imagine it would matter how many were given by someone. During the ride, it’s limited to one. Is that a firm ‘one only’ rule? Could be. No one who knows has said anything. shrug

I only do it through the companion app, and I thought that was the only way to do it. After the one, the web app effectively says ‘You had your one’. I guess your idea makes the most sense, but then why is ‘the web’ still counting them to end up withdrawing them later. Sometimes seemingly hours later.

And the thread title could have been better worded I suppose. Oh well…


There are other discrepancies. If I lead a group ride, on my activity overview in ZCA the ride is shown with a much higher number of Ride Ons as on the ride’s details page. This does not happen with free rides, so I guess it is not just the difference between Ride Ons given during the ride and Ride Ons given afterwards, since I get Ride Ons afterwards for free rides too.

Also there is this odd inconsistency regarding the participants count for group rides. Each place where a number is shown shows a different one and it seems not clear to me, what the reasons for the differences are (incl./excl. late joining riders, only riders having finished the ride, etc.). Therefore, if someone wants to know how many riders had participated, there is always just an educated guess.

There was a conversation on FB years ago when I was on it about the ‘issues’ with Zwift. People joked that they came for the ‘UI issues’… Some who claimed to be programmers said that perhaps Zwift has gotten so huge that it has exceeded their programming team’s capabilities to mange. It happens to most really expansive software projects. Sometimes that level is reached very quickly, and other times it takes years and tons of alterations and patches. Memories of Windows NT for instance. The problem is, rewriting Zwift would likely be such a monumental task that it would take YEARS and the existing codebase would be evolving as the effort progressed making it possible to be a waste of time trying to pull it off, and keep the new features in.

I had thought, perhaps, of rewriting the core of Zwift so that it was like a ‘plug and play’ machine, and new worlds would have to meet the requirements to be plugged in to the ‘shell’ at that point and the shell would do the actual presentation of the commands in the world file, but even that would take years to write. At some point, we all have to accept Zwift, warts and all… They aren’t the only training app out there, but having tried many of them, Zwift is pretty damn good at being what it claims to be. It’s fun, addicting, quick, not static, expandable, it’s just pretty much what I’ve spent untold number of hours on. (It just could be better, but can’t everything?:man_shrugging:t2:)