Everyone has a preferred trainer difficulty in Zwift whether this is due to wanting to keep a consistent cadence or due to lack of gearing for steep climbs etc.
Its been shown time and time again that the power required is the same which ever percentage you use to maintain or climb a certain speed.
The issue is trainer difficulty slider changing gradient percentage for declines for myself and I’m sure plenty other light riders racing with 100% TD against heavier riders using a low TD makes racing competitively close to impossible and any potential rest sections short / long declines are full efforts to try to stay attached to the group.
I understand why trainer difficulty was introduced but the slider should ONLY!! be relevant for inclines for declines ALL!! Zwifters should be on the same decline percentage whichever trainer difficulty setting they use.
At the moment descending a 10% decline
On 100% TD this would result in a - 5% gradient being sent to your trainer as Zwift halves the %
On 50% TD this would result in a - 2.5% gradient being sent to your trainer
On 25% TD this would result in a -1.25% gradient being sent to your trainer
On 0% TD this would result in 0% gradient being sent to your trainer
Clearly looking at the above regardless what your opinions are on trainer difficulty for Inclines for declines this results in a huge advantage for racing choosing a low / lower trainer difficulty.
I cycle indoors and outdoors I want to replicate the feeling of climbing outdoors when Zwifting and therefore don’t understand why I potentially have to adjust a setting to be competitive especially when it was never introduced to alter declines.
Please please change trainer difficulty slider to only change gradient feel on inclines.
Ok I’m 56KG descending the Alpe using 100% TD I have virtually no resistance to push against and due to my weight if I was racing against a 75KG rider using 25% TD which is a popular setting for racing I’m led to believe unless he is recovering and only light peddling I have no chance to stay in his draft I’m aware if we were using the same TD he would still have an advantage but at least I would have a much better chance.
I race in CAT A advanced with super strong riders my goal is to hang on to the front as long as possible the annoying thing is if I get dropped majority of the time its on cresting a climb or a short decline and the root cause is Trainer Difficulty.
I have no objection to offering separate settings for resistance on climbs, descents, and flat roads so don’t take this as a “no” vote, and I think some other app already did that (maybe FulGaz? dim memories…). But my goal would be to replicate my current experience, and yes I am the enemy here, the ~75kg guy who races with low Trainer Difficulty (though not in the ZRacing Advanced events). For me that’s typically 30% because that’s the minimum for Club Ladder events. I use virtual shifting which means maintaining fairly steady resistance when cresting a climb or descending is not difficult. I would not recommend that anyone use 100% Trainer Difficulty in Zwift Races, though I know some people do. I think they are harming their prospects by doing that.
My intention is not to force anyone into using a trainer difficulty that’s not suitable for their Hardware capabilities or their preference only that ALL should be on the same gradient setting for declines surely that is not difficult to implement.
Inclines and declines should’ve never being linked in the first place I’m assuming it was easier that way so that’s what happened.
In its current state I could imagine some racers changing TD on the fly during a race to suit the gradient which IMO should not be allowed one a race starts.
A rider on a bike with too-high gearing needs lower Trainer Difficulty for climbs. A rider on a bike with too-low gearing needs lower Trainer Difficulty for descents. So your proposal trades one problem for another similar problem.
It’d be great if Zwift could make a virtual chainring, really just a change in the baseline resistance, so that people whose bikes don’t have the right range of gears can adjust it to suit.
If my understanding of smart trainers is correct it would work for all of them, not rely on them being virtual shifting compatible as that is about faster responsiveness to simulate the feeling of a gear change.
Surely trainer difficulty sorts that out for uphill, downhill I don’t care what it does - heck I’d even skip the downhill some days when short on time, only care about the uphill bits. Some devices have virtual shifting, this should take care of the gearing issue now. I tried it on Tacx Neo 2T and hated it, found it sluggish, laggy.
I’m fortunate that the kickr bike has gearing selections so I can replicate what I use on my real bike.
For racing, I would have minimum downhill trainer difficulty, at least try to keep things realistic to real riding. If you have lower gearing in real life for the hills, then spinning out downhill is the price you pay - it’s a trade off and strategy. Should be same in Zwift - this would Make Racing More Exciting™.
But then I’m not racing, so what does it matter to me. Let them game the system as they wish.
At higher trainer difficulty you more easily spin out on descents whereas with lower difficulty you can keep applying torque. And honestly trainer difficulty should be set by the race organiser so everyone is racing the same race
Zwift used the feature in Zwift Games… 2 years ago? Club Ladder uses 30% minimum, and maybe VirtuSlo events have used the feature. Most organizers either don’t know about it or choose not to.
It’s a bit silly to say it gives everyone the same experience when some trainers can simulate 4x steeper gradient than others, and some don’t offer any gradient simulation.
There’s a hundred other things higher up the list if greater fairness is the goal.
Could be, but I like my bike to be set up the way I like it and not have someone else decide that for me. So I just wont join those events or quit the moment I find out and they didnt mention it.
)