“Dope mode”
Seems like quite a miss from Wahoo to not have pre-greased the wheels in terms of getting the UCI to adopt this ahead of the worlds. The impact of this being disallowed for worlds is probably going to really mute the excitement about its usefulness/viability, so whatever cost Wahoo could have taken to provide racers with consistent equipment for worlds, or data they should have shared with UCI to convince them they could provide a consistent experience for worlds participants would have been worth their effort I would imagine.
I don’t see it as a loss. If it is so good that they feel it is so much better that they don’t want people to have an unfair advantage.
The TdF should be raced on Walmart bikes.
they actually included a criterium race in one of the crossfit games and it was basically that but funnier. it’s probably on youtube, i definitely recommend watching it. it will bring you joy
2 Likes
Lots of fluorescent shoes too!
“So as you approach an incline or a straightaway, you want the hardest gear possible cause that’s when you can create the most power… and as you go on a downhill you wanna shift downwards on your gearshift…”
~expert crossfit analyst
That slow speed solo crash was gold. Bike tried to buck her off. Apparently she also crashed in her qualifier. Gets back on with chain dangling.
Innovation 
1 Like
Yeah, but you know what I mean when it comes to the UCI. 
It needs some hills to help challenge them.
From what I could see no proper cycling shoes even.
Has anyone really managed to get the Race Mode option to appear with the bike v2? I have Direct Connect configured and I don’t see the option. Thanks.
Just for fun I did a quick GSheet to see what the accumulated energy advantage is with a 10x sample rate vs 2x over a 5 second sprint from 500-1500w. It’s higher than I thought it would be. The GSheet is here if you want to fix my math.
Edit: I should mention this ignores any after-the-fact resampling which could make the final 2x energy numbers about the same, but still lagging the 10x in terms of the timing. That initial jump may be the big deal.
This is assuming that power is still be applied at the finish line. If a rider stops pedalling, wouldn’t the higher sampling rate slow a rider down quicker, and therefore if you do 1000 tests of two riders putting out the same power one with Race Mode one without, they should on average finish in the same point?
This logic seems to go against GPLama’s results, which makes me think that either:
A: Race Mode is somehow selectively providing the peaks and not the troughs
B: Zwift’s physics are broken and rewards surges, however small those are, as opposed to all forces acting equally.
I may have the wrong end of the stick with the physics / maths, but it doesn’t make sense to me that the same power reported more frequently equals more distance covered.
1 Like
Yes this assumes acceleration is even all the way to 1500. And yes, the same effect applies when slowing down which I think is probably a good thing if you are trying to hold a specific position in a draft.
The 10x rider just gets to take advantage of their power boost sooner than the 2x rider by about a 1/2 second or so. Then it starts to even out. And top end power and strategy probably still wins but that first burst can change the outcome for evenly matched riders.
Edit: It just occured to me that everyone is talking about 1Hz vs 10Hz sampling, not 2Hz. Sigh. In my defense, I have done a couple of cycling BLE emulation apps and just assumed 2Hz was the thing. Here’s a 1Hz vs. 10Hz chart. I have to say that first second looks downright brutal.
2 Likes
dunno about A but intuitively i suspect this to be true
The test GPLama wasn’t doing with the test races in his second video was whether there’s a benefit for staying with a group. Whether its easier to come off or on the power more rapidly in order to stay within the group - so less risk finding yourself shooting out front out of the draft or having to chase back on at the back. He did test it briefly in his first video and thought it did help, but it wasn’t a full test over a long ride.
The implication would be that whilst you’ll still be with the pack, you’ll have expended less power and few micro sprints - so better able to sprint off the front when it actually counts.
1 Like
I don’t disagree with that, it’s the first test where one rider finishes in front of the other that I’m concerned about.
I’m a long way from my last physics class, but I’m not sure this is an issue with Zwift physics. Accelerating on a bike happens over some period of time—you’re not immediately applying full force—and so there is an advantage to detecting the acceleration faster. But reducing the power to zero (GPLama’s video) is either instantaneous or takes much less time (relatively), so the impact of more frequent readings doesn’t matter as much—at least not enough to completely offset the initial advantage. (Another way of thinking about it might be that acceleration comes from the trainer, so frequency of recording matters, while deceleration comes from Zwift, so once the trainer reads 0, everyone is on the same footing.)
They wanted an even playing field, and probably not everyone participating could use it hence why it was not allowed for the World’s events. I don’t see a problem with this tbh
is it fair to race against someone who has the new Kickr with dircon 10hz Race mode enabled> Blockquote
as fair as, racing against dumb over-reporting watt trainers