Zwift performance vs. on road stats


(Yama Karim) #1

 Dear Zwift,

I feel like I’m a better rider than my performances show on Zwift but this is not a bad scenario for me because most would assume it would be the other way around.

What I am slightly perplexed about is when I look into the riders’ history from some of the better ‘A’ groupers many seem to be Cat 4/5s or 3s on the road. This seems pretty consistent among many of the top performers.  What is even more striking is the fact that many of these riders (Cat 5/4/3s) are cranking out 4-5 w/kg on average form 20 minutes to well over an hour.  By most estimations, these numbers would correspond to upper echelon Cat 3 up to UCI Division III Pros.

I realize this is all for fun, and that we should enjoy it for what it is, and focus on our own fitness etc.  I also realize that like every new program there are lots of things that need to be ironed out over time.  But it would be good if you could shed some light on the above and if we can open up the discussion without any implied accusations about weight doping, equipment set-up, calibration etc.

Thank you in advance,

Zwifter


(Dave Dixon) #2

I think it’s quite likely that any discrepancies you notice between real world and in-game performance are not due to a problem within Zwift’s processing. More likely, IMO, is a problem with trainer calibration (or inherent accuracy) or your “weight doping” idea. Why? Because people riding in Zwift has generated a ton of data over the last two years, and if there was a noticeable problem with the translation between input power-to-weight history and the speed that Zwift computes at any point, it would be *quite* noticeable to the Zwift people, and it would be shortly corrected.


(Terrence Peeples-ZSUN/USMES) #3

Like the person said about me, I doubt that this issue lies with zwift but people using VPower, ZPower (incorrectly) & weight doping. It’s known that there are trainers that are giving + 50W to the rider. The problem is that there are always going to be cheaters/fliers in this game. I’m crossing my fingers that these intentional cheaters will get tired of the game eventually or see that if they are getting KOM/Green jersey & winning races that’s it’s really an empty achievement since they really didn’t have to work for it.


(Stephen Larkin) #4

Im pretty new to cycle training but I do see many people getting a little hung up on comparison of real and virtual training.

My own take on it is I want to improve as a cyclist and need a training platform to monitor and improve upon this during the winter.

 

| believe Zwift provides this platform.

 

1.Yes you need to establish your capability within Zwift but it does not have to exactly mirror all aspects of real riding outdoors.

  1. Zwift is constant the course conditions do not change dramatically due to the elements and surfaces experienced outside. This alone gives a sound platform for personal improvement.

  2. Yes we want to know that our Zones are broadly in the same region as for outside and this can be achieved by testing in Zwift and then working to improve.

4 Whilst 30 Kph in Zwift may not equate to 30 kph in the real world… If During your Zwift training you make a 15% improvement in FTP, average speed on a known circuit will improve along with improved cadence at lower heart rates, improved endurance etc. You will take this to the road. :slight_smile:

Ok Im about improving my performance, and I can do this knowing the metrics of my equipment and its limitations within game.

If you want to Race in a virtual world then that’s a all new ball game.

In my opinion indoor training has been made tolerable, interesting and fun because of programs like Zwift.

Enjoy, improve and most of all have fun.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


(malcolm may (WCC) C) #5

I think the w p kg is a bit of red herring, and more personal than general.

We tried a club ride, first half 2 - 2.5 wpk, then 3 - 3.5 wpk for the remainder.

Clearly the people weighing 70 kgs are in a better place than those who weigh 100 - like me.

The real problem comes when 2.5 wpk for me is up by my FTP. 

When we jumped to 3 wpk, I was 130% of my FTP, while the leader, at 70 kg, was 210 vs his FTP of 350.

I can easily imagine him lapping at 4 wpk. He could do 280 watts all day with that 350 FTP.  Its not always numbers. Sometimes people are just better. 


(Dave Dixon) #6

I disagree. It’s “always numbers”.


(malcolm may (WCC) C) #7

yeah, but numbers are personally dependent. The op is talking about people doing 4 - 5wpk for hours. For me thats 400 - 500+. Not possible for me. For average people it may be 280 -325. 

It depends.