Why is anyone actually concerned about the points system, Zwift will never be fair. There are too many variables that have an impact on performance. Ie… the power meters/trainers used all have different accuracy and hill profile representation…even when doing something like ZRL it’s just to easy to game the system if you want to….
It has nothing to do with being fair. It is about having fun.
For example: Lets say rider Bob has a badly calibrated trainer that read 100w to high, Bob will be racing in B even if Bob can only do 100w IRL. But Bob is still riding at max effort and he get his training and we are competing.
We would like to go group similar (as in similar powers) into groups to have fun together.
8 Likes
The highest 15second power showing on ZRApp is 38w/kg. But at least he’s in the right cat!
1 Like
ZR.app data is derived from ZP, which comes from
zwift.
1 Like
It is one to game the system, it is another to have a systemic broken system.
Currently we are moving towards the latter.
1 Like
but did zwift give him achievement badge for it? (also probably yes)
The idea that mild miscalibration is fine because they are miscalibrated into B being “fair” only works until you hit A and then all the really bad set ups and/or cheating come into their own.
1 Like
It’s a completely moot point anyways. The purpose of any categorization system isn’t to police abnormal power numbers. Correcting or moderating that power data is an entirely different issue. vELO, ZP points, the current implementation of ZRS, etc would all need to place those errant riders somewhere for categorization.
2 Likes
trying to game the system and them when that system changes means having a moan, people put themselves ion that position then complain, tough
The ones that put themselves there are not the one affected. My score is probably 400 points higher than expected, but it doesn’t affect me. My score will expire in 3 months and they don’t have cat designed for this score till Fall.
BUT those that beat me in a race is racing a D but getting a score boost by a mid B level rider. Two month down the road their score would have been inflated by my score. When the categories does show, they will be much higher than expected.
1 Like
William
You are only one rider in the race. 1 out of the 5, or 1 out of 10, or in the whole race. I don’t totally understand how all points are going to fit into the calculation.
But I really don’t think your artificially inflated points will make that much difference.
And if it does, I really doubt the same rider is going to beat you 5 times.
If they do, I really doubt that those 5 races will be his top 5 point races, That will go towards his 90 day best.
JMO
This is just 1 race. I can be consider a volume racers, if you add tiny races I usually put in more than 7 race per week. That would be 90 days worth of races for any riders that place ahead of me.
Tell us you don’t understand the new system whilst trying to make it all about you.
You will be an insignificant outlier…
Moving on…
Wiliam is right. His numbers may be an extreme example of what he’s getting at, but it’s a systemic issue with ZP points and this ZRS implementation, not an edge case. The nature of a 5-best point system with no downward-revising mechanism other than time means that inflation will happen over time. It already has in the ZP point system, which is the exact same fundamental equation being used for ZRS.
To influence others he need to be one of the best 5 racers in the top 10
If he is racing 700 ranked riders he doesn’t have a cat in hells chance of being one of the best 5 riders come the ‘northern autumn’
He can’t be both over ranked and an influence on the race score by being one of the best 5
1 Like
Except that “best” in the ZRS formula means just that his ZRS is one of the highest. If he’s being matched with people that are way above his ability, but close to his ZRS, it’s very likely that he’ll be one of the “best” while losing. And again, this isn’t even an edge case. It’s magnified by the level of his inflation over his actual abilities, but it’s not a one-off issue. This inflation is systemic to the ZP point/ZRS framework.
Low performing, high ranked riders will have minimal impact on race scores when there are normal volumes of racing.
Where they are a problem is low attendance races…
1 Like
Exactly. It’s a fundamental problem with a reward system like this. If this system is so broken that you have to start adding a bunch of restrictions to people like “don’t race up”, “don’t join small fields”, “don’t race for 90 days”, and anything else, it’s time to put that system down and use one that actually fits the end goals.
1 Like
Come fall, the data is already all screwed. It’s actually already messed up, from the last 30 days I been racing skewing peoples data. There are plenty of D racers that are consider high C that was boosted by my losses.
My Zwiftpower oldskool ranking points currently come from 149.06; 165.61; 166.38; 261.19; 291.58 (three pen A races where I came last or second to last).
Ignoring the pen A results, I think my best five results of the last 90 days should be 261.19 (6/24); 291.58 (6/10); 293.65 (6/24); 296.24 (6/28); 321.81 (6/26).
Date in brackets.
1 Like