I can 
2 Likes
Im sure you know this, but what the hell.
The longer the duration you use to group riders together, the narrower that band will need to be used to group them, as soon as you do that, that 30 seconds power becomes the deciding factor as those with the highest wkg in the range will all arrive at the line at the same time. Which is pretty much a carbon copy of CE racing.
Im still of the opinion if power was to be used, it shouldnt have been the basis but that ship has sailed, 30 second, 6-8min & 25min power should have been used over just the 30/600 numbers.
1 Like
It seems a lot of people complaining seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. You can’t be both Jasper Philipsen and Tadej Pogacar at the same time. You have to accept that some races you’re just there as pack fill and in others you might have chance to compete. I’m sure the current system is far from perfect, but it seems like a step in the right direction. With more and more people racing in ZRS-races they can get more data and continue tweaking the system.
I too feel like I’m seeded to high, but at the same time I just have to wait and see, I don’t think I will stand a chance in the 520-690 group, because I feel that there might be some solid A’s in that group while I’m just a middle B. But let’s see how it will evolve.
10 Likes
I have no problem being pack fill and badly losing the sprint at the end. 98% of the race duration is still fun and challenging. My problem is that because I did some hard sprints in an otherwise easy ride that I’ll get blown out the back at the start of almost any race I join
2 Likes
Hey there, here ya go, I was in the C pen: Zwift World Series Race 2 - Community - The at Home Cycling & Running Virtual Training App
It seemed most folks in the top half had a ZRS increase and most in the bottom half had a decrease regardless of their ZRS score or the racing scores of who they beat from what I could see.
Edit: Oh I see someone smarter than me already linked it:
Zwift World Series Race 2 - Community - The at Home Cycling & Running Virtual Training App
Edit 3: I also see it says there were 129 folks in the 350-520 category, but only 64 scores show up. Did that many folks drop out, or do they only show a certain number of the riders in these races? If that many folks actually dropped out that would be significant attrition.
Edit 4: If scores do still decay I bet I’ll lose some of that +4 I gained here before my next race too 
1 Like
Fair enough, something they should look out for. If that happens too much to too many riders they should have to address that by lowering the impact of 30s or make it 1-3min or something.
But there has to be something in there to balance aerobic versus anaerobic and put both types of riders in the same race to create dynamic racing .
1 Like
That contradicts eachother a bit. How many times do you think people are willing to be pack fill before they stop doing those races ?
Think this is the same race as seen by Zwiftracingapp, so only shows those registered on zwiftpower, fair few DNFs…
fwiw, 78 show up in the LIVE tab in Zwiftpower C-cat, whatever that means.
20 of the names showing in Live do not have a “Finished” label. So from ZP view, about 25% of starters didn’t finish.
I still don’t understand score movements. Below is snapshot of the 3rd thru 8th places. The top limiter of this Cat was 520.
So the 6th place finisher had an increase of at least 77 points? How is the scale/qty of an increase in points determined? That rider will be in the B cat next time while some of the riders that bested him are still a good ways off from being promoted.
Yup, that is the race. I thought the companion also showed anyone without ZP, but they only show the folks with ZP now apparently? There was still a pretty solid amount of attrition in that race though it seems.
But yeah, you can see the ZRA scores for literally every single person above me is higher and there seems to be a strong pattern of folks being lower below me in terms of ZRA scores (so ZRA scores look pretty accurate to performance here in general). Where if you look at the ZRS view it seems like the both the folks below me and above me almost all have a higher ZRS (often by a fair margin), and that performance gave me only a +4, which will probably decay before I race again
So, if that’s the size of a bump I get when I’m above that many 400+ riders and with absolutely nobody ahead of me with a lower ZRS at all, I don’t expect my ZRS to move much at all, and it will probably just decay back to the seed value in general.
So just to put the two links together for comparison…
ZRA view (check the 350-520 category): https://www.zwiftracing.app/events/4515867
Zwift Score View (check the 350-520 category): Zwift World Series Race 2 - Community - The at Home Cycling & Running Virtual Training App
2 Likes
8 chars
1 Like
Zwifting in fall/winter only, each year started in D, soon came into C… Didn’t stopped racing, tried to stay out of the last 1/3 finishers. Finished some races as ITT. But I am gonna race again.
I don’t believe I am the only one.
6 Likes
Current ZRS is just silly. Look at the ZRS monthly events. Riders are doing ITT riders. They are nowhere near each other. They might as well go solo.
1 Like
I agree that more power bands than just 30s and 10m should be used. But my posts are generally too long as it is without adding lots of (side comments) 
. I will disagree on the inclusion of 30s power at all though. Anaerobic/neuromuscular capacity has no value as a primary predictor of success in a mostly aerobic activity.
Ok, you might be going on, but I guess we bot know not everyone is like you. And with just a very small part of Zwift is racing we cant really have riders being picky about the races they join since a lot of the races will have less and less racers.
We need more racers not less.
1 Like
Those people already have all the info they need:
Never do sprint training outside of races
Go cruise some Tiny Races to tank your score if you’re near a boundary
Their algorithm is bad and if they share it we can all point out exactly what they’re doing wrong with it. You’re advocating for something called “security through obscurity” which is a terrible practice and always fails.
1 Like
I can’t see any comments in this scanning through …. I think baseline racing score looks so wrong for lots of people based on ZP profile because the Zwift academy workouts contain both a fresh 30s power test and a 10 minute power test. These are both very different to a race effort (particularly a 30s race winning effort). My score went up massively from doing the workouts and the 30s in particular is higher than I’ve ever done in a race (even when I was at my fittest).
I really think the seed score needs to consider efforts from racing only, not efforts from training because any fresh power test will over rate someone against those who don’t do power testing.
6 Likes
Not advocating anything if I remember correctly when CE calculations were first posted there was a huge outcry from the gamers forcing Zwift to backtrack and change the goal posts to allow them to continue to game.
You are right. 30s efforts are done at the end of a race, where your ability have tapered off.