Your phenotype determines what you can reach and what you cannot. No matter how much you train. Then, since Zwift could easily provide routes and races for almost all the Phenotypes, I don’t see why you should tell someone self-proclaim instead of looking at the metabolism of the rider itself.
In real life, if you take a look at the sprinters stats, you see you need raw power instead of wpk. That’s why you could see a good amateur sprinter beating a pro climber in a sprint, if they compete in the same race at the same level of aerobic pace. Then the climber could maybe keep a higher pace in the aerobic part of the race, but if you artificially limit that aerobic capacity, you’ll have sprinters of the same category compete fairly. Another good option could be having velodromes and “pistard” challenges instead of road racing only: that way you could effectively test yourself on different disciplines.
So it’s not a matter of philosophy: it’s a matter if you’re gifted or not with a good aerobic engine (and so you can naturally compete in aerobic races) or you should drop Zwift because you’re anaerobic (and nothing will change that, no matter what you do).
A huge portion of riders on Zwift have no idea what their phenotype might be because they haven’t trained enough to find out. There are many sprinters out there who are not sprinters. They are just not “cycling fit”. With a small training load, I’d wager that most riders are “sprinters”. Many of them might be great endurance athletes. For them, phenotype is just a measure of what they’ve been doing lately, not genetics.
Usually, if you’re “average” trained, a good threshold test with gas exchange and lactate measure is enough to tell you what you are.
I could agree with you that most of the riders on Zwift could not have an idea of what they are or could be, but it could be a self-limiting phenomenon: if you “self-proclaim” as a sprinter but you’re not, you’ll sooner or later reach your limit on your sprinter capacity. But it’s not a matter of self-proclaiming. If you’re not sufficiently fit to be in a higher cat, you’ll compete in a lower cat. Having “phenotype-driven” category will only give more chances to have more fun competing on different levels in different disciplines.
Alternative option to Zwift racing score now the Mario kart version of Zwift is arriving…
Those who solely want to win with their little gold cups can do those races time & time again… All other racing can have a results driven system that provides proper race protocols and categories.
Approximately nobody will do that testing, and what’s average? 30 minutes on the bike 4 days a week and a gym session? I really don’t know but I do know that there are a lot of time-crunched people on Zwift, because that’s one of the problems it solves.
Think about the incentives for a low-volume rider who hovers at the top of D category winning sprints. Let’s say they have genetic potential to be something other than just a sprinter. Should they be upgraded and forced to work harder for results in C, or should they just stay where they are clobbering the D category? If they’re getting consistent podiums, what would encourage them to move up and work harder to achieve their potential?
I can’t talk for most of the Zwift sprinters. I don’t have data, I don’t know how you talk about that. Maybe some feelings.
What I can tell you is that if you have an excellent anaerobic engine and just a good aerobic one, the only disciplines where you can compete in are short and high-intensity efforts. Take a look at some top level athletes (I can give you the Italian indoor team): you’ll not find a rouleur or a climber there, you’ll only find good chronomen and sprinters (Ganna, Viviani, Milan…). There’s a correlation between the indoor and outdoor cats: metabolism. And you can’t change your metabolism. It is what it is.
Then if I want to train my aerobic skills and I’m not on Zwift just to “win gold cups” I can simply perform trainings and not race at all
Approximately nobody will do that testing, and what’s average? 30 minutes on the bike 4 days a week and a gym session? I really don’t know but I do know that there are a lot of time-crunched people on Zwift, because that’s one of the problems it solves.
If you do medical checks to have competition in real life, you should have it. If you don’t, probably you don’t take Zwift too seriously and maybe you don’t race, since racing in Zwift is something that from a medical standpoint is really similar to maximal efforts.
Think about the incentives for a low-volume rider who hovers at the top of D category winning sprints. Let’s say they have genetic potential to be something other than just a sprinter. Should they be upgraded and forced to work harder for results in C, or should they just stay where they are clobbering the D category? If they’re getting consistent podiums, what would encourage them to move up and work harder to achieve their potential?
Do you really think that people that care about their “potential” is motivated by Zwift?
Yikes, what a bad take. “Other people don’t spend as much time as me on the bike, so they must not be motivated.” Outside of the ZRS discussion anyways.
Hope the team working on ZRS will take community feedback into account, and the reopening of the discussion gives me hope! The TSOZ release for a November timeline is a bit worrying, but I’ll try to stay optimistic.
Nope, the communication is good between all of us here. We’re trying to roll out it back out in about two months. As I said, we’ll have more information for you soon!
We’ve been working hard since the soft launch earlier this summer to revamp it and make it much better.
That’s where the cat limits need to be adjusted so that those who really should be racing in a higher cat, by that I mean b cat racersvwho should be racing A cat would put an end to the lack of A racers but zwift won’t do that
You don’t want to seem to race up like many people is all
it depends on how much philosophical weight you place on whether it’s more honourable to pedal a bike really hard for 30 seconds or just kind of hard for an hour or two. personally i think both are equally dishonourable
Its a fair question - How much effort should it require to be competitive in a category?
I feel the right answer and fair answer comes from variable boundaries, but currently ‘zwift’ leans towards those who want to work for 30 seconds.
If the idea is more like IRL racing then things need to drastically change as only 30 seconds of hard work rarely happen even in short closed road crits or oval track races.
amen, no denying that. stuff like TTTs and to some extent ladder races are interesting community innovations but i don’t have any answers for how to solve the fundamental issue
in the words of banksy, who probably just stole them off someone else, “nobody eats a mcdonalds because they want to take a ■■■■”
My only ask is that you stay in close contact with Tim and his team.
I know it’s not easy accepting advice and direction from someone who isn’t a Zwift employee.
But they’ve spent so much time and effort testing and perfecting their system.
It’s so rare to have an expert offer access to everything they’ve built – especially for free.
Please don’t let ego (not yours) and bureaucratic process get in the way of the best solution.
There’s too much competition out there now to risk it.
I bet the vast majority of Zwift racers don’t have that data. I certainly don’t and have no plans to get it. I do race, and I had a cardiac stress test to avoid dropping dead but nothing beyond that.
I have no idea, probably some are (?). If the incentives in the game are right then they can either get motivated or start losing races when they get upgraded.
I see.
Only thing I could tell you is that I hope you don’t underestimate the stress Zwift races generate to your body: usually cardiac stress test is not enough to race safely, that’s why athletes that do competitions (and so maximal efforts) even at amateur level are required to be completely tested by a medical staff, with legal docs proving your body capabilities to deal with the efforts. Personally I do it every year for different sports, and Zwift is to me just a way to keep fit in the meantime. I can tell you that Zwift races usually push my heart rate at my max cardiac frequency (sometimes over) and I think this happens to many people…and if most of them underestimate it, there could be unpleasant events in the future.
Anyway different ideas that I think will not affect the future of racing points.
Sticking back to the topic, I just think that applying race points system to “race phenotypes” (flat, rolling, hill, mountain and TT) could just foster competition and allow a better understanding of each one capabilities, and giving more fun to who races just to compete (and not to fight against itself).
I’m done.
