Zwift Chat

[bridgy]

What a smart strategy Paul, laying off the back of the pack at the start of a climb for a while, sprinting back on when the pace hasn't really got going. Then staying with the leaders over the crest for fastest time. That takes some supreme confidence and talent

Thanks Andy - I'm not so sure about the supreme talent comment though - I wish!

It's potentially a bit dangerous so you have to be careful how much gap you leave for sure - but when it goes well it really works

 

[Peter Salt]

Hi Everyone. A reminder about the FRR series. A few of you that expressed interest still not signed up or allocated to the team?

Almost 1k riders signed up across all of the teams at this moment.

 

[alex_cycles]

Hi Everyone. A reminder about the FRR series. A few of you that expressed interest still not signed up or allocated to the team?

Almost 1k riders signed up across all of the teams at this moment.

View attachment 665120

7 so far, although after last nights ZRL I think my normalised power might be in HAB territory now, but it didn't change when I updated it
Going to try and do several of the races, but will choose daytime ones mostly.

 

[bridgy]

Just saw this article pop up, haven't read it through yet.
https://zwiftinsider.com/zwiftracing/

Only just had a chance to look at this - and I think it looks like a great idea. Solves many of the problems we were discussing recently about the current ranking system as it's very much a results based ranking system. You can look yourself and others up on the website the guy's set up and see where people would be categorised under this new system if it's ever used by Zwift - https://www.zwiftracing.app/rankings/overall

 

[Joffey]

Only just had a chance to look at this - and I think it looks like a great idea. Solves many of the problems we were discussing recently about the current ranking system as it's very much a results based ranking system. You can look yourself and others up on the website the guy's set up and see where people would be categorised under this new system if it's ever used by Zwift - https://www.zwiftracing.app/rankings/overall

Quite interesting that. I just checked the CycleChat Team and I would be grouped with:

And to be honest that would be about right. Last night I was close to Phil and ahead of Steve, both Cat C, but I am stuck in D. But then again I could moan and say I wouldn't win any races in Silver, but it would be fairer to Bronze if I was promoted. I think in all fairness I shouldn't be in D but even despite a 12 mile TT the other day at a near max effort I wasn't close to Cat limits but I usually podium. Strange old game is Zwift!!

 

[Whorty]

Quite interesting that. I just checked the CycleChat Team and I would be grouped with:

View attachment 665143

And to be honest that would be about right. Last night I was close to Phil and ahead of Steve, both Cat C, but I am stuck in D. But then again I could moan and say I wouldn't win any races in Silver, but it would be fairer to Bronze if I was promoted. I think in all fairness I shouldn't be in D but even despite a 12 mile TT the other day at a near max effort I wasn't close to Cat limits but I usually podium. Strange old game is Zwift!!

I'm 'Gold 1' which feels right as that would probable be full of C limit riders and lower B riders .... so would mean the slower Bs who are normally dropped fast, would get a good race with the faster C's who are normally at the pointy end of races.

I think this is where the current cat system struggle ... it's the boundaries. If a C slips into B they are buggered (presumably the same if B's slip in A) as they are dropped in the first few KM and end up rolling around on their own ... put out less power as no one to race against, and a few months later they are back in C again through no real fault of their own.

 

[steverob]

That's surprising that I'm ranked as highly as that, considering it's only counting results since mid-September, during which time I've really been struggling. I can only presume that one of the warm-up races I did before the ZRL season started had a really high quality field, therefore making my result count for way more points than I thought.

Last night I got dropped early, then got dropped again towards the end and my best twenty minute power was below 2.5 w/kg (e.g. Cat D numbers), despite me weighing in at my lowest weight in almost two years.

 

[Peter Salt]

Just got an email about the FRR series and learned a few new things. Neutralised 1k starts at 2W/kg. Primes for first 150 riders. They will manually review everyone's category before start date. The more I read about, the more I like it.

 

[alex_cycles]

Quite interesting that. I just checked the CycleChat Team and I would be grouped with:

View attachment 665143

And to be honest that would be about right. Last night I was close to Phil and ahead of Steve, both Cat C, but I am stuck in D. But then again I could moan and say I wouldn't win any races in Silver, but it would be fairer to Bronze if I was promoted. I think in all fairness I shouldn't be in D but even despite a 12 mile TT the other day at a near max effort I wasn't close to Cat limits but I usually podium. Strange old game is Zwift!!

The current single point W/kg cat limits are utter bollocks though and should be totally discredited. They only really work on 20-minute pure climbing races. You're not really stuck in D. You are free to race C or higher. You're only "stuck" once you exceed cat limits.

 

[bridgy]

I'm 'Gold 1' which feels right as that would probable be full of C limit riders and lower B riders .... so would mean the slower Bs who are normally dropped fast, would get a good race with the faster C's who are normally at the pointy end of races.

I think this is where the current cat system struggle ... it's the boundaries. If a C slips into B they are buggered (presumably the same if B's slip in A) as they are dropped in the first few KM and end up rolling around on their own ... put out less power as no one to race against, and a few months later they are back in C again through no real fault of their own.

I can see the logic of what you're saying but I also see quite often that riders who get dropped don't necessarily just cruise round, but actually end up doing higher average power than some of the much higher placed riders. Rich is a good example of this - although I often finish in a group further up the road than him in ZRL races, he usually has very similar or higher average power than me. Yesterday I finished 7th and Rich finished 46th and nearly 5 minutes back and our watts were within 4 watts of each other. This is down to the race being decided with the shorter bursts of 1-5 minute power as we discussed the other day.

 

[<Tommy>]

I’ve not read it to be honest. Are the groups still split with boundaries?

 

[Whorty]

I can see the logic of what you're saying but I also see quite often that riders who get dropped don't necessarily just cruise round, but actually end up doing higher average power than some of the much higher placed riders. Rich is a good example of this - although I often finish in a group further up the road than him in ZRL races, he usually has very similar or higher average power than me. Yesterday I finished 7th and Rich finished 46th and nearly 5 minutes back and our watts were within 4 watts of each other. This is down to the race being decided with the shorter bursts of 1-5 minute power as we discussed the other day.

That is true, some riders will continue to push but I'm in the camp that no point busting a gut to finish in the same position as if I rested for a bit, let the group behind catch me, ride with them, then beat them on the sprint and finish in the same position.

Also, if I'm dropped it's because I've gone totally in the red, nothing left. So I need to rest for 5 mins before I can even think of pushing again. No way I could be dropped then continue on at near cat limits (if I could, it's probably true I wouldn't have been dropped in the first place).

I'm not great anyway at riding high numbers on my own, hence why TTs are just rubbish for me, so once I'm dropped it's just a case of getting round and holding position.

But to me the logic of trying to get lower B and higher C in the same pens makes some sense as we are probably closer in racing terms then a low C vs high C, or a low B vs high B.

 

[<Tommy>]

That is true, some riders will continue to push but I'm in the camp that no point busting a gut to finish in the same position as if I rested for a bit, let the group behind catch me, ride with them, then beat them on the sprint and finish in the same position.

Also, if I'm dropped it's because I've gone totally in the red, nothing left. So I need to rest for 5 mins before I can even think of pushing again. No way I could be dropped then continue on at near cat limits (if I could, it's probably true I wouldn't have been dropped in the first place).

I'm not great anyway at riding high numbers on my own, hence why TTs are just rubbish for me, so once I'm dropped it's just a case of getting round and holding position.

But to me the logic of trying to get lower B and higher C in the same pens makes some sense as we are probably closer in racing terms then a low C vs high C, or a low B vs high B.

But won’t there still be a boundary? Maybe I’m missing something.

 

[steverob]

But won’t there still be a boundary? Maybe I’m missing something.

From reading some of the details on the documents accompanying the site, this is what I have ascertained:

Because there are a total of 17 ranks (it looks like there are less at first glance, but Gold for example is further split into 1, 2 and 3) the people behind these rankings are anticipating that race organisers will be able to customise the boundaries on their pens.

This means that if for example you are in Platinum 2, sometimes you might be in the first pen and grouped with Platinum 1, Challenger and Champion racers; while other times you'll find the first pen only has the top few ranks while Platinum 2 ends up being the highest rank in the second pen rounded out with the first few rungs of Gold ranked riders. And etcetera as you go further down the ranks.

So no matter where you are ranked, there is a chance that each race could be different for you - you could be a big fish in a small pond one race, then be the cannon fodder in the next, even though your rank has remained roughly the same. So with a variety of people to race against, that *should* mean more opportunities to prove yourself against better opponents and improve your ranking (or so the theory goes).

Of course this all depends on a) Zwift choosing to implement this sort of ranking system and b) them rolling out customisable pen boundaries at the same time. Which is probably a big ask given the glacial pace Zwift development happens at.

 

[<Tommy>]

From reading some of the details on the documents accompanying the site, this is what I have ascertained:

Because there are a total of 17 ranks (it looks like there are less at first glance, but Gold for example is further split into 1, 2 and 3) the people behind these rankings are anticipating that race organisers will be able to customise the boundaries on their pens.

This means that if for example you are in Platinum 2, sometimes you might be in the first pen and grouped with Platinum 1, Challenger and Champion racers; while other times you'll find the first pen only has the top few ranks while Platinum 2 ends up being the highest rank in the second pen rounded out with the first few rungs of Gold ranked riders. And etcetera as you go further down the ranks.

So no matter where you are ranked, there is a chance that each race could be different for you - you could be a big fish in a small pond one race, then be the cannon fodder in the next, even though your rank has remained roughly the same. So with a variety of people to race against, that *should* mean more opportunities to prove yourself against better opponents and improve your ranking (or so the theory goes).

Of course this all depends on a) Zwift choosing to implement this sort of ranking system and b) them rolling out customisable pen boundaries at the same time. Which is probably a big ask given the glacial pace Zwift development happens at.

So unless I’m reading what you’re saying wrong Steve , that aspect is the same as it is now. In the sense that boundary’s will be defined, and then used to place you.

So it doesn’t matter if they rearrange the boundary’s so now mid to high C is racing with mid to low B for example. All that means is that they’re changing the imaginary boundary line to a different position. That’s the equivalent to a single catergory now. Just with a different perimeter?

If they’re now using more detailed metrics to define ‘athlete’ ranking then that’s great though. The sooner the push a new system through the better!