Zwift Chat

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
CXRAndy

CXRAndy

Guru
Location
Lincs
That's weird Paul, do you know why only power was dropping out? From the video everything else seemed to be connected. What device do you use for Zwift PC or apple? Do you use Bluetooth or Ant+
 

13 rider

Guru
Location
leicester
Just watched Laverack on his race. He couldn't match the sprinters, lap 3 went for long attack up the steady climb.

He gapped the pack 28secs and held it over the Brae.

He again tried a do or die attempt from the bottom of the Brae, ran out of steam and was swamped 100 yards from the line.
Even he couldnt hold off the pack . when he went I thought hed hold it too the end but the high power he was pushing to try and stay away from a committed pack rolling through was just too much ,nice to know he is human .
Do you think he will get through the first elimantion ride in the world champs ,first 30 go through thats on that course 1 lap
 

Legs

usually riding on Zwift...
Location
Staffordshire
Hammered myself last night on Bologna. I did a PB last week with doing the flat bit at 310W… so I went out and did the flat bit at 324W this week… and really paid for it on the climb! I clocked exactly the same time, but at a higher overall average power. Got caught by ex-pro Tomás Swift-Metcalfe on the line.
 

Legs

usually riding on Zwift...
Location
Staffordshire
Cracking effort there Legs:okay: Its one of those courses that holding back rewards with a better time

Cheers @CXRAndy ! I got a little FTP bump on intervals too :okay:
1676541596351.png
 

bridgy

Legendary Member
Location
Cheddar
That's weird Paul, do you know why only power was dropping out? From the video everything else seemed to be connected. What device do you use for Zwift PC or apple? Do you use Bluetooth or Ant+

It's a Neo bike and PC via Ant+. The HRM is also Ant+. That's a good point about it only being the power that dropped out because as I said the HRM is Ant+ too but also the cadence seems to keep reporting doesn't it, and that's obviously coming from exactly the same source as the power -the Neo Bike. Odd.
 
Is this this sort of thing that Zwiftalyzer can help with if you put the workout file into it?

How long were the power dropouts? I wonder if there is a different sampling rate for cadence and power e.g once per second sampling for cadence and ten times per second sampling for power?

There could also be a different smoothing algorithm for the two?
 
OP
OP
CXRAndy

CXRAndy

Guru
Location
Lincs
Is this this sort of thing that Zwiftalyzer can help with if you put the workout file into it?

How long were the power dropouts? I wonder if there is a different sampling rate for cadence and power e.g once per second sampling for cadence and ten times per second sampling for power?

There could also be a different smoothing algorithm for the two?

That would be a good idea Nick.

Also having another device recording the data, like a Wahoo or Garmin head unit. Then you could see where the dropout is occurring

Bike or PC/ant+ device
 
Last edited:

Peter Salt

Bittersweet
Location
Yorkshire, UK
Hammered myself last night on Bologna. I did a PB last week with doing the flat bit at 310W… so I went out and did the flat bit at 324W this week… and really paid for it on the climb! I clocked exactly the same time, but at a higher overall average power. Got caught by ex-pro Tomás Swift-Metcalfe on the line.
Tim, I found that Best Bike Split gives a cracking good pacing strategy for Bologna.

Great effort but you can probably go 30s quicker using the above (at similar average power).

EDIT. This is what it proposed I do last time round (about half a year ago):

Screenshot_20230216-132300~2.png
 
Last edited:

Legs

usually riding on Zwift...
Location
Staffordshire
Oh yeah, I'm definitely wise to the negative-split strategy! I don't think there's anywhere near 30s more to be had without more power overall. Last week (310W flat / 349W climb) was pretty close to optimal pacing, though I went a bit hard at the bottom of the climb. This week (324W / 340W) I put in a bit more power on average (and am 0.5kg lighter), but clocked the same time to the nearest tenth of a second - got a bit carried away on the flats!
 

Peter Salt

Bittersweet
Location
Yorkshire, UK
Oh yeah, I'm definitely wise to the negative-split strategy! I don't think there's anywhere near 30s more to be had without more power overall. Last week (310W flat / 349W climb) was pretty close to optimal pacing, though I went a bit hard at the bottom of the climb. This week (324W / 340W) I put in a bit more power on average (and am 0.5kg lighter), but clocked the same time to the nearest tenth of a second - got a bit carried away on the flats!
I think my FTP at the time was around 225. The green bits were around 205 (91% FTP). Lowest yellow was circa 210 (93% FTP), mid-yellow 215 (96% FTP) and then upper yellow at 225 (100% FTP), just before the gradient. The hill was at ~270 (120% FTP). EDIT: I rounded stuff up to nearest 5W myself.

Didn't you mention yours was at 315? If so, that would be 380 for the climb - significantly more than on your both attempts.

But it put that together based on a 19.5 minute total effort. At your fitness - 16.5 minutes - it may propose even more. Give it a go and stick to it religiously - would be a cool experiment.
 

Norry1

Legendary Member
Location
Warwick
I think my FTP at the time was around 225. The green bits were around 205 (91% FTP). Lowest yellow was circa 210 (93% FTP), mid-yellow 215 (96% FTP) and then upper yellow at 225 (100% FTP), just before the gradient. The hill was at ~270 (120% FTP).

Didn't you mention yours was at 315? If so, that would be 380 for the climb - significantly more than on your both attempts.

But it put that together based on a 19.5 minute total effort. At your fitness - 16.5 minutes - it may propose even more. Give it a go and stick to it religiously - would be a cool experiment.

Build it as a workout and do it in Erg?
 
Top Bottom