@Whorty , do you now you've signed in the E pen ? ,I joined you we raced D last time , I presume the league scores won't count ,didn't bother me I've missed a week
I get trounced by quite a few riders who are in the old B cat, but have ZRS scores in the 200s or low 300s There are a considerable number of riders with too high or too low a ZRS still. I hope when they rejig things in October they do a better job.
Hi Alex are TT bikes barred from tomorrows event?
They should be barred, yes. Pretty sure that was one of the series settings
Booo
What I lost on the first climb I might have been able to claw back on the flat and then some
Yeah sure I do get that some people are under-scored and others over-scored based on their current ability. And I also fully accept it's not perfect - nothing ever is. And there's always room for improvement, especially with a new system.Hi Paul, there are some anomalies with the racing score probably the earlier part, where a few B cats have low scores, I raced a few
Maybe this is from less races they had done. I admit there does seem to be less 'out of category ' riders now RS has been up and running for a little while.
Results for me are aligning between the old ABCD categories and RS. A few more months should see tighter categories
This is tomorrows event.
View attachment 745817
Yeah sure I do get that some people are under-scored and others over-scored based on their current ability. And I also fully accept it's not perfect - nothing ever is. And there's always room for improvement, especially with a new system.
But my point is WHY are these people initially categorised like that? It's not an "anomaly" if it's actually based on their actual past 90 day power numbers (which seems like as good a thing to base the initial score on as anything).
And if they then get upgraded as they finish highly in races and/or do higher power numbers then that's the system working exactly as designed, not the system being flawed.
Are there loads of people who have been given really low or really high ZRS for literally no reason and that bears no relation to their 90 day power numbers? And are these people retaining that excessively high or excessively low ZRS after winning or losing races? If yes then I 100% agree - there's anomalies, the system is badly flawed, they need to do much better.
But if there's logic behind the initial scores - even if it doesn't reflect a reality Zwift have no way of seeing - and if the ZRS scores are adjusting quickly with results as they should be, then I really don't see the problem and we all just need to give it a bit of time?
Yeah sure I do get that some people are under-scored and others over-scored based on their current ability. And I also fully accept it's not perfect - nothing ever is. And there's always room for improvement, especially with a new system.
But my point is WHY are these people initially categorised like that? It's not an "anomaly" if it's actually based on their actual past 90 day power numbers (which seems like as good a thing to base the initial score on as anything).
And if they then get upgraded as they finish highly in races and/or do higher power numbers then that's the system working exactly as designed, not the system being flawed.
Are there loads of people who have been given really low or really high ZRS for literally no reason and that bears no relation to their 90 day power numbers? And are these people retaining that excessively high or excessively low ZRS after winning or losing races? If yes then I 100% agree - there's anomalies, the system is badly flawed, they need to do much better.
But if there's logic behind the initial scores - even if it doesn't reflect a reality Zwift have no way of seeing - and if the ZRS scores are adjusting quickly with results as they should be, then I really don't see the problem and we all just need to give it a bit of time?
If I get my arse handed to me today with a few B cats listed in the event, then the initial ranking is somewhat off point.
I'm not personally bothered I self filter those who aren't in my categories or race series
So how do you suggest the initial ranking should have been calculated to avoid this?If I get my arse handed to me today with a few B cats listed in the event, then the initial ranking is somewhat off point.
Tron or Pinarello + ENVE 7.8 probably the best bet for tomorrow