Countime wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 6:35 pm
I think we just need a B+ and C+ catagory like they did with the A’s
And then once we've all adapted to that and I'm frustrated that I'm being pushed into B but can't compete do I then get a B- category as well?

Check out Mark Roberts' post on Zwift Racers FB about why KISS have moved to a blanket E category in their races: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ZwiftRa ... 616336912/

Some good points made in a long but worthwhile post. Most relevant sections quoted below (without permission):

If we engage in a little reductio ad absurdum we'll see how daft W/kg categories for racing are... In the interests of fairness anyone who holds 4.0+ races in the A category so the riders who can just about get to 4.0 have a chance of winning the B category. But 3.2 - 4.0 is quite a wide range of performance, so shouldn't we split that in two because right now the people at 3.5 have no chance of winning? And then maybe we should take our new B+ category of 3.6 - 4.0 and split that because the riders at 3.8 still have no chance of winning. And we keep going and going and going. Eventually everyone gets their own category. Everyone gets to win.

tl;dr

If you throw away ABCD and everyone races everyone else all of that goes away (although I accept it might bring problems I've not thought of). So you used to finish near the front of the D category, but now you're down in 90th place? Maybe ZwiftPower used to show you as D-1, but now it shows you as U-90? So what? Really? Ultimately it means exactly the same thing. You're still finishing in the same ***absolute*** position you always were. ***Nothing*** has changed in that regard. Those A, B, and C riders were always ahead of you before. They still are. The only difference is we no longer have some arbitrary banding that creates the *illusion* of you finishing in a higher position.
I totally disagree with Mark Roberts' post on FB.

If we get rid of different categories we will alienate most rides that participate in races. Why do IRL races have different Categories? It is to make it exiting for i wider group of people.

i am not going to push hard for a 90th place, I will ride my legs of for a 3rd even if it is C. We all want to pretend we are real races like this A+ guys, we want to play tactics, try to make a breakaway or to let a small group go and real them in just before the line.

In big races we do need more than 4 categories and on smaller one less. This need to be controlled by Zwift, we need on the fly categorization (ie every one enter the race with no cat's and then as we roll out we get grouped into our cats, with A going first and 30sec later B ....) Zwift can use the ZP rider score to determine the groups and if the person is not on ZP Zwift use the FTP/weight plus a factor.

I know most race organizers are in the top of the game, so they tend to look out for the top and that is ok, the top have different issues and I think they are a lot harder to solve.
I’m not saying we should ditch categories altogether, and I still race C category so I can enjoy being competetive. My post was in response to the idea of introducing B+ and C+. No category system is perfect and at some point we just have to ride what we have.

NB. I understand that as a rider who’s natural ability extends to exactly 3.2w/kg then that’s easy for me to say, however as I lose more weight I will inevitably end up becoming a very non-competetive B cat racer in the very near future and I’m OK with that.
domj039 wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:45 am
Countime wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 6:35 pm
I think we just need a B+ and C+ catagory like they did with the A’s
And then once we've all adapted to that and I'm frustrated that I'm being pushed into B but can't compete do I then get a B- category as well?

Check out Mark Roberts' post on Zwift Racers FB about why KISS have moved to a blanket E category in their races: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ZwiftRa ... 616336912/

Some good points made in a long but worthwhile post. Most relevant sections quoted below (without permission):

If we engage in a little reductio ad absurdum we'll see how daft W/kg categories for racing are... In the interests of fairness anyone who holds 4.0+ races in the A category so the riders who can just about get to 4.0 have a chance of winning the B category. But 3.2 - 4.0 is quite a wide range of performance, so shouldn't we split that in two because right now the people at 3.5 have no chance of winning? And then maybe we should take our new B+ category of 3.6 - 4.0 and split that because the riders at 3.8 still have no chance of winning. And we keep going and going and going. Eventually everyone gets their own category. Everyone gets to win.

tl;dr

If you throw away ABCD and everyone races everyone else all of that goes away (although I accept it might bring problems I've not thought of). So you used to finish near the front of the D category, but now you're down in 90th place? Maybe ZwiftPower used to show you as D-1, but now it shows you as U-90? So what? Really? Ultimately it means exactly the same thing. You're still finishing in the same ***absolute*** position you always were. ***Nothing*** has changed in that regard. Those A, B, and C riders were always ahead of you before. They still are. The only difference is we no longer have some arbitrary banding that creates the *illusion* of you finishing in a higher position.
Eh, I disagree that you can't win B races at 3.5.

You definitely can. If you look at my race history, that used to be my limit and I still could podium (flat) races regularly back then, even at 3.4-3.6 w/kg averages.
GerrieDelport wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:43 pm
I totally disagree with Mark Roberts' post on FB.

If we get rid of different categories we will alienate most rides that participate in races. Why do IRL races have different Categories? It is to make it exiting for i wider group of people.

i am not going to push hard for a 90th place, I will ride my legs of for a 3rd even if it is C. We all want to pretend we are real races like this A+ guys, we want to play tactics, try to make a breakaway or to let a small group go and real them in just before the line.

In big races we do need more than 4 categories and on smaller one less. This need to be controlled by Zwift, we need on the fly categorization (ie every one enter the race with no cat's and then as we roll out we get grouped into our cats, with A going first and 30sec later B ....) Zwift can use the ZP rider score to determine the groups and if the person is not on ZP Zwift use the FTP/weight plus a factor.

I know most race organizers are in the top of the game, so they tend to look out for the top and that is ok, the top have different issues and I think they are a lot harder to solve.
I agree with you.

If no categories, a race is just interesting for those few A-riders in the front group. For 90% of the riders, the race will be done in the first kilometer already. Racing is not just racing, it's also the tactical game, sprinting for a win, etc.

I am, however, not a fan of more categories. In the end, always somebody will be the first and somebody the last. I don't think 8 or 10 categories will make racing more fun.

No system is perfect, I would focus on tweaking some con's of the current system, not changing it radically.
One thing that would help fairness in all races without changing catagories is this.
Dont allow riders to get draft benefit from someone that is not in their catagory.
Example. If u in a b race with the main group and the A’ s going flying by the top b’s will jump on thus creating a disparity in the B grp. In the real world they do not allow different catagories to draft off each other. Im guessing in zwift they did this at first because there was not enough riders and it helped the “social” aspect. But now we are past that. Yes there are some races where the faster gros go first and thus that helps but really just remove the draft effect and then it does not matter when u start. The b’ c’ etc will then stay within their own group as it should be.
One thing that would help fairness in all races without changing catagories is this.
Dont allow riders to get draft benefit from someone that is not in their catagory.
Example. If u in a b race with the main group and the A’ s going flying by the top b’s will jump on thus creating a disparity in the B grp. In the real world they do not allow different catagories to draft off each other. Im guessing in zwift they did this at first because there was not enough riders and it helped the “social” aspect. But now we are past that. Yes there are some races where the faster gros go first and thus that helps but really just remove the draft effect and then it does not matter when u start. The b’ c’ etc will then stay within their own group as it should be.
Countime wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:54 am
One thing that would help fairness in all races without changing catagories is this.
Dont allow riders to get draft benefit from someone that is not in their catagory.
Example. If u in a b race with the main group and the A’ s going flying by the top b’s will jump on thus creating a disparity in the B grp. In the real world they do not allow different catagories to draft off each other. Im guessing in zwift they did this at first because there was not enough riders and it helped the “social” aspect. But now we are past that. Yes there are some races where the faster gros go first and thus that helps but really just remove the draft effect and then it does not matter when u start. The b’ c’ etc will then stay within their own group as it should be.
Interesting idea. Personally I try to stick onto a higher category group for as long as I can, getting as much of a draft advantage as I can. If no one could adopt that tactic it'd be a totally different (arguably more interesting) race.
Countime wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:54 am
One thing that would help fairness in all races without changing catagories is this.
Dont allow riders to get draft benefit from someone that is not in their catagory.
Example. If u in a b race with the main group and the A’ s going flying by the top b’s will jump on thus creating a disparity in the B grp. In the real world they do not allow different catagories to draft off each other. Im guessing in zwift they did this at first because there was not enough riders and it helped the “social” aspect. But now we are past that. Yes there are some races where the faster gros go first and thus that helps but really just remove the draft effect and then it does not matter when u start. The b’ c’ etc will then stay within their own group as it should be.
hmmh... would be a worth of testing..
Stu_P wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:47 am
Countime wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:54 am
One thing that would help fairness in all races without changing catagories is this.
Dont allow riders to get draft benefit from someone that is not in their catagory.
Example. If u in a b race with the main group and the A’ s going flying by the top b’s will jump on thus creating a disparity in the B grp. In the real world they do not allow different catagories to draft off each other. Im guessing in zwift they did this at first because there was not enough riders and it helped the “social” aspect. But now we are past that. Yes there are some races where the faster gros go first and thus that helps but really just remove the draft effect and then it does not matter when u start. The b’ c’ etc will then stay within their own group as it should be.
Interesting idea. Personally I try to stick onto a higher category group for as long as I can, getting as much of a draft advantage as I can. If no one could adopt that tactic it'd be a totally different (arguably more interesting) race.
Race organisers can cull other categories already.