Interesting graph that, imagine pushing 5.5w/kg for an hour!!! Bonkers. Puts me pretty much in the middle which seems about right, although I'd have thought trainer road would attract stronger riders, I've never trained in my life! Bit concerned some are below 0.25w/kg....should we send an ambulance!!
do you use zwift tinas ?
I tried it for a while, preferred Sufferfest. Actually preferred trainer road but the story lines in Sufferfest keep me amused even if TR has better training programs.
That and the curve on my trainer seems compressed, apparently I can maintain 325W, but can barely do 2.5x that in a sprint, so even if I did ride in a 3.5-4.0W/kg group I'd be left for dead in the last kilometer.
no zwift doesnt DQ you – ZP does if the race org has enabled it .
when yu look at end results you often see people who hold 6 w/kg ave.
More OFTEN than not i notice they dont have a lightening strike next to their name meaning they are on estimated power from sensors and an estimated curve rather than actual power.
seems somewhat pointless to me.
I don't know the ins and outs of it, could you not just look at the results on zwiftpower and ignore the sandbaggers/weight dopers?
Interesting graph that, imagine pushing 5.5w/kg for an hour!!! Bonkers. Puts me pretty much in the middle which seems about right, although I’d have thought trainer road would attract stronger riders, I’ve never trained in my life! Bit concerned some are below 0.25w/kg….should we send an ambulance!!
Hopefully an anomaly, like 0.1% have put the decimal point in the wrong place on their weight or something!
It'd be interesting to see a graph showing the spread relative to power meters for other ways of estimating power. e.g. powermeter Vs tranier curves, powermeter Vs Strava estimates etc. You would assume that Strava/Zwift/TR/SF etc update the profiles each time someone rides that trainer or bit of road with a power meter but there must still be a spread even between different setups with the same model. But it would be interesting to know if when Strava says I've done an 250W effort up a 20minute climb, how likely is that to be accurate (ignoring things like the days it says you did 300W+ because there was a tailwind)?
The ramp test overestimates FTP for me, ordinarily I'd expect to complete the 400W interval if I'm fit and giving it everything, which would give me an FTP of 300W+.
My best ever 20min effort is 313W from March 2019, 95% of which is 298W. I managed 311W for 20mins at Richmond iirc in a 1-lap race back in early Feb. Due to lack of training and possible COVID-19 illness, I'm back down at ~269W.
There's a lot of accuracy variance with power between turbos and power meters, they measure from different points in the drivetrain system and so results can vary massively.
I've compared my Neo Gen 1 & a SRAM Red Quarq twice, not much in it
I don’t know the ins and outs of it, could you not just look at the results on zwiftpower and ignore the sandbaggers/weight dopers?
You can't though because you're in a race, with a group of 30 of you.
So lets say you ignore the group and wait for the next group, you then missed the first 3 places on Zwiftpower as 3 of the others hung in with the bunch... But if you try and stay with the bunch the potential is, you get blown out near the end.... How do you decide ?
When i was racing C it was a simple affair for me because if you could pull away from me on the Crit circuit you were not a true C. Sure in the last 1km i'd get beaten by a few Cs at times, but not in the lead up to it. But as i say, you can't really just let people pull away from you if you're in a race, can you ?
if your not able to keep up then it should be a reasonable measure that your not going to finish at the front of the group anyway
as i said - race your own race not that of others.
its not the world champs its not win or go home without a pot to piss in . its a bit of fun
My best ever 20min effort is 313W from March 2019, 95% of which is 298W. I managed 311W for 20mins at Richmond iirc in a 1-lap race back in early Feb. Due to lack of training and possible COVID-19 illness, I’m back down at ~269W.
to be fair - 20 minute power is an estimated FTP anyway. and as such people train to improve that measure of FTP which improves your 20 minute power but not as much your actual FTP.
FTP is not the be all and end all.
they extrapolate from 20 minute power because a true FTP test is a thing of horror and VERY hard to pace.
a 25mile time trial event is a good FTP gauge as itll likely take you round an hour.
My ramp test on trainer road gave me 256. I have subsequently ridden for an hour on turbo non stop and I think the number was 263, so pretty good way of estimating.
My mate rides zwift with a wheel on tacx which is meant to be 'smart' and his numbers are all over the place, tt power varies between 230 and 260 watts. Even my flux power is totally inaccurate when compared to my stages, which is what I take my power readings for zwift, tr etc.
I do find that power indoors is far harder to come by than power outdoors. I reckon I'm about 5% lower on the turbo. Anyone else find this?
I do find that power indoors is far harder to come by than power outdoors. I reckon I’m about 5% lower on the turbo. Anyone else find this?
Nope, my best power figures for 5-60mins have all come from indoors (although a very quick look at this year shows I've done ~315W indoors and outdoors for ~10mins).
Outdoors for me gets messed up by factors including junctions; traffic lights; undulating terrain; wildly unstable climb gradients on relatively significant cat3/4 hills.
However, when I haven't turboed for several weeks, it takes me the best part of ~3 weeks of regular intensive sessions (~30mins+ with a vast majority at z4+ power, 3+ times a week) to allow my body to heat adapt to indoors and then match my outdoor stats. To begin with, my heart rate for any given power ~z3+ is significantly higher than outdoors.
I was one of the riders Dowsett was complaining about on the TT video (this race https://zwiftpower.com/events.php?zid=376569 )
Zwift has gifted us both with perfect CDA’s and he’s at altitude....
The difference with those guys is they can do those watts in a TT position or 6 hours GT, not just a 20-60 min race.
One thing I've noticed on Zwift is that I record higher maximum heart rates than I ever manage on the road. 193 Vs 186 BPM, using the same HR strap. Weird.
HR is just adrenaline and racing....
My highest HRs were when i raced local XC stuff and Zwift races of old
On a local loop I just can't mentally push myself the same
Same, I can’t get my HR up to the same levels I can achieve outdoors...
Using the road feel (motor etc) actually makes it harder to hold onto the pack downhill because you have to get it in top gear and pedal like crazy, whereas a normal trainer will just take any power input and increase your speed. On top of that, road feel robs power over cobbles and gravel sections.
I have a Neo, and have ridden a couple of events recently where I was pedalling flat out on big descents to try and keep up with other riders who were pulling away from me while freewheeling at zero Watts, so obviously different trainer setups work in very different ways.
Of course people will be "cheating" on Zwift, but there's not much point in worrying about it. It's an entertaining way to use a turbo trainer and a useful training aid for real life cycling. I'm nowhere near the pointy end of the events I ride, but I usually find a group I can ride with and where I have to put in a decent effort to keep up with the others.
HR is just adrenaline and racing….
I get as much adrenaline from a good Zwift race as i ever did from racing outdoors 🙂
To some, Zwift is a game... but when you're in the mix in the last 3km of a race with 20 others, it's SO not a game 🙂
@kcr you know about the super aero crouch thing on big hills? If you're putting out no power and it's steep enough you crouch and it's super aero, so sometimes not pedalling is faster.
It's not quite a game, but it's certainly not real racing. And I dont get anywhere near the buzz of rocking up to start line of a proper tt when im on zwift..nor do I particularly care where I place online either....the results are largely irrelevant, a bit like strava times.
It's a decent way to stay fit during winter and lock down, but I can't understand people who race online but not in real life..
t’s not quite a game, but it’s certainly not real racing. And I dont get anywhere near the buzz of rocking up to start line of a proper tt when im on zwift..nor do I particularly care where I place online either….the results are largely irrelevant, a bit like strava times.
It’s a decent way to stay fit during winter and lock down, but I can’t understand people who race online but not in real life..
I've done both, road circuits, XC, XCM, etc.... Zwift is just like it but without it being in the arse end of winter, cold, wet and muddy 🙂 Zwift racing has all of the positives and none of the negatives 🙂
I can race any time of the day, on courses that suit me, finish the race and 2 mins later i'm in the bath or sitting down with the family.... brilliant 🙂
It’s not quite a game, but it’s certainly not real racing. And I dont get anywhere near the buzz of rocking up to start line of a proper tt when im on zwift..nor do I particularly care where I place online either….the results are largely irrelevant, a bit like strava times.
It’s a decent way to stay fit during winter and lock down, but I can’t understand people who race online but not in real life..
I sort of agree but think it's huge for road racing, and can fully understand people preferring e-crits to real ones. Crashing is a very real thing in closed circuit road racing and personally I aint got time for that. People riding like bellends with the traffic is also a very real thing in open road racing AFAICT.
If I crash in a cyclocross race (which I do, frequently) then 9 times out of 10 it didn't hurt too much, my bike isn't broken, and, critically, it was likely my fault - I made a technical mistake so that's on me. Crash in the bunch sprint of a crit 9 times our of 10 is going to hurt like fk and maybe worse, decent chance of wrecking your bike, and often will be nothing to do with you.
My rule of thumb is that anyone going faster than me is probably cheating. To be fair, sometimes they are cheating inadvertently - eg: trainers with dodgy power outputs - but I do find it hard to believe that so many people an be faster than me. On my local loop, I have never been passed by anyone. Go figure 🙂
you know about the super aero crouch thing on big hills?
No, I wasn't aware of that at all! I did notice the other avatars going into the super tuck position.
Zwift racing has all of the positives and none of the negatives
Zwift is good fun, and they've done a decent job of simulating the feel of riding a bike (if you are using a smart trainer) but it's a long, long way from the cut and thrust of real world racing, and the buzz you get from racing flat out in a real world bunch.
HR is just adrenaline and racing….
Could be that. In my last race, it became critically important to come 25th rather than 26th! Thought I was going to pass out afterwards.
but it’s a long, long way from the cut and thrust of real world racing, and the buzz you get from racing flat out in a real world bunch.
For you.... not for everyone 🙂
For you…. not for everyone
Fair enough. For me, sitting in my garage pedalling in a straight line is a long way from manoeuvring around a fluid bunch, trying to read what my opponents are up to, negotiating terrain, corners and weather conditions and using them to best advantage, pushing my limits where getting things wrong could have real consequences. For me, a Zwift road race can be just as demanding as the real world in terms of simple Watts output, but it is nowhere near real life in terms of racing skills and mental intensity.
Similar to Dowsett, worth looking at Zwift Insider and Kevin Bouchard and Ted King do an A Cat race. Interesting take on the tactics they use, especially on use of drafting and being at the front at the start of the race.
Zwift Insider Video Link
Never done a Crit or any sort of road race (unless we include Ride London 😂 )
I’ve done a few TT and they are a lot of faff for 30 or 60 mins of cycling.
Done a few XC races
Zwift is easier than a TT and less faff and not much different in terms of technicality
XC racing is a lot muddier
Zwift is easier than a TT and less faff and not much different in terms of technicality
XC racing is a lot muddier
It's night and day different from the technicality of a real TT, tiger, as there is no aero. Means no position, means not all that interesting or relevant as squaring the power / aero circle is the essence of testing. What is my most powerful, most aero position, that I can safely sustain? Doesn't get any more technical than that - no single cycling technique is studied in more depth.
The other technical side of TTing is total conservation of momentum over the road undulations (v difficult skill to master IRL) but you do get at least a simulation of this in zwift.
Wow, this thread is a window into a world I was aware of, but don’t quite understand.
I got a cheap turbo just before lockdown and have started using Zwift to follow a training plan to hopefully come out of this fitter than I went in. I didn’t realise the racing thing was quite so serious & caring about what others are doing on it!
As for estimating FTP, I have no idea how accurate mine is. I did a ramp test, it came out at 245W and it bases the workouts around that which seems to be working OK.
I didn’t realise the racing thing was quite so serious & caring about what others are doing on it!
Don't ever look at the Zwiftpower forum then.
People care, deffo. I certainly care. Although since I moved to B and obscurity I care less
How accurate are the power readings from the cheaper tacx wheel on smart turbos?
I rode with my mate up alp d zwift yesterday, and he put out 265 watts for the climb. Which is as much as he's ever put out in any of the 20 min tts we do.
So either he's improved overnight, or these wheel on turbos vary from day to day fairly substantially..
If they're on a Flow it's +/- 5% you can see the variance here
I'm on a Flow at the moment and considering an upgrade, I was going to get a 2nd hand cross bike post lockdown but coming to the conclusion would get more value from improving my Zwift set up.
I'm not too worried about noise as in an detached insulated garage and ride with noise cancelling headphones, but would like to improve the accuracy and gradient reproduction.
If it makes any difference prob 80% ERG and 20% Racing/Free Rides.
So do I just drop some cash (when they're back in stock/people flogging them post lockdown) on a Kickr or Tacx Neo, or would an entry level direct drive plus a power meter and head-unit be a more flexible solution. Or maybe even keep the Flow and get a rear wheel power meter.
https://whatsonzwift.com/workouts/build-me-up/week-1-pre-training-plan/ isn't bad as a rough and ready way of gauging if your FTP is in the right ballpark, if doing it on when your legs aren't dead.