Zwift spins

Daroxtar · 05-05-2020 09:22PM

dahat wrote: »

I've got to make time to get this in the training plan. 50 plus mins climbing sounds horrific though.

No, it was only 49 minutes. Twas grand

:D

martyc5674 wrote: »

FairPlay that’s some time.
55 minutes was my previous best- bought a direct drive trainer recently and now it’s taking me 70 mins!

Ya, I'm highly skeptical about my real life ability to do the Alpe under an hour. My turbo doesn't go above 8% so i was able to keep a high enough cadence and very steady power output for most of it whereas in reality once I hit 10%+ my cadence drops down to 70rpm or less and once the cadence drops the legs start to burn a lot quicker. It was more of a TT than a real hill climb but I'm still happy with the overall improvement in the past few weeks.

martyc5674 · 05-05-2020 09:43PM

Daroxtar wrote: »

No, it was only 49 minutes. Twas grand :D

Ya, I'm highly skeptical about my real life ability to do the Alpe under an hour. My turbo doesn't go above 8% so i was able to keep a high enough cadence and very steady power output for most of it whereas in reality once I hit 10%+ my cadence drops down to 70rpm or less and once the cadence drops the legs start to burn a lot quicker. It was more of a TT than a real hill climb but I'm still happy with the overall improvement in the past few weeks.

That’s very true - my old trainer you could go up the alpe in the big ring spinning away - not a hope in hell on my new one which is more realistic for me, as I’m normally reaching for the small ring at 6-8% sustained gradient out on the road.

Macy0161 · 06-05-2020 10:15AM

There was a few virtual everesting it last week when I was on it (another minute off, but still quite under an hour*!) - apparently you have to have trainer difficultly set to 100% for it to "count" for everesting, which seems a bit mad when different turbos have different maximum gradients...

*I did manage under an hour on Sundays Zwift Team Ireland Uber Pretzel. Unfortunately, that was with the rubber band on the group, but it is on Strava so counts for someone!

Crocked · 06-05-2020 12:23PM

Daroxtar wrote: »

No, it was only 49 minutes. Twas grand :D

Ya, I'm highly skeptical about my real life ability to do the Alpe under an hour. My turbo doesn't go above 8% so i was able to keep a high enough cadence and very steady power output for most of it whereas in reality once I hit 10%+ my cadence drops down to 70rpm or less and once the cadence drops the legs start to burn a lot quicker. It was more of a TT than a real hill climb but I'm still happy with the overall improvement in the past few weeks.

If you haven't changed the setting Zwift defaults to around 50% difficulty, so if the climb is 10% Zwift tells your trainer to simulate 5%. So most trainers can cope with how Zwift defaults

CramCycle · 06-05-2020 12:29PM

Crocked wrote: »

If you haven't changed the setting Zwift defaults to around 50% difficulty, so if the climb is 10% Zwift tells your trainer to simulate 5%. So most trainers can cope with how Zwift defaults

I presume for races it goes to 100% though?

Macy0161 · 06-05-2020 12:38PM

CramCycle wrote: »

I presume for races it goes to 100% though?

No, one of the zwift insider racing tips I read was to reduce it to 30% for rolling courses.

Speed is still based upon power output, it just effects how much resistance you feel. Apparently - I haven't changed mine!

JimmiesRustled · 06-05-2020 01:12PM

CramCycle wrote: »

I presume for races it goes to 100% though?

As Macy pointed out you can have it anything you like even for race. This is why in some races you'll see lads holding the same power over the top of climbs and onto the descent that they were holding on the climb. Normally if someone is on a smart trainer with the "trainer difficulty" set to say 50% you'll notice a drop in power as they crest a climb and shift gears.

It's especially prevalent in the time trials. Set the resistance to zero, have your wahoo bolt/garmin edge control the smart trainer and just set a power in ERG. If you've a decent idea of what you can hold it makes it a bit easier than having to contend with shifting gears on climbs etc.

I think this is what Rohan Dennis did for that Alpe du Zwift climb with the rest of the Ineos lads. He didn't seem to drop or increase power as the gradient changed.

I don't have any problem with it but I think if Zwift are talking about becoming a bigger player in e-sports etc then its definitely a bit of an issue but probably the least of their worries in this domain what with the differences in power meter readings from one manufacturer to another and the issues around different smart trainers not to mention weight and height "doping" if you can call it that.

iwillhtfu · 06-05-2020 01:25PM

CramCycle wrote: »

I presume for races it goes to 100% though?

For the pro races they're all at 100% I'm guessing this is due to the fatigue created on an actual climb and some lads wouldn't hit it with the same effort in real life.

They've also brought in weight verification before hand also.

check out Lionel Sanders on youtube he's a triathlete but and absolute power house, he's really pushing to get the set up correct so there's no ability to cheat the system

Macy0161 · 06-05-2020 01:26PM

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

I don't have any problem with it but I think if Zwift are talking about becoming a bigger player in e-sports etc then its definitely a bit of an issue

I've done some TrainerRoad threshold workouts up the Alpe. I have considered building a workout to just hold the 3.2kg up to break the hour, but seems like cheating to me. And only cheating myself.

JimmiesRustled wrote: »

but probably the least of their worries in this domain what with the differences in power meter readings from one manufacturer to another and the issues around different smart trainers not to mention weight and height "doping" if you can call it that.

I see this when doing the TrainerRoad workouts controlling my Hammer, and Zwift taking power from my 4iii left sided. Where it's recorded will effect the output (pedals vs crank vs turbo), different manufacturers, total v dual v left only, whether it was calibrated, big ring vs small ring etc. I guess that's why zwift are getting into hardware!

CramCycle · 06-05-2020 03:05PM

Pretty much, so pedal and crank meters tend to give you a higher wattage as they aren't losing anything through the drivetrain, not much but a little. If I could hold my FTP I would do alot better in most races, in fact I could easily have programmed my powermeter to hold just under the limit between B and C catagories and come in near top of the pile each week. It wouldn't really be racing though, having to get out of the saddle on a short sharp climb just to make it over rather than change gears and carry a fair whack of speed is alot better craic. It is starting to explain those racers in the CI league who can just float right under the line. Tis a pity and something they need to fix to keep me interested after this is all over.

Daroxtar · 06-05-2020 03:32PM

Crocked wrote: »

If you haven't changed the setting Zwift defaults to around 50% difficulty, so if the climb is 10% Zwift tells your trainer to simulate 5%. So most trainers can cope with how Zwift defaults

Ya, it was on about 75%, I find it better for races to keep resistance up on descents. Aside from that I climbed it mostly in the small ring and popped into the big ring on bends or flatter sections and stood up to give the quads a break here and there.
As regards setting up just under the category limit, you won't win anything doing that. I tried that a couple of times and got spat straight out the back at the start. If you want to sandbag successfully you have to be a bit cuter than that

CramCycle · 06-05-2020 03:38PM

Daroxtar wrote: »

Ya, it was on about 75%, I find it better for races to keep resistance up on descents. Aside from that I climbed it mostly in the small ring and popped into the big ring on bends or flatter sections and stood up to give the quads a break here and there.
As regards setting up just under the category limit, you won't win anything doing that. I tried that a couple of times and got spat straight out the back at the start. If you want to sandbag successfully you have to be a bit cuter than that

Use your bolt to control resistance, have it set high at the start and drop it back after a few minutes to a steady state. Super tuck on descents to drag your average wattage down more, Bingo.

andy69 · 06-05-2020 04:14PM

I've to set mine to 100% because all the big boys and girls absolutely bombing it down the hills were leaving me for dust. I'm pushing out maybe 3WKG descending while some of them were at 0.something. I was swinging out of them!

So at 100% it means then I feel the drop in gradient fully (as opposed to having it at maybe 50% difficulty, and therefore only feeling like 2% on a 4% descent...and therefore having to push hard to keep up).

Did a race round the Park Perimeter course which was like a roller-coaster - so many crests and each time I had to change up and down off the big ring I could see I was losing ground over the folks that were able to stay in the one gear and let their trainer/zwift adjust their speed.
For the lighter folks among us, I think the 100% works better in my (limited) experience to it.

GPLama dude did a test of the settings there on YT recently, was interesting to see it working.

martyc5674 · 06-05-2020 04:32PM

andy69 wrote: »

I've to set mine to 100% because all the big boys and girls absolutely bombing it down the hills were leaving me for dust. I'm pushing out maybe 3WKG descending while some of them were at 0.something. I was swinging out of them!

So at 100% it means then I feel the drop in gradient fully (as opposed to having it at maybe 50% difficulty, and therefore only feeling like 2% on a 4% descent...and therefore having to push hard to keep up).

Did a race round the Park Perimeter course which was like a roller-coaster - so many crests and each time I had to change up and down off the big ring I could see I was losing ground over the folks that were able to stay in the one gear and let their trainer/zwift adjust their speed.
For the lighter folks among us, I think the 100% works better in my (limited) experience to it.

GPLama dude did a test of the settings there on YT recently, was interesting to see it working.

Youve that backwards i think- if you want to be able to push out good wattage on the descents you need your difficulty set lower.
Think about it- its much easier to put a bit of power into the pedals on a 2% versus a 10% where you can barely catch up with the drive train.
Marty.

dahat · 06-05-2020 04:48PM

I'm not so sure i'm losing out too much not having a smart trainer with Zwift reading the above. In order to stay in a group racing i've to hold high watts up & down hills as i feel no effect from drafting or incline increases. The further lads move away from me the more watts required while watching the gradient map onscreen. A poster here told me grind up & spin down which has helped massively while racing.

I've a pre order in for a smart trainer but not sure now i want to hand out near 1k without trying the game on a smart trainer.

andy69 · 06-05-2020 05:05PM

martyc5674 wrote: »

Youve that backwards i think- if you want to be able to push out good wattage on the descents you need your difficulty set lower.
Think about it- its much easier to put a bit of power into the pedals on a 2% versus a 10% where you can barely catch up with the drive train.
Marty.

Sorry yeah, it's half of half if you have it set to 50% difficulty...

If you've it set to Max, then on a -10% downhill you'll feel it at -5%. If you're at 50% difficulty you'll feel half of that, so -2.5%

This is exactly for the reason you pointed out there...you need something to push against. Found the vid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j78DORELiTY

Macy0161 · 06-05-2020 05:14PM

dahat wrote: »

I've a pre order in for a smart trainer but not sure now i want to hand out near 1k without trying the game on a smart trainer.

With the two caveats I didn't pay near that for my Hammer, and I haven't raced (yet, well apart from every group ride/ non-meet up I've done on zwift), I definitely think you miss the full experience on a dumb turbo. Whether it would lead to better race results is a different issue of course!

dahat · 06-05-2020 05:27PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

With the two caveats I didn't pay near that for my Hammer, and I haven't raced (yet, well apart from every group ride/ non-meet up I've done on zwift), I definitely think you miss the full experience on a dumb turbo. Whether it would lead to better race results is a different issue of course!

I'd suspect it would lead to higher watt values but not better results everytime. At the moment I'm hammering at threshold or near it for most of the time which is both good & bad. The workout feels solid which is exactly what I'm after.
The CI races are good craic and graded for everyone just don't lose weight, gain weight each week as you get better. Try one race, be no harder than any other group ride I'm sure.

The current dilemma is whether new power meter pedals over a new turbo is the next purchase, pedals currently ahead as my 6800 Stages is surely near end of life after 4 years or so.

JimmiesRustled · 06-05-2020 07:15PM

dahat wrote: »

I'd suspect it would lead to higher watt values but not better results everytime. At the moment I'm hammering at threshold or near it for most of the time which is both good & bad. The workout feels solid which is exactly what I'm after.
The CI races are good craic and graded for everyone just don't lose weight, gain weight each week as you get better. Try one race, be no harder than any other group ride I'm sure.

The current dilemma is whether new power meter pedals over a new turbo is the next purchase, pedals currently ahead as my 6800 Stages is surely near end of life after 4 years or so.

I'd 100% go power meter. Especially if the decision is between it or a turbo for a better experience on Zwift. Zwift with a smart trainer is almost harder. I've done both. My turbo was acting up so controlled resistance via my head unit. Had it set to a resistance of 35 whatever that means.

Yeah I guess you could argue it's a bit more "realistic" in terms of gradient simulation but zwift and realistic shouldn't be used in the same sentence. There are power ups, drafting is a bit of a mystery sometimes as updates come along and mess up the algorithm, lads holding power that pros would struggle to hold. It's good fun but I wouldn't get caught up in the marketing hype. The turbo is still a pain and to be honest I'm looking forward to training in terrible conditions over the winter after the last few weeks of being stuck on the turbo.

Crocked · 07-05-2020 07:48AM

CramCycle wrote: »

Pretty much, so pedal and crank meters tend to give you a higher wattage as they aren't losing anything through the drivetrain, not much but a little. If I could hold my FTP I would do alot better in most races, in fact I could easily have programmed my powermeter to hold just under the limit between B and C catagories and come in near top of the pile each week. It wouldn't really be racing though, having to get out of the saddle on a short sharp climb just to make it over rather than change gears and carry a fair whack of speed is alot better craic. It is starting to explain those racers in the CI league who can just float right under the line. Tis a pity and something they need to fix to keep me interested after this is all over.

In a race no-one is setting erg to hold a set power as you'll get dropped from groups and lose drafts. But there are certainly people who will sit up to drift back into a group regularly or have their garmin showing an average lap power so they know what their average is. Just so they come in under Zwift/ZP 95% of 20 min rule and don't get upgraded. Thats too much like hard work for me to be honest and zero craic. Nothing against it personally as they are playing the game, hopefully the newer zwift power zones will cut it out. Until Zwift move to a real world upgrade system where results get you upgrade not W/kg you'll have people managing their efforts to finish at the front. Anyone could race D cat and stay within cat limits and win every time at the moment (on ZP anyway)

A lot of the top A cat riders would have their trainer difficulty set t0 30% or lower to reduce the gradients and more importantly gear changes which is what it's really about. having to use only a couple of gears is much easier on the legs to keep in your happy zone cadence rather than mashing 60 rpm in the granny gear.

Speakerboxx · 07-05-2020 08:50AM

How does one know the power on your smart trainer is accurate? I feel mine is over reading but then again i can't be sure.

JimmiesRustled · 07-05-2020 08:52AM

Speakerboxx wrote: »

How does one know the power on your smart trainer is accurate? I feel mine is over reading but then again i can't be sure.

Unless you've more than one source of power, you won't really be able to tell. For training it should make no difference as long as it is consistent even if it is reading high.

lissard · 07-05-2020 11:00AM

All this talk of gaming Zwift to win races is a bit riduculous don't you think? Surely the point of a smart trainer is to replicate real world road feel. I mean who cycles up Alpe de Huez in 53x11 - it's nonsense. I'm all for setting the trainer difficulty to 100% so a hill actually feels like a hill and you have to shift down to climb it. For ERG mode workouts, it's fair enough as the faster gears makes everything smoother and a bit more pleasant but simulated road feel should match the real thing as much as possible.

CramCycle · 07-05-2020 11:03AM

I agree, I never knew this was possible. I thought the pedalling downhill when in a group was just an artefact of bad programming. If Zwift has taught me anything, some people will cheat at anything. I'd prefer they just had a standard for races or that each race organiser set the % feel and that was that.

martyc5674 · 07-05-2020 12:15PM

lissard wrote: »

All this talk of gaming Zwift to win races is a bit riduculous don't you think? Surely the point of a smart trainer is to replicate real world road feel. I mean who cycles up Alpe de Huez in 53x11 - it's nonsense. I'm all for setting the trainer difficulty to 100% so a hill actually feels like a hill and you have to shift down to climb it. For ERG mode workouts, it's fair enough as the faster gears makes everything smoother and a bit more pleasant but simulated road feel should match the real thing as much as possible.

The thing is- my last trainer only went to 6 or 8%- and I had it set to 100% and Its only now im realising why i was regularly getting dropped on descents. I put it down to me being relatively light, but its because i had it set to 100%.

But now I have a new trainer that goes to 25%- and even set @ 50% its a totally different animal.
So unless everyone is on a top end trainer capable of replicating the course there will always be differences even if everyone is set to 100%.
Marty.

Macy0161 · 07-05-2020 01:18PM

lissard wrote: »

All this talk of gaming Zwift to win races is a bit riduculous don't you think?

Eh, it is a game isn't it? Turbo difficulty way down the list of things "wrong" with zwift imo. Powerups, these new "boost" features they're testing, weight doping, power meter differences...

lissard wrote: »

Surely the point of a smart trainer is to replicate real world road feel. I mean who cycles up Alpe de Huez in 53x11 - it's nonsense. I'm all for setting the trainer difficulty to 100% so a hill actually feels like a hill and you have to shift down to climb it. For ERG mode workouts, it's fair enough as the faster gears makes everything smoother and a bit more pleasant but simulated road feel should match the real thing as much as possible.

As Marty says, it's just another variable - lots of turbo's don't go up to the 18% you get on the bonus climb.

My understanding is that it doesn't make it easier, it effectively gives you more gears - someone could be doing the alpe at 100%, but spinning up on a mountain bike, against someone on a standard crankset and an 11-23 also at 100%. There's always variables.

Zwift defaults to 50% - this thread shows that people don't even realise that.

CramCycle · 07-05-2020 01:23PM

Macy0161 wrote: »

Zwift defaults to 50% - this thread shows that people don't even realise that.

I have to say, climbing is my thing and I was shocked at how I was battering up some of the 14% climbs. I put it down to just being short and sharp and hitting the power before the powermeter increased the resistance, so i just ploughed through. It underestimating the resistance now clarifies I was not the man I thought I was in the virtul world.

dahat · 07-05-2020 02:12PM

Are people looking for too much for what is essentially a computer game?

JimmiesRustled · 07-05-2020 02:30PM

dahat wrote: »

Are people looking for too much for what is essentially a computer game?

I don't think so. You look at any computer game and you'll have cheating but you'll equally have measures that weed this out for the most part. Zwift have kind of just wiped their hands of trying to regulate any sort cheating within the program and have instead left it to volunteers at Zwiftpower to try and regulate it.

It's not exactly a cheap platform at €15 month. It's obviously been trying to cater itself to competitive cyclists what with e-nationals and big competitive events but has completely failed to try and bring in any sort of anti-cheat mechanism instead leaving this to ZwiftPower and it's mods.

I'm not talking about incremental weight/height changes. I'm talking about lads going from 90kg to 50kg in a day and then back to 90kg after a race. Same with height. That and offsetting calibration of power meters in order to produce bigger power figures.

It's fun for what it is but with the popularity of it growing, especially in the competitive scene, Zwift would really need to have some measures in place to root out some of these more obvious issues if they're looking for it to try and sit with regular road racing. Which, from seeing it on Eurosport the last few days, looks like the direction they might be trying to take it.

Macy0161 · 07-05-2020 02:40PM

Weepsie wrote: »

Ye should all give RGCycling a go. It's a bit more rooted in realism.

No boosts, it will slow you down on a corner and reduced power no matter what your putting out, drafting kinda works well..

It has a limited user base, but could easily organise a private race on it if people wanted. (Even on a virtual local route)

I've tried to use it, several times, and got bored of waiting for it to load. Going to try it again over the weekend with The Cycling Podcast "Our Giro" routes.

From the outside looking in, I was never convinced by zwift, but I'm pretty much converted, albeit as to date a non-racer. Never getting the wheels at the top of the alpe way more irritating to me than most of the other stuff (try again for sub 60 and wheels tomorrow!).

Zwift spins

Comments