True it does ( I know, i had a horrid game of league yesterday because of ping times)
But (indulge me for a second) - tampering with latency is a one way street, you cant make it go faster, you can introduce lag in the system - remember the old lan party days, where someone would unplug the network cable or hit pause on the router to dodge a kill? Yeah that doesnt happen anymore in the online games.. a) the companies that make these games are spending a ton of Operational man(person) power on improving last-mile latency. b) the games are designed to either send your character back to the spawn point if you disconnect, or the "action" is happening on the server, so you still die.

On the other hand with zwift, the tampering is all local (like the old lan party days) - all the data collection, the metrics, is all local. So tampering the trainer, or have someone else ride, or weight doping actually incentivize the player.

You are correct, though there are other ways to cheat in online games. I will admit it is MUCH easier to cheat in Zwift than in other games, but cheating is not exclusive to Zwift.

That's right. Only those that currently live in a place where noise is not an issue to neighbors (like a detached home or don't care). Non-homeowners or anyone without detached walls probably wont participate. Age range would most likely be 35-75.I'm describing the limitations because I'm in that category.

Esports - teams would practice on their own equipment then participate at live events or compete remotely which you could do in Zwift. DC Rainmaker's article also talks about those. The article here (https://zwiftinsider.com/how-massive-is-zwift/) mentions: Zwift isn’t just a fitness tool… it’s also an MMO: a massively multiplayer online game. But just how massive is it?

Or make it end

---

***

Currently it might be easy. But the industry *should* eventually be able to take advantage of the BTE standards for authentication and encryption with relative ease. I haven't though fully through the authentication logistics, but the overall BTE standards consortium is acutely aware of the danger of man-in-the-middle attacks, which is what your proxy device is. It's just that normally the end consumer isn't also the threat. (Normally the threat is a 3rd party). But I think the case of the malevolent consumer can be handled.

If the money becomes serious, the cheating issue will destroy it. Zwift isn’t reading the power from your trainer, it’s reading an Ant+ signal, that it assumes is from your trainer. What you need is an ant+ signal giving power data and some device data ( which can be simulated ).

I’ve been messing around with Ant+ in recent months, their site is really good, and you can simulate ant devices.

If I wanted to cheat for a load of cash, I would ‘ride’ Zwift using a joystick.

I don’t see how they can prevent that.

On site races.

Yes, the only way.

A group of people in a room racing.

Might as well go outside together, then.

Kind of defeats the purpose, imho.

They don't all have to be at the same site. You could have designated sites at various locations across the globe.

Also, you don't need to close roads, don't need security or other infrastructure. Live stream allows you to broadcast the race to the world at minimal costs. Many benefits.

I do a 24 hour team relay computrainer race every year at a computrainer studio. It is an awesome event. I could see the demand for a zwift studio for sure. Here in Madison, we have two indoor training studios (that I am aware of) and I think they do ok... or at least they have been in business for some time so they are at least surviving. I think a zwift studio would attract customers, at least in Madison where the market supports endurance sports and the weather is bad enough part of the year. I don't know if you can justify the capex needing to have both a trainer and an individual screen per trainer, but who knows. I would think zwift at some point would try to offer some sort of commercial membership package/software for this similar to computrainer's studio software.

As for watching zwift racing in general... I watched the last race after reading the DC rainmaker article. I did it while doing a workout. I did not like it, and probably won't watch another race, but who knows.

Sure cheating is an issue that should be addressed. 'Live events' look to be an easy solution but they detract from one of the biggest selling points of Zwift racing: you can compete in a location that is convenient to you without impacting on family life.

The most committed Zwift racer I know retired from a professional cycling career, had a couple if kids and now races in the lounge room whist they are asleep (or otherwise occupied). She has raced CVR, the national eCrit and the KISS super league. She has benefitted from the competition and the team work. She wouldn't have been able to do any of it if she had been forced to travel even if it was just to a local site.

As an aside, live events have their issues too. Some of the CVR finals have been plagued with dropouts. All those trainers and HR monitors transmitting in close proximity I guess. More than one person has had their chances wiped out by an untimely transmission error.

I don't know what the anti cheating solution is, but I think it would be silly to choose one that removes the very thing that sets Zwift racing apart.

It does not defeat the purpose, if the purpose is to equitably compare the participants in the zwift/e-race. And I do believe it's just another segment of cycling. It can be called 'e' but you are still on a bike doing exercise, not moving a joystick (*if you aren't cheating...ala bluefever's ant manipulation offer...) and there is a real physical benefit to doing e-sports, as opposed to regular video gaming. *(And yes, I'm all ears to hear the gamers comments about this but I've personally seen the issue and have heard endless stories from my patients)