Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

W/kg or IF?
Quote | Reply
I've been thinking about this a bit...bike race categories (*on Zwift) are broken down into W/kg (ie A=>4.0, B=3.2-3.99...etc) at FTP, and while riding around in Zwift, everyone is able to see their instant pace/effort in terms of W/kg.

But, isn't it a better measure of effort to use intensity factor (IF)?

Comparing to weight is the first step in normalization to the population, as it's going to be a harder for the heavy people to go up hills but it doesn't really tell me about their effort level. Are they working as hard as me at 3.0 W/kg? This effort will be easy for an A rider and extreme for a C/D rider.


I did a Group Ride @ 2.5-3.0 recently and there were a bunch of complaints about how 'fast' the pace was. I thought to myself that I have no idea if it's fast for some or not because there is no relation to FTP.

Compare:
A 175 lb (80kg) male with an FTP of 320 Riding at ~3.0 W/kg=240w, which is 75% of FTP
A 175 lb (80kg) male with an FTP of 280 Riding at ~3.0 W/kg=240w, which is 86% of FTP
A 175 lb (80kg) male with an FTP of 240 Riding at ~3.0 W/kg =240w, which is 100% of FTP
A 155 lb (70kg) female with an FTP of 175 Riding at ~3.0 W/kg=210w, which is 120% of FTP
A 175 lb (80kg) female with an FTP of 175 Riding at ~3.0 W/kg=240w, which is 137% of FTP

Much easier for the big guy with the biggest engine, obviously. But no real ability to compare efforts while riding as FTP is not know, except for the fact that 3.0 is top end of FTP for C category, so I suspect that ride was really only for A/B riders.


Wouldn't it be a better comparison with IF? Or should anyone really care about anyone else's effort while riding or racing?
Quote Reply
Re: W/kg or IF? [dtoce] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What are you talking about .... ?
Bike categories are only a suggestion.
Unless you want to race ZADA approved, you can write anything on your profile, included your (estimated) FTP.
IF has nothing to do with "instant data" wich is needed to simulate speed. It's an "average" result of the whole past "effort".

Louis :-)
Quote Reply
Re: W/kg or IF? [louisn] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
louisn wrote:
What are you talking about .... ?
Bike categories are only a suggestion.
Unless you want to race ZADA approved, you can write anything on your profile, included your (estimated) FTP.
IF has nothing to do with "instant data" wich is needed to simulate speed. It's an "average" result of the whole past "effort".

Louis :-)


I'm talking about power. Rather than look at 200 watts and 2.85 W/kg, I'd rather see 0.80 IF. (my FTP is 250)
We don't see people's profile or their bike category, in 'real time' on the right side of the screen, we see W/kg.


If you know your FTP and your 'instant data power', IF can be determined easily.
current instant power/FTP=IF. Speed is irrelevant to me. And I don't need the entire effort for IF.

As it is, upper left corner in Zwift:
watts/rpm/HR

right side:
me and other riders/WperKG/total distance


I'm just saying that I'd rather look at IF as a measure of effort not watts or watts/kg

*(edited to add that it is a bastardized version of IF as it uses AP, not NP, for watts on a trainer during a Zwift ride...)
Last edited by: dtoce: Dec 1, 19 5:53
Quote Reply
Re: W/kg or IF? [dtoce] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It may make sense for you to be able to see your IF (potentially in the same area of the screen as your instant power/HR/Cadence)... but it makes absolutely no sense to have group rides based on IF. IF is completely meaningless to how fast you will ride, which is the only thing that matters for a group trying to stay together. Those people complaining that 2.5-3.0 W/kg is too hard/fast for them have simply picked the wrong group ride.
Quote Reply
Re: W/kg or IF? [kerikstri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
kerikstri wrote:
It may make sense for you to be able to see your IF (potentially in the same area of the screen as your instant power/HR/Cadence)... but it makes absolutely no sense to have group rides based on IF. IF is completely meaningless to how fast you will ride, which is the only thing that matters for a group trying to stay together. Those people complaining that 2.5-3.0 W/kg is too hard/fast for them have simply picked the wrong group ride.

I haven't done Zwift in over a year, but the group workouts where everyone stays together regardless of effort seemed unnatural to me. I could see IF being a way to lump everyone into a single group without totally suppressing effort-based positioning.
Quote Reply
Re: W/kg or IF? [trail] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
given that most courses are flat, pure watts means quite a bit more than w/kg does

kerikstri wrote:
It may make sense for you to be able to see your IF (potentially in the same area of the screen as your instant power/HR/Cadence)... but it makes absolutely no sense to have group rides based on IF. IF is completely meaningless to how fast you will ride, which is the only thing that matters for a group trying to stay together. Those people complaining that 2.5-3.0 W/kg is too hard/fast for them have simply picked the wrong group ride.

It's not. People will always hammer a good 0.5-1.5 w/kg on the harder sections (aka not riding smoothly in real world) and stretch the group. It takes a well-organized group leader to marshal things, with either constant reminders before the inclines and/or usage or fences to DQ people shooting off the front.

How one ride advertised as 3.0 w/kg behaves is quite different from how another one may behave.

trail wrote:
I haven't done Zwift in over a year, but the group workouts where everyone stays together regardless of effort seemed unnatural to me. I could see IF being a way to lump everyone into a single group without totally suppressing effort-based positioning.

it's all a bit academic, when it could be argued that indoor riding per se is unnatural

personally, i want something engaging when riding indoor, so I can put in the miles beyond what I would otherwise be able to do riding solo on zwift (about an hour, longer when I have a set workout). It so happens that riding within a group allows me to do that. If that's a group ride with people of comparable abilities, great. If that's a group ride that allows the group to stay together regardless of effort, that's fine, too.

Furthermore, IRL, a group ride that stays together regardless of abilities means some have to putter while others are red-lining; as a result, it just doesn't occur IRL. On zwift, this could occur, and I personally think it's better from a social perspective...
Quote Reply
Re: W/kg or IF? [dtoce] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dtoce wrote:

If you know your FTP and your 'instant data power', IF can be determined easily.
current instant power/FTP=IF. Speed is irrelevant to me. And I don't need the entire effort for IF.

......

*(edited to add that it is a bastardized version of IF as it uses AP, not NP, for watts on a trainer during a Zwift ride...)

It isn't just a bastardized version of IF, it is an incorrect one. Your equation above only applies where AP=NP and all of the time variation factors cancel out of the equation. Outside of this very unlikely scenario, where VI=1.0 for perfect pacing which you MIGHT get close to for a perfectly flat 10mile TT, you need to bring in the time variations. Instantaneous IF literally makes no sense, it is paradoxical when you look at the full equation and its purpose. And ESPECIALLY useless in a road race.

Also, in real life handicapping by race category is meant to be based on speed/ability. IF not only ignores weight, it also normalizes for ability by taking FTP about of the measurement. A 100w FTP cyclist can maintain the same IF as a 300w FTP cyclist for 1/3rd ish of the power.

I'm not sure what you are trying to get out of this?

Cheers, Rich.
Quote Reply