Why doesn’t Zwift offer more in the way of flatter TT courses. I don’t always like to climb for an hour and be credited for a 5 mile ride. Obviously you can train to hours versus miles, but not everyone wants to ride only hills.
The only flat courses are Tempus Fugit, Tik Tok, Volcano Flat and Beach Loop. The flat courses in Makuri are no joke and not flat. I’ve done 6 hour trainer rides and believe me I’m not racing for 6 hours or riding Road to Sky for 6 hours.
It’s like the whole format is geared toward recreational riders that will hammer for 45 to 90min.
I really wish Zwift would do something for triathletes. They could even use locations where triathlons are held like Kona, Oceanside, and Florida (Panama City Beach)
Agreed, I wish they had longer rides with relatively smaller hills. I’m doing IM Indiana and besides riding the Tick Tock course several times there’s no good long route.
With that said I do like Big Foot Hills, but again it’s not the same as training on a flatter route.
Agreed, I wish they had longer rides with relatively smaller hills. I’m doing IM Indiana and besides riding the Tick Tock course several times there’s no good long route.
You can reduce the resistance % if you wanted to do other routes without having the gradient hit the trainer resistance. Just an option for you.
Back to the OP - I note your point and sentiment, although I slightly dispute your point. I did 110km of fairly steady riding that ended up being a touch over 3 hours last saturday. Was Zwiftopia belt for the main part, and can’t quite remember the name of the other route but had some incline/decline on it - possibly the ‘flat’ route that still includes the zig zag climb and descent instead of going through the cobbled sprint section.
As someone that used to train for ironman on the imagic velodrome 15 years ago then I can say I love the inclusion of some elevation in the zwift routes I do use the flat ones for when I’m doing odd technique sets where I prefer to have steady resistance from the trainer and use the gears to change effort (one leg drills, rolling accelerations, etc).
All my riding is based on effort (watts) per hour and not virtual distance anyway, and TP doesn’t use distance in any metrics I track, so not really an issue for me.
Why doesn’t Zwift offer more in the way of flatter TT courses. I don’t always like to climb for an hour and be credited for a 5 mile ride. Obviously you can train to hours versus miles, but not everyone wants to ride only hills.
The only flat courses are Tempus Fugit, Tik Tok, Volcano Flat and Beach Loop. The flat courses in Makuri are no joke and not flat. I’ve done 6 hour trainer rides and believe me I’m not racing for 6 hours or riding Road to Sky for 6 hours.
It’s like the whole format is geared toward recreational riders that will hammer for 45 to 90min.
I really wish Zwift would do something for triathletes. They could even use locations where triathlons are held like Kona, Oceanside, and Florida (Panama City Beach)
I have to say I find Zwift offering far “flatter” options than anywhere I can ride outside! Also - a lot of the “hills” in Zwift are not very steep at all, most of the rolling courses top out at around 4-5-6 %. Set your trainer resistance to 50 % and the variance in power for a 5 hour ride will be way less than any outdoor ride you do. Imo wattopia has numerous flat-ish routes besides tempus. Flat Route, Tick - Tock, Wattopia waistband, even sand and Sequoias, volcano circuit / Volcano flat, etc.
Why doesn’t Zwift offer more in the way of flatter TT courses. I don’t always like to climb for an hour and be credited for a 5 mile ride. Obviously you can train to hours versus miles, but not everyone wants to ride only hills.
The only flat courses are Tempus Fugit, Tik Tok, Volcano Flat and Beach Loop. The flat courses in Makuri are no joke and not flat. I’ve done 6 hour trainer rides and believe me I’m not racing for 6 hours or riding Road to Sky for 6 hours.
It’s like the whole format is geared toward recreational riders that will hammer for 45 to 90min.
I really wish Zwift would do something for triathletes. They could even use locations where triathlons are held like Kona, Oceanside, and Florida (Panama City Beach)
I’m unclear what actual problem you are referring to, and I don’t think I’m the only one. In terms of terrain simulation from a physical point of view, it’s pretty irrelevant. You can reduce trainer “difficulty” to simulate a flatter route or switch it off entirely to utterly ignore the Zwift terrain. If you do that, the terrain is just cosmetic. You can ride as long or far as you like with as much or little resistance as you like.
If you just want to have a bigger distance figure to record at the end, well, that’s kinda silly. Zwift distance isn’t directly comparable to real life distance anyway, and do you really just look for the flattest terrain you can on training rides? Eddy Merckx wouldn’t be impressed!!! Once you’ve got power data and a watch, distance or speed become redundant metrics for recording effort.
Agreed, I wish they had longer rides with relatively smaller hills. I’m doing IM Indiana and besides riding the Tick Tock course several times there’s no good long route.
You can reduce the resistance % if you wanted to do other routes without having the gradient hit the trainer resistance. Just an option for you.
Back to the OP - I note your point and sentiment, although I slightly dispute your point. I did 110km of fairly steady riding that ended up being a touch over 3 hours last saturday. Was Zwiftopia belt for the main part, and can’t quite remember the name of the other route but had some incline/decline on it - possibly the ‘flat’ route that still includes the zig zag climb and descent instead of going through the cobbled sprint section.
As someone that used to train for ironman on the imagic velodrome 15 years ago then I can say I love the inclusion of some elevation in the zwift routes I do use the flat ones for when I’m doing odd technique sets where I prefer to have steady resistance from the trainer and use the gears to change effort (one leg drills, rolling accelerations, etc).
All my riding is based on effort (watts) per hour and not virtual distance anyway, and TP doesn’t use distance in any metrics I track, so not really an issue for me.
Thanks for the trainer difficulty pointer. I don’t know why I didn’t think of it. I had mine full difficult and lowered it to around 30%. It helped keep my mileage up and now I can add more variety in routes.
There’s a reason that Fuego Flats is the busiest part of Zwift. As far as longer flat courses, I think they worry about the density being too low.
As for other “flat” courses:
-Richmond fan flats, but it’s quite short.
-RGV route on the France map…just turn around before you get to the balloon field. This is my favorite “flat” route.
Did RGV last night. It was sweet as I hammered it. I took a U Turn at the Ballon Fields. Does that part get punchy?
I hadn’t used the U Turn function and that in itself was very useful. Thanks for the help.
Not punchy per se, but there’s a lot of small elevation changes (nothing more than 3-4%). None of it is sustained, but it could get annoying.
That part is supremely annoying in a group ride though, as the side-to-side change in direction severely reduces in-game draft.
Doesn’t sound terrible other than the side to side effect on drafting
It’s not horrible, but personally I find rollers on Zwift to be irritating since you are continually in the wrong gear. The Balloon Fields are the France map equivalent of Titan’s Grove.
There’s a reason that Fuego Flats is the busiest part of Zwift. As far as longer flat courses, I think they worry about the density being too low.
As for other “flat” courses:
-Richmond fan flats, but it’s quite short.
-RGV route on the France map…just turn around before you get to the balloon field. This is my favorite “flat” route.
Did RGV last night. It was sweet as I hammered it. I took a U Turn at the Ballon Fields. Does that part get punchy?
I hadn’t used the U Turn function and that in itself was very useful. Thanks for the help.
Not punchy per se, but there’s a lot of small elevation changes (nothing more than 3-4%). None of it is sustained, but it could get annoying.
That part is supremely annoying in a group ride though, as the side-to-side change in direction severely reduces in-game draft.
Doesn’t sound terrible other than the side to side effect on drafting
It’s not horrible, but personally I find rollers on Zwift to be irritating since you are continually in the wrong gear. The Balloon Fields are the France map equivalent of Titan’s Grove.
Pretty much this. It’s not too much of a bother when Im riding these rollers at threshold or below. They are much more annoying if I’m supposed to do 110-115% over them, as the gradient change necessitates constant gear changes, which means I could never get on top of things.
IRL rollers aren’t like this, where a gear change is needed almost every fifteen seconds.
My short answer to this is Zwift catering to road cycling, not tri or TT. Which is likely 5x their paying audience.
Honestly, I wish the TT’s thru USAC or club runs around here were more punchy, hilly, and technical. Anybody can put a head down looking 30 yards ahead and hammer. Even a Zwift indoors only idiot. Not everyone can really pace a complicated course and use bike handling skills at over 35mph downhill and around corners. As with fast corners the unskilled come out of aero and suck wind. The skilled fly thru.
So to that extent, if I want a smooth workout I do erg mode. If I want to do a free ride, elevation please.
Also to echo an earlier answer, simply lower the trainer % difficulty from 100% to like 25%. Likely would flatten the worlds right out.
