But TR doesn’t have “bikes” that require adjustments. They don’t have terrain changes that require adjustments. They don’t have drafting. TR’s speed discussions are in the primitive state compared to Zwift’s, which makes it simple.
Edit: After seeing your edit, it’s much of this input data that TR doesn’t have to deal with.
Zwift’s discussions need to continue as nothing is perfect, but continued discussions and work only helps to trend it towards better. TR’s response is that they don’t even want to start the work. Then don’t send distance or speed.
Most of the Zwift debates are really about how the app establishes a CdA based on the only 3 parameters available to do so: gender, height, weight. Which debate is 100% applicable to “please calculate my speed accurately in TR”.
In any other instance, we can have discussions about the details on what the best method to build a camp fire. But TR hasn’t even discovered fire yet. Seems premature to have detailed cda discussions to derail this getting implemented.
And again I say, if you don’t want to do it, that’s fine. Don’t send any speed/distance.
As @Nate_Pearson indicated - they tried that, and were inundated with service tickets.
The good news is, we have the ability to foresee the future debates relating to performance modeling, by looking at Zwift debates. The next one: “I’d like the performance modeling to take into account the altitude at which I’m using the app. It’s not fair, I’m at 8000 ft and I can’t output as much power as at sea level.”
For me, virtually all of the people I know who train indoors understand indoor training doesn’t matter for speed/distance. HOWEVER, I like this metric because it does help you somewhat keep track of distance on your equipment for maintenance cycles. For example, keeping an eye on distance on your chain and cassette.
document as support article on using a) gearing to deliver realistic speed, b) wheel size = 0 to drop speed to zero
Option 2: Add option to disable recording speed
document as support article on using gearing to deliver realistic speed
And then point everyone to the support article.
Move on and spend developer resources on stuff that makes us go faster. While the mental side matters, keep it simple and avoid the slippery slope of physics unless its part of a greater plan to support group racing or some such.
I do something similar. I leave Strava alone (don’t care) but I have an excel spreadsheet where I record time & mileage. I am using calories to determine how far I am riding. I know it’s not accurate either but it gives me a somewhat reasonable estimate of how far I would ride - assuming somewhat flat terrain with little wind.
I understand what you guys are saying with the slippery slope and can of worms. I’d say the can of worms has already been opened .
I just like improving things day to day and I may be a bit too passionate about that. That is progression. And if they did implement the simple equation above, sure it would continue the discussion with more advancement, not end it. So yes it is a can of worms. But while the discussion never ends, you end up with a better product. Better that than having a non ending discussion and moving nowhere
Have you ever been responsible for a software product? Every product I’ve been associated with has a list of at least 500-1000 items that will make the product better, to someone, somewhere. Simply put in my experience it is not possible to do every item on the list, or to keep incrementally improving every aspect of a product. The challenge is deciding what to work on, to deliver the biggest impact for the most number of users and/or draw new users. Ball is in TrainerRoad’s court to make the judgement call. Trying to minimize the effort (“just implement the simple equation already”) without knowing what’s on the development teams plate is, err, interesting? Not sure what to say. Good luck with that negotiating tactic.
My suggestion is to let your average speed results from a TrainerRoad work out that appear in STRAVA be directional rather than exact. For example what I have settled on for myself is taking a look at my STRAVA riding history outside during a given period of time and during that time I take what my average mile per hour was and set that as my benchmark. Let’s say my average speed was 20 mph During the time period I’ve chosen and I complete a TrainerRoad workout, sweet spot for example, And if my average speed is 23 mph as recorded in STRAVA. That means I probably have my chain on a cog that is too small. So I shift up one or two for my next work out and if my average speed on my next work out comes out to be right around 20 mph then that’s where I keep my gearing for all further workouts. Don’t let yourself get wrapped around the axle on such a thing. Pick a baseline mile per hour that fits your general average and then find the gearing that produces those similar results after each TrainerRoad workout.
