The Peloton Guide is far cheaper than some other products in its category (for those with the “all-access” Peloton plan, at least) but it often feels like it’s still version 1.0.
A few months ago I purchased the Peloton Guide. I had been taking some weight training classes, and was intrigued by some of the things the instructors said in the class, namely that if I had the Peloton guide, it would track reps and keep track of how much weight I was actually lifting. I checked on pricing, and found that it was a one-time cost (about $200, if I recall), with no additional monthly cost as I already had the “all-access” plan. (Important note: if you don’t have the “all-access” plan, there is a monthly cost to owning a Peloton Guide, and that changes the value proposition immensely. I like having the guide and use it several times a week, but would not be keeping it if it had its own subscription.)
The guide comes in one box and consists of two devices, the camera and a remote. The camera plugs directly into your TV via HDMI and doesn’t require a smart TV or any particular apps or intermediary devices. Calibration is quick — just repeat a few key phrases and you’re good to go.
You get a remote, but it seems that just about every command can be performed using voice as well. In practice, I only use the voice commands for in-class actions, such as changing the weight I’m using for an exercise (I do not have the Peloton Rack, which apparently automates this as well). I should mention that a second user in my home had a lot of trouble getting the guide to respond to her voice, but this seemed to clear up after she re-ran the voice control set up.
There are videos online from Peloton on how the Guide works, so I’m not going to go into all of the features. Rather, I’ll just give you the highlights and lowlights of the user experience. Spoiler alert: I’m still using it, so all-in-all I have to give it a positive rating, but my wish list is also pretty long.
What the Guide does well:
The one thing the Guide does best is act as a commitment mechanism. It’ll keep track of your workouts, and will set a schedule for you based on your preferences (for example, the number of days in the week you want to train). For some people, I think, this might be just the thing to get them into a routine.
The Guide will also set a schedule, so you can tell it that you want to work out, say, four days a week, and it will set up a new four-workout set each week. I appreciate having that done for me, though I do not know how personalized the recommendations are. It’d be great if it could make some sort of analysis, based on my past performance, to tailor the workouts, but I don’t think it’s likely doing anything nearly as sophisticated. I imagine that most everyone who selects the same number of workouts is recommended the same mix, but I don’t know that for sure.
What the Guide doesn’t do well:
The Guide certainly has some room for improvement in some areas, and the thing I would put at the top of the list is rep counting. There are a lot of instances in which the Guide counts extra reps. To give one example, say you are doing a dumbbell press (pushing a dumbbell from your shoulder to over your head). You do a set of them and they’re counted — all good. Now, you are done, so you lower the weight to your waist or to the floor and the counter counts that as a rep. This is a problem, as far as I’m concerned. I want to be able to return to this workout in, say, a month, to see if I’ve improved, and the difference between being able to do ten reps of an exercise and being able to do eleven is not insignificant. Some exercises are even worse — pushups sometimes are counted wildly, maybe because the motion isn’t all that dramatic and the camera has to see your whole body, but pushup counts (and floor exercises in general) tend to be very inaccurate.
Given that the Guide seems to have a lot of trouble with rep counting, it doesn’t even attempt to try in a lot of cases. Combination moves (say, a snatch to a press) generally aren’t tracked. Often you just see “timed activity” in the display when the motion is just too complicated to track, and that happens pretty often.
The other way in which I think the Guide is a bit of a disappointment is that it doesn’t do anything to correct your form. It does let you see yourself on the TV in a window so you can see your own form and compare it to the instructor, but you can only do that when you’re facing the camera. For many exercises, you’re asked to turn to the side (90 degrees to the camera), so facing to the side and then looking back to the screen is awkward. Additionally, it’s not so easy to look at the screen when you’re on the floor doing floor exercises.
Other limitations:
The biggest limitation, it seems, to the Guide is that everything is either a floor exercise or a dumbbell exercise, so it’s not possible to get an equally good workout for each muscle group. Specifically, exercise in which you’re asked to pull down are next to impossible. Back exercises generally have you leaning forward from the hips, and you could reach the limit of what your lower back can stand before you reach the limit of your upper back muscles to work out. Lower body work tends to be various forms of squats, either one-legged or two-legged. You can get a good workout, to be sure, but ultimately it seems like a workout might contain two or three exercises that work the exact same muscles.
After workouts, you can see some neat graphics that show what muscle groups you have been working out. I think this is really based on the content of the exercise program rather than any feedback from your actual workout. It will tell you how many reps you did and how many targets you hit, but I have yet to figure out how to benefit from that information. On a workout by workout basis you can compare your current effort to a prior effort, but to do so you need to take the exact same workout as before. It would be more useful if the system were to break down by exercise and report on trends on that basis rather than doing comparisons by workout.
Final word:
The Guide works for me because I only had to pay the up-front price for the device and I already have the dumbbells needed. The workout scheduler does create a compelling commitment mechanism. I am hoping that the software will improve over time, that rep counting will become more reliable, that the algorithms used to analyze my progress and select workouts will improve (not sure it’s do any of that today) and that the Guide will gain the ability to help me perfect my form. Will that happen? Hard to say. I do not have any visibility into how much of a priority the Guide is for Peloton. The company’s post-pandemic troubles have been widely publicized, and I’m sure they are being extremely circumspect about where they are spending their energies in terms of building out new capabilities in their products. It would not surprise me if the Guide doesn’t grow beyond what it is today, but if it doesn’t, there is a lot of room for a competitor to seize the in-home weight-training market.
To recap, back in May of this year (102 days ago, to be exact) I, like many owners of the original model Peloton bike, received an email titled “Important Recall Notice”. This email read, in part:
Today, Peloton is announcing a voluntary recall of original Peloton model Bikes sold from January 2018 to May 2023 in the US. This voluntary recall is being conducted in cooperation with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).
…
REASON FOR THE RECALL: The original Peloton Bike seat post can break unexpectedly during use, creating a potential fall and injury risk. Peloton has identified 35 reports of seat posts breaking out of 2,160,000 units sold in the US. There have been 13 reports of injuries, including a wrist fracture, lacerations and bruises.
Because my Peloton bike gets used nearly every day, I ordered my free replacement right away. A few weeks later I got an email saying that due to high demand, they were prioritizing riders above a certain height or weight. I didn’t meet either criteria, so I was in the last group to get a replacement post.
Evidently, Peloton fielded 750,000 requests for replacement seat posts, so it has taken them a bit of time to meet that demand. Anyway the post arrived via FedEx today, and only took a couple of minutes to install (Phillips-head screwdriver required). I examined the new post against the old, and they appear to be made of the exact same materials (powder-coated steel of the same gauge, as far as I can tell. The heft is similar). The only difference I could tell is that the welds between the segments (there are two welds) were significantly beefier on the new post.
Here are photos of the two posts, with the old post in the foreground. The difference in the thickness of the welding bead is pretty noticeable.
Examining the old post, there are several spots where the powder-coating has worn off, but certainly no cracks, corrosion, or anything else that looked worrisome. Near as I can tell, it looks completely solid (though perhaps the ones that have broken looked that way, too!)
My Peloton bike has gotten years of daily or near-daily use, and it’s held up well. The only part I have needed to replace (apart from the pedals) are the plastic water-bottle holders (which are unfortunately made of very brittle plastic), and even these were a no-cost fix (I can’t remember exactly when I did that or how old the bike was at the time.) The bike is still quite and there has been no need to replace bearings or belts or anything. Sure, my wife and I are not particularly big or powerful riders, but this bike has had a lot of virtual miles on it, and it’s still going strong.
What pedals should I replace my Peloton pedals with?
I have been asked that question numerous times since I wrote my blog post on broken Peloton pedals and the need to replace them periodically (about every 12 months, according to Peloton). You’re a busy person, so I’ll give you the short answer first…
Answer: just about any “delta” or “look”-style pedal will do.
Why these particular pedals? The answer has to do with the Peloton shoes and not the bike. As you can see from the photo, the Peloton shoe has three screw holes for the cleat, arranged in a triangle pattern (a.k.a. a “delta”, which is what gives the delta-style clip its name). So, you need to find a pedal that uses a compatible cleat. You’ll get a pair of cleats in the box with your new pedals, so if you’re the only Pelotoner in the family you are all set. If not, you may need to buy cleats for the other riders, as there can be variations between the different delta-style manufacturers that could necessitate new cleats. Fortunately, cleats aren’t all that expensive if you need to buy them.
On my road bike, I have SPD pedals, which make it easier to clip-in and clip-out and therefore more to my liking for actual road use. Neither of these things is particularly important for Peloton use, at least in my experience. Needless to say, if you’re not using your Peloton shoes, SPD might be an option for you. (If your shoes are SPD ready they’ll have two screw holes side-by-side, close to one another near the centerline of the shoe.)
There aren’t too many variables when buying pedals and cleats, but one you should be aware of is “float“. Float has to do with how much lateral motion is allowed when clipped in, meaning how much your heel can swing in or out before you actually unclip. Float can range from zero to a few degrees of angle. I don’t have any reference information to back me up, but I believe the stock Peloton cleats have zero float — you’re pretty locked-in on those. Whether you want to go with something a bit more permissive is really up to you.
My best advice is to ask at your local bike shop. You could even bring your shoes. Any pedals they sell you will work because the threaded holes on the crank arm is standard, so the fact that you are shopping for pedals for a Peloton bike and not a road bike doesn’t really make a difference.
Before I begin discussing the Strive Score, let me note that I’m not a doctor or any other type of accredited authority. I’m just an ordinary Pelotoner who likes data. This blog should not be used in place of advice from a real medical expert.
On April 30th, 2021, Peloton announced a new heart rate-related metric across all workouts. They call it “Strive Score” and here’s how they describe it:
Strive Score is a personal, non-competitive metric that measures your performance in every workout—from equipment to the floor. All you need is a compatible heart rate monitor…and some good old-fashioned motivation.
Peloton PR
The Holy Grail, not just for Peloton but for all on-and-offline fitness programs is finding some way to quantify effort in a way that is meaningful regardless of your personal physiology and fitness level. This sort of universal measurement has so far eluded sports science, and is a huge barrier in the automation of any sort of personalized training program. Some day, when science has evolved sufficiently, we will look back at the sort of metrics we use today as being very crude, but nevertheless today this is what we have to work with.
Peloton’s best metric in this regard is the good ol’ FTP number. FTP, Functional Threshold Power, is a number which is arrived at by actual experimentation on the athlete. Basically, to find your FTP score, you work as hard as you possibly can for a period of time, and however much work you can do (a multiplier might be involved depending on how long your test is) becomes your FTP. Your workout intensity is then based on that number (10 minutes at 80% FTP, 5 minutes at 110% of FTP, etc). Periodically, you re-test to recalibrate, and use the new FTP number as the basis of future workouts.
The Strive Score explained
Many people do not want to endure the FTP test, and that’s understandable. Unfortunately, if you’re not going to be using a benchmark that was at least arrived at using real-world data about you individually, you really have no choice but to fall back to something that is far more generic. This is where heart rate comes into the picture. Heart rate correlates to effort, of course. Your heart rate is slowest during most phases of sleep, and is highest when doing strenuous work such as running or climbing stairs. We’re all individuals when it comes to how quickly our heart rate increases under stress and how quickly it recovers when resting, but it’s generally safe to say that you’re generally working harder when your heart rate is higher, and working less hard when it is lower.
The Strive Score seeks to quantify heart rate over time. Even sitting still you’ll generate a strive score value over time (at a rate of about 0.0048 points per second), as long as your heart is beating. The longer you go, the higher the score rises (so a ten minute effort at constant heart rate will yield double the score of a five minute effort at the same heart rate). Raising your heart rate above a certain percentage of your maximum heart rate* triggers a bonus multiplier (starting at 2x for heart rates above 65% of maximum).
Since the heart rate multiplier and time are the only variables, it is fairly easy to calculate the theoretical minimums and maximums of the Strive Score, and they are as follows**:
Minutes
Minimum
Maximum
5
1.4
11.6
10
2.9
23.2
15
4.3
34.8
20
5.8
46.4
30
8.7
69.6
45
13
104.4
60
17.4
139.2
90
26.1
208.8
Note that the strive score is incremented every second, so you will not be able to hit the max score for an interval unless your heart rate is the maximum zone going into it.
Reading the table: The table above lists the minimum and maximum attainable values for the indicated duration. For example, if your heart is beating, you cannot get less than a 1.4 score in five minutes of exercise, because you will be in zone 1 the entire time. If your heart rate is in zone 4 or above for the entire five minutes, your five-minute maximum would be 11.6 points. If you effort is not strictly zone 1 or zone 4+, your strive score will be somewhere between these minimums and maximums, depending on how many seconds you spend in each zone.
Strive Score or FTP, which is best?
I think I can say without fear of contradiction that the FTP test result, if arrived at after a valid test, is the best available metric of fitness available to us. It’s what I use to track my own fitness, and I rely on it more than I do heart rate or Strive Score.
Another nice thing about FTP is that it is not a Peloton concept, but rather it is used in other areas of sport. Zwift has a very nice feature to calculate FTP, for example.
All that said in favor of the FTP, the Strive Score has one very intriguing feature that FTP lacks, and that it is intended to be an indicator of effort rather than an indicator of achievement. As your fitness improves, it actually becomes easier and easier to hit your FTP numbers (which is why you need to re-test and re-calibrate periodically), because FTP is a measure of achievement, and when you’re fitter you can achieve more (or, in this case, achieve the same with less effort). Strive Score, as a measure of effort, should be less affected by your relative fitness (though it is, to some extent). For people seeking to improve their fitness, and who are looking to get some sort of feedback that they’re putting in the right amount of effort (at least, as compared to other attempts), the Strive Score could be a useful metric for that sort of information.
** The per-second strive point value of 0.00483 was arrived at through experimentation. Please let me know if you get markedly different results, and I will try to refine this value. I confess that I expected to find it to be a “rounder” number, such as 0.005, but it doesn’t actually seem to be quite that high.
Badge Addiction – (noun): an irrational fixation on the pursuit of intangible awards or the mental illness and compulsive behavior resulting from the dependency.
The phrase “gamification” was coined in the not-too-distant past, to describe the introduction of game-like elements (most notably, achievements and awards) into everyday activities. As a result of gamification, ordinary people like myself can bury themselves in digital medals and badges. While satisfying on at least a superficial level, there are a few gamification fails out there I’d like to rant about for a minute.
Silver Medal: Peloton’s Seasonal Challenge badge
My vote for the least satisfying in-game fitness badge is Peloton’s seasonal challenge badge. The seasonal challenge involves doing a Peloton workout (of any kind) every day for a given month. Why is that seasonal? Not sure. But that’s the topic for another day.
The reason why I think the seasonal challenge is the least rewarding of all the badges is that for all but the last day of the month, you are greeted with the message “unearned” whenever you view the challenge. The badge remains unearned until you complete a workout on the last day of the month. Only then is it earned, and you can bask in the glory for the rest of that day, until the challenge is over and the badge ends up in your badge closet.
Look at it this way: Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Unearned. Earned. The end.
So, you stare at “unearned” for twenty-nine days and then you get one day to see the word “earned” — that is, if you log back onto Peloton after finishing your first workout of the day. If you just do the one workout, then you probably never see the “earned” message, and depending on the workout you may not see the badge in your workout summary for the one workout. Besides, the workout’s over, time to move on.
I suppose you can go to your badge closet to reminisce about these old challenges, but even I don’t do that. For the sake of research for this post, I just glanced into my Peloton badge closet and counted 1,707 badges. Is that a lot? I really don’t know how it compares to other people, but it sounds like a big number. Looking at my Apple Watch achievements, it seems I only have accumulated 1,292 of those. I’m not an extraordinary athlete by any stretch of the imagination, but I have piles of badges. (In the early days of Peloton, you got a badge for three consecutive workouts, and then you got that badge again if you did a fourth, and then again if you did a fifth — plus the badge you get for doing five in a row. Do six in a row and you get two badges. As much as 1,707 sounds like a lot of badges, I was positively swimming in them before the algorithm changed a year or two back.)
I have badges for Black History Month, Hispanic Heritage Month, Pride Month, Women’s History Month, and all sorts of other clicktivism badges. Trouble is, as much as I’d like to think I’m striking a blow for social justice when I ride my exercise bike, I’m having trouble seeing the connection.
Gold Medal: Strava’s Global challenges
What might be the least motivating motivator out there is Strava’s monthly global challenges. I got an email yesterday, for example, congratulating me on the “May Cycling Climbing Challenge”, awarded to anyone who climbs some distance (I think it’s 7500m). “Nice work!” it said, before informing me that my rank was #25,696 out of about 310,336 people. Now, I guess I should be proud that I seem to be in the top 10% or so, but I am having a hard time getting over the fact that more than twenty-five thousand people have accomplished more. That’s four times the population of the town I live in. Way to keep me humble, Strava!
The strange thing about all of this gamification is, even though I don’t think I see any value in collecting all of these virtual badges, I really can’t deny that I’m motivated by them. The gamification of workouts has been a strong driver for me, and I seriously doubt that I would have been able to integrate regular workouts into my daily routine for the first time in my life if it hadn’t been for the badges.
There are certain phenomena in behavioral economics, such as anchoring, that have been proven to exist even when they’re fully exposed. That is, you can be fully informed about a bias and yet still be subject to that bias. It seems that badges fit that category (at least for me). Even though I know the badge is completely made up, not worth anything, and completely ephemeral, I will get up early in the morning and sweat for hours to get it.
Although I want to think that I am smarter than all of this, evidently I’m not. At least it’s good for my health.
Yes, you can, but you can’t just substitute your own crank arms (as you can with the pedals, cleats, or shoes). The Peloton crank arm on the left side of the bike is fairly conventional, but the one on the right is welded to the plate that is bolted to the drive wheel. I imagine that only a Peloton part will serve.
How do I replace a Peloton crank arm?
Peloton used to have a video explains how to change out flywheel bearings, a process that includes pulling one of the crank arms, but that video became private (not sure, except that with the new bikes, it seems you can remove the drive belt cover without removing a crank arm.
I located this user-provided video that demonstrates the process. Needless to say, this isn’t official Peloton instructions, but for all of you right-to-repair types, you know what you’re risking. You will need a 8mm Allen wrench and a crank arm puller. The process is the same as it would be for just about any bicycle, so if you’ve done one of those, this should be familiar.
Will this fix the problem I’m having with my pedals?
I wrote a previous blog post regarding broken Peloton pedals, in response to what seemed to be a rash of broken pedals back in 2018. Although not much seemed to have come from “pedalgate”, the post still gets comments from users who have problems with their pedals. It seems that if you have problems with your pedals detaching from the bike, it could be one of three issues:
The pedal breaks at the post. This is the issue that inspired my earlier post, and if this happens to you it seems likely that you will have to replace the crank arm. If the pedal post actually shears off, the broken piece will remain in the crank arm, and you likely cannot remove it with a wrench. (If you can remove it with a wrench, then you can replace the pedals without removing the crank arms).
The pedal falls out of the post. Though an uncommon occurrence, pedals can work their way free. If this happens, you should be able to put the pedal back on and tighten (15mm wrench, tighten to 25 ft-lb).
The pedal was cross-threaded. If this happens, the pedal will fall out, and you will not be able to reattach it. It is necessary to replace the crank arm. You’ll know the difference between this issue and #2 above because you should be able to see and feel (watch for sharp edges!) the threads in the crank arm. If the hole in the crank arm is more or less smooth, the threads are gone and you will not be able to attach a pedal.
EVERY 3 TO 5 RIDES: Tighten any loose pedal with the included 15 mm wrench. Pedals should be tightened to 25 lb-ft of torque. Turn clockwise to tighten the right pedal and counterclockwise to tighten the left pedal.
For your indoor-riding money, which is better: Peloton or Zwift? I have both, and although Peloton riders and Zwift riders each have more or less the same goal of getting a good cycling workout, they almost could not be more different. After about 1,000 Peloton rides (just about every day for a couple of years), I switched entirely over to Zwift a few months ago, but am now splitting my time between the two. I’ll explain why…
The Peloton Experience
For this comparison, I am going to by relying on my own history with both the Peloton bike and the Zwift experience, and talk about the pros and cons of each. You’ll see that sometimes the comparisons are apples-to-oranges (after all, one is hardware with streaming content and the other is an app to which you bring your own interface) but I think it is possible to make some valid comparison since at the end of the day it’s all variations on indoor cycling / spinning.
My Introduction to the Peloton Bike
I bought my Peloton bike a couple of years ago after hearing my brother go on and on about how the Peloton had improved his fitness. It was hard to miss that he’d lost 70 pounds in the year he’d owned it, and that summer when members of our extended family climbed Mt. Mansfield he certainly did seem to be up to the task (we rewarded him by making him carry the backpack). Even so, my friends who know me as a cheerleader for the bike that goes nowhere might be surprised to learn that I left my first visit to the showroom unimpressed.
In August of 2017, my wife and I went to our local Peloton showroom (yeah, we live in a place like that) where we got to sample the bike. The salesperson showed me that you watch the class on the screen and turn the resistance knob when the instructor tells you.
“If the bike knows the resistance should go up, why do I have to turn the knob?” I asked. This was a dumb bike. Nicely made, and super smooth action (thanks to a drive belt instead of a chain), but just plain dumb.
Eager to please, she showed me a feature called “just ride” that featured beautiful movies of rides on trails and roads that I could just follow, bringing my own soundtrack if I wanted to. “So, if the road goes uphill in the movie, does the ride get harder?” I asked. “No,” she replied. The fact is, the experience on the bike has nothing to do with what you see on the screen. Again, dumb.
My wife and I left without buying a bike. I am not sure exactly how she felt about it at the time, but I was disappointed. I wanted a bike I could ride in the winter, and this didn’t seem to be it. I had never taken a spin class and wasn’t all that enthusiastic to, either. And, for all the hype, the Peloton experience is just a spin class beamed to you over the Internet. I mean, let’s keep some perspective.
The Peloton is not a biking simulator
Over the next few days, I actually found myself starting to reconsider my first impression. I had been disappointed in the Peloton bike because wasn’t the indoor bike simulator I wanted, but then again, it wasn’t trying to be. I realized on reflection that a big factor in my disappointment was my expectations and not anything to do with the bike itself. The following weekend, my wife and I went back to take a sample class on the bike.
This time, I started to think of the Peloton as a training tool, a piece of equipment that could make me a better cyclist not though a true simulation, but by focusing on very specific elements of the experience, namely building up my cardiovascular endurance and my leg muscles. The Peloton bike is a direct-drive setup (like a fixie) and there is no coasting on the Peloton — something that took some getting used to… I felt like George Jetson on the treadmill sometimes! With no coasting, there really isn’t any “downhill” on the Peloton, either. You can lighten up the resistance to next to nothing, but you are still spinning even when your are in so-called “active recovery,” which is the closest thing to rest that you’re ever going to get as long as class is in session.
Given how happy I am with my Peloton bike today it’s funny to think that purchasing it was such a close call. Even after the second visit, I was still on the fence. After all, start-up cost for the bike was north of $2,500, and I’d pretty much agonize over that sort of spend if I didn’t end up using it. My wife seemed interested, though, and in the end each of us rationalized the purchase by telling ourselves that we were doing it for the other.
Does the Peloton really work?
Yes. Yes it does. You have to actually ride it, though. Get yourself on a schedule where you’re doing, say, three or four 45 minute rides a week and I can’t imagine how you won’t see a difference. And cycling is one of the lowest-impact exercises there is, so if you’ve got the motivation you can do it every day.
On the topic of the Peloton’s effectiveness, I’d say that for building cardiovascular fitness it’s probably even better than actual cycling out on the road. On the Peloton, there really is no downhill-as I mentioned before there is no coasting. You also don’t ever need to stop for traffic lights or stop signs or anything like that. It is one continuous workout. In fact, the only way I’d say the Peloton bike was easier than the road bike is that on the Peloton you choose your own resistance and can increase or decrease it at any time, whereas on the road bike the hills are what they are, and although you get to select your gearing you still have to get up the hills on your route.
So, if you love your Peloton, why did you pony up for a Zwift setup?
After about two years riding (generally daily) on the Peloton, I was starting to wonder if there might be more in life. We had a couple of great years, and at the end of it I was in excellent shape, maybe twenty pounds lighter, and able to keep up with riders half my age (and drop them on the hills — priceless!). The Peloton is a low-impact exercise and it’s something you can do every day, and I really couldn’t ask for more. Still, I had started seeing the Zwift demo bikes set up in the bike shop and was being bombarded constantly on YouTube by Zwift ads, and I started to think, “it really would be fun to actually do a bike riding / racing simulator.”
I didn’t take the plunge right away. After all, although I owned a road bike I didn’t have the other equipment needed to get started. For the uninitiated, it’s important to know that Zwift is an internet service / app(s), and not a hardware/software/service combination the way Peloton is. The hardware component of Zwift is BYO, and the cost can be significant, particularly if you don’t have a bike. (On the other hand, if you do have a bike some Zwift setups can be relatively inexpensive.)
Since I didn’t already have an indoor trainer, I used Zwift’s website for guidance and settled on a Wahoo Kickr / Wahoo Climb combo. I already had an Apple TV and (as I mentioned) a bike, so I wouldn’t have to purchase anything else, but the Wahoo gear ran north of $1500 all by itself. Zwift is a subscription service with a monthly fee, too, so if depending on what equipment you have already the Zwift experience cost can rival that of the Peloton (though over time the much higher Peloton subscription cost will make a big difference). Setting up Zwift wasn’t too difficult, but unfortunately that is only half the battle in this case, because the trainer itself needs to be set up. Getting my bike connected to the Wahoo (I bought the wheel-off model) and dialed in took a fair amount of time, so advantage Peloton in the “getting started” matchup.
Closer, but still not a perfect simulator
Although I enjoy the Zwift very much, it is sadly not a perfect bicycling simulator, either. Now, I’m aware that most of the shortcomings I’m about to detail have to do with the (Wahoo) hardware and not the Zwift program, exactly. But you can’t Zwift without hardware, and I’m using what seems to be their preferred setup, so at the end of the day I don’t think it’s really off the mark to call these things issues with Zwift.
The first shortcoming that becomes obvious is that there is no braking in Zwift. I think there’s a keyboard key for slowing down, but practically speaking there’s no braking. That’s not nearly as big a problem in the virtual world as it would be in the real one, because Zwift has no collision detection so there is no chance of colliding with your fellow riders or obstacles, and there is no chance of you not being able to make a corner due to excessive speed. Still, drafting is a thing in Zwift (and some opine that it’s an even greater force there than IRL) and it can be tricky to tuck in behind another rider when you can’t actually tap the brakes. Complicating things is the subtle latency between the trainer and the app, and positioning yourself for drafting becomes an art form.
Along the same lines there is no steering in Zwift. You can make route-level decisions such as turning left to go to the volcano or turning right to climb a mountain, but that’s as far as that goes. As I mentioned, there are no collisions in Zwift, so you don’t have to worry about steering all that much (in fact, sitting in the middle of a pack of fifty riders is no big deal in Zwift!) but as Zwift is trying to expand into dirt and gravel simulations, the lack of steering is a barrier to having any sort of technical riding. For road riding, I don’t find it a big deal.
Another shortcoming, and the one I still notice on a daily basis, is that the feel of the bike isn’t the same, particularly when pedaling hard. Because my bike is locked into the trainer, it has none of the natural rocking from side to side that is part of pedaling. This isn’t so noticeable at pace speed, but when sprinting or climbing it feels very restrictive.
Speaking of climbing, that, too, is somewhat unnatural. While I appreciate the Climb’s ability to raise the front fork of my bike to change the geometry for climbing, if I get out of the saddle to make it up a particularly steep grade the whole assembly gets to be a bit unbalanced, and sometimes the rear end lifts a little. It’s not terrible, but it’s not “normal”, either, and inhibits all-out efforts at climbing.
As I said before, these things could easily be called shortcomings of the trainer rather than of Zwift, but since they’re part of the Zwift experience I think it’s fair to include them. Wahoo has recently released their own Wahoo bike (which, at over $3000, is more expensive than my road bike!) and Saris (among other companies) have introduced wooden “bike surfboards” to allow for more natural motion, so it’s clear that the issues are known and people are hard at work trying to find solutions. Indeed, it seems to be a badly kept secret that Zwift is working on it’s own trainers, if for no other reason than to standardize a feature set. As of this writing, though, there is still work to do.
So, with those gripes out the way I have to say that I do love riding on Zwift. It doesn’t take the place of riding outdoors, but it’s a fun diversion. Zwift races are fun, and Zwift group rides (which everyone just understands are races, too) are great. I even did a “meetup” with about a half-dozen of friends from the cycling club and we ran one of the courses together (using discord to chat). It’s a great way to spend a couple of hours, and I am very much looking forward to seeing the platform grow over time.
Even though I’m really enjoying Zwifting, that doesn’t mean I’ve turned my back on the Peloton. In fact, in recent weeks I’ve been spending even more time on the Peloton than on the Zwift. I’ll explain below…
Why Zwift is better than Peloton
Zwift is more fun. I think I can say that without reservation. On Zwift you climb mountains (including a faithful reproduction of the Alpe D’Huez, which is close to an hour and half of unremitting uphill), ride underwater (through a see-thru tunnel, though I suppose in the game even that isn’t needed), past dinosaurs and volcanos. There is visual interest in the landscape, and it doesn’t get boring any more than your local outdoor rides do.
I also think that I work a bit harder in Zwift. On the Peloton, I may be asked to pedal for thirty more seconds at a high resistance, but on the Zwift I know I’m pedaling hard because I’m near the top of a hill — I can even see the mountain goats hanging out at the summit. On the Peloton, I may be chasing the person above me on the leaderboard, but it’s really just by following a number (the number of kilojoules they’ve output as compared with me) which is dry to say the least. In fact, Peloton very deliberately de-emphasizes competition while in Zwift even the group rides are races. And when you’re chasing someone in Zwift you literally see them up the road, and you can viscerally feel the gap closing or widening. Dropping a friend in Zwift is every bit as satisfying as dropping them in the real world.
So, if Zwift is more fun and I get a better workout, why ever go back to the Peloton? Well, Peloton does have its own strengths.
Why Peloton is better than Zwift
I find the consistency of the Peloton workouts to be an advantage. Although there are different types of rides (tabata, hills, intervals, etc), one forty-five minute class seems to me to be much like another, so I can compare outputs and distances across rides much more evenly. By contrast, on the Zwift, I might be trying to compare a thirty-minute climb of Mt. Zwift this week to an hour on the desert flats last week and really have no idea how they match up. On the Peloton bike, I find that the consistency of the challenge makes it easier for me to gauge my efforts and to track my progress.
I also find the Peloton experience a bit more civilized than the Zwift experience. Of course, my choice of bike and Wahoo trainer is not Zwift’s doing, but since I’m using the preferred setup I think a comparison can be made. The Peloton bike is heavy and sturdy, easily adjustable for things like seat height and handlebar height, and nearly silent in operation due to its belt-driven mechanism. By contrast, my Zwift setup seems exceedingly cramped and noisy. It’s my own bike that I selected and set up, so you’d think that’d be perfect for me, but because it is clamped into the Wahoo trainer it feels unnaturally rigid. The chain and derailleurs are considerably more noisy than the Peloton’s belt, and that noise is amplified by the indoor setting — I never thought of the bike as noisy when it was outdoors.
Another big advantage that the Peloton has over the Zwift is that there is less involved at the start of each workout. Even if I have to adjust the bike after my wife’s used it (sharing a bike is not really even an option in the Zwift world unless both riders are exactly the same size) I can jump on the bike and be ready to start a workout within a minute or so. With Zwift I need to turn on the TV, turn on the Apple TV, choose the Zwift app, launch the Zwift companion on my phone (because of the limited Bluetooth connections on the Apple TV), start my Kickr and Climb, pair the bike to the companion app, and choose a ride using the horrible Apple TV remote (which is a lot like dialing your phone from five feet away using a pool cue). It takes several minutes. And, because every Zwift “event” is a race, I’d better be good and warmed up well before the official start! What it all comes down to is that when I have limited time it is far easier for me to grab my chest strap and my shoes and jump on the Peloton. Sometimes, there is something to be said for freedom from choice.
So, Peloton or Zwift?
Not many people are going to want to invest in both Peloton and Zwift. After all, you are getting the same sort of exercise with each, and you obviously can’t ride both at the same time. I’m going to answer this question with an “it depends”, which feels like a bit of a cop-out, but I’ll try to explain myself.
The Pelotoner wants to work out. It’s a pure workout machine. It may not be as much fun as the Zwift, but there is an enthusiastic instructor and (hopefully) good music, and as long as you challenge yourself you can get the best bang for your buck for the time you have to spend riding.
The Zwifter is the cyclist, who is driven indoors either by weather or expediency. The workouts are quite varied, and some can be much more challenging than a typical Peloton class (and Zwift does have a “workout” mode with intervals pegged to different power zones), but it’s a little more difficult to do a Zwift workout if you have a hard stop at the other end (most Zwift rides are distance-bound, rather than time-bound).
So, if I had to choose, which one would be my pick? Because I ride outdoors during the season (and whenever I can), I think I’d pick the Peloton. It helps me maintain my fitness, and because the classes are all time-bound I can more easily fit the workout into my schedule. If, for some reason, I somehow found myself unable ride in the real world (which is what got me into all this in the first place), I’d pick the Zwift as the platform that can hold my interest better.
Final Thoughts
After I finished this blog post, I realized that there was one angle I really hadn’t discussed, and that is, which of these two platforms can best simulate the other? The answer, I think, is clearly Zwift. There is a training mode in Zwift which lays outs an exercise plan based on power zones, just like the Peloton Power Zone rides. There is an FTP test and then the zones are used for the training courses. In fact, the Zwift training courses have a cool feature where, if you are doing a multiple-workout course, after finishing one the next might not be available for a day or two, forcing you to rest (or at least encouraging it). There is also a limit to how long you can wait to do the next workout, so not only do you have to rest but you can’t rest too long and still complete the course as it’s prescribed.
By contrast, the Peloton doesn’t have anything that really simulates an actual bike ride, and because it’s up to you to set the resistance, it never will. It’s just not baked into the DNA. I am still a big Peloton fan, but the fact is it rather unapologetically does just one thing. If that one thing is the one thing you want, then there’s your answer to whether Peloton or Zwift is the right pick.
Among the metrics displayed on your Peloton screen is “speed”, presented in MPH with no explanation. I have been a daily Peloton rider for years, and I have always wondered how that speed is calculated. Recently, I though it would be nice to know how many watts I’d have to produce during a workout to cover a certain distance, and in order to do that I knew I would have to crack the speed code. Following is a rather lengthy examination of Peloton bike speed and a formula for calculating speed from output.
Speed is not simply how fast the wheel spins
My first thought when considering the Peloton concept of speed is that the speed of the bike should be calculable using the circumference of the flywheel multiplied by the RPMs, divided by time. It was pretty much immediately obvious that this was not correct. If it were, then resistance would have no bearing at all on speed; speed would be purely a function of cadence (a minute on the bike will be enough for you to see that it is not).
Conceptually, it’s important to understand that your Peloton bike is not simulating a fixed gear (“fixie“) bike, with resistance a substitute for hills. Looking at it, you’d be forgiven for likening the flywheel to the drive wheel on a bicycle, but that’s not the case. You can think of the flywheel as the chainring instead (even though the bike already has a chainring, er, “beltring”). The flywheel and the chainring are locked and move at the same relative speeds, so although when you look at the bike it seems logical that the flywheel is the drive wheel, if you can get your head around the idea that it’s the chainring, the rest makes sense. The flywheel is the chainring, and the resistor magnet is the rear derailleur. If that doesn’t make sense, don’t worry about it. You don’t really need to be able to conceptualize this if you will trust me that the flywheel speed is not the bike speed. So, let’s get on with it.
Speed and output are very highly correlated
Although Peloton has not shared with me the secret speed formula, my data suggests strongly that speed is a function of output alone. Basically, the harder you’re working, the faster you’re going. You can spin fast with a light resistance, or crank down on the resistance and pedal slower, but if you’re generating the same output, you’re going to be traveling at more or less the same speed.
Body weight’s role in calculating Peloton speed
It would seem that body weight, gender, resistance and cadence are not direct factors in the speed calculation. I mean, some are part of the calculation, because they factor into the output calculation, but it would seem that output is the only variable in the speed calculation.
The Data
I have put together more than a hundred data points (Peloton rides) from five riders of both genders, ages between 17 and 53. Observed wattages fell in the range of 20 – 281. The R2 value of over .99 indicates that the formula very accurately describes the relationship between output and speed for all of these rides.
The Formula
Working backward from a set of data points correlating average output with average speed, the formula for finding speed is:
V = 2.1w0.44
Where V is the speed in mph and w is the output wattage (the wattage at the moment of measurement, not the total output).
This is not a prank, this is actually what my data tells me. If you think this looks needlessly complicated, I totally agree with you. That said, the data correlates very strongly with this formula (R2 > 0.99).
Almostperfect
As I mentioned above, the data fits the formula very well, so it would seem like I can wish everyone happy riding and close this post. I have to confess, though, that I’m not entirely satisfied with the equation I’ve posted above. It’s just so messy! For one thing, those are some odd number to use (I’m rounding as it is), and for another, even with an R2 value as high as it is it still seems odd to me that the data points to map even more exactly to the trend line. This is an equation with only one variable… I would expect the points to be absolutely spot on, and they’re not, and I don’t really have a good explanation as to why. Perhaps the sampling frequency plays into it. I have also noticed that the Strava data for the rides varies slightly as to total output and average speed, so the whole data collection may be a little less precise than it seems like it should be.
If and when time permits, I plan to create a handy chart mapping output and speed, similar to the Watts/kJ charts that I’ve done. Meanwhile, if you have any comments or information to share on the topic of output and speed, please share. Thanks!
For my first century ride, I chose the French Creek Iron Tour. Of the local events I know about, this was actually the hardest (over 6,000 feet of climb). I picked it for two reasons: one is that it was fairly close to home so I didn’t have to get up too early on a Sunday morning, and the other is that the ride is difficult enough that if I were to actually finish, I wouldn’t be left with the feeling that it wasn’t a “legit” century. There are more difficult centuries out there, I’m sure, but anything with over a mile of climb is the real deal As far as I’m concerned.
Well, how did I get here?
The road to this first century ride began in July of 2017, when I visited San Francisco and was amazed to see so many cyclists tackling the many steep hills of that city. I myself probably wasn’t logging more than a couple hundred miles a year on my bike, feeling like the rolling hills of Southeastern Pennsylvania weren’t conducive to cycling. Of course, San Francisco makes the county I live in look pool table flat. So, with my attitude suitably adjusted, I resolved to get back into cycling more when I returned home.
Part two of the equation was my purchase of a Peloton bike in August of the same year. My brother (#CrunchyFrog) and brother-in-law (#SaucyDawg) had them, and were singing the praises of the bike (and, in particular, an instructor they called “JJ”) at our family reunion. Back home, my wife (#ExcellentBird) and I checked out the bike, but it took us more than a week, two visits to the showroom and a sample class before we talked ourselves into buying one (and we each probably did it for the other!). It was not an easy sale, but I rationalized that I was buying it for her, and she did the opposite.
The Peloton bike quickly became part of my routine. In fact, a day doesn’t feel complete without a ride. I’ll even come back inside after a road ride and get on the Peloton bike! By October I tried my first organized bike ride, the Main Line Animal Rescue Gran Fondo. Joining it was a bit of a spur-of-the-moment thing. I really had no idea what my abilities were, so signed up for the 30-mile course (and managed to raise $500 in a week) and completed it on my hybrid bike, which was the only one I owned).
I had a great time on that ride, and decided that it would be fun to ride with my friends from work. To do that, I figured I needed a road bike, so I bought myself a 2017 Fuji Gran Fondo in November, taking advantage of the end-of-season sales.
5,000 miles on a bike that doesn’t move
It was pretty much all-Peloton, all-the-time that winter, but when the warm weather rolled around I tried a few events. One was the 50 mile course of the French Creek Iron Tour, which was hilly but do-able. Near the end of the summer I was invited to join a team organized by my company to do a three-day, 160 mile ride in Cape Cod. Modesty prevents me from telling you how I fared, but let’s just say I didn’t have to wait in line at the buffet at the end of the ride.
It’s hard for me to express how much the Peloton bike did to prepare me for that ride. Each day I got up in Cape Cod I felt like I hadn’t just rode for hours the day before. I actually felt stronger each day. And although I try to take care of myself, I was never what anyone would call an athlete… it’s just not in my genes. Nevertheless, thanks to the daily Peloton rides, I felt unstoppable on the road that weekend.
The last ride of 2018 was the MLAR Gran Fondo again. This time I had recruited my brother and brother-in-law and we did the 100K (64 mile course). Well, we did 40 miles of it. Unfortunately at mile 41 I got tangled up with another rider and crashed out of the ride. I had surgery a week later to put some things back in place, but once the stitches were out I was back on the Peloton bike. It was slow going for a while due to some broken ribs, but each week was better than the one before and I was putting up decent numbers again by January.
In mid-winter I started the “Game of Zones” PZ challenge (Pelotoner’s will get that). After that, I signed up for “Zone Wars”. Completing these really made me feel like I was back in the game. In early spring, I did a ~30 mile gravel ride which I did not enjoy with a mountain-biking friend who also did not enjoy it. Somebody enjoys gravel riding, but I’m not entirely sure who that is. Anyway, like a lot of challenges in life, I’m glad I did it, and glad I never have to do it again.
It’s Century Time
So, after healing up I find spring around the corner and I need a goal. One of the things I love about the Peloton bike is it allows me to set goals and to measure my progress. Of course I have the goal of completing the unfinished Gran Fondo this fall, but after my experience in Cape Cod I was already pretty sure I could do a 64-mile ride. So I decided I would do a century. I really had no idea whether I was ready for a century, but it seemed like a good goal. I selected the Iron Tour partly because of its bad-ass name, and partly because I had done the shorter courses before and knew it to be a well-organized event with good markings and well-stocked rest stops (complete with cookies).
If you’re not into cycling, understand that the “century” is sort of a benchmark of legitimacy. Road riders can be grouped by those who have ridden a century and those who haven’t. It’s a bit like what marathons are to runners: either you’ve done it or you haven’t. (I don’t know how other people feel about it, but it seems to me that a marathon is a lot harder than a century, but whatever…)
I downloaded a chart from Bicycling.com that showed how much riding I should do each week leading up to the century. Oops! It’s an eight-week plan, but I only had four weeks. Still, at week 5 the long ride of the week was 40 miles, easily do-able, so I figure I was on track … it’s not like I was getting off the sofa at week 5.
A little help from my friends
At this point I got some valuable help from the West Chester Cycling Club. I joined their Saturday group rides and thankfully not only are the people really nice, and not only are they good cyclists, but they have a number of rides each weekend (and some during the week if your schedule is flexible enough) so you can pick your distance and speed. On successive weekends I built up from 44 miles to 49 miles to 64 miles and then, on the weekend before the Iron Tour, an 86 mile trip to Chesapeake Bay. The last two were somewhat tiring but still very do-able, so I still didn’t have a good sense of how much I could really do. Plus, even the 86 mile ride had only 4,000 feet of climb, so the Iron Tour would be not only longer but hillier (if that’s a word).
I took it easy the last week, resting up for the Iron Tour. I did short (20 minute) low-impact Peloton rides and even didn’t ride at all on two of the days (very unusual for me).
Tackling the Iron Tour
I suppose it was the right move to rest so much, but I really felt out of sorts on the actual Iron Tour. I figured I would sail pretty easily through the first two-thirds and then venture into unknown territory, but I was actually already feeling somewhat tired by mile 40. At mile 70 I really started to get unhappy — at that point the hills are long and rolling, but you’re out in the farmland where there is no shade and the wind was blowing very strongly (the volunteers at the rest stop at mile 80 were literally holding onto the tent so it didn’t blow over). And of course the wind was a headwind, did you even need to ask?
Come mile 80 I was actually happy to get back into the wooded hills, even though it meant more climbing. I knew I was getting pretty sunburned (I was about six hours into the ride at that point) and the trees cut down on the wind somewhat. Around mile 75 I started to question how much I really cared about finishing this ride, but after mile 90 I knew I was going to finish.
One of the things you learn on a seven-plus hour bike ride is how long all of the batteries in your various devices last. My Lumos helmet (with built-in lights, a gift from my wife after my crash) ran down after about 3 and a half hours. My rear tail light / radar died after about six hours. And, worst of all, my Garmin itself started giving me low batter warnings at mile 100 (of 101!). This was a serious crisis. If the Garmin doesn’t record your ride, does it count? Would I get Strava credit? Would I be able to “Relive” my ride?
So, although I had planned to basically declare victory at mile 100 and coast to the finish, in the end I feel the need to empty the tank in order to finish the ride before my Garmin crapped out completely. Fortunately for me, the last mile or so of the ride was relatively flat, and I crossed the finish line just about 7 ½ hours after I started.
It was deeply satisfying to have completed a century ride (and this one in particular), but I was ready to be done. I wrote in my Strava notes, “anyone who draws up a ride with 6,000 feet of climb is a dick”, and I’ll stand by that assessment. Still, as I write this a few days later, I have to admit that I really enjoyed the challenge and it probably won’t be too long before I try another century.
In fact, I hear there’s one out in Hershey, PA where they give out chocolate at the rest stops.
The Peloton leaderboard contains a great deal of information on how you’re performing, both against others who are taking / have taken your class as well as how you’ve performed in the past. It’s a fairly data-packed screen, so let’s get into it…
Exhibit A (above) is my own line item on the leaderboard, taken from a point in which I’m about 2/3rds through an on-demand ride. Let me start with the numbers (and other data you see here) before I go onto the leaderboard as a whole.
Personal Record Information
The very top line (that begins with a star) shows me my best effort for the length of class I’m taking. From this, you can tell that the screen shot is from a 45 minute class. The top bar shows my personal record for a 45-minute class (which is 512 kj). On the far right of the bar, you see the number 325. That number is a pacing number. It shows me what my pace was for the ride in which I got my PR. At this point in time in this ride (not the PR ride), I had made only 222 kj (see below for how I know that), so I know that I’m behind the pace for a PR (actually, WAY behind :).
If I am ahead of the pace for a PR, I’ll know it because this whole PR bar will appear below my status, instead of above it. This is handy, because you can tell at a glance if you are headed for a PR or not. Note that you have to have taken at least one class of the same length before you will see the PR bar.
Where I am in the Group
Next, let’s get into the status bar. The first number you see on the left (25) is my position on the ride. This may be my position overall, or it might just be my position within the filtered group (not enough information shown to know). Sometimes you’ll see your position number with another number below it in parentheses, and the number in parentheses indicates the unfiltered position. More on that later.
Moving to the right, you see my avatar. Surrounding my avatar is a partially complete white circle, going from the 12:00 position clockwise to about the 8:00 position or so. This is a visual representation of how far along in the class I am. When he clock is half full (that is, reaches the 6:00 position), I’m halfway through the ride. Note that this clock display of time is only available on on-demand rides — if you’re riding in a live class you will see your avatar but not the clock display.
Next to the right is my leaderboard name (LeftShark), with some information below it. The information below is my location label from my Peloton profile and also my gender and age group (you can choose to show or hide this through your Peloton preferences on your bike). None of these have anything to do with position, they just identify me.
Total Output
The big number on the far right, the one that really counts, is your total output. This number is the same as the one you see at the bottom of your data display (for information on total output and how it’s calculated, see my previous post: Your Peloton Screen). This is the number that determines your rank on the leaderboard.
Filters, Followers and High-Fives
Here’s a second screen shot that illustrates a few other elements of the leaderboard. First, instead of seeing all riders, you are looking at a list of those “Here now” (a distinction made for on-demand rides). Here now, as the name suggests, shows riders that are doing the on-demand ride the same time you are. Now, not all riders on an on-demand ride are at the same point of the ride, but we’ll get to that.
In addition to showing the “here now” riders, this list is further filtered to the subset of riders that I am following. In this case, the list is now limited to just two riders, myself and Mighty Unicorn. You can see next to Mighty Unicorn’s name the outline of a person (or, at least, a bust), which indicates that I am following her.
Before I look at what we can see in the other riders’ line, let me review my own data. I am in second place in the filtered list (of two riders). I am also 69th among riders who are “here now”. The clock circle around my avatar indicate that I have only just begun the ride (maybe a minute or so into it, it’s hard to tell exactly). On the right of my leaderboard line, the number 1 indicates that I’ve generated only 1kj on my ride so far.
Just above my leaderboard line is my PR line. It shows that my PR for this length of ride (which happens to be 45 minutes) is 512, and at this point in my PR-setting ride, I’d already generated 10kj.
Let’s take a look at what we see on Mighty Unicorn’s leaderboard line (again, left to right).
First, you see the number 1 and (29). That indicates that she’s in first place in the filtered list (of people I follow) and 29th in the list of people doing the ride at the moment. (For comparison, I’m second on the filtered list, but 69th in the unfiltered list. It is not shown on this display the total number of people on the unfiltered list.)
To the right of these two numbers is Unicorn’s avatar. Notice the hand icon superimposed on the avatar. This indicates that Unicorn has high-fived me. If I tap the avatar, I will high-five her back, and the hand icon will disappear. I can high-five Unicorn or any other rider –even if I haven’t been high-fived myself– by tapping on her icon. Once you have high-fived someone, there is a waiting period before you can high-five again. I haven’t heard the phrase “high-five spam” used, but that’s what we’d call it if it were a thing. The delay is there to try to help us avoid annoying each other with repeated high-fives.
You can also see that the white “clock” ring around Mighty Unicorn is much more filled in than mine. It’s hard to see exactly how filled in it is because of the hand icon, but it looks like she is about 2/3rds through the ride. So, how does my 1kj effort at, say, one minute compare with her 222kj at, say, 35 minutes? There’s no way to directly compare those, unfortunately, so it is difficult to tell how you’re doing against others in an on-demand ride unless you start at more or less the same time.
Decoding the Leaderboard
Finally, let’s look at the leaderboard near the end of a ride, and decode the information.
Again, I’ll start with myself, now in 44th position (among the riders “riding now”). The circle clock tells you I’m about 3/4th done with the ride, the 308kj I have generated is behind my PR pace of 396. (You can also tell at a glance that I’m behind my PR pace, because the PR bar is above my leaderboard entry.)
In 41st place, at the top of the image, is “harrydorn”, who looks to be just a couple minutes away from finishing. He’s 5kj ahead of me (313 vs 308), so will I pass him? It’s hard to say, but given that I probably have ten more minutes or so than he does left, my guess is yes, I will. I can’t be more exact than that. (Incidentally, if I click on harrydorn’s name instead of his avatar, I’ll see his current resistance and RPMs, which is handy if, say, I’m slightly ahead and want to make sure I can hold off a surge).
In 42nd place is “BGPackergirl”. You can see that there is a checkmark superimposed on her avatar. This indicates that she has finished her ride. Her final output is 310, and will not continue to increase. You can also see that her avatar is slightly dimmed, which indicates that she has logged out of Peloton. Note that you can high-five a rider who has finished (checkmark but not dimmed), but you can’t high-five a rider who has logged out (dimmed avatar).
Next is “SassfroMass”, in 43rd place. Sass (can I call you Sass?) also has 310 kj and looks to be just about finished with his (her?) ride. The checkmark hasn’t appeared, so he’s not completely finished, but the clock circle is complete so the end of the ride is probably only seconds away. Will he pass GBPackergirl to take 42nd place? Probably, but it’s not guaranteed.
Below me is “jholloway7”, with 307kj, in 45th place. Note that jholloway7’s clock is just about as complete as mine, which tells you that we started at more or less the same time and are on pace for a similar finish. My passing SassfroMass, GBPackerGirl and even harrydorn seems pretty much guaranteed, but I’m neck and neck with jholloway7 and if I’m watching the leaderboard he’s the one I need to keep my eye on.
One final note about leaderboard position on on-demand rides. Your position on the leaderboard may not be particularly meaningful, because you are being compared to other riders wherever they are on their own rides. A rider who started the ride thirty minutes earlier will probably remain ahead of you on the leaderboard up until just about the end of your ride (if you even catch them), and a rider who starts thirty minutes later than you probably will not catch up to you before you’re finished even if they’re significantly faster. The only real comparisons you can make are across riders who have all completed the ride.
So, that’s the leaderboard in a nutshell. If you have any questions or feel that I’ve left anything out, please let me know in the comments and I’ll try to address any loose threads.