RGT Cycling's race series: User reviews

[Dave K]

Whats the point of RGT Cyclings race series if the competition is just going to be a bunch of Zwift refugees who cant handle a real challenge? I mean, Ive seen some of the top riders on RGT and theyre not exactly setting the world on fire with their times. Is it just a case of the same old names dominating the leaderboards, or are there actually some talented riders out there who are worth paying attention to? And whats with the lack of transparency around the ranking system? How are riders actually being ranked and whats the criteria for determining who gets to ride in the top tier? Is it all just a big popularity contest or is there actually some substance behind it? And dont even get me started on the lack of diversity in the racing calendar - its the same old routes and scenarios every week. Wheres the innovation? Wheres the excitement? Is RGT Cyclings race series just a stale, uninspired rehashing of the same old ideas, or is there actually something more to it?

 

[ciclistaloco]

The RGT Cycling race series isn't just about real-world challenges, it's also about providing a platform for all cyclists to compete and showcase their talents. Yes, there may be some fast riders from Zwift, but that doesn't diminish the achievements of others. The ranking system is based on a complex algorithm, taking into account various factors such as rider's power-to-weight ratio, consistency, and past performances. It's not a popularity contest, but a merit-based system. As for the racing calendar, RGT is constantly innovating and adding new routes, scenarios, and challenges to keep things exciting. Don't dismiss it as just a rehashing of old ideas.

 

[cleff]

Hmm, it sounds like you're feeling a bit underwhelmed by RGT's race series. I get it, seeing the same names dominate leaderboards can be a buzzkill. But let's not write off those "Zwift refugees" just yet. They might be new to the scene, but they could bring a fresh perspective and new challenges to the table.

As for the ranking system, I'm with you. A little transparency goes a long way. But let's also consider that maybe the criteria are more complex than we think. Perhaps it's not just about raw power, but also strategy, consistency, and sportsmanship.

And about the racing calendar, I'd love to see some unexpected routes and scenarios too! But hey, every platform has its growing pains. Maybe RGT's just taking its time to find its unique flavor.

So, here's a question to ponder: how would you revamp RGT's race series to keep things exciting and fair for everyone?

 

[JRWilloughby]

The RGT Cycling race series seems to have sparked some intense discussions, with valid points raised on both sides. It's true that the influx of Zwift refugees might have changed the game, but let's not forget that these riders are still looking for a challenge and seeking to hone their skills.

The lack of transparency in the ranking system is indeed puzzling, and it would be beneficial for RGT to address this issue to foster a more inclusive and fair environment. Clarifying the criteria for tier placement can help dispel any notions of popularity contests and ensure that talented riders get the recognition they deserve.

As for the racing calendar, I can understand the yearning for diversity and novelty. However, sometimes revisiting classic routes and scenarios can remind us of our roots and offer a chance to gauge our progress. Of course, this doesn't mean that RGT should neglect innovation—there's always room for fresh and exciting additions to the calendar.

The competition can be robust, and perhaps the top times don't always set the world on fire, but let's remember that cycling, like any other sport, is about continuous growth and improvement. By fostering a supportive and constructive community, we can help each other rise to new challenges and make the RGT Cycling race series even more thrilling.

 

[Thranduil]

The RGT Cycling race series, while intended to provide a challenging platform for cyclists, seems to have become a refuge for Zwift refugees, raising questions about the quality of competition. The dominance of familiar names on leaderboards and the lack of transparency in the ranking system contribute to the perception of a popularity contest rather than a merit-based system.

Moreover, the monotonous racing calendar, with the same routes and scenarios every week, hampers innovation and excitement. It's high time RGT Cycling addressed these concerns, fostering a more diverse, transparent, and competitive environment for cyclists to thrive in.

Cycling enthusiasts yearn for fresh challenges, and rehashing the same ideas may not suffice. Encouraging new talents, implementing clear ranking criteria, and incorporating innovative racing scenarios could significantly enhance the appeal and credibility of the RGT Cycling race series.

 

[jhas]

"RGT's race series feeling a bit 'Groundhog Day'? Maybe it's time to shake things up. What about a 'King of the Mountains' challenge on real-world routes? Or how about a 'Sprint King' competition? And let's not forget about the power of the underdog - sometimes the 'Zwift refugees' can surprise us all. Just a thought. #spiceitup #freshrouteideas"

 

[cleff]

King of the Mountains, huh? Sounds like a recipe for domination by the climbers. But what about the rest of us? A true shake-up would be a handicap system, giving everyone a fair shot. And forget about those "Zwift refugees" bringing a fresh perspective - they're just in it for the easy wins. Time for some real competition. #handicaprevolution #fairgame

 

[Dave K]

So, if climbers get the throne and the rest of us are left in the kingdom of flat, where’s the fun in that? Is RGT secretly a climbing cult? What about sprinters?

 

[JRWilloughby]

Ah, sprinters, the lifeblood of any race! You raise a valid point: should RGT Cycling become a climbing cult, ignoring the thrill of sprint finishes? I reckon not.

Incorporating more criterium races or hilly stages with sprint finishes could balance the current climbing-heavy calendar. This way, all types of riders can shine, from puncheurs to full-fledged sprinters.

But here's a thought—what if the climbing-focus emerges from the community itself? Could it be that, as Zwift refugees joined, they brought their love for mountainous terrains with them? Perhaps RGT should embrace this natural evolution while keeping an eye on diversity.

Ultimately, the key lies in catering to the varied strengths within the cycling community. By nurturing a supportive environment, we can all elevate our skills and enjoy the multifaceted beauty of virtual cycling. So, let's ensure that no stone is left unturned, nor any sprint left uncontested. Let the pedals do the talking, and the results speak for themselves! ‍

 

[Dave K]

So, if RGT is catering to these climbing enthusiasts, does that mean we should just accept the boredom of flat courses? Is anyone else tired of watching the same riders pedal in circles, or is it just me?