Maybe your trainer is different but on my Tacx Neo I get different speeds/distances depending on which gear I’m in (and therefore flywheel speed)…for that reason alone it is an irrelevant data field for me.
1 Like
Mine would be like that, too. That’s why I use the Virtual Speed in the SYSTM app. If you use the trainer’s speed it will definitely be all over the place. The Virtual Speed in the app tries to adjust your estimated speed based on the resistance and power, etc which evens it out.
1 Like
I take your point about using it as a data point to set yourself goals/PBs etc. I suppose anything to keep us motivated is a worthwhile feature.
1 Like
AKA: I don’t have to beat the bear, I just have to beat you…
3 Likes
@CPT_A, I like your response. Short, sweet, exactly to the point!
1 Like
All metrics matter to me. I dont show speed on screen because its unrealistic going at 30kmh on climbs like a pro 
And when the workout goest to Strava I miss having the climbing data (when workouts have gradient) and dislike having overcalculated distance. I cannot climb 35kms in 1h10 on Mount Wellington can I?
Unless you’re Nicole! Seriously though, I get that these things are important to other people (hence my original post seeking input from the Coaches back in October).
@SSaldanha, do you use virtual speed in the app? I’ve always found it a much more accurate representation of the distance and speed over the course of a workout than using the trainer calculated version or a speed sensor. That said, I haven’t done Mt Wellington yet (I know I know…off to flogging station #8 with me) as I’ve been riding solely outdoors since May. My outdoor season is horribly short.
2 Likes
I will have to check how speed is calculated at the moment for me.
1 Like
Sir Erik, when you say virtual speed of the Kickr Core I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing. I am speaking specifically of the setting within SYSTM and suggesting using SYSTM’s own virtual speed rather than the one reported directly from the trainer (or a speed sensor) even though both are really “virtual speed” in reality 
Here’s the article on what it is and why and how to use it:
Here is a quick pic of the setting
1 Like
Yup, that’s the setting i always run.
I don’t mind too much about the distances in the virtual world. I kinda like that the virtual ones are always at zero elevation. It makes sorting out the virtual ones quite easy.
1 Like
I should add Sir, that average power tho!!!
1 Like
Well thank you, Sir Glen. I had a couple of laser goats looking over my shoulder
1 Like
So as I read the article again, the formula is based on 0 elevation so while I guess you’re “climbing” Mt Wellington you’re not really climbing anything when it comes to SUF/SYSTM and the best you’re gonna get (unless you’re on RGT or Zwift or another sim) is a reasonably accurate representation of your distance and speed based on your power output.
I look at trainer power, cadence, heart rate, and duration as physically real data. It is this data that is relevant to workouts, training plans, and quantifying performance, which is true for training outside as well. With trainer speed, distance and ascent, you’re free to decide how you want to calculate them over some imaginary course, so they could be anything. Within a virtual world, like Zwift or RGT, there is a degree relative consistency, so they can be used comparatively, but only with that virtual world. Even in these worlds, workouts and plans are still based on power, duration, cadence and heart heart rate. Virtual speed and distance depends on whatever course you happen to be riding the in that virtual world.
You did more 4km in the same climb. I guess it counts the power not the real distance of the road.
2 Likes
Its not a must have but a it would be nice to have issue getting those climbing meters counting to strava. Is it so hard to make it happen?
If the gradient on screen moves from zero up then I guess its not that hard to count the distance x gradient to add up the meters you climb. In the workout i’ve mentioned and other like that I guess it would be quite simple. That mount has a climbing distance and the workout goes all the way to the top.
Not even Nicole does it that fast! I live at the base of this climb, do it from time to time and could not help but be drawn to the strange figures - distance wise - shown. The annual kunanyi ITT that goes up from the other side is 21.6km in length and Nicole, who was the fastest woman up there this year, did it in just over an hour (just … Nicole just missed sub 1 hour). The record is, I believe, still held by Richie Porte - 49:51 translating into an average speed of 25.43km/hr.
As to the route taken in the SYSTM OL up from Cascade Brewery - that is 18.1km long (the kunanyi HC climb proper is 11.2km long and starts at Fern Tree). So figures of 33+ km are quite far out. And naturally speed too.
As regards real life power - when I did the ITT last year and achieved middle of the field my power for the 1.13:57 was 245W at 67kg. I’d hate to think what Nicole (and Richie) put out!
Sorry, I feel like a bit of a spoiler here (Oh, and I too have speed and distance turned off …)
2 Likes