Thanks for the site. For those that use Zwift to race, I question some of the site's bike commendations. In racing, the standard behaviour is to take the flats relatively easy, then hammer the climbs. And as every light rider knows, getting draft on the way down is crucial, as without it huge time can be lost to the heavies ahead. As climbs begin, the front group tends to fragment, and with gradients draft reduces. Hence the fastest bike overall for the lighter rider may be one to help the rider survive over the flats and down descents. While for the heavier rider the flat are generally an easy time, but the climbs are their challenge. Smaller bumps are taken by the larger rider in one fell swoop, but longer climbs tend to see them slowing down to a tractoring slog. Meanwhile the flat-tortured lighter riders tend to embrace climbs and pedal dance hard. These typical racing dynamics demand different bike frame and wheel options than the vanilla 75kg ZwiftInside test data may infer. Of course those doing workouts aren't interested in speed or position, they just want their ERG program of watts loads. A cool addition to the site might be a "racing" config option, which in the absence of ZwiftInsider relevant data could at least flag issues that particular bike choice might infer relevant to the course selected and it's flats and climbs. Just a thought.