Suggestions for 2012 season

...and let me win some time

Yeah the team values need to be sorted out and hopefully its a SEASON long credits system, non of this re-setting nonsense, if your in at the start, good on you, if you start late thats your tough luck I feel if it had been that way right through i could have had more points as i would have been able to pick the team i wanted with the amassed credits and not limited because the game was reset

Also, as many more races as you can and more overlaps aswell because that was great having to balance two races between your nine riders

I would like to see more flexible choices, but still so you can only have one GC guy and then pick what you want a bit like this

Want 2 sprinters, then fine, you can only have 1 AR, same with climbers

But if you want 3 AR them you can only have 3 DS, slightly flexible, but not hugely

I dont want to see a team reset button, because thats just a cop out, if you make a mistake, thats your fault, dont go making it easy

A separate league table where our choices get points for the time not the position over the line on stages. So if the first 50 riders have the same time they get the same points whatever that might be. Then the next group gets less points etc etc. This makes up for riders sitting up and being placed lower down than if the had continued to ride. But it would have to ba a stand alone separate competition.

One would think that unlimited choices within budget would make the game easier but it does not(halfords). I would not go there.

I would like to be able to carry 1 transfer over once per small tour. 3 times per grand tour.

Maybe have a wild card section where we could pick 1 rider from any speciality.

I would not like to see a reset button, even though there are times when I could have used it, like inadvertantly having 3 riders from same team and having to take one out. It allows us to banter more on the forum, and avoids people changing due to that chat.

To be honest I completely disagree on this point, the way the prizes are dished out means that really it's not a season long game. You get the big prizes, bikes worth £1k+, for the three GTs and the season long prize is 'just' a £200 Evans voucher so in prize terms the season long comp isn't as important as the three GTs. As far as I'm concerned the Giro, TdF and Vuelta feel like separate competitions with major prizes and the season long prize tacked on the end.

If you don't reset then going into the TdF the top 50-100 players from the Giro will have a massive advantage over everyone else and you run the risk of the same people winning every GT. If you reset then players who only want to play the GTs or even the TdF (and who are we to discriminate against them?) will have as much chance as anyone else to do well. Whatever happens those who make the right picks will do well but the reset evens the playing field for the start of each GT. 'Forcing' people to play the whole game would be counterproductive for the site and the game and if people feel like they're not being given a chance they won't play.

I agree on carrying over transfers, if I choose not make transfers on one stage it'd be nice to have those to use later on and it adds another element to the game, choosing not to make changes one day in order to carry them forwards to later in the game. Maybe a max of two transfers carried over so you can only ever have four and all carried over transfers are reset on rest days?

Another option might be to have a 'wildcard' where, if you play it in a transfer window, you get double transfers. That means if you were to play your wildcard during a normal Grand Tour transfer window you'd get four transfers instead of two BUT you can also play it on a rest day and get eight transfers instead of four thus adding a skill element to choosing when to play it.

My sixpennorth of gawd help us :-

If the GT's are still to be separate comps, then a value reset at the start seems fair but maybe, after the GT finishes, your team value could be reset to the greater of it's value at the end of the tour and it's value before the reset for those who are taking part for the whole season.

This seems good, and fair, to me.

I would also like to see more races (particularly more of the one week races) but I wasn't mad keen on the overlapping so that could be difficult. Maybe having a larger budget and running two teams? You could choose to spend it all on one race or split into two lower value teams.

On similar lines, I would like to see some women's racing included. Perhaps everyone should have to have a women's team as well? If that would put people off, maybe it could be a separate competition, running in parallel. There are some very good women racers around with not much support and maybe 4 or 5000 road.cc competitors wanting to know about the races would boost the profile a little.

I agree, more one week races like the ENECO tour and the tour of Poland would be good as well as the Tour of Britain. Some women's races may be good too but I suspect that, like some of the smaller tours, getting the level of information required to run the fantasy game including intermediate sprints, mountain points and getting actual results in a timely manner may make some races unworkable for fantasy purposes. Even some of the bigger stage races like the Tour de Suisse were terrible for getting information.

I think that two teams where races overlap could be good and that was mentioned a while ago during the Dauphine/Suisse crossover. Maybe it could just be easier to allow unlimited transfers during overlaps so that you can still pick and choose who you want and which race they're in but it allows more flexibility.

Also, please don't drop the purist comp, it's great fun!

Also, I don't think the Consistency league works, the same people (person) who's at the top of the season league is at the top of the Consistency league so it doesn't really work as intended (ie giving something for people who joined mid season to try and win).

How about a UCI style world rankings instead? Score the top few teams in each stage and add the scores up at the end of the season to get a ranking. Maybe 100 points for a stage win down to 50 in sixth then reducing in 5 point gaps to 11th and then one point gaps to 35th

100, 90, 80, 70, 60, 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19... down to 1 point for 35th place?

That way if you're inconsistent but every few stages you get in the top 10 point scores you could beat someone who's consistently top 50.

That all depends on IF Evans donate prizes again??

I think there should be season long credit though and if there are prizes going to be offered then its off benefit to play the whole season, if you just want to play a one off GT then you'll just have to be lucky and pick well

There was only 7 stages before the Giro this year and the gain over others was not that much. But with the game going to be started in January next year, the gain could be much greater

So say it did go that way and I happened to win one of the prizes for one of the GT's, then that should automatically rule me out of a prize for the rest of the game, even the way it was re-set this season, it still meant that someone could go on to win Giro, TdF and Vuelta if they picked the right guys, so i would hope they wouldn't win all the top prizes??

I agree with the consistency not working at all, It is the same person that is top in both, scrap it all together in my eyes

The other thing, is LIMIT everyone to 1 team, because i've seen on the forum that others have more than one, which if not in the rules it should be. Although, if you wanted to have 2 one for the normal and one for the pursuits, then name your teams the name but put (pursuit) afterwards??

"anyone found to have more than 1 team will be removed" or words to that effect is in the rules.

I can't find anything about having more than one team (I admit, I have a normal team and a purist team) but I did spot this:

So why do people have more than one then?

Yeah thats the bit i was on about, where you cant win more than once

Keep 'em coming... we also have plans of our own

One thing that I would like that should be nice and easy. Better access to the game rules and guides without having to register. I tried to get some people from work to play the TdF this year but quite a few said that they didn;t want to sign up before finding out how the game works, they wanted some run down of how it works (basically the game guide you've already produced) before deciding to play or not.

Are you planning on including the Olympics next year. How will team bonuses for that, as well as this years World championships come to think of it, be allocated? It seems unfair to give all HTC riders 5 pts if Cav wins when his actual team on the day would be GB with people like Wiggins, Froome, Thomas etc supporting him.

Good point drheaton, i never thought about that, in theory, you could have alot of the GB squad if its left as is

Less frequent transfers during a tour. It is onerous to log on every day and make transfers, maybe 4 per week same as Halfords would be better.

Allow me to pick any mix of sprinters/ climbers/ AR/ Domestique, and if I want them all from Sky, why not ?

No way, Halfords was a shocking game, want to keep away from anything they used

I think that the amount of transfers and the limits on who I can pick are part of what makes the game great, I wouldn't pay half as much attention to the tours through the year if I wasn't having to try and work out which DC is on form and likely to get in the days breakaway etc or acting as a teams sprinter like Kittel/Degenkolb.

I can however see the point that making two changes a day can be pretty hard work some days and with the competition running practically every day for three weeks during the Giro, TdF and Vuelta it can get a bit much. For this I'd like to see either the Purist comp getting a bit more serious with the prizes to encourage people to try this or having a semi purist comp where you can only make changes on rest days. That way if you want to play as a purist/semi-purist you can do and judge yourself against others doing that whilst still letting the people who want to play the full two-transfers-a-day game carry on doing that.

Another idea I had (which could involve LOADS of work by Dave) is to allow players to 'schedule' transfers ie be able to choose who you're going to bring in for every stage up to the next rest day and have these changes happen automatically without you having to log in. This'd help those on holiday for the starts/middles/ends of races as they can still have the changes they want but wouldn't give them an advantage as they might be picking on old info. If you could do that and then be able to cancel changes (ie schedule three days changes then have a change of heart after two and swap who you were going to change for someone else) that might solve alot of problems.

How about, for the grand tours, the points you get for the GC points are based for the entire race on the team you picked on day 1.
But the points for the stages take into account the transfers you make.
So picking who you think will do well overall at the start of a long tour is going to be better rewarded (if you get it right)
I get everyone is getting GC points at the moment for Froome and Cobo, but if you guessed that on day ibe you deserve a pat on the back.
And so if stage one was a TTT, you would be wary of picking the TTT specialists, and more strategy is required for the picks.

So no GC points for anyone else but who you pick for stage one? not high five'in that idea

You might aswell just become a pursuit player

one of the things we're considering is a tour bonus based on your starting team. A bit like what's described above, but separate to the GC points. So, you pick your team to start based on who you think will win, and play as before, with transfers and GC points. But if you picked Froome and Cobo on day 1 and they end up one and two, you get a bonus at the end of the tour.

carrying transfers over: noted

also mooted: extra transfers could be available, but you'd pay for them. So you get your two, but if you want to make a third it'd cost you 10 points or whatever, and maybe even more for a fourth...

Now thats a good idea, quite a hefty bonus?

So for instance, i'm on 1162 and cherrypicked the current leader is on 1546 and if that was the end of the tour, so a nice 200, 150, 100 for the top 3 and if i'd picked Cobo, Froome and Wiggo, that would see me top

As far as how points are awarded during a stage:

I would suggest:

1. Stage PC: Each sprint have 3, 2 and 1 point available for 1st, 2nd and 3rd

2. Stage KM: Have the following points available.

HC: 5,4,3,2,1
Cat 1: 4,3,2,1
Cat 2: 3,2,1
Cat 3: 2,1
Cat 4: 1

It makes sense to me to bring the pints down just because an attacker could earn more points than the stage winner if there are a lot of mountains, but I think most people feel the real prize, and therefore the most points should go to the stage winner. On a mountainous stage, a rider could accrue a lot of mountain points, yet not wear the climber's jersey at the end of the day, which I think is more prestigious than just getting a lot of points, yet the leader of the KOM, at the end of the day only gets 5 points? I'd rather the rider get less points along the way.

3. For Team Time Trials: If your rider does not arrive with his team to the line I propose he get no points - or the amount of points the team he matched times with.

4. I'd also like to see the points available for the GC standing from the first stage, the Team Time Trial. In my mind if you get to wear the leader's jersey after the stage, why not award fantasy points for it?

I think your going the wrong way manolo, thats just making the game dull

If you decrease the points for mountains and sprints then your taking the thrill of trying to work out who might go in the break each day, if you reduce those points, people will just load their team with people in the GC to gain more points

For TEAM time trails, why should a rider who's worked his ass off in the opening half of the TT not get points for finishing with the team? thats the whole point of it being a TEAM TT the team works in whichever way the feel is right

Also, giving GC points for an opening stage TTT isn't right because then you benefiting from the team deciding a certain person crosses the line first, thats not a good idea

[EDIT: we already have that]

Somebody suggested weighting the classics' finish line points as if they were the opening stage of a tour (finish line points plus GC points), so 1st gets 30, 2nd gets 28, 3rd gets 26 and so on til 10th gets 12, 11th gets 10 and as it is now from there on down to 20th gets 1.

I hope you get your team selection code from early in the season up and running again Dave, a bit of flexibility would be helpful

One final thing i thought off that really came to light in the TdF this season

Is it possible to change riders category's for each race??

So to avoid having 3 riders in the GC: Team leaders, ok, so Radioshack didn't do well with the 3 they had in there, BUT you didn't have that set up with the Schlecks?? But you have it just now with Geox, Sastre and Menchov are GC, so why not the Schlecks?

A bit of consistency with that would be nice, either have only 1 GC team leader per race, which would be better in my eyes or make it fair, If Sastre and Menchov are GC, then i see the Schlecks should be aswell?

TTT & GC points, that has what happened this year in Giro & Vuelta. You need to pick right team and know the team politics. I did well in the Giro, lousy in the Vuelta. Why not keep it.

GC finishing order points for starting line up. Is likely to significantly change the way people play the game and adds to the complexity. You need to sell it to me, what makes it good (and yes Cobo & Wiggins was in my Vuelta starting line up).

2 transfers per day is good and I want to keep it, I do really like the idea of being able program my transfers in days in advance (I have missed 3 transfer windows this year, mind you one was the day I beat everybody in a Giro stage - go figure).

The Halford's game is rubbish compared to this (and I have played the Halford's game as the SBS game for the last 3 years)

Keep the mountain and sprint bonus points as is, even though the Giro, TDF and Vuelta do them all differently. Giro heavily favoured climbers, TDF breakaways + sprinters bonuses.

and my previous post in another thread on same topic

+1 for rider values changing throughout next season based on performance during season. Just make sure when some riders rides rise in value, other riders decrease in value. (ie average GC rider value before Giro is 30, Contador dominates his value rises from 40 to 44, end of Giro his values stays at 44, average GC rider is still 30, even if other 20 GC rider drop 0.2)

Like the idea of same budget for everyone in Giro, TdF & Vuelta, it is about fairness. Banking points for World Tour add to complexity, which I don't really like. Plus is it really competition if your team is over 220 points competing against 175pt teams?

Banking transfers, makes it more complex. Only way I would say yes is 2 unused transfers can be banked as a single transfer. And you can only bank max of 2 transfers.

Only 2 transfers makes you plan ahead, while you all where working on your Alp D'Huez strategy, I transferring in riders for the Grenoble TT (who could climb JC Peruad anyone), that is why I finished 7th overall in TdF (brilliant TT performance, too bad I picked Spartacus instead of Tony Martin, expecting afternoon rain, but went from 13th to 7th overall that day).

Again I like the simple 1 GC 1 PC 1 KM 2 AR 4 DS. 2nd choice 1 GC 1 PC 1 KM 2 AR 3 DS + 1 your choice any more adds complexity.

Other changes I would like to see:

Increased points for the classics, currently the winning rider gets 20pts if rider wins 1st day of multi day race the usually get 35pts, 20 for win, 10 for 1st in GC and 5 for leading sprint classification. Suggestion top 25 finishers in one day race get points from 25pts for 1st to 1pt for 25th. Logic, points at end of classic (325pts) roughly equal points for end of stage in multi day race with finish, GC, sprint, mountains and young rider points (310pts), Advantages nice and simple. Disadvantage 6th place in a one day race = 1st in GT stage.

Alternative 1st 30pts, 2nd 28pts, 3rd 26pts... 9th 14pts 10th 12pts, 11th 10pts, 12th 9pts ... 20th 1pt. Logic = stage + GC points.

Lantern Rouge is over valued, once a GT is on it is easy to pick the Lantern Rouge, they rarely change from stage to stage. Suggestion decrease the value of Lantern Rouge from 10pts to 5pts. Also award Lantern Rouge points for the last rider to finish a classic.

I'm about to swear - in fantasy football - yes i know we shouldn't use bad language on forums, but, in their game you get 2 transfers each week and if you transfer more players you loose 4 points for every transfer.

I think it was mentioned about extra transfers and losing points, seems a good idea though.

In the end the game runs well as it is and only needs a couple of tweaks.

How about a small prize for the winner of each stage, such as a pair of socks or signed memorabilia from teams which i'm sure Evans could get quite easily using their contacts.

I like this idea but I'd hate if I did really well through a tour only for someone who's had a shocking last week to jump above me because they'd made some good choices at the start. Likewise I don't know how well it would work if going into the last 2 or 3 stages nobody really had any idea who was likely to win because the bonus was big enough to have a significant effect on the scores. That kind of uncertainty wouldn't be good for the game, perhaps having daily points allocated on who you picked at the start might be good rather than having a big lump of points at the end. That being said if you want to try and pick a team that'll do well throughout the tour for the first stage play the Purist game.

Any of these ideas, transfer carry over, transfers costing points (as long as the price is reasonable) and having a transfer wildcard where you play it and get double transfers for a stage would work and be an improvement.

I also agree with this to a point and when team values are reset to 175 the rider values should not be reset, it was daft at the start of the TdF that those riders in great form who's price had increased significantly were then reset to their lower starting value. Rider changes should be allowed to fluctuate through the year, team values should keep being reset. Ensuring an average price is kept for each category is also a good idea.

About the GC classiification:

I like this idea, just one rider designated as the GC guy per team. It would be crazy, but maybe fun if that GC guy could change during the race. Just thinking out loud here.

About the KM classification:

In my opinion it's too big. Right now there are only 6 riders in the PC classification. I wish there were only about that many in the KM classification. There are a lot of riders I would like to use right now in that classification. Maybe, as in the GC suggestion, there should only be one KM guy per team in this classification. Have the rest as DSs or ARs. That would open up being able to use a lot of these guys on breakaway stages.

About Lloyd Mondory, why he is in the KM classification is beyond me. Helpful for the sprint stages, but I'd rather see him as an AR.

Thinking about it swapping riders from AR to KM to GC at different stages of the year could cause massive headaches for Dave and the database. Possibly just having a greater selection of PC and KM guys (so for example adding some of the really cheap climbing or sprinting DSs, people like Turgot and Bonnet, at their low DS price) would give more choice and combined with being able to pick 2 or even 3 KM/PC/GC riders that might solve some of the issues.

If you're setting categories at the start of the season you're always going to get anomalies like the three radioshack GC guys in the TdF but with experience that should happen less in the future anyway.

No it didn't, If you go have a look

TTT stage: Team Time Trial scoring. 10 points for each participating member of the first place team down to 1 point for each participating member of the 10th placed team

So when HTC won the Giro TTT on the opening day, they all scored 10 points, there was no GC points

But would of been nice to score 10 points for picking Pinotti

I know you talked about a tour bonus for your riders you pick in the first stage according to their GC finishing place

What about the same kind of thing for an all round finish?

For example, If i picked Cobo on the first stage, Even if he lost and came 2nd to Froome, he's got more mountains and general points, so has the overall jersey just now in La Vuelta, How hard would it be to calculate that for the Giro and TdF?

Just the top guy i mean, so the guy who has the best GC, Points and Mountains combined

As for the limits on the number of riders from one team:

I'm all for letting us pick as many riders as we want from one team, except for the Team Time Trial Stage. Or maybe have up to 4 riders from the same team. The only advantage I see is the 5 points on offer if someone on the same team wins the stage. In my mind it might be fun if, forexample, I wanted to field the entire Sky team one day and could! I'd love it! On any given stage, other than the TTT, it really should be no big deal. And, If the pros can do it, why can't we?

I think the limits help the game and force you to pick across more teams rather than everyone picking 4 from Sky, 3 from HTC or something like that. It takes people out of their comfort zone and adds an element of difficulty to it.

How about instead of all these extra transfers/extra flexibilty you run a squad based system? Everyone has a squad of around 25 riders at the start of the season/tour on a budget of 250-300 credits and you can make as many changes per stage within your squad as you like?

EDIT: For even more complication how about a draft style pick within a mini league of 10-12 players, that way nobody has the same riders and everyone has a team with some great riders and some trash.

Also, another idea blatantly stolen from the fantasy NFL game I used to play is keeper leagues, you pick a team in a draft and keep that team each year picking up the odd free transfer here and there or agreeing transfers with other teams.

If the pro's can do it?? yeah because they are under contract to their team

I dont think you should be able to pick more than 2, its a great rule, because if you went and picked a full team sky, like yesterday and sky went on to win, thats 40 extra just for picking them all, no no, everyone should be in the same position, 2 riders limit, else your going to have people saving transfers, using credits to get more and picking a different whole team every day, there is no skill in that

Let them do this... 20 pts for Froome and 5 for each other sky rider.

...I will take my current average (from the consistency league) of 12.18 pts per rider per stage... and that is every stage... not just the one where Froome (or whoever) wins.

Agreed, imagine this year having 9 HTC riders then having to try and change two at a time before you get into the mountains, you might get one decent score IF Cav won (but not nearly as much as if you'd actually picked 5 or 6 sprinting ARs and DSs) but you'd be totally screwed for the next two-three stages. The best case scenario for that is maybe 2 or 3 riders in the top 20 and 5pts per person, a top score of 70 or 80 isn't that great.

That being said I'd prefer to stick with it as it is.

I don't think that there should be much change to the number from each section, or the team limit. This mimics a real team, they don't have teams full of sprinters only, they try to win in all disciplins even HTC !!
As for the size of the groups, I would say contrary to too big they are too small. particularily the climers section, but that depends on the runners in every race. I do like my wildcard selection idea.

I would also like to see how my original team would have fared if I had been purist. Maybe a shadow purist league running in the background.

I would also exclude team time trials altogether, as they bias everything.

Dave in m useless opinion there is not much wrong with this league and I have played them all, the right balance of simplicity against complexity.

Maybe one other thing is a big final weighting in the gts for having the winner of the jerseys. Because like many people, I will not change much in my team for the Vuelta, because like today breakaways are going to be let away, and i'm going to look for points gained from the jerseay classifications.

I fully agree with that, but not when the team listing puts 3 leaders in, no sprinter and no cimbers

As far as i remember, Radioshack in the TdF had 3 GC team leaders, 2 AR and 4 DS? i might be slightly out with that, but not far off, So i think at the start of the race, ONE guy should be in the GC with any other "team leaders" stuck into AR and maybe valued up a bit?? If not then for next year i want to see BOTH Schlecks in the GC places

The only thing I'd really like to see changed is to reduce lantern rouge points from 10 to 5. 10 is quite hard to get for any rider. Used it a lot in TdF and not much in the Vuelta but have a spare transfer today and it's tempting to use it for Veelers but it's a bit boring.

Wouldn't change much about picking teams or transfers to be honest but I think maybe make the points for position in the stage a bit higher for the top positions. At the moment it's better as the tour goes on to stick to GC guys or people who are high in several competitions (or lantern rouge) rather than take a risk on a stage winner.

So 30 for 1st, 25 for 2nd, 20 for 3rd, 18 for 4th and then as normal. This makes it less easy to just play safe, (which is the best way to be near the top).

1. You pick top 5 GC.
2. You pick PC winner
3. You pick KM winner

You get a bonus of 25, 20, 15, 10 and 5 points, at the end of the competition, if your choices place at the end of the race in the top 5. (If Cobo and Wiggins were in your top 5, at the end of the race you would get 25 and 15 points, as it stands right now.)

If you chose the PC or KM winner, you would get a 10 point bonus at the end of the competition.

None of your picks would accrue points during the race. This would be a separate prediction maybe to serve as a sort of equalizer or tiebreaker, where you could pick these riders without having the pressure to keep them on your team at all times. This would just be a bonus at the end of the competition to reward having picked the top 5 on GC, the KM and the PC winners.

I like the idea of end of comp bonus points but I think they should be small enough so that it's a close choice between going for a good team on stages 1, 2 and 3 and going for GC heavy but not ideal team on those stages and getting some bonus at the end of the tour.

That way you'll get people gambling on GC picks that may or may not pay off rather than being sprinter heavy. I think that's a better option than having it so that everyone picks GC guys for the first stage or two and we end up with an odd stalemate for the first week as people try and crowbar sprinters into a team full of climbers.

I agree with you GKam on the way the catagories are made up.every team should only have 1 team leader and should be represented in all disciplines. I thinks there was a situation similar to Radishack with Garmin if i remember correctly.

Little prizes, sponsors willing, for the regionals too would be nice. Maybe the company sponsoring that terrible ass advert could be one

I dont know how viable this would be, but following on from thefatcyclist about the regional's

Why not have a look at LBS's in those area's and see if you can get a goody bag or voucher, nothing huge, but to promote the use of your LBS rather than online shopping

my top wish: Purists' league for each competition (gts and world tour) so there's still a decent amount of selection skill but we can choose not to bother with these silly spod-rewarding transfers and still stand a chance of winning something.

More spot prizes would be good too.

Top Hat to ya Dave & yer crew - Don't change a thing (although January start is cool)

Congrats to dave and the team for running such a successful fantasy game.....Ive read all the comments above about changes,and I agree with some and disagree with others......I think its important though that the game is tweaked a little but equally important that wholesale changes are not made...."basically,if its not broke,then dont fix it"......
Its impossible to please everybody all of the time,but personally I think that Dave and the team do an excellent job of keeping most people happy for most of the time.....a time consuming,thankless task at times...
So `chapeau` guys and your efforts are appreciated....Even if I still havn`t received my TdF goodies...

First like to comment on the excellent game.

I have played the SBS fantasy comp (same as Halfords) for the last 3 years. This game (Evans road.cc) is far superior in communication (bit of a human face) and technical execution (interface, scoring accuracy and timeliness). Having said that I quite like both of the games and glad that they have their differences.

New ideas (so far as I can tell)
• Country flags nest to each contestant on the scoreboards
• Most recent stage score next to total score on scoreboard for each contestant, with rollover rider points
• Points listing is hidden away under stage listing, whereas should be incorporated as part of the rules. This could be achieved by creating standard types of stages of which I’m guessing there might be 5 or 10. The stage listing could simply refer to one of these standards
• Replace the consistency league with highest score on any individual stage – this could help maintain interest to the end for those who joined late
• Could there be a clarification of the number of teams that one person can have (in the rules)

Some of my more general thoughts/thought on what has already been discussed
• Need to look at purpose? Is it for as many as possible, or just for a limited number of suckers who devote hour(s) per day/week? Dare I suggest the sponsorship dollar is somewhat a consideration and therefore maximum site traffic.
• I had just got to thinking I could do the world tour next year (based on this years calendar) but then I saw it’s starting in January – that’ll go on for a long time. Not sure I’ll be able to maintain the enthusiasm and time for the whole season
• Not so sure about the rider values changing at all – who gains – those who do well get rewarded with points for the game and a bigger budget. Those who get behind don’t get the option to catch up. Having said that, consensus seems to be that points should change.
• If point change retained I think reset at start of grand tours is good. I’m guessing that there is a spike in interest for each grand tour (esp tdf) – you don’t want to be making it stacked against the newbies.
• Have to be careful of level of complexity. Already quite difficult for someone not used to fantasy cycling games.
• With this in mind need to consider changes as a whole – does this new combination of rules work?
• Flexibility in choice of when to use transfers (as opposed to set 2 every time) leaves the result a lot more open, and requires a lot more planning (also complexity)
• I like the idea of being able to have a purist team and a regular team from the 1 logon. The purist team to run on a setup that only allows transfers at the right time.
• Completely agree about being put off by not being able to see anything about the game before signing up. After seeing nikobec’s comments elsewhere I decided to give it a go
• I don’t see any problems with some of the data inconsistencies that are thrown up (eg Radioshack 3 on GC, only 5 sprinters available, set classification across year when their purpose in individual races might be different). It is all part of the game to exploit these things.

In the end the rules are the rules and you just have to use them to your best advantage
Cameron

One small suggestion. Arrows next to your score in the Overall league and each individual league or regional league showing whether you moved up, down or stayed in the same spot in the standings after the last stage.

Expand the regional tables so that you can see where you rank in your region (eg Aberdeen, Highlands and Islands), home country (eg Scotland), country (eg UK), continent (eg Europe).

Gameplay is currently good although I made a few points ages ago, I'll go back and try to dig them up.

I disagree with this idea but maybe a compromise would be to have a bonus tenth rider who you pick on stage 1 and then cannot be changed.

Totally agree with above re minimum tinkering.
I would like to see limited carry-over of transfers and a LITTLE more flexibility of choice.
However, If the season long competition is to have any meaning I feel the 9 one day classics and world championships should be allocated many more points.
For example, the three major tours between them have a total of approx. 19,000 points available while the 9 one day races listed have a total of approx. 1,900 points available and have little influence on the competition. A factor of 10!
And, like the real world, should a tour stage win be worth as much as winning the world championships or Paris –Roubaix?

Again, many thanks for an enjoyable and well run competition.
I used to think that I knew something about pro cycling but some of you guys amaze me!

It would be quite good to have a flag next to each rider's name, so you get some idea of who's going to attack when a big race goes through a rider's hometown...

I think that it would be fun to have more races crossing over, but with the ability to have two teams at the same time.

Maybe a 'subs bench,' for changing riders midway through a stage, but with a limited budget, like what's left over from your team, would introduce another level to the game, weighted towards those who don't go to work/school and spend all day streaming Eurosport...

Age related prizes could be good, like u16, 16-25, 25-40, 41-65, 65+.

WRT stage races overlapping, I think it's best to have a system similar to how Dauphine/TDS was done this year, BUT;

Instead of having 4-transfer days while we switch over, why not have two overnight unlimited windows; one at the start of the crossover and one at the end. That way you can bias your mixed team however you like, and it makes things better for the purists.

I think a good basis for the races to include in next years fantasy competition would be the UCI World Tour ie everything that contributes towards the World Rankings. I also like the idea of including a few of the other major one day races and also the Tour of Britain as it's our home race.

Just a small comment - I think at the start there should be an element of the choice where you pick a nationality from the UCI rankings and you CANNOT CHANGE at any point in the game.

Pick up points for nationalities of riders who win as well as the riders you have picked in the team... Drop points for any drop outs/disqualifiers...

Obviously some nationalities are going to be favourable for picking, but it would add an element of further variations in claiming points and open up the game a bit.

Quite enjoyed this years fantasy league, missed a few stages due to absent mindness but felt the element of trying to get a good team together on limited points certainly made me do plenty of research!

Next year, Tour of Britain and maybe one or two smaller races with more prizes.

Well done Team Road.cc

I think the purist league is a great idea but how about opening it up to include everyone.If you are only allowed one team and the prize for this league is minimal compared to with transfers it takes out any real incentive for me anyway.What about taking your first picks for tours etc on day one and using this for the purist league rankings whilst still allowing transfers and entry into the main competition.It would certainly add to the conundrum of picking your squad at the start instead of only for the first stages and for those who miss alot of transfer windows but do get a few mean they are in with a shout from the start at least in the purist league.

I posted this elsewhere, but thought it might be approprite here, too

I don't like:

Ok, when do we get to see the new rules and any changes? December? How about letting us vote on them bewteen now and the end of the yaer? I got a lot of planning to do!

Just to be devil's advocate what if we didn't change the game itself but maybe changed the way we awarded prizes? So bigger daily prizes to keep the interest going until the end of a stage race, but maybe at the cost of a slightly lesser main prize - though depending on the sponsors maybe not at the cost of a lesser prize.

I'm quite keen that we keep the element of needing to do some research because I think that for many people that's the most enjoyable part.

I'd be ok with keeping the rules the same, but I'd want, as stated above, only one GC, one KM and one PC guy per team, per race, especially for the grand tours!

Maybe, as in the Giro de Lombardia and the WC's, there should be no limits as to 1 GC, 1 KM, 1 PC, etc... for anything but stage races. I think that makes a little sense.

Now, please, don't get rid of the bikes as prizes. I'd have a heart attack!

I don't think many people would leave the game if it didn't change but as it's pretty new it would make sense to try and get it right asap. I like the game as it is and feel that rather than wholesale changes a few tweaks here and there would be massively beneficial to the way the game plays.

Prize wise I think you need to be careful. I guess that through ad revenue the game supports alot of the site (as it generates alot of hits) so you want as much through traffic as possible. Most of the players to date will probably have been convinced to play by the large prizes on offer, especially for the TdF, and then stayed with the game through the rest of the season. Diminishing the 'value' of the main prizes might lose some players and wouldn't draw as many new ones in. A headline prize for the TdF of £2-3k's worth of bike is a big pull.

As I've said before what I feel really needs to happen is that everyone has an equal change for every prize so for each grand tour everyone starts on equal credits etc. I worry that spot prizes might go to the team with the biggest budget which means those already in contention for the main prizes. If team budgets didn't alter then yes, I'd be all for upping the 'worth' of the spot prizes and giving everyone the opportunity to win something.

Agree with Simon F on this... the prizes are secondary for 95% of the field. If we were doing it for prizes then most people would drop out after a short time.

And also agree that it doesn't need wholesale change - just some tweaks to make the classics work a bit better and be slightly more flexible in category selection.

I'm not bothered about rules or prizes neither as it seems to be working OK at the moment & I just enjoy the crack.
The simpler the rules the better, but if the changes give more flexibility in selection, that's fine

I agree with this. The flexibility afforded for the WC's and Lombardia seems like something that would be ok for one day races.

Ok, is there a timeline for the changes to be announced or discussed? Any polls going to be set uo somewhere? January? Before the Tour Down Under? I'm ready!

Big thanks for the game - really enlivened the pro season, and helped me and the mrs focus on certain riders through different races and the whole season. I won the TdF but she won the season!

I don't mind some of the tweaking as per somew of the comments above, but really just want it up and running again. Any proposed dates when it will be ready to go?

You know, I really wanted to say thanks, too... I've been on this game every day for so long I can't believe it. I'm really addicted to it! Thanks for the high!

And now my top two requests for next season:

1.

Yes, please! That! Or! Being able to make all the changes I want to my team and have transfers charged only at the end of a transfer deadline!

2. Remove the Star Rider/Domestique restrictions! Although I'd be ok with limiting the amount of GC contenders to 4 per team only (!) during Grand Tours.

Otherwise, all Star Riders restrictions should be removed for all races all year long. Budget constraints will prevent team stacking in most cases.

I think we could also do away with the no more than 2 riders per team rule. There's no real advantage to having more than 2 riders oer team except in a TTT, and then you'd probably have to dig yourself out of a hole when the sprint stages or mountain stages come along!

But, yep! It's a mighty fun game and I love it! Thanks!

The 2 per team really came home to roost in the USA Pro Challenge

How so?...

In the end, having the full Garmin roster wouldn't have been a bad move! Tyler Farrar got 2 stage wins, Tom Danielson got a stage win & lots of KOM points, Vande Velde won the overall and lots of points along the way, Dave Zabriskie was in the points a couple times... and I'm sure there were more Garmin scores I'm forgetting at the moment.

Wow. I guess in a smaller race with lots of lesser known riders choosing a team becomes a bit more of a challenge.

I can see why they would want to limit the number of riders from one team in particular in these smaller races to force you to go outside the box, but! it is harder on purists, as you say.

I don't know, I think we can do without that rule next year. I can't see why that rule was implemented. It only seems to matter in smaller races or for TTT's.

If you don't want to get rid of it maybe you can forfeit 5 points if you choose to have a 3rd rider from the same team... Just like you forfeit 20 points if you want an extra transfer.

I don't know.. but thanks for the explanation!

A hardcore purist competition where you select a pool of 30 riders at the start of the season from which to chose your team for each race.

we should probably have a 2013 season thread rather than tacking the new stuff onto this one...

Great idea about tbe 2013 thread...suggest it to dave

How about being able to nominate a team leader for double points?