Home

Just comparing cost of Coquard and Wynants and wondering if their relative score is by design or a glitch?

Rank Name. Team. Value Score
563 Maarten Wynants Blanco Pro Cycling 5.4 33
859 Bryan Coquard Team Europcar 6.0 5

Note that all of Coquards points are Fl, as are 30 from Wynants. Seems odd

15 comments

Avatar
drheaton [3318 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Score is over a 12 month period, but form and profiles are taken into account.

Coquard has raced fewer stages in the game than Wynants so while Wynants has scored more points on average, per stage, he may have scored a similar amount.

When riders haven't raced many stages their values can fluctuate, look at Gaudin at 18 credits as a prime example, won a prologue (classed as ITT of which there are two in the TdF) and showed up in Paris-Roubaix but hasn't raced many stages so has an inflated price on an average score basis.

Avatar
TERatcliffe26 [4465 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Some of the values seem laughable

By your way of thinking I can imagine more than half the riders in the game will have a value of 6/5 or less. I could be wrong but if im right it makes your process rubbish.

I do not like those numbers, as it would seem to make the game far too easy

Your idea of tweak the game is not the same as ours. You use the word tweak as completely change.

Avatar
enrique [2255 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I wanted to tinker with the rider values so I created a list of values of riders from a calculation I explain below.

Here is a selection from the list showing some of the the Top Scorers in the 2013 Tour and what their value would have been based on the process I explain below:

Christopher Froome 40.0
Peter Sagan 39.4
Alejandro Valverde 32.8
Mark Cavendish 32.8
Joaquin Rodriguez 32.2
Alberto Contador 28.0
Tejay Van Garderen 25.2
Cadel Evans 23.0
Edvald Boasson Hagen 20.4
Richie Porte 20.4
Matthew Harley Goss 17.7
Rui Alberto Faria Da Costa 17.4
Michal Kwiatkowski 17.2
André Greipel 15.7
Tony Martin 15.1
Bauke Mollema 14.2
Thomas Voeckler 12.4
Nairo Alexander Quintana Rojas 12.3
Philippe Gilbert 13.7
Andrew Talansky 13.2
Alexander Kristoff 11.7
Pierre Rolland 8.1

Greg Henderson 3.2
Enrico Gasparotto 3.0
Gert Steegmans 3.0

How the values were calculated:

All that was done was divide Chris Froome's 'Total Points Accrued in the Last 12 Months' (1385) by 40.0, the highest value the game permits for a rider.

The premise is that Chris had the most points in the game in the last 12 months so he deserves the highest value afforded in the game, 40.0 points. Everybody else, according to that (!) logic should be below that.

Then you divide everybody else's 'Total Points in the Last 12 Months' by 34.6, what you get when you divide Chris's 'Total Points in the Last 12 months' by his set value of 40.0.

Yes, the only thing it looks at is 'Total Points Accrued in the Last 12 Months'. The formula ignores the type of stages a rider has gained his points at. I realize that. And it ignores whether the points came from a break, from Finish Line points, from being the Lanterne Rouge, from the Combativity Prize etc... I realize that, too.

These numbers can also be generated several days and even more than a week before the start of the Tour if you wait for the Tour de Suisse to end.

And yes, there are riders that would fall below the 3.0 value, but all of those (!) can be brought up to 3.0.

What do you think of the numbers? What do you think about the process? Do you like the numbers? Are you at ease with them? Please (!) spare me your opinion of me. Talk about the process and the numbers (!), not me (!). I won't feel insulted if you choose to ignore me!  1

I can already hear the moans and groans, but just bear with me. Again, let me be clear, just in case, this not meant to offend or insult or demean the game at all. It's just an interesting and entertaining issue to discuss.

Just in case, I am not (!) trying to force anything down anybody's throat. Please undertand that. I just get excited and want people's opinion on the idea. Whether you like me or my style is not the point, I'd rather discuss the idea than me, my style, etc... it's just to discuss and piggyback idea upon idea about how to tweak the game. If I get on your nerves, I apologize sincerely. Thanks!  1

Avatar
enrique [2255 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

This is a team that is possible for the mountains under this valuation:

Christopher Froome 40.0
Alejandro Valverde 32.8
Joaquin Rodriguez 32.2
Alberto Contador 28.0
Haimar Zubeldia 4.0
Arnold Jeannesson 3.3
Greg Henderson 3.2
Enrico Gasparotto 3.0
Gert Steegmans 3.0
149.5

I kind of like the fact that your 3.0 riders can actually get you some points! :

Avatar
drheaton [3318 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Enrique, you need to find something else to do with your spare time.

And your method is awful.

Its based on the premise that every rider scores their points over a given number of races. It ignores the fact that that everyone rides a different number of stages. If Froome races 50 stages a year, Voeckler races 25 fantasy stages and Cav races 80 stages how can dividing by a fixed number possibly include that kind of variation.

The current method is so much more sophisticated than you can understand and takes account of all kinds of little things that you just seem to ignore.

Your method is terrible in that totally undervalues lots of riders. Rolland only really rides the Tour de France from the fantasy calendar so his points for 12 months might be low compared too others but his average is good and he scores well on grand tour terrain.

I say this completely seriously, please stop this. You are not helping at all. We are well aware of what works and what doesn't with the pricing and are already thinking about next year. There are things which can be improved but there will be no radical changes, no magic new formula will be discovered and definitely not one as simplistic as the one you've detailed.

Dave puts a huge amount of time and thought into the game and how it works. Every part of the game is considered and thought out to give balance and so that the game works as intended. This is one of many cycling games out there, all working differently, and this game fills a particular niche for thousands of people who enjoy playing it without issue. If you don't like how this game works (and you really don't seem to because you're generally unhappy with almost every aspect) I suggest you start playing some of the others available.

Like I said, please stop. All you're doing now is pissing people off (again) and spoiling the game. You suggest things (which is fine) but then you pick and pick and pick, you don't let anything go and when people don't agree with your idea you keep suggesting it in different threads. On pricing, you've suggested some things and had an official response from Dave that not much will change and that the formula won't be adjusted to artificially reduce prices, that was a proper response to your request/question and you totally ignored it instead persisting in suggesting something which has already been rejected.

Avatar
TERatcliffe26 [4465 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Quintana
Greipel
Goss being higher than Greipel
Talansky
Mollema
Kristoff
Rolland

Among a fair few others seem too low as well but not quite as silly

Avatar
enrique [2255 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
TERatcliffe26 wrote:

Some of the values seem laughable...

Which ones seem laughable to you? I mean, I only look at it as a starting point, not etched in stone...

Avatar
Gkam84 [9068 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Once today's scores are in, I'll be doing the Tour of Poland values, I'll see if I can find the riders above, that will show you any changes  3

Avatar
enrique [2255 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Gkam84 wrote:

... I'll see if I can find the riders above...

Thanks. I think I asked this before, but when you update the values does every rider in the game get an updated value, meaning all riders should reflect their current value on the 'Rankings' page, or do you just update and publish the new values for only those that are going to do the Tour of Poland?  39

Avatar
enrique [2255 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

The current method... takes account of all kinds of little things...

Well, let me ask something that must seem incredibly obvious to you, why doesn't the game, or does it, take into consideration races outside the game races?

For example, I was surprised to see Danny van Poppel valued lower (9.1) than his brother Boy (15.6) when a little over a month before the Tour, in the Tour of Belgium in late May, it was Danny who raked in three Top 5 performances against Greipel and was No. 3 and No. 5 against Kittel in the Tour of Picardie in May, too. The valuation seemed a little odd to me. I took it for granted that Danny would score more points than Boy...  39

Did the game give Boy a higher value because Boy raced more races that were in the game? Maybe the game should take into consideration races outside of the game to help out with the valuation process  39

Avatar
drheaton [3318 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
enrique wrote:
drheaton wrote:

The current method... takes account of all kinds of little things...

Well, let me ask something that must seem incredibly obvious to you, why doesn't the game, or does it, take into consideration races outside the game races?

For example, I was surprised to see Danny van Poppel valued lower (9.1) than his brother Boy (15.6) when a little over a month before the Tour, in the Tour of Belgium in late May, it was Danny who raked in three Top 5 performances against Greipel and was No. 3 and No. 5 against Kittel in the Tour of Picardie in May, too. I gladly put him on my team, but the valuation seemed odd to me because I took it for granted that Danny would score more points than Boy...  39

Did the game give Boy a higher value because Boy raced more races that were in the game? Maybe the game should take into consideration races outside of the game to help out with the valuation process  39

Because the game is using points scored in the game, its using past stages and races for which scores have been done. Obviously the game can't use scores that don't exist.

The Tour of Belgium isn't in the game so obviously there were no fantasy scores for the race in the system.

You complain that there were no more 'undervalued' secret picks, people who are picks that only the more ardent fans would pick. Doesn't Danny Van Poppel perfectly fit that description?

Without running fantasy scores for every single race in the world you can't catch everyone so the scores are based on fantasy races, with the expanded calendars coverage is better, especially for the biggest races, but minor races are missed and those are where your value picks will come from.

Avatar
enrique [2255 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

You complain that there were no more 'undervalued' secret picks, people who are picks that only the more ardent fans would pick. Doesn't Danny Van Poppel perfectly fit that description?

Yes he does, I had him on my team and then he abandoned... Why can't we have more?...  3

Avatar
drheaton [3318 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
enrique wrote:
drheaton wrote:

You complain that there were no more 'undervalued' secret picks, people who are picks that only the more ardent fans would pick. Doesn't Danny Van Poppel perfectly fit that description?

Yes he does, I had him on my team and then he abandoned... Why can't we have more?...  3

More?

How many undervalued riders do you want?!

Van Poppel was a steal at 9 credits, today we had Reza, Gene and Lobato all featuring in the sprint, all cheap riders.

I've got an idea, let's just get rid of values completely then you just pick any nine riders you like. Then, every rider is undervalued. Will that stop you complaining? No? Then let's go further, let's give everyone unlimited transfers too so you can just pick whoever you want whenever you want. Will that stop you from complaining? No? OK, how about you just run the game then and do whatever the hell you like.

I'm sorry, I've tried to understand you and tolerate all your crap but you just keep pushing and pushing.

You're a troll Enrique, I swear you're just here to get a rise out of people but you won't from me any more. From now on I will not read or reply to any of your comments or threads. God help everyone else.

Avatar
Gkam84 [9068 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
enrique wrote:
Gkam84 wrote:

... I'll see if I can find the riders above...

Thanks. I think I asked this before, but when you update the values does every rider in the game get an updated value, meaning all riders should reflect their current value on the 'Rankings' page, or do you just update and publish the new values for only those that are going to do the Tour of Poland?  39

Because I haven't yet put in a startlist. Every rider from all teams taking part in Poland will be updated, just finding those riders now

Avatar
Gkam84 [9068 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Ok the only guys I can't give you are Goss, Rolland and Vockler. Because I have put in Greenedge team and Europcar aren't riding. Here are the rest of the riders you selected above. Remember that ever stage barring the final TT stage is in a mountain stage. First two are SF, 3 MM and a HM

Christopher Froome 40
Peter Sagan 40
Alejandro Valverde 40
Mark Cavendish 31.3
Joaquin Rodriguez 40
Alberto Contador 40
Tejay Van Garderen 32.1
Cadel Evans 32
Edvald Boasson Hagen 27
Richie Porte 33.1
Rui Alberto Faria Da Costa 34.3
Michal Kwiatkowski 37
André Greipel 27.6
Tony Martin 22
Bauke Mollema 33.9
Nairo Alexander Quintana Rojas 36.8
Philippe Gilbert 24.2
Andrew Talansky 30.4
Alexander Kristoff 22.4

Greg Henderson 10.4
Enrico Gasparotto 13
Gert Steegmans 12.9

ALSO, I'll give you one rider, because you were complaining they don't go down in value. Wiggins was 40 if he was riding the TdF, If he riders Poland, he's only 29.2