Home

I'm already struggling. One of the cheap fillers in my purist team has pulled out and there are so few cheap riders on the roster that I had to downgrade one of my mid-league riders to accommodate the change.

If any more cheap riders drop out then I'll be screwed. Or seriously compromised.

I need a bigger budget. My human rights are being violated. I'm going to call Strasbourg.

127 comments

Avatar
Leviathan [1921 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Oh phew, I clicked on this and though you might not be able to afford some important piece of kit to keep your bike on the road. Instead I find it is just for your *insert pejorative adjective* game.  19 Phew, hope I am not the only one into real cycling not fantasy stuff. I just come here, post, click on ads and buy stuff on wiggle.

Avatar
Gkam84 [9086 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Well the final roster is not complete. It just shows how good the field in the TdF is this season.

So there may be more cheapo's dropped soon when the final roster gets down  4

Avatar
livestrongnick [2118 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

So far i've managed to pick a team and have 1.3 credits to play with. So it's not that tight really  19

Avatar
sanderville [340 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
bikeboy76 wrote:

Oh phew, I clicked on this and though you might not be able to afford some important piece of kit to keep your bike on the road. Instead I find it is just for your *insert pejorative adjective* game.

Aha! I see your confusion, bikebot. I posted in the Fantasy Cycling forum but you thought it was about real cycling.

No, it was about that stupid, useless game that the owners of this website have spent years developing for the 20,000+ people who love it. I'm sure you're right that none of them even have bikes, that's why they are so keen on road racing.

bikeboy76 wrote:

Phew, hope I am not the only one into real cycling not fantasy stuff. I just come here, post, click on ads and buy stuff on wiggle.

Erm, ok. I don't think Wiggle would want to be associated with you. In fact I'll bet all my dhb kit on it.

Avatar
Leviathan [1921 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
Sanderville wrote:

Erm, ok. I don't think Wiggle would want to be associated with you. In fact I'll bet all my dhb kit on it.

Well they seem quite happy to be taking my money this week. Just pointing out that there are alternative revenue streams for road.cc.

Avatar
dave atkinson [6214 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

it is possible to like both real cycling *and* fantasy cycling, bikeboy. you're not required to choose one or the other...

Avatar
drheaton [3318 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
Dave Atkinson wrote:

it is possible to like both real cycling *and* fantasy cycling, bikeboy. you're not required to choose one or the other...

Really, I always just assumed that actual cycling was just there to make it clear who gets the fantasy points...

Avatar
robdaykin (not verified) [368 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

Really, I always just assumed that actual cycling was just there to make it clear who gets the fantasy points...

It's you. The real cycling seems to make little difference to that :-P

Avatar
stevemarks [470 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Something a little awry with the weightings meethinks?

A Lutsenko 11.3, 35 points ranked 548th
A Amadour 14.1, 118 points ranked 118th
M Moser 19.6, 417 points ranked 41st
G Levaret 7.7 12 points ranked 753rd

Two of these may be bargains but... it doesn't make much sense.

 13 7 7 39

Avatar
drheaton [3318 posts] 3 years ago
0 likes

Lutsenko hasn't raced much so yes scored 35 points in not many stages meaning his per-stage points averages is relatively high. The same probably applies to Levaret and Amador. Lavaret in particular, because he's pro-conti level, will have raced little in the game during the last 12 months.

The game has a minimum number of stages in place for the average so there is some smoothing involved and it tries to avoid spikes for riders who've not competed much but in the end there are always going to be riders like that and, in fairness, that should be the case.

If a new rider, someone like Bouhanni last year, bursts onto the scene not having raced any fantasy races, his value should spike because he's bagging points and he started out at a relatively low price. Forcing his price down artificially makes him cheaper than how his talent should be valued and you end up with the opposite situation. Riders being undervalued.

Avatar
stevemarks [470 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Dan

I know it is difficult and I really am not moaning as of course it's the same for everyone etc etc.

However Moser has been around a bit this year and has more than 10 times Lutsenko's points. Race winner, stage winner, almost everyone will have heard of him, Frankly I didn't even know who this other guy was, yet the difference in price is less than 1/2. Does this make Moser cheap or Lutsenko expensive? Does it matter, almost definitely not, but given the plethora of cheap guys that were available in the past, I think the game has effectively changed.

Maybe that is for the better.

I hope so.

Good luck!

Avatar
ray silvester [1836 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
drheaton wrote:

Lutsenko hasn't raced much so yes scored 35 points in not many stages meaning his per-stage points averages is relatively high. The same probably applies to Levaret and Amador. Lavaret in particular, because he's pro-conti level, will have raced little in the game during the last 12 months.

The game has a minimum number of stages in place for the average so there is some smoothing involved and it tries to avoid spikes for riders who've not competed much but in the end there are always going to be riders like that and, in fairness, that should be the case.

If a new rider, someone like Bouhanni last year, bursts onto the scene not having raced any fantasy races, his value should spike because he's bagging points and he started out at a relatively low price. Forcing his price down artificially makes him cheaper than how his talent should be valued and you end up with the opposite situation. Riders being undervalued.

Betancur is the prime example this season....3.0 credits earlier in the season.

Avatar
ray silvester [1836 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

i think the switch from 20 to 10 pts for a penalty transfer is the biggest game-changer to be honest......I'm finding the prices fine.....there are plenty of decent 5-15 credit climbers and or break artists out there.

Avatar
enrique [2341 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Sanderville wrote:

... I'm already struggling...

I know!  1

stevemarks wrote:

... given the plethora of cheap guys that were available in the past, I think the game has effectively changed....

I know... Ironically, because of the lack of budget space.. We went from 175 points to 150... And the 'price inflation', though the game has changed, it oddly feels, at least for the Tour de France, like the game as it stood in 2011, where you had to have the 1 GC, 1KM, 1PC, 2 ARs and 5 DSs... By the time you hade made your choices, you probably had no space for anything but 3.0 riders on your team!  1 How ironic!  1 Tomorrow's stage scores will be funny! I think they've been on the low side of things because most people have had to stick 4 or 5 3.0 to 3.7 riders in there to fit their choices... And then a glut of teams end up looking alike! I think we should revise the values for the riders next year for the Tour just to make the teams a little more flexible and different one from the other!... It'd be nice to put in another climber in there... I can't imagine anyone will have any more than 4 or 5 'Stars' for tomorrow!  1

I mean, how many times have we seen the same 3.0 riders so 'Popular' in the game? Everybody (!) has to (!) take them!  1

You know... going from 25 points for the stage winner to 35 also affected things... cause you can't really afford not to go to the stage winner and get set back that many points... Funny how it all works out!  1

drheaton wrote:

...If a new rider... like Bouhanni last year, bursts onto the scene... [f]orcing his price down artificially makes him cheaper... and you end up with [r]iders being undervalued.

Which we all love! I remember Bouhani fondly at his 3.0 days!  1

Avatar
drheaton [3318 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I agree that the biggest change to the game this year has been 10 point penalty transfers.

It's added a whole new dimension to picking your team allowing you to dig yourself out of a hole or take tactical penalties as a kind of gamble to try and increase your score.

Last year, with penalty transfers costing 20 points, there was absolutely no reason to make them because you were always going to lose out.

This year though it's a much more balanced decision with a fair amount of risk involved but a reasonable pay off if you get it right.

Avatar
dave atkinson [6214 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Quote:

I can't imagine anyone will have any more than 4 or 5 'Stars' for tomorrow!

'twas ever and so. you've never been able to afford more than 4 or 5 stars. that's kind of the point.

probably the balance has shifted a bit too far, there aren't quite enough cheap riders to choose from this year. I might tweak things for the upcoming tours, but to be honest it's less likely to be a problem then, there'll be more of the second-tier riders in the rosters. Everyone brings their A game to the Tour.

Quote:

And then a glut of teams end up looking alike!

'twas ever and so. no matter what the rules are, the people who do well will end up having similar teams, because they're picking the riders who get the highest scores. i've lost count of the number of times i've explained that. if you made all the riders 3 credits and you could pick who you like, it'd still hold true. isn't that obvious?

Avatar
ray silvester [1836 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Dave Atkinson wrote:
Quote:

I can't imagine anyone will have any more than 4 or 5 'Stars' for tomorrow!

'twas ever and so. you've never been able to afford more than 4 or 5 stars. that's kind of the point.

probably the balance has shifted a bit too far, there aren't quite enough cheap riders to choose from this year. I might tweak things for the upcoming tours, but to be honest it's less likely to be a problem then, there'll be more of the second-tier riders in the rosters. Everyone brings their A game to the Tour.

Quote:

And then a glut of teams end up looking alike!

'twas ever and so. no matter what the rules are, the people who do well will end up having similar teams, because they're picking the riders who get the highest scores. i've lost count of the number of times i've explained that. if you made all the riders 3 credits and you could pick who you like, it'd still hold true. isn't that obvious?

The trick is getting to that team first and thus getting a lead and forcing everyone else to gamble.

Avatar
enrique [2341 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Dave Atkinson wrote:

....'twas ever and so. you've never been able to afford more than 4 or 5 stars. that's kind of the point...

enrique wrote:

...And then a glut of teams end up looking alike!...

Well, all I'm saying is that if we're forced to choose only 4 riders it's a little bit boring and that because they're only 4 then it's more than likely that those teams will look a lot (!) alike (!)  39

I mean, I'd be surprised tomorrow if 99% of the teams don't have Froome, Contador, Noval, El Fares, Bono, Fischer and Mederel. I'm just saying that it's hard to get excited when you know the teams will be so similar. It's no fun!

I'm glad you said

Dave Atkinson wrote:

...probably the balance has shifted a bit too far, there aren't quite enough cheap riders to choose from this year. I might tweak things for the upcoming tours, but to be honest it's less likely to be a problem then...

I'm not saying I don't understand that it was NOT (!)

Dave Atkinson wrote:

...ever and so. no matter what the rules are...

I know that

Dave Atkinson wrote:

...the people who do well will end up having similar teams...

I mean, what does it matter that you've

Dave Atkinson wrote:

...lost count of the number of times i've explained that...

If no matter how many times you explain it people get forced into picking such similar teams?

I imagine that tomorrow everybody will have Froome, Contador, Quintana and the same 4 or 5 domestiques. How anti-climactic is that? So, yeah, tweak it, baby, tweak it!

So no (!) I don't (!) believe that

Dave Atkinson wrote:

... if you made all the riders 3 credits and you could pick who you like...[people... will end up having similar teams]...

Hell, no! Not at all (!) That's exactly the opposite of what I think would happen (!). I believe you'd have a huge (!) diversity of teams! At least more than what we have now only being able to fit in 4 riders that will give you a chance to keep up to speed (!)... It's matter of perspective, I guess... My guess is tomorrow everyone will have Froome, Quintana and Contador and then have to choose between Valverde, Rodriguez and Moreno... But if everyone had any rider they wanted at 3.0, can you imagine how different the teams would be?...  39

The more you restrict our choices, the more the teams will look alike (!)!

Dave Atkinson wrote:

Isn't that obvious?...

Now granted, I don't believe this is happening by design, and I'm not saying do something about it right now, but just insisting on changing something next year, the rider valuations, the budget, or something (!) just to make it more fun (!)

But, honestly (!) I love (!) the game (!)  3

Avatar
rcorbin [212 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Jeez Enrique

If Froome Contador and Quintana were 15 points each, "everyone" would still pick them!

What can Road CC do? Damned if they do, damned if they don't (in your eyes anyway)

For someone that "loves" the game, you don't show it.

Avatar
ray silvester [1836 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

There are other viable options to Froome,Contador and Quintana(I hope they prove viable anyway in purist terms).

Avatar
dave atkinson [6214 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Quote:

I mean, I'd be surprised tomorrow if 99% of the teams don't have Froome, Contador, Noval, El Fares, Bono, Fischer and Mederel

well i'll be sure to let you know if they make it up to 99%, but for reference here's their current popularity:

Froome 36%
Contador 7%
Noval 11%
El Fares 19%
Bono 21%
Fischer 29%
Mederel 19%

Froome and Contador will be a lot more popular today, the others won't really change. certainly not everyone will be going with froome *and* contador. I'm not, for a start.

Avatar
enrique [2341 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
rcorbin wrote:

... If Froome Contador and Quintana were 15 points each, "everyone" would still pick them!...

Dude, you're right, but (!), what I'm saying is that, using your numbers for arguments sake, not that I would go that low, but then you'd be able to put Froome, Contador Quintana and then (!), at 15 points each, for arguments sake (!), I could also have Fuglsang, Rodriguez, Valverde, etc...

The diversity would come from being able to bring in other (!) riders AFTER (!) you bring in the ones everybody will too!

Restrict it to 4 riders, a lot of teams will look the same, open it up, you get more diversity with more divergent opinions (!)

Dave Atkinson wrote:

... I'll be sure to let you know if they make it up to 99%, but for reference here's their current popularity...

Thanks for the stats, Dave...

Avatar
dave atkinson [6214 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

if the team choices were really as restricted and prescriptive as you think, enrique, forcing everyone to pick the same team as you, then i'd expect to see two things:

1) a big pile of people at the top with the same number of points
2) you amongst them

which of those do we see?

Avatar
enrique [2341 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Dave Atkinson wrote:

if the team choices were really as restricted and prescriptive as you think...

Well, Dave you do have a point!  1 But! Let me clarify to make sure I present this in the same context that I view it. When I say the team choices are restricted, I was talking about the quantity of quality riders you can put on your team. For the most part, in the sprints you can bring in guys like Kittel and Lobato and Van Poppel. In the medium mountains you can bring in Gavazzi and Impey and Lagutin. Which means you can have 5 and up to 6 riders to get you points. When the mountains come, then you have to (!) play the big guns, and you have very little flexibility, making the teams more alike. Especially since there are so few (!) 3.0 riders and so many (!) riders in the 40, or close to (!) 40 range!

So I'm saying that the rider valuations and the restricted budget make most (!) people able to pick only 4 riders and, in the Tour, and, especially in the mountains (!) I would bet that those team will look a lot (!) alike, but not in the medium mountains or the flat stages, just (!) in the mountains! And, just like everyone else, I like the mountains the most (!), so why should we have to have such similar teams in the mountains?... Tweak it, baby, tweak it!  1 Next year, of course!  1

I just think that your point makes sense, but I'm talking about the similarity of the teams in the mountains, therefore the timing of this rant when we come to the mountains (!). If I was talking about the whole (!) race, obviously, you'd be right (!). But I hope you get my point!  3

Avatar
ray silvester [1836 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I've got to disagree enrique.....there's more scope for cheap riders to pick up points in the mountains than in the sprints.

Look at today's break for example

Hoogerland 6.2(former polka dot wearer and renowned suicide merchant)
Riblon 8.4(and he's a previous stage winner here)
Molard 7.8(was in a long break during the Dauphine and sa a wildcard rider probably likely to break at some stage)
Marino 4.9(wildcard rider and therefore also likely to break at some stage)

those 4 total 27.3 credits leaving 122.7 for 5 other picks.....and I wouldn't mind betting it would be similar throughout the mountain stages and that's without considering the obvious mountain bargains such as Schleck,Gadret,Serpa,Cunego and Navarro.

Avatar
Jonas Lorenzen [78 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

..wonder why Contador is classified as a climber and not a GC..absolutely O.T..I know

Avatar
Alan Tullett [1568 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I think everyone's teams will be rather different today but by the mountains next week they will be more similar as we see who really is in form and has table points. A lot of possible options today. Gone for 3 expensive ones, 3 around 10 credits mainly for tomorrow, and 3 cheapos.

Avatar
TERatcliffe26 [4607 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Jonas Lorenzen wrote:

..wonder why Contador is classified as a climber and not a GC..absolutely O.T..I know

Down to how his fantasy points have been accumulated, so he has accumulated alot of points, but not enough have come in one of the stage types by which the GC riders are decided

Avatar
enrique [2341 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
cyclingnews.com wrote:

... Matteo Bono has abandoned the Tour...

Oh, great!  2

Avatar
enrique [2341 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Dave Atkinson wrote:

... well i'll be sure to let you know if they make it up to 99%...

Froome 36%
Contador 7%
Noval 11%
El Fares 19%
Bono 21%
Fischer 29%
Mederel 19%

...

Crap, I forgot to check for Saturday, so, I guess once the stage has passed, you only have info for that last stage, right? So there's no way to know how many people had Froome and Contador on Saturday, right?  39

Pages