Giro 2014

Well, this should be the
Well, this should be the ‘Perfect’, within budget, Purist team for the just completed Giro, according to my calculations:

33.2 Cadel Evans
29.3 Rigoberto Uran
26.7 Rafal Majka
19.1 Wilco Kelderman
17.9 Roberto Ferrari
17.2 Fabio Aru
14.0 Dario Cataldo
13.1 Julian David Arredondo
9.4 Tim Wellens
179.9

It would have scored 2369 points. Notice no Quintana and just one sprinter in there…

In comparison, this was the best ‘real’ Purist team…

37.0 Nairo Alexander Quintana
33.2 Cadel Evans
26.7 Rafal Majka
23.7 Domenico Pozzovivo
19.1 Wilco Kelderman
17.2 Fabio Aru
16.4 Fabio Andres Duarte
3.4 Rick Flens
3.3 Francesco Chicchi
180.0

It scored 1890 points… Team name boz, manager boz…

I don’t care one way or the
I don’t care one way or the other about the budget, but I just saw that I came in 11th at the end of the Giro, and I was just 80 points behind the winner. Now, 80 points is something like 3 bad calls away from the win, I’d say, and these 3 bad calls were enough to put me as low as 11th place. This means that the competition was truly very tight. I didn’t check, but I think it was much tighter than usual, and one of the reasons for this is probably the high budget. This is not to criticize the budget, I had fun, to be honest, there was a bit less thinking to do and even though I made some serious errors along the way – pretty often, that is – I somehow always seemed to remain in contention (again due to the generous budget, I suspect). Just my bit for the budget discussion…

chiv30 wrote:[…if

chiv30 wrote:

[…if [S]carponi, [Rodriguez and]… Martin… had been there… the game would have been different due to their prices

Yeah, I agree… I also have to admit the dynamics for Purist teams vs. Standard teams are different… I’m going to look at the best Purist team and the best ‘possible’ Purist team later just to see that, of course… … but, maybe, just maybe (!) we could have a lower budget just (!) for the Purist competition… which might appease dr and others that want (!) that challenge for the Purist side but let the budget be higher for the ‘Standard’ competition… 😕

Twybaydos wrote:The thing I

Twybaydos wrote:

The thing I like about the game in its normal sense is…

I agree… But this is what’s fun about it… Even with that ability, how many people fell flat on their face loading up on GC favorites on a couple of stages to then have a huge breakaway take the top 10 or 15 spots? That’s (!) what’s cool about it… Even if you’re able to load up on GC favorites galore, in a 3 week race that strategy will keep you near the top, but won’t win the competition for you… And that’s (!) great! 🙂

enrique wrote:drheaton

enrique wrote:

drheaton wrote:

Using one persons performance to judge whether a budget is right or not is nonsense…

Sometimes you sound so ‘high and mighty’… It’s a pity… You tend to come across as arrogant and a ‘know it all’ with comments like this and I can’t imagine you’re like that in your real life… I mean, you can’t be, you’re a friend of dave’s, after all… and he’s the greatest (!) :)

Let it go fella , ur right but let it go I did 😉

drheaton wrote:… a 180

drheaton wrote:

… a 180 budget just makes it too easy to pick all the best riders and no longer forces you to pick and choose weighing up the strengths and weakness of each rider…

chiv30 wrote:drheaton

chiv30 wrote:

drheaton wrote:

Using one persons performance to judge whether a budget is right or not is nonsense, so much is down to chance like losing Rodriguez and Kittel in week one or Evans not being able to stick with the pace.

My point stands. If, going into the race, you can pick the top three GC riders plus the best sprinters in one team then the budget is too high.

But everyone had the same budget and choices , if u look at the fs purist in particular not everyone made the same choices on riders which if the budget had been 250 would have had the same end result, different teams ….it’s not solely the budget that picks the team it’s people’s preferences and hunches as well

I agree that to win a comp, whether it be purist or otherwise, you still need to pick the best riders. The fact that the same old people are at the top of the Giro standings, despite the higher budget, shows that.

My point is more that some of the personal challenge of picking a strong team within budget has gone. I no longer had to make the difficult choices between the best sprinter who’ll get me points on flat stages or another GC guy, I no longer needed to choose between a Quintana, an Evans or an Uran for my team, I could have ALL of them if I wanted.

From my point of view purist is about making the tough calls and picking as good a team as you can within strict limitations, a 180 budget just makes it too easy to pick all the best riders and no longer forces you to pick and choose weighing up the strengths and weakness of each rider to the same extent.

A 150 credit budget would have meant I could have picked Quintana, Rodriguez or Evans, not all three, or it would have meant dropping my sprinters in favour of GC guys, a 180 credit budget means I can have the best of all worlds. Yes, I still managed to choose poorly with that budget (although no-one can blame me for picking Rodriguez and Kittel) but that’s the nature of the game, and a separate issue from the budget.

Don’t think there’ll be any
Don’t think there’ll be any danger of that in the Dauphine