- This topic has 127 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by
ray silvester.
-
CreatorTopic
-
June 21, 2013 at 4:49 pm #19168
sanderville
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.
-
CreatorTopic
-
AuthorReplies
-
enrique
Sanderville wrote:…The TdF
Sanderville wrote:…The TdF must account for a huge chunk of any team’s annual budget… It costs the sponsors more, it costs Eurosport more pie money for Carlton Kirby, it costs road.cc more to post all those mini-pumps that I never win. It’s a big-budget affair.So give us a bigger budget.
…I’m only suggesting an increase of 50 points or so to avoid being forced to pick the same four cheapest riders as every other player in the game.
Is it unworkable to give people more money for the TdF than for the Tour of Poland?
What a beautifully simple thought. I admire how you framed it so naturally. Sounds good to me! 🙂
Sanderville wrote:I was being uncharacteristically ironic…And I enjoy that (!) Thanks for the post and the lighthearted rambling! 🙂
I was being
I was being uncharacteristically ironic in my original post but this is all getting unnecessarily complicated. Changing algorithms and scoring systems is over the top. This situation has come about because the riders selected for the TdF have form that means they aren’t cheap. It probably won’t happen for any other race.The TdF must account for a huge chunk of any team’s annual budget – more bus fuel, more hotel rooms, more bidons, more chamois cream, more everything. It costs the sponsors more, it costs Eurosport more pie money for Carlton Kirby, it costs road.cc more to post all those mini-pumps that I never win. It’s a big-budget affair.
So give us a bigger budget.
This probably won’t happen for the Vuelta, but if it does then just up the budget a bit. I’m only suggesting an increase of 50 points or so to avoid being forced to pick the same four cheapest riders as every other player in the game.
Is it unworkable to give people more money for the TdF than for the Tour of Poland?
Gkam84
Holy Moly, enrique has come
Holy Moly, enrique has come up with an idea I like.YES, in a 9 rider per team race, it would be quite easy to make one rider from each team a super cheap guy
enrique
enrique wrote:…how about
enrique wrote:…how about lowering their value to 3.0 for Friday’s, Saturday’s and Sunday’s stages? 😀Ok, then, how about next year, for the Tour only, every professional team gets assigned one 3.0 to 3.5 value rider per team? So you can put a low value rider from any team you like at a dirt cheap value? 😕
I wasn’t meaning to do it
I wasn’t meaning to do it straight away enrique, you can’t change things mid way like Dave says, I was talking about the Vuelta if it ends up like TdF.The other thing is, if new riders don’t come through, then anyone who scored points goes up slightly. It will have to be looked at for next season. BUT, that’s for the off season, NOT for suggestions right now 😉
dave atkinson
you can’t just feck about
you can’t just feck about with the rider value half way through a grand tour. please don’t be daft.enrique
Gkam84 wrote:The only thing
Gkam84 wrote:The only thing that might be worth looking at… is changing a couple of… guys down to 3.0…Yeah, I like that idea…
Maybe you could just take the 10 lowest valued guys and make them all 3.0. This year that would have been:
Albert Timmer 4.9
Jean-Marc Marino 4.9
Dmitriy Muravyev 4.7
Christophe Le Mevel 4.6
Benjamin Noval 4.5
Julien El Fares 3.7
José Ivan Gutierrez Palacios 3.4
Murilo Antonio Fischer 3.0
Matteo Bono 3.0
Maxime Mederel 3.0It’s kind of sad to see Noval, Bono and Gutierrez abandon and not be able to substitute them with other riders at around the 3.0 level.
At last count, I think the following riders hadn’t scored a single point (!), how about lowering their value to 3.0 for Friday’s, Saturday’s and Sunday’s stages? 😀
Fredrik Kessiakoff 27.0
Janez Brajkovic 19.8
Christian Vandevelde 18.9
Boy Van Poppel 15.6
Alexandre Geniez 13.3
Enrico Gasparotto 12.0
Adriano Malori 11.1
Damiano Cunego 11.1
Tom Leezer 11.0
Yoann Bagot 10.1
Gatis Smukulis 10.0
Michael Schar 9.3
Steve Morabito 9.2
Edward King 8.1
Guillaume Levarlet 7.7
Manuel Quinziato 7.2
Aliaksandr Kuschynski 7.1
Christophe Le Mevel 4.6
Benjamin Noval 4.5
Murilo Antonio Fischer 3.0
Matteo Bono 3.0
Maxime Mederel 3.0The only thing that might be
The only thing that might be worth looking at for future tours. Is changing a couple of random guys down to 3 in value if there aren’t many cheapo’s there.So someone like Hoogerland, sitting at 6.3 I think, bump him down to 3. Making the known names 😉
TERatcliffe26
But Enrique that team you
But Enrique that team you present is exactly why things changed, when you are able to pick a team such as that it is too easy and there may as well be no values at all. Also back then values were not based on form, and some of the riders are not the riders they are todayenrique
enrique wrote:Christophe Le
enrique wrote:Christophe Le Mevel 3.0
Benjamin Noval 2.5
Murilo Antonio Fischer 2.5
Matteo Bono 2.5
Maxime Mederel 2.5Going below 3.0 really isn’t that (!) bad. I mean, none (!) of the riders above have scored any points, so effectively, they’re just filling up space, so why not make them cheaper? 🙂
enrique
drheaton wrote:… How about
drheaton wrote:… How about putting in place a theoretical maximum average price calculated across all riders and if that is exceeded each rider’s price is proportionally decreased?…I like that! That might have worked nicely for this year’s Tour! 🙂 I think the current average for the riders that started the Tour is 15.7, so… 😕 The average may have to go lower than 15…. Hmmm… 😕
enrique
Dave Atkinson wrote:i’m
Dave Atkinson wrote:i’m wondering about lowering the upper price limit to 35 from 40, see if affects the dynamic of the game. thoughts?Hell, I love (!) the idea… The more riders I can fit in the better! But (!) I also remember previous discussions where I was begging for 2.5 and below riders… So I would lower the upper values of the top riders and (!) consider dropping some DS’s below the 3.0 level too, too!
In the words of the venerable master Gkam in the July 2012 “Using Delisted Riders” thread:
Gkam84 wrote:… we have a fair idea who’s going to be at the finish first, so to fit 4/5 of them in, I need to use cheapo DS’s ;)Gkam84 wrote:… say your rider worth 2.5 drops out of the race, but the next cheapest is 3.1, but you only have 0.3 left. You would HAVE to drop someone else…Dave Atkinson wrote:don’t forget there’ll be more cheap riders at the vuelta tooYeah, I think the Tour has been the tightest and most difficult to manage budget-wise
enrique
Gkam84 wrote:Right, lets make
Gkam84 wrote:Right, lets make this simple… if the changes benefit everyone and not just the one person in the corner who screams and cries till they get their own way.That sounds fair. And reasonable, too! 🙂
enrique
TERatcliffe26 wrote:You
TERatcliffe26 wrote:You shouldn’t be able to have 4 so called stars/team leaders…Here’s an actual team I once had for the Vuelta:
24.9 Bradley Wiggins
29.0 Daniele Bennati
17.9 Â Bauke Mollerna
34.0 Jakob Fuglsang
34.9 Peter Sagan
12.0 Â Wouter Poels
11.0 Christopher Froome
9.0 Fredrik Kessiakoff
2.3 DSWe had a budget of 175. That was a nice number! the truth is I don’t know why we went down to 150. I really don’t think the Competitions were that (!) close! Or were they? 😉 By the end of a Grand Tour, people had made so many different choices there was a clear winner. Why restrict the budget and thereby the quantity of Star Riders that can fit into team so much?
I really don’t think it made that much of a difference back then. There were clear winners after 3 weeks of racing, I think. Or am I wrong? It was still fun! 🙂 It all sorts itself out and the winners will pull ahead anyways, and, well, I just think it’s more fun to be able to put more people you want to cheer for on your team! 🙂
You shouldn’t be able to have
You shouldn’t be able to have 4 so called stars/team leaders, that is the whole point of valuation -
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.