Price inflation

Sanderville wrote:I need a

Sanderville wrote:

I need a bigger budget. My human rights are being violated…

Ok, how about this as a general rule of thumb for budgets and values next year?

How about if we value the riders so that if anybody wanted to they could fit the 4 highest valued riders + 5 domestiques in their team and that would be possible?

This is efectively what Dave is proposing by bringing down the value of Star Riders to a max of 35 or so and having more (!) DS’s at 3.0, or, to my preference, as below, having some DS’s at a lower value than the 3.0 limit we now have.

So, for example for the Tour, this year, with these values below (subject to discretion, etc..), this team could be possible:

Alejandro Valverde 34.0
Joaquin Rodriguez 34.0
Alberto Contador 34.0
Chris Froome 35.0

Christophe Le Mevel 3.0
Benjamin Noval 2.5
Murilo Antonio Fischer 2.5
Matteo Bono 2.5
Maxime Mederel 2.5

Total 150.00

That way, if anyone wanted to, they could have 4 Stars at any given point in the Tour, knowing full well that in all probablitity they would only score on those 4 riders? Huh? 😉

enrique wrote:drheaton

enrique wrote:

drheaton wrote:

Value setting is based on form and the points a rider has scored over the last 12 months on certain types of stage…

I’ve always liked the way this game has been set up. I remember when we had to choose 1 GC, 1KM, 1 PC, 2 AR’s and 4 DS’s. I thought that was pretty cool! I just wonder if rider values were set back then so you could have 5 “Stars” (1 GC, 1KM, 1 PC and 2 AR’s) on your team and the current system is also “geared to” or “planned for” so that you cannot fit in more than 4 or 5 “Stars” on it…

I’d like to apologise to everyone in advance but I’m about to pull an enrique…

From the 2012 suggestion thread:

enrique wrote:

And now my top two requests for next season:

…

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.

enrique, I know some people can be ‘changeable’ but you really take the piss sometimes.

drheaton wrote:… In

drheaton wrote:

… In rebuttal to enrique though I’ll say this. There are still plenty of hidden gems… Two that come to mind are Reinhardt Janse Van Rensburg and Bryan Coquard…

I agree those are two very good values… But, obviously, those didn’t exist in the Tour, so I don’t think it’s a bad idea to lower the value of the top riders and lower the value of the lowest, too (!)… I may be wrong, but I think this game is also about being able to cheer your favorite riders on (!) and the more we can fit in, the better…

Value setting is based on
Value setting is based on form and the points a rider has scored over the last 12 months on certain types of stage. It’s then adjusted depending on the terrain in a given race.

For example. Mark Cavendish scores lots of points on flat stages and has good form. Therefore for a flat 7 day race (every race given a ‘flat’ rating) then he’d have good form and would have scored loads of points on similar stages in the last 12 months making him high valued.

Take Froome as an example on the same course. It’s flat and he doesn’t score as well as Cav on the flat but actually he has scored purely because he’s getting jersey points on the TdF stages. That means he’s unlikely to be as high priced as Cav but he’ll still be relatively expensive because he has a great form rating and has scored points on flat stages.

That might seem daft that Froome still gets a high value but when you look at it in terms of the TdF you have a handful of flat stages, MM, HM and SF stages and a couple of TTs.

Froome gets points on those flat stages because of GC points so those need to be reflected in his price. Likewise his price will be increased because he gets hich points in the mountains whereas Cav’s price would decrease because he doesn’t score on the hilly stages.

Effectively the game takes a look at the race then at the points a rider has scored in the last 12 months, has a go at predicting (statistically) how many points that rider averages on each type of stage, factors in form then kicks out a price.

It’s all automated which takes any objectivity out of the picture and it’s fair based on a formula.

In rebuttal to enrique though I’ll say this. There are still plenty of hidden gems. The fantasy game does not cover every single race in the calendar and you can still pick up riders cheaply that you’ve seen doing well in non-fantasy races. Two that come to mind are Reinhardt Janse Van Rensburg and Bryan Coquard.

Van Rensburg is an Argos-Shimano first year ‘sprinter’ who has been doing well in minor races. I picked him up for one of the small stage races and got some cheap points from him.

Coquard has been tearing up the pro-conti level sprints and beating some big names. He was provisionally in the Europcar team at 6 credits and would have been a steal but he was cut from the team just before the race.

These riders still exist, you just have to look outside of the fantasy races to find them.

drheaton wrote:Sorry … I

drheaton wrote:

Sorry 🙁 … I suppose enrique’s backing did colour my opinion slightly…

You’re forgiven…

drheaton wrote:

I fundamentally don’t like the idea of ‘hiding’ points when it comes to valuing riders…

I have no problem with that at all. I remember when, was it Bouhani or Kittel, 😕 that came to the Vuelta at a ridiculous price. I think it was 3.0 credits.

It’s an advantage you get when you scout out lesser races…

It’s an advantage that the DS of a smaller team gets when he goes to smaller amateur races and scouts out races and riders the ‘big teams’ aren’t looking at.

I actually ‘love’ that concept.

And (!), once the race starts, evrybody else will notice, and they’ll transfer that rider into their team anyways (!), thereby “rewarding” the person who really (!) follows cycling and giving them an advantage for “maybe”, at most (!), 1 or 2 stages. You know (!) it won’t (!) catch the ‘real’ players off guard! They’ll just smile and put those riders in their team (!)

I think that’s pretty cool! 😀

drheaton wrote:

…players who don’t have the time to research each individual rider are punished….

So, no (!) I don’t see it as “punishment”, not at all!

And I don’t (!) see it:

drheaton wrote:

… the same as us not properly updating the start list for the race…

chrisdstripes wrote:drheaton

chrisdstripes wrote:

drheaton wrote:

I think that’s a terrible idea.

No need for that Dan, only making a suggestion! I knew Enrique’s approval would be the death of that idea… ;)

Sorry 🙁

I suppose enrique’s backing did colour my opinion slightly but I fundamentally don’t like the idea of ‘hiding’ points when it comes to valuing riders so that players who don’t have the time to research each individual rider are punished.

For me, it’s the same as us not properly updating the start list for the race. We could say that it’s the players responsibility to check it as well but all we’re effectively doing is punishing those who trust that the start list is up to date and don’t have the time to go to cycling fever or PCS to check the start list for themselves.

drheaton wrote:
I think

drheaton wrote:

I think that’s a terrible idea.

No need for that Dan, only making a suggestion! I knew Enrique’s approval would be the death of that idea… 😉