- 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
-
drheaton
Oh my god enrique, give it a
Oh my god enrique, give it a rest.You think every single team in the race would have picked Froome?! Are you mad? I spoke to my dad this morning who plays and he didn’t pick Froome, he expected a French break to stay away and for Sky to just keep it together and control the race, he was wrong but that was a valid thing to expect.
One of the main blogs I read does a preview, they said it could go either way yesterday and that we could either see a GC battle or a break staying away. In the end it was a GC battle but only because Europcar missed the break and never gave it much leeway.
Stop trying to load more work onto those who run the game just because the stats aren’t showing numbers you expect.
enrique
Dave, I know there are way
Dave, I know there are way many more important things than answering my frivolous questions about this, but, to be clear, when I look at the “Picked by” section, which tells you what % of teams picked that rider for the last stage, it would be cool for it to refer to the actively managed teams.I wish I could tell easily so I looked at the figures (below).
I looked at the “This competition: Tour de France” league. I counted a total of 6,330 teams.
519 of those teams have a score of 0. When I click on the score (0) of those teams, all the ones that I click on seem to have a blank roster. They seem to have no riders on the team selected, no points scored. So maybe those teams should be out of the calculation… 😕
The same thing happens when I look at the scores for individual stages. Stage 9, for example, has 366 teams scoring 0 points and none of the ones that scored a 0 that I clicked on have any riders in them. Stage 13 has 389 teams scoring 0 and I couldn’t find any that scored 0 that I could see any riders in the team.
Could it be that these are teams that registered for a previous competition that didn’t register specifically for the Tour de France? Maybe they too should be out of the calculation.
So, just to be clear, if they got a score of 0, does that mean that they were given a score and that, therefore, they are considered by the system as a team that has been selected and confirmed and there fore part of the calculation?
Do they, therefore, count as teams that did not (!), for example, pick Cavendish for Stage 13? or Froome for Stage 15?
Dave Atkinson wrote:it’s based on all teams given a score for a stage; ie those that have selected and confirmed a teamI’m just wondering why the riders on these teams can’t be seen. 😕
So, are these teams that score 0 and I can’t see any riders in them part of the equation to determine the % of teams that had a particular rider on their team? :?…
Dave has said, its based on
Dave has said, its based on all teams given a score which means legally selected teams. Empty teams don’t count.I think what enrique’s saying
I think what enrique’s saying is that there will be registered players who have not(for whatever reason)picked a team for a particular competition.Is the popularity percentage for a rider worked out by selections of that rider divided by ALL registered teams or selections of that rider divided by all legally selected teams?
(Is that what you mean enrique?)
Incidentally,I think it would be impossible to differentiate between actively managed teams and inactive teams once a selection IS made at stage 1 of a competition as the ‘system’ would need to be intuitive enough to work out who’s playing purist,who’s banking transfers etc.
Don’t forget that the 52%
Don’t forget that the 52% also includes all purist teams too. I think the 52% figure seems reasonable, just on the forum there were a few teams without Cav and plenty of purist teams won’t have him too.Expecting 90% of all teams to have Cav is unrealistic.
dave atkinson
52% for cav seems low to you?
52% for cav seems low to you? so more than half the teams in the whole game picking cav is low?it’s based on all teams given a score for a stage; ie those that have selected and confirmed a team
enrique
Dave Atkinson wrote:… well
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%…
Here I go again… 😀 This is going to sound stupid, so I thought, why not? 😀 These totals seem to me pretty low… And I’ve always asked to see the number (!) of teams rather than the % of teams, so (!) 😀 I have a lingering doubt, Dave… When the percentage of teams that have chosen a particular rider is shown (as above!) is it based on all teams registered on the database OR (!) on the teams that are paricipating actively in the Tour de France competition?
I ask because I get the impression that at some point, maybe last year, I did not participate in a particular competition, yet I was pretty sure some of the riders I had for the previous competition were still accumulating points. So, I started wondering, what if Dave, or the system, is actually reporting on ALL (!) teams in the database, not just those who are actively participating in the Tour de France? That (!) would explain why those figures seem low (!), but, maybe I’m wrong (!) 🙂
So, in essence, how does the % of teams that picked a rider get counted? Based on all registered teams? Or based on those that are active in the competition? And how do you identify that? Do you track that transfers were made to a team in the period between the Tour de Suisse and the Tour? Meaning someone had made changes to their roster and therefore deliberately set up a team for the Tour de France? Just curious…
For example today, Cavendish was on 52% of the teams, Greipel was on 22%, Sagan was on 29%, Kittel was on 34%… and those totals just seem pretty low! Of course I may be wrong… As usual! 😉 But I guess I’m curious how you track which teams are active in the Tour vs. that those that may be inactive, those that were not set up to play the Tour, etc… For example I imagine that going to the ‘Tour de France’ page to select a team could mark that team as ‘registered’, if you will, for the Tour de France competition, but, do the metrics you present take that into account? Or do they just look at ALL (!) registered teams for ALL (!) competitions? I’m dying to know (!) 🙂 Thanks! 🙂
So, basically how many teams are actually playing the Tour? vs. how many teams are registered? And the % of teams that picked a rider is based on which of the 2?… Thanks! 🙂
enrique
Dave Atkinson wrote:… well
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? 😕
enrique
cyclingnews.com wrote:…
cyclingnews.com wrote:… Matteo Bono has abandoned the Tour…Oh, great! 🙁
TERatcliffe26
Jonas Lorenzen wrote:..wonder
Jonas Lorenzen wrote:..wonder why Contador is classified as a climber and not a GC..absolutely O.T..I knowDown 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
Alan Tullett
I think everyone’s teams will
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.Jonas Lorenzen
..wonder why Contador is
..wonder why Contador is classified as a climber and not a GC..absolutely O.T..I knowI’ve got to disagree
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.
enrique
Dave Atkinson wrote:if the
Dave Atkinson wrote:if the team choices were really as restricted and prescriptive as you think…Well, Dave you do have a point! 🙂 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! 🙂 Next year, of course! 🙂
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! 😉
dave atkinson
if the team choices were
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 themwhich of those do we see?
-
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.