Price inflation

rcorbin wrote:… If Froome

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…

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

Dave Atkinson wrote:….’twas

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 (!) 😕

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?… 😕

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 (!) 😉

Quote:I can’t imagine anyone

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.

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?

Sanderville wrote:… I’m

Sanderville wrote:

… I’m already struggling…

I know! 🙂

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! 🙂 How ironic! 🙂 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! 🙂

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

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! 🙂

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! 🙂

drheaton wrote:Lutsenko

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.

Lutsenko hasn’t raced much so
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.

drheaton wrote:Really, I

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 😛