Log in:  

Register

CQ ranking

Come in and talk about betting, computer games and cycling simulations, and your office's or online fantasy cycling leagues.

Moderators: Eshnar, Red Rick, Tonton, King Boonen, Valv.Piti, Pricey_sky

08 Dec 2010 20:22

ingsve wrote:If anyone scores less than 7500 points I suggest they get banished from this forum.




Ive been looking into these cq rankings to see how the points work.

I see that the skill is in finding behind the scenes rider so to speak. Those with the Libertine Seguroses and Mellow Velos of this world should make good use of their euro tour knowledge.

Riders like EBh who by simple logic had worse seasons than the year before, get similar points because of all those 2nds

Last year the best buy would possibly be horner, so a maverick pick is good once in a while i guess.


What i was most shocked to find is that a Grand tour king of the mountains jersey, is worth as much as a stage win.



ps, Chapeau to Hugo for the work put into this.

And Hrotha. How is 0 points even possible. You get points for coming top 60 in the tdu ffs.:confused: Looking at those rankings yoy get points for just about anything.
The Hitch: Winner 2013 Vuelta cq game. Winner, Velorooms prediction game 2012, 2013. 2nd all time cq rankings.
The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.

The story is beginning again, just as it did 14 years ago


journalist with integrity.
User avatar The Hitch
Veteran
 
Posts: 28,787
Joined: 14 Jun 2010 10:58
Location: London.

08 Dec 2010 20:23

hrotha wrote:Why not? It's not like the situation would be any different in practice if the guy had finished a single Pro Tour race and scored 5 points that way.

Hell, he might not even be worth it even for free! :p


Perhaps we have different people in mind, my problem was more that the rider I meant is not completely certain for next year
User avatar Barrus
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,498
Joined: 28 Apr 2010 19:38

08 Dec 2010 20:35

hrotha wrote:Why not? It's not like the situation would be any different in practice if the guy had finished a single Pro Tour race and scored 5 points that way.

Hell, he might not even be worth it even for free! :p


The guy has to be included. I had 28 riders and was close to the limit when I thought of him, and thought "ooh, I wonder how cheap he is, will he be under the limit?" Damn straight he was.
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,056
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

08 Dec 2010 20:36

Just saw that the rider I was thinking about, did have points. I directly changed my team to include him
User avatar Barrus
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,498
Joined: 28 Apr 2010 19:38

08 Dec 2010 21:06

so those 3 stars that are coming back after suspensions are available to choose or not?
User avatar jens_attacks
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,766
Joined: 08 Sep 2009 18:00

08 Dec 2010 21:15

First, I think this is a great idea for a game, and a great time for it to come out in the boooring offseason. Thanks Hugo Koblet.

As far as the contest itself goes, I think it makes sense not to have any cutoff or exceptions, for the sake of simplicity. The same pool of riders should be available to everyone, and it's up to those people to decide whether some gambles are worth it or not (ie. if Pellizotti, for example, ends up suspended then you risk wasting that spot). If people miss out on 'slam dunk' bargain picks, be they injured riders, returning dopers, etc, then that's their own flaw in picking their teams.

For numbers, obviously if you could choose riders with 0 points last year there should be an upper limit of how many you can choose. The suggestion of 25-30 seems to work fine, as that's protour levels of restriction. Those who have already chosen a team over 30 have 3 weeks to figure out which couple of riders to drop so it shouldn't be a big deal. Either way, clear rules soon would be great for us all.

That's my 2 cents. Thanks again.
skidmark
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,559
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

08 Dec 2010 21:29

skidmark wrote:For numbers, obviously if you could choose riders with 0 points last year there should be an upper limit of how many you can choose. The suggestion of 25-30 seems to work fine, as that's protour levels of restriction. Those who have already chosen a team over 30 have 3 weeks to figure out which couple of riders to drop so it shouldn't be a big deal. Either way, clear rules soon would be great for us all.


Yes, there has to be an upper limit. Otherwise I would just submit my list and then just add the just over 2000 riders who scored 0 last year and hope a few hundred of them score some points next year.

We've had four diffrent suggestions for an upper limit so we need an official word from Hugo Koblet both on the upper limit, if it's OK to use riders that rode and scored 0 points in 2010 and also what price certain doping suspended riders should have such as Rebellin, Di Luca and perhaps even Pellizotti.
ingsve: Winner of the 2011 CQ Ranking Manager Game.

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it” - Max Planck
User avatar ingsve
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,085
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 22:52
Location: Borås, Sweden

08 Dec 2010 21:42

I say no limit to numbers, but the riders had to score a point last year.

But it's not my contest... mainly I dont' want to have to go back and look for some 0 point guys and update my team.
kurtinsc
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,370
Joined: 17 Nov 2009 14:21

08 Dec 2010 23:00

You could just make it a limit of 25 riders but have unlimited amount of money. Make it about who made the biggest "profit" from the original value of the teams.

Should only be allowed to have a certain amount of riders as if you have more riders it will give you an advantage because of course if you get a lot of riders who had ****ty years they are going to make big money for you and their value will sky rocket. Therefore the guy with 30 riders will have an advantage because he would have a lot more ****ty riders.
diggercuz wrote:second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
User avatar auscyclefan94
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,325
Joined: 16 Jun 2009 02:37
Location: Australia

08 Dec 2010 23:08

auscyclefan94 wrote:You could just make it a limit of 25 riders but have unlimited amount of money. Make it about who made the biggest "profit" from the original value of the teams.

Should only be allowed to have a certain amount of riders as if you have more riders it will give you an advantage because of course if you get a lot of riders who had ****ty years they are going to make big money for you and their value will sky rocket. Therefore the guy with 30 riders will have an advantage because he would have a lot more ****ty riders.


Well, I think it is fine as it is with 7500 CQ$ to spend. I agree though that if there is a range of allowed riders then it makes no sense not to use the maximum allowed number unless you are really satisfied with what you have and can't afford any more riders though that would mean 0-cost riders are outlawed which I don't see why they would be.
ingsve: Winner of the 2011 CQ Ranking Manager Game.

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it” - Max Planck
User avatar ingsve
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,085
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 22:52
Location: Borås, Sweden

08 Dec 2010 23:59

The Hitch wrote:And Hrotha. How is 0 points even possible. You get points for coming top 60 in the tdu ffs.:confused: Looking at those rankings yoy get points for just about anything.

It takes real talent, no doubt about that. This guy's a legend.
Libertine Seguros wrote:The guy has to be included. I had 28 riders and was close to the limit when I thought of him, and thought "ooh, I wonder how cheap he is, will he be under the limit?" Damn straight he was.

I knew he had zero glorious points because I like to look at his CQ page and giggle like a schoolgirl.
Barrus wrote:Just saw that the rider I was thinking about, did have points. I directly changed my team to include him

Damn, that means there's another hilarious rider I could sign out there, and I don't know who he is.
User avatar hrotha
Veteran
 
Posts: 15,456
Joined: 10 Jun 2010 20:45

09 Dec 2010 00:13

auscyclefan94 wrote:You could just make it a limit of 25 riders but have unlimited amount of money. Make it about who made the biggest "profit" from the original value of the teams.

Should only be allowed to have a certain amount of riders as if you have more riders it will give you an advantage because of course if you get a lot of riders who had ****ty years they are going to make big money for you and their value will sky rocket. Therefore the guy with 30 riders will have an advantage because he would have a lot more ****ty riders.


Well, that might also make it more exciting, in the sense that while I might think that it'd be good to have 25 riders and get a couple of better 'top' riders that'll get me a bunch of points, someone else might think that it'd be good to skim a bit off the top and get 30 riders. The obvious bargains will all be snapped up anyway, so it'll just be a guessing game for the best strategy.
skidmark
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,559
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

09 Dec 2010 01:21

A couple of ideas for the dopers (ie. guys with 0 or very little points coming off suspension):

1. Give every doper the same CQ price ie. 250, 500 etc (some value everyone agrees on)

2. Keep the prices as they are but maybe the doper only gets half the points they score (or some agreeable percentage 65%, 75% etc) ie. wins a race and gets 1000 points so in the end is only awarded 500 in our game.

Just some thoughts.....
The computer is smarter than me Bjarne, I no need to understand computer it need understand me - Carlos Sastre in Overcoming
RIP - Swordsman
RIP - Craig1985

Wallace wrote:In Lance's prime, you could take all the drugs you wanted, whenever you wanted. Ah, those were the days... If you put Contador on the program Lance was on in his prime, it would be like watching a bicycle duct-taped to the space shuttle go up the alps. You have to factor all that in when figuring out which one is the most talented
User avatar El Imbatido
Member
 
Posts: 1,348
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 13:22
Location: Australia

09 Dec 2010 01:46

hrotha wrote:It takes real talent, no doubt about that. This guy's a legend.

I knew he had zero glorious points because I like to look at his CQ page and giggle like a schoolgirl.

Damn, that means there's another hilarious rider I could sign out there, and I don't know who he is.


So lets get this straight. Hes a legend. Hes so good that having him can potentially win you this game. He has never been sanctioned for doping. He missed last season, but was neither suspended nor injured nor retired. In fact, from what im reading, he may have raced but, despite his greatness managed to somehow not get any points.

Im starting to think you guys pmed eachother, decided to play a private joke on the rest of the forum.

But barrus wasnt in on it, so now hes claiming to have found another one.
The Hitch: Winner 2013 Vuelta cq game. Winner, Velorooms prediction game 2012, 2013. 2nd all time cq rankings.
The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.

The story is beginning again, just as it did 14 years ago


journalist with integrity.
User avatar The Hitch
Veteran
 
Posts: 28,787
Joined: 14 Jun 2010 10:58
Location: London.

09 Dec 2010 02:12

The Hitch wrote:So lets get this straight. Hes a legend. Hes so good that having him can potentially win you this game. He has never been sanctioned for doping. He missed last season, but was neither suspended nor injured nor retired. In fact, from what im reading, he may have raced but, despite his greatness managed to somehow not get any points.

Im starting to think you guys pmed eachother, decided to play a private joke on the rest of the forum.

But barrus wasnt in on it, so now hes claiming to have found another one.


The guy I'm thinking of certainly did ride this year. He rode over 40 race days of 2.1 races and above but didn't score any points. I think it can't be that hard to figure out which rider it is.
ingsve: Winner of the 2011 CQ Ranking Manager Game.

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it” - Max Planck
User avatar ingsve
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,085
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 22:52
Location: Borås, Sweden

09 Dec 2010 04:05

Just require the rider to have a point.

Everyone is working from the same list. Every rider has a value. We can all take guys from the list.

Zero points just creates problems. In theory, we should all have EVERY 0 point rider on our teams automatically... so we all get their points. That means their points don't matter, so let's just leave them off and be done with it.
kurtinsc
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,370
Joined: 17 Nov 2009 14:21

09 Dec 2010 04:27

ingsve wrote:The guy I'm thinking of certainly did ride this year. He rode over 40 race days of 2.1 races and above but didn't score any points. I think it can't be that hard to figure out which rider it is.


Yeah I'm on the same page I think.
He can't be excluded. But guys like this need to have some sort of price tag included IMO.

Should be 25-30imo
Maybe if a rider dopes he should lose all points for the season. Making doping / dodgy riders less attractive.

Ps. So far I have 1 rider at 1406 :p

Btw 7500 is a perfect amount.
User avatar Timmy-loves-Rabo
Veteran
 
Posts: 10,448
Joined: 22 Jun 2009 13:44
Location: Melbourne

09 Dec 2010 04:57

Oh I see who you mean now... now I'm angry that it took me so long (I even looked at the same guy before but didn't see he had 0 pts in 2010).

Anyone picking the revelation of 2011, David Tanner?
Ferminal
Veteran
 
Posts: 16,953
Joined: 03 Jul 2009 09:42

09 Dec 2010 05:47

Ferminal wrote:Oh I see who you mean now... now I'm angry that it took me so long (I even looked at the same guy before but didn't see he had 0 pts in 2010).

Anyone picking the revelation of 2011, David Tanner?


David Tanner is a good pick and is cheap enough:D
joy118118
Member
 
Posts: 845
Joined: 15 May 2009 12:33

09 Dec 2010 07:01

Timmy-loves-Rabo wrote:Yeah I'm on the same page I think.
He can't be excluded. But guys like this need to have some sort of price tag included IMO.

Should be 25-30imo
Maybe if a rider dopes he should lose all points for the season. Making doping / dodgy riders less attractive.

Ps. So far I have 1 rider at 1406 :p

Btw 7500 is a perfect amount.


Like the idea about the doped riders! Surely TGBM will be in your team, timmy?
diggercuz wrote:second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
User avatar auscyclefan94
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,325
Joined: 16 Jun 2009 02:37
Location: Australia

PreviousNext

Return to Games and Fantasy Cycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Back to top