Log in:  

Register

The 2015 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

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

Moderators: Eshnar, Irondan, King Boonen, Red Rick

25 Nov 2015 18:34

I really like the idea of the new deadline rules. That should eliminate the usual discussions in the first week, hopefully.

I'd also prefer to keep the limit at 7500.
HelgeBlendet
Junior Member
 
Posts: 252
Joined: 29 Dec 2011 09:43

25 Nov 2015 20:51

I also prefer 7.500 points as I think teams will differ more thous making the game more interesting.
User avatar rote_laterne
Member
 
Posts: 447
Joined: 06 Jan 2014 20:21

26 Nov 2015 11:14

Keep it at 7500!
User avatar jsem94
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,397
Joined: 05 Oct 2010 18:24
Location: Örebro, Sweden

26 Nov 2015 12:50

keep it at 7,500
adamski101
Junior Member
 
Posts: 138
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 11:49

26 Nov 2015 17:44

+1 for 7.500
comodoro
Newly Registered Member
 
Posts: 4
Joined: 02 May 2012 12:05

27 Nov 2015 13:29

My first list for 2016 is already over 10,000 so my vote is to increase the limit to 10,325 :D

Damn, I truly wish I could have all those great riders but 7500 is a good number and we can compare with previous years.

I would also vote to ban the most obvious picks. What's the point of having somebody like Kittel on a team when everyone else will have him as well? Just a waste of space and points ...
User avatar Jancouver
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,570
Joined: 14 Mar 2009 22:03
Location: San Diego, USA

Re:

27 Nov 2015 17:31

Jancouver wrote:My first list for 2016 is already over 10,000 so my vote is to increase the limit to 10,325 :D

Damn, I truly wish I could have all those great riders but 7500 is a good number and we can compare with previous years.

I would also vote to ban the most obvious picks. What's the point of having somebody like Kittel on a team when everyone else will have him as well? Just a waste of space and points ...

Regarding obvious picks I was thinking along the same lines, but ultimately you can not exclude possibility that someone will deliberately want to take the risk of not having that rider.

And you definitely can not exclude that even the obvious pick may fail ( see Moser, Andy Schleck, Goss etc.).
PeterB
Member
 
Posts: 532
Joined: 20 Feb 2012 13:53

27 Nov 2015 21:26

Goss will be on my team again...how can he do worse? :)
Skyline Drive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPjM6rZ4pN0
_____________________________________________________________________________
Canton Ave Climb
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C90ZPlbEfmU
User avatar Jspear
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,541
Joined: 23 Feb 2014 03:50
Location: N. VA, USA

Re:

28 Nov 2015 00:13

Jspear wrote:Goss will be on my team again...how can he do worse? :)


He can retire. :D
User avatar jsem94
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,397
Joined: 05 Oct 2010 18:24
Location: Örebro, Sweden

Re: Re:

28 Nov 2015 17:01

PeterB wrote:
Jancouver wrote:My first list for 2016 is already over 10,000 so my vote is to increase the limit to 10,325 :D

Damn, I truly wish I could have all those great riders but 7500 is a good number and we can compare with previous years.

I would also vote to ban the most obvious picks. What's the point of having somebody like Kittel on a team when everyone else will have him as well? Just a waste of space and points ...

Regarding obvious picks I was thinking along the same lines, but ultimately you can not exclude possibility that someone will deliberately want to take the risk of not having that rider.

And you definitely can not exclude that even the obvious pick may fail ( see Moser, Andy Schleck, Goss etc.).


Thanks Peter for bringing up Andy Schleck again, I had all but forgot him and the great pick I thought he was.

Keep the points at 7,500 we're all playing with the same amount so it shouldn't matter.
User avatar uspostal
Junior Member
 
Posts: 185
Joined: 04 Aug 2010 14:29
Location: USA

Re:

29 Nov 2015 19:00

Jancouver wrote:My first list for 2016 is already over 10,000 so my vote is to increase the limit to 10,325 :D

Damn, I truly wish I could have all those great riders but 7500 is a good number and we can compare with previous years.

I would also vote to ban the most obvious picks. What's the point of having somebody like Kittel on a team when everyone else will have him as well? Just a waste of space and points ...


I understand the idea behind that, but it'd be difficult to implement. First, there's never been a truly unanimous pick; the most popular riders this year were still missing from at least 25 teams. Of course, it's likely if someone just forgot an obvious player, then maybe their team won't be that robust and competitive, but still, by picking those 'obvious' riders you get an advantage over somebody (if they do well, which is never a guarantee). Second, where would you draw the line at 'obvious picks'? I've thought some picks were 'obvious' only to realize that only about half the teams were on the same page; without knowing who other people are thinking of, it's hard to know when to draw the line, because then you'd be doing things like 'riders that you think 75% of the teams are going to pick' should not be included, and that's far too speculative. Third, there are 33 spots, so if you have a few that are relative equalizers for most teams, there is still plenty of room for exciting and unique picks. We've tinkered with the fundamentals of the game before for dopers, which is a special case both morally and how a doping ban affects CQ points (ie. getting Valverde for 0 points in 2012 would have been bonkers). But a doping ban is cut and dry - trying to figure out where to draw the line on who an 'obvious' pick is would just open up too much of a can of worms for my liking. I guess the bottom line is that it would take far too much work and discussion to build consensus around this for my capabilities (if there could even be consensus), so it's easier just to let the rules be as they have been.
skidmark
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,633
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

Re: The 2015 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

08 Dec 2015 04:37

So, confirmation that the game is 7500 points. All other main elements will remain the same too; the green jersey competition was a success this year, I felt, and mc_mountain suggested a similar 'KoM' competition for the team that had the highest cumulative rankings on the 'weekly top movers' standings (get it? best 'climber'? Not bad).

Anyway, the new thread for the 2016 game will be up in the next week if all goes to plan; I'm currently travelling, but I should be able to find some time to sit down to it.
skidmark
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,633
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

Re: The 2015 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

10 Dec 2015 02:23

skidmark wrote:So, confirmation that the game is 7500 points. All other main elements will remain the same too; the green jersey competition was a success this year, I felt, and mc_mountain suggested a similar 'KoM' competition for the team that had the highest cumulative rankings on the 'weekly top movers' standings (get it? best 'climber'? Not bad).

Anyway, the new thread for the 2016 game will be up in the next week if all goes to plan; I'm currently travelling, but I should be able to find some time to sit down to it.


Thanks for the update! Should be fun!

Anybody got the overall standings over the years for this CQ game since we started?
User avatar Jancouver
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,570
Joined: 14 Mar 2009 22:03
Location: San Diego, USA

Re: The 2015 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

10 Dec 2015 23:11

I haven't yet compiled an updated list of all 5 years of the game, but if nobody else has that info on hand (I believe skibby and/or EvansIsTheBest has had this info in the past) I'm planning on doing it when my current trip is over, which will be around Christmas time.

I was coming on this thread to provide a link to the finalized standings of this year's game, which could be used for 'official' purposes such as summarizing all the years. The only difference right now between it and update 42 is that I corrected fauniera's entries that had omitted over 100 points from their team, moving them up to 8th overall. If anyone sees any corrections that need to be made to this one, I can update again.

Anyway, here is the file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/cvj5mahrklglc5x/CQ%202015%20final%20update.xls?dl=0
skidmark
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,633
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

Previous

Return to Games and Fantasy Cycling

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

Back to top