Register

## The 2017 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

### Re:

Netserk wrote:You cannot put a number on it a priori, absolute or relative (just take the hypothetical scenario where every rider scores exactly the same as the year before). You're average rider will cost 227. If the (average) return for many of the best picks around that price is 400, then the value of a rider costing 0 with a return of 100 will depend on how larger the return (in absolute measures) of a more expensive pick is than that of the average rider. In this case, you only have to find a single rider with a cost of 454 (or less) and a return of more than 700 for the swap to be good. If there's two above average priced riders, they will have to have a combined cost of 681 (or less) and a return of more than 1100 for the swap (of three average riders with the cheap rider and the two more expensive riders) to be favorable.

In a year with many good very low cost riders, the expensive riders will not have to be as good as in other years, and vice versa, just like if the return of an average cost rider is high, more of those will be able to out-perform a more diverse selection.

So in short, both relative and absolute return is important for all picks, and the market decides how those two needs to be combined for a pick to be good.

*Sometime, I will take a closer look on last year's game and the market of the most picked riders (probably top-100) and analyze how good picks they/(some of them) were, or rather how much of a return a rider would have to have in the different price ranges to be a contributing factor for a top team.

Yes, to put it in a more simple way: For any N amount of riders you have (in practice I work with pairs or trios, for simplicity), you need to be sure that there is not another combination of N riders at the same price which together will score a higher (probable) amount of CQ points (in absolute measures). Which is what I wrote last year. Then of course you need to weigh the points ceiling/floor for a rider against his average expected score (if he rode an infinite amount of seasons) and decide how much risk you want to take. I think hakkie2's theory is much closer to this than the notion that every rider needs to double his points.

On another note; you seem to take an interest in this game, so it's a pity you didn't submit a team. I'm sure you would've done well.

Edit: Oh, and about the analysis for last year that you're planning. I remember Skibby once did an analysis on the optimal team for one of the years, and calculated the "penalty" for not including each rider, i.e. how much less points the optimal team without that rider would score. That's kind of what you're thinking about, isn't it?
Squire
Member

Posts: 1,411
Joined: 28 Dec 2010 23:39
Location: Shanghai

Not exactly, instead of analyzing what the very best (theoretical) team would have to be, it'd be a (simple) model over how big a return a good pick (a pick that wouldn't harm the winning team) would have to bring for the different prices. Speaking of which, I forgot to mention that when we talk about how much a rider needs to score to be a good pick, we often forget that we are talking about averages. In reality, a few picks will obviously be more than just good, and a rider like Kittel last year meant that the average of the other riders on the team wouldn't have to be as big. So for the last places in your team (which theoretically should be the weakest picks) the riders don't really have to score as much as the average of your whole team. And all that before we talk risk etc., because just like there will always be extremely good picks, there will also be bad picks on even the best team.

Regarding this year's participation, I would have liked to do so, for sure, but only really if I thought I could make a good enough team to be in the better end, which I didn't think I'd manage this year, since I haven't had much time before Christmas nor really followed/investigated the youth circuit as much as I'd have liked. Regardless, I think it's a great and fascinating game in it's simplicity and depth; and it's a good framework to think about cycling.
Goodbye, Tommeke; thank you for all you have given us!
Netserk
Veteran

Posts: 19,997
Joined: 30 Apr 2011 13:10
Location: Denmark

The 8 people who have SCOTSON Miles will be pleased. Impressive display of power.
18-Valve. (pithy)
Senior Member

Posts: 2,594
Joined: 04 May 2011 12:50

Good pick by them, he made my youth team but not main team
del1962
Veteran

Posts: 6,891
Joined: 16 Oct 2012 17:20

### Re:

18-Valve. (pithy) wrote:The 8 people who have SCOTSON Miles will be pleased. Impressive display of power.

Incredible!
LaFlorecita
Veteran

Posts: 30,825
Joined: 15 May 2011 09:53
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands

### Re:

18-Valve. (pithy) wrote:The 8 people who have SCOTSON Miles will be pleased. Impressive display of power.

Was a great attack no doubt. Looked like the rest of the group sat on Durbridge who was already knackered. In part because everybody expect Greenedge to keep it together due to being the strongest team.
Then the counter attacks were too little too late
Tigerion
Member

Posts: 578
Joined: 21 Jul 2011 03:23

### Re: The 2017 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

Update: there is no update!

CQ hasn't put out a post-Aussie nats update, although they usually do, so I'm going to hold out hope that one is coming.

In the meantime, I've cleaned up the spreadsheet, got it up to the official 131 participants on the front page (Gotland was the other team that had its own tab but I forgot to include on the front page), and erased all the non-participant pages. Take a look through the file here.

I also updated the final official popularity standings, for riders and teams - had to change two teams that were entered in error and add one more team I messed up on and missed. Here's the final list of team popularity:

Rank Team score
1 fauniera 1633
2 Vesica 1631
3 Shawnm4747 1616
4 minessa 1612
5 freshman 1589
6 Kazistuta 1585
7 Wallenquist 1565
9 PeterB 1549
10 Popchu 1547
11 snccdcno 1546
12 skidmark 1528
13 the asian 1527
13 the attacking vikings 1527
15 Total Package 1526
16 del1962 1522
18 DJ Sprtsch 1508
18 Kryvo 1508
20 SafeBet 1506
21 will10 1492
22 kabete 1490
23 Hugo Koblet 1482
24 postmanhat 1474
25 Roubaix 1472
26 search 1464
27 CraZyCaLL 1463
28 laarsland 1462
29 HelgeBlendet 1453
30 nuvolablu 1435
31 lenissart 1433
32 karaev 1421
33 Joelsim 1417
33 LaFlorecita 1417
35 GP Blanco 1409
36 jeroenk 1406
37 Polliwop 1403
38 shalgo 1400
39 abbulf 1388
40 togo95 1378
41 simple 1362
42 AlyKaptan 1361
43 Maaaaaaaarten 1360
44 Jancouver 1344
45 Armchair cyclist 1341
46 Crevaison 1340
47 Eric10 1339
48 Schleckamagurky 1333
48 torcia_86 1333
51 Hakkie2 1326
52 vroome.exe 1308
53 Hugo87 1305
54 DFA123 1297
54 Kjellus 1297
56 Pentacycle 1288
57 Mellow Velo 1285
58 LightBing 1278
59 ansimi 1275
59 Gotland 1275
61 Brullnux 1270
62 greenedge 1261
63 Gigs_98 1260
64 rote_laterne 1257
65 trackstand 1254
66 comodoro 1247
67 Squire 1243
68 Martin 1236
69 Eyeballs Out 1222
70 EvansIsTheBest 1218
71 18-Valve. (pithy) 1217
72 Blues in the bottle 1215
73 oliveira 1213
74 Geraint Too Fast 1212
75 tom_jelte 1193
76 Yellow Knight 1182
77 Object 1177
78 Googolplex 1169
79 Bicycle_Boy 1165
80 Russell23 1147
81 sublimit 1144
82 Falze 1142
83 Sneekes 1123
84 Ludwigzgz 1122
85 Pantani1 1113
86 Ferminal 1102
87 merengues 1072
88 AupaPyama 1060
89 Spice_Girls 1043
90 R_O_Shipman 1017
91 Jpettersen 1012
92 Pirrewiet 1010
93 Jakob747 1008
94 barmaher 997
95 PunchingRouleur 992
96 escartin 988
96 zlev11 988
98 DJW 985
99 Londonpat 979
100 PremierAndrew 967
101 bminchow 965
102 bort 958
103 WKA311 941
104 al_pacino 928
105 just some guy 924
106 sodak_za 915
107 Tigerion 906
108 ItalianGigolo 899
109 Manafana 893
110 scrooll07 882
111 Poles & Co. 877
112 LukasCPH 871
113 LosBrolin 828
114 Nicosix 801
115 yoyokt 737
116 VeloRooms 735
117 ThePirate81 729
118 Tych23 653
119 archieboy 640
120 Roar Like A Mouse 625
121 CQmanager 604
122 armchairclimber 543
123 Guybrush 519
124 Carlo_Algatrensig 458
125 Josedin 454
126 Slapshot 450
127 Trudgin 414
129 Guigsteam 313
130 ChrisDK 292
131 Magnumpti 219
skidmark
Senior Member

Posts: 2,721
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

### Re: The 2017 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

Okay, i won. Nice game that.
fauniera
Member

Posts: 1,465
Joined: 12 Oct 2013 15:00

I did a big fail and put Rolland in twice

Good that you saw it Skidmark. Looks I have given all of you a little bit of a headstart
Gotland
Junior Member

Posts: 90
Joined: 14 May 2009 12:48

Thanks for the responses @ Jancouver, La Flo and Squire! My thoughts to each are below.

With Richie I think he was worth the risk in terms of being an unpopular pick, and the fact he didn't ride at all after the Olympics. He's had better springs than he did last year and he could have placed higher at the Dauphinie and the TDF, so this year i'm hoping all the stars align for him.

With Haas I definitely did pick him with some Aussie bias, but also think he can benefit by being DD's only rider really suited to the hilly races. With his Nationals performance i'm hopeful he can ride great at the TDU. A bit more worried now about Van Der Sande and Guldhammer (their low scoring pasts/ not being on a Continental team in 2015), but hopefully they can still go well!

With Jay McCarthy over Haas I agree to an extent, but I decided to pick a new Aussie for fun this year. With Porsev you're right and hopefully his absence doesn't come back to bite me. Schachmann wise I think he'll perform solidly throughout the year and has pretty good climbing ability so that was my other consideration to go with the ITT. Furthermore EQS' riders always seem to perform strongly and I think he has a big chance of being in their WC TTT squad who I think will edge out BMC, Movistar and Katusha (they're my dark horses for the event) so he'll get some points there.

Regarding Gaviria @DFA123 my thinking went along the lines of: consistent points being brought in year round; his track focus of 2016; his hugely impressive P-T; and lastly in regards to the Giro uncertainty as to who can challenge him. With no Kittel there and my suspiscion that Greipel may not ride so he can replicate his 2015 TDF I don't know who would be able to challenge him.

Your guys teams all look very solid as well, hopefully I can be in a position to contest against them high up in the leaderboard.

With regards to Scotson, starting off like this is a great start and should give him increased confidence for the year ahead. I picked Edmonson over him just because I thought he'd have a better chance to score points due to his sprinting ability but looks like he's staring off on the back foot.
greenedge
Veteran

Posts: 5,626
Joined: 27 Mar 2011 04:23

I had a quick look at the popularity lists for this year. Here's how they've affected the overall CQ game statistics:

We have a new leader in overall picks across the years! Dombrowski moves past Phinney & Goss to take first place as the most picked rider ever. Aru enters the top 10.

1 DOMBROWSKI Joseph Lloyd 325
2 PHINNEY Taylor 316
3 BETANCUR GOMEZ Carlos Alberto 296
4 GOSS Matthew 289
5 MOSER Moreno 270
6 SCHLECK Andy 257
7 BOONEN Tom 252
8 EWAN Caleb 248
9 ARU Fabio 236
10 HENAO MONTOYA Sergio Luis 215

Degenkolb enters the list of most popular picks per year by being in 88,5% of all 2017 teams.

1 BOONEN Tom 92,0 % 2014
2 KITTEL Marcel 91,7 % 2016
3 SCHLECK Andy 90,2 % 2013
4 HUSHOVD Thor 89,4 % 2013
5 DEGENKOLB John 88,5 % 2017

As some players have already suspected, 2017 is indeed a very "unique" year, only surpassed by the first year of the game, 2011. This is decided by an admittedly very crude calculation: Amount of different riders picked divided by number of teams participating. There are of course a number of ways by which this number can be skewed, but it's an indicator at least. 2011's "uniqueness number" is 5,9; 2017's number is 4,8. The "least unique" year was 2013 with a "uniqueness number" of 4,0.

The amount of riders that have been picked at least once every year has almost halved from last year. 31 remain of last year's 59. This is the first year nobody has picked Sagan, Anton or Goss ( ) among others.

Three of the ever-present players were lost this year, so among the 2017 participants there are now only 16 people who have played the CQ game every year.
Squire
Member

Posts: 1,411
Joined: 28 Dec 2010 23:39
Location: Shanghai

^ Interesting. Thanks for the analysis. I wonder what will happen to next year's edition's "uniqueness number," if the most popular team wins this "very unique" edition, though. If it will have hardly any effect at all, or if significantly more people will go for a similar strategy as Fauniera went for this time.
18-Valve. (pithy)
Senior Member

Posts: 2,594
Joined: 04 May 2011 12:50

### Re: The 2017 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

Just a note for the CQ Game stats trackers and aggregators out there (I know Squire is one, but I believe there are others) - two teams changed their names this year that I know of, although there may be others. The team "Poles & Co." played as "WheelsuckersPL" the last few years, and "Guigsteam" was "Roda_na_Frente" in the past. If anyone else changed their team name that I forgot or don't know of, feel free to post that info here.
skidmark
Senior Member

Posts: 2,721
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

### Re:

I'm finally back home and back in my life so I can catch up with this thread a bit. Comments are about a week outdated now, but whatever. I'll be weighing in with my thoughts on things, and talking about my own team in a bit, because I love the discussion and it's a pretty dead period in the game still.

Hugo Koblet wrote:Here's my team. I won't go into detail on every single rider, but I'll post a few comments here and there. I think that I should say first that I don't think that my team in any way is optimal and perhaps not even very good. I decided that I wanted to pick some riders that I would like to follow this season even if it meant leaving out some obvious good picks. This means that I've left out riders like König, Ponzi and Trofimov to make room for less obvious, and probably less good, picks.

ZAKARIN Ilnur: 867

You know when you make an impulse purchase at checkout desk? Well, my most expensive rider was my impulse purchase. I honestly never even considered Zakarin before January 1st when I send in my team. It might have been the hangovers that made me pick him but I really like him and I do think that he can turn out to be a good pick. He showed last year that he's the rare kind of rider that can be competitive from March until the Giro ends which is a good recipe for scoring many points. This year his Giro-Vuelta schedule is much better than last year as well, so I have some hopes that he will turn out to be a good and pretty rare pick.

GAVIRIA RENDON Fernando: 833
ARU Fabio: 777
MOSCON Gianni: 622
KWIATKOWSKI Michal: 611
BENOOT Tiesj: 588
DEGENKOLB John: 550
LANDA MEANA Mikel: 479

The backbone of my team. I've already commented briefly on those, but the thing I like the most about my team is that I managed to include all of these riders in my team. I think the real value of the game lies here, so I'm pretty happy about that.

VIVIANI Elia: 275
INTXAUSTI ELORRIAGA Beñat: 79

Obvious picks whom I couldn't and wouldn't leave out of my team.

BEVIN Patrick: 203

I'm surprised that he has only been picked 5 times. He showed last year that he's a pretty good puncheur and prologue rider which is a great recipe for scoring points in this game. He also had much of his 2016 ruined by injuries so he should be able to do much better than last year. I wouldn't be surprised if he was one of the revelations of 2017, though I might be getting my hopes up too high.

I'll stop there because I don't need to go through your whole team, but I'd like to make a few observations.

- Zakarin is a risky, but probably decent and possibly very good, choice. I had him on my first long list until my process of repeatedly vetting my list and paring it down got him off on the second pass. Rodriguez is gone so the team is his; he dropped out of a top-5 GT placing literally with one day to go so there's no question he can do it; he's proven his worth in the 1-week races. He's solid, aggressive, young and hungry. I see no reason other than injury that he won't at least match his score. That said, he still had a pretty good year, and maybe if he did top 5 the Giro he wouldn't have gotten those other 165 or so points he got in the Tour. Still, let's say Giro-Vuelta and a smattering of 1-week results, 13-1500 isn't out of the question with his talent.

- that middle/high-price lineup is certainly the key to this game. I obviously chose a strategy with Nibali, some select picks from the middle group, and a bunch of lower-priced picks. You've got Benoot, Gaviria and Moscon that I don't have from there, and I'll talk about Gaviria another time, but Benoot is poised to have a bounceback year for sure. I considered him for awhile, but in the end found it too hard to hang my hat on a rider whose season depends so much on classics. I guess he's shown he can score in a variety of types of race, so he's more likely to cover than, say, a Paris-Roubaix specialist, but I just didn't quite see enough in him. Moscon I didn't even consider - my thought would be that he's shown aptitude above expectations in his first year, so Sky are gonna start using him on higher-level races, where points are bigger but competition is tougher. I have trouble seeing him improving his score by more than 1-200.

- I think Bevin could be quite a good pick. I have trouble guessing who's going to break out at Cannondale, as they have so much relatively young stage-racing talent that it's hard to guess who's going to have a good year and who is mostly going to work for others. Aside from Bevin there's Canty, Craddock, Carthy, Dombrowski, Formolo, Villella, Michael Woods... and that's aside from the leadership (Talansky, Uran, Rolland). I went with Dombrowski because his ceiling is high and Vaughters has a personal liking for him, but I really just don't know, so I preferred to stay away from the rest.
skidmark
Senior Member

Posts: 2,721
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

### Re: Re:

skidmark wrote:I'm finally back home and back in my life so I can catch up with this thread a bit. Comments are about a week outdated now, but whatever. I'll be weighing in with my thoughts on things, and talking about my own team in a bit, because I love the discussion and it's a pretty dead period in the game still.

I am curious to know if you at some point considered adding Richard Carapaz this year? What's your reasoning for leaving him out of your squad. Don't you rate him?
Jakob747
Member

Posts: 312
Joined: 10 Jun 2009 17:33
Location: Colombia

### Re: Re:

Jakob747 wrote:
I am curious to know if you at some point considered adding Richard Carapaz this year? What's your reasoning for leaving him out of your squad. Don't you rate him?

But anyone who's paid attention knows I'm risk-averse in this game. I'm always excited by the variety of styles of teams, and particularly like your dedication to emerging riders. Can I ask you why you would pick Carapaz? And also, where do you find info on him or a rider like him?
skidmark
Senior Member

Posts: 2,721
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

### Re: Re:

skidmark wrote:
Jakob747 wrote:
I am curious to know if you at some point considered adding Richard Carapaz this year? What's your reasoning for leaving him out of your squad. Don't you rate him?

But anyone who's paid attention knows I'm risk-averse in this game. I'm always excited by the variety of styles of teams, and particularly like your dedication to emerging riders. Can I ask you why you would pick Carapaz? And also, where do you find info on him or a rider like him?

The reason why I took Carapaz is quite simple. He is young, talented, in a WT team, only costed 5 points and I don't have knowledge about cheap riders anyway so I simply took him. (Ofc I also have to say that I just generally didn't spend that much time for my team so maybe I wouldn't have chosen him if I had done more research) The thing is that I don't see a big risk in taking a talented rider if the riders is so cheap. What I don't understand is why so many people took Egan Bernal (who btw has his 20th birthday tomorrow) who is extremely young, especially for a climber, and costed over 150 points. I mean how many climbers make 300 points with 20 years even if they are incredibly talented.
Gigs_98
Veteran

Posts: 6,860
Joined: 18 Feb 2015 18:36
Location: Austria

### Re: Re:

skidmark wrote:
Jakob747 wrote:
But anyone who's paid attention knows I'm risk-averse in this game. I'm always excited by the variety of styles of teams, and particularly like your dedication to emerging riders. Can I ask you why you would pick Carapaz? And also, where do you find info on him or a rider like him?

I live on a hemisphere were attending races like Vuelta de la Juventud, Fusagasugá and Clásico RCN ect ect {all races were Carapaz have shown his talent in the past} are logical and easy accessible, so I've been lucky enough to see Carapaz race live, here in Colombia several times and have always liked what I have seen. An alternative would be to visit and go through http://www.clasificacionesdelciclismocolombiano.com/ where you will find the classifications of the vast majority of races here in Colombia.

You have won this game two times {I have never finished in the top-20 I think} so it is not because I question your decision-making at all, after all, I hardly doubt Carapaz will be a game-changer, However, Ondrej Cink isn't exactly a household name either, so I was just wondering what your reasoning behind not adding Carapaz would be. Thank you very much for elaborating on it.

Regarding Carapaz, he truly is a great climber with a lot of potential. He is also very, very explosive so races like Gran Premio Miguel Indurain, Circuito de Getxo and Villafranca-Ordiziako ect should suit him excellent as well... Even though as you point out the depth at Movistar is extremely stacked. 200 CQ points in 2017 should defiantly be possible in my opinion. Lets see how he handles the transition to the highest level and how he will develope in his rist ´real´ year in Europe.
Jakob747
Member

Posts: 312
Joined: 10 Jun 2009 17:33
Location: Colombia

### Re: The 2017 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

Btw he also did have one good dig on the climbs with Fabio Aru last year! In Toscana...
Jakob747
Member

Posts: 312
Joined: 10 Jun 2009 17:33
Location: Colombia

### Re: Re:

Jakob747 wrote:
I live on a hemisphere were attending races like Vuelta de la Juventud, Fusagasugá and Clásico RCN ect ect {all races were Carapaz have shown his talent in the past} are logical and easy accessible, so I've been lucky enough to see Carapaz race live, here in Colombia several times and have always liked what I have seen. An alternative would be to visit and go through http://www.clasificacionesdelciclismocolombiano.com/ where you will find the classifications of the vast majority of races here in Colombia.

You have won this game two times {I have never finished in the top-20 I think} so it is not because I question your decision-making at all, after all, I hardly doubt Carapaz will be a game-changer, However, Ondrej Cink isn't exactly a household name either, so I was just wondering what your reasoning behind not adding Carapaz would be. Thank you very much for elaborating on it.

Regarding Carapaz, he truly is a great climber with a lot of potential. He is also very, very explosive so races like Gran Premio Miguel Indurain, Circuito de Getxo and Villafranca-Ordiziako ect should suit him excellent as well... Even though as you point out the depth at Movistar is extremely stacked. 200 CQ points in 2017 should defiantly be possible in my opinion. Lets see how he handles the transition to the highest level and how he will develope in his rist ´real´ year in Europe.

That's awesome! Thanks for the link. Really, my only pipeline for those types of results is the CN forums, and I don't have the time anymore year round to keep up on threads of developing riders that I might not see much of (and was led astray by Ryo Hazuki's obsessive, optimistic hype too often to trust that kind of source alone). It's true that Cink isn't a household name, and I actually started writing about him in my previous response before deciding the post was long enough. But my decision to include, say, Cink vs Carapaz is just risk management. Like, I don't know anything about Cink really either, but MTBers have a long history of success in transferring over to the road (Evans, Hesjedal, Peraud, Sagan, etc etc) enough to make me believe those skills and talent are transferable fairly immediately, vs, say, someone who is a young developing rider making the jump to Europe for the first time. I don't want to risk missing out in case Cink takes to the road and scores 500 points - I'm okay missing out if Carapaz hits his (in my mind, lower) ceiling for this year.

That said, as a cycling fan I yearn for non-'traditional', or maybe more accurately, non-rich countries (read: not western Europe, USA, Australia) to have successful cyclists at the highest level, so I will certainly be cheering him on, just as I have excitedly cheered the wave of Columbian success in the past half decade, just as I cheer for Eritreans on Dimension Data, just as I am stoked that a weird Russian/Costa-Rican rider that got famous for doing the most bonkers descent in a GT in recent memory has become a solid Giro finisher. But I try to wring out that sentiment when picking my CQ team, hard as it may be.

Maybe I should take him for the Emerging Riders game?
skidmark
Senior Member

Posts: 2,721
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:16

PreviousNext