CQ Manager evaluation thread

[Hugo Koblet]

bicing:

That dopeology homepage you refer to.. You mention that a riders points will be stripped if a rider is only officially banned - that I agree with - but how's that any different from CQRanking itself? They strip a rider of his points if he's officially banned as well, I think?

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Anyway, I think I've come close to making up my mind about rules for next year.

I only have issues with a couple of riders, so if anyone is interested in discussing these particular cases in a PM and help me out over the course of the season (especially with regards to looking for doping cases) that would help me out a lot.

 

[bicing]

bicing:

That dopeology homepage you refer to.. You mention that a riders points will be stripped if a rider is only officially banned - that I agree with - but how's that any different from CQRanking itself? They strip a rider of his points if he's officially banned as well, I think?

Yeah I don't know what CQ ranking website does. If they keep an accurate record of al lthe doping things then that's cool. I just know of dopeology because it was made by a CN forum guy, l'arriviiste and had help from some of the clinic gurus like maserati

 

[Kwibus]

I definately don't want more riders. Let's just stick to 7500 poins and 35 riders max ok?

I don't really mind that happens with the riders that return from a doping suspension. I'll leave that up to you

 

[auscyclefan94]

A few points on what's been mentioned:

ACF, you say '25 is too much', and 'the more like a pro team the better'. Why is it better?

And are you trying to say that if we had fewer riders, people would be forced to make more unique choices because all those guys that everyone might want won't be available to everyone? I see the point, but rather think the opposite, that if you have more options you will exhaust the 'obvious' ones quite quickly and have more room for unique picks. I guess an argument can be made either way.

Also, to the idea (mentioned by a few) that the season should end at the Japan Cup, I have reservations about that. Sure it's a bit of a trail-off as it stands, but there are still some races. Right now, the Tour of Hainan is going on, it's HC and has several riders picked in this game. Then there are the weird continental championships in November - last year Daniel Teklemaniot (spelling off the top of my head; possibly entirely wrong) got about 100 points out of those, to name one rider that could have value changed.

I think if we're going to go that route, we should make it a year-round competition starting and ending on a fixed date. Say we started December 1st, or even November 15th, this year. Wouldn't that satisfy everyone? Of course, we'd have to let this game 'finish' so they'd be running simultaneously until December 31st, but let's say we picked new teams for November 15th, and ended November 15th next year. Now we have something to do in the off-season, and track the silly little races our guys might be involved with in November and December with interest for bragging rights at the leadership of the new game, rather than no one caring about it because the results of this year are already decided. Then next November 15th, we take the leader of the 'current rankings', which CQ conveniently provides. If we want to eventually end after the last HC ranked race or something, then we can start 2012-13's the day after Japan Cup or whatever and have that up and going as this upcoming one is winding down.

There are 2 problems I could see: first would be in terms of putting the scores in the spreadsheet - my understanding is that CQ doesn't provide downloadable info with the flexibility to find results from November 15th 2011-January 15th 2012, for example. Second would be that, of course, some riders might not be signed by then. But some might not be signed by January 1st either. Anyway, just an idea because the natives are restless here (heck, I just finished my 128-rider long list) and so jumping on another game a bit early might give people something to do right away.

Also:



I like option 2, with the 'take the values from the last season until they were suspended plus the numbers after they returned from suspension last year'. As a numbers guy, option 3 is attractive and thorough, but I feel it's just too complicated for most folks to really appreciate or get.

The reason why I think the number of riders being more like a Pro Team is a good thing is because it is more realistic to what actual teams are in the real world. This makes the game a little more realistic and the plot Hugo set up in the beggining was a person being given 7500 CQ dollars and buying a team therefore to make this fantasy game realistic as possible, the game should have a similar cap on the number of riders. Secondly, i30 riders is still a decent number of riders to have a wide variety of riders without teams becoming too similar.

I think the point you made about the Japan Cup is a good one but the races remaining after the Hainan Cup don't score points or the riders in those races are insignificant to the riders we have here. Also would be interesting to know when the deadline is with entering teams and when we can start sending in our teams.

 

[Moondance]

My personal 2c:

I think the 7500 CQ point cap is fine, but I could support perhaps a slight decrease to 7000 even if I don't think it's absolutely necessary.

What I am definitely against is a decrease in the amount of riders that can be selected. If anything I would plead for an increase to 35, or maybe even 37. If one limits the selection to, say, 25, you'll be getting a lot of teams that look very similar, because I think everyone who followed the game closely this year has already identified a few must buys, and most people will build around that. If one has a cap of 35 teams are broader, and there is greater room for differentiation of teams.

As for the calender issue, I completely agree with ACF.

My line on the dopers would be as follows. Everyone who returned from suspension in 2011 and raced on a (semi-)professional team and had the opportunity to amass CQ points in 2011 should be given their 2011 value. This is essentially what we did this year. Rebellin would therefore have a value of 889, Astarloza 44, and Thomas Dekker would have a value of 11 (to name the most prominent examples). With respect to riders who return at any point during 2012 (for instance someone might consider selecting Pellizotti in anticipation of his legal return in May of next year) the 'last full season' should count. Valv-Piti has 2494, Pellizotti 987. We can consider making a little overview of all returning dopers and assigning them a value accordingly (whether on the basis of my criteria or otherwise) so that it is clear to everyone.

Again, many thanks to Hugo and everyone who helped him maintaining this brilliant game. Thanks to all my fellow competitors, and congratulations to Ingsve, who boasted all year in his sig that he was going to win, and did. Restepc.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Right now I think I'll go with the following:

- 25-33 riders. 7500 points. Just like this year. As have been said; if it ain't broken, don't fix it.
I think it worked out pretty well last year and allows us to "track our process" from year to year. Also it doesn't make anyone who wants more points available dissapointed if we decided to lower the budget and vice versa.

- Any rider suspended or provisionally suspended at the beginning of the season (1/1 2012 that is) is not allowed to be picked.

- Any rider who, due to suspension, wasn't allowed to ride for the whole of the 2011 season will have a value equivalent to that of his last full season.

- The season starts 1/1 2012 and ends with the next update when the last "big race" is over (this year the game would end when the next update is out after Tour of Hainan).

I think these rules make the game as simple as possible while still allowing previous dopers to be chosen.

There a still a few doping cases I'm not sure what to do with, but I'll think about it.

 

[hrotha]

Sounds good. I think all those are reasonable and will enjoy a decent consensus.

- Any rider suspended or provisionally suspended at the beginning of the season (1/1 2012 that is) is not allowed to be picked.

Does this include someone like Mosquera? He's not provisionally suspended, except by his team, but if we go by the spirit of the law he shouldn't be eligible. And what's the status of someone like Alex Rasmussen?

Not trying to nitpick - it's just that there's always going to be some grey areas, so we'll probably need some days to review everybody's teams to make sure they comply with the rules once they've been sent in.

- The season starts 1/1 2012 and ends with the next update when the last "big race" is over (this year the game would end when the next update is out after Tour of Hainan).

Big race = .1 or higher, right?
(In practice it'll probably be some .HC, WT or SuperHCWT Chinese race, but just to make sure)

edit: I saw you edited your post to say you were still thinking about some doping cases, so disregard much of this post I guess

 

[The Hitch]

What happens if someone fails a test, or is implicated in doping years earlier, but isnt suspended by Wada, and hence isnt officially banned and hence continues to appear in cq for the season, with their results in tact.

It was strongly proposed by crusaders that if WADA are uncertain, and are yet to ban this rider, such a person should receive the ultimate punishment - get banned from the cq game, anyway.

As such it was proposed that the team sheet of everybody that has this rider, should be edited at every update, to ensure that that rider is not getting away with any points.

Of course it would be impossible to edit the entire race histories and promote the riders who finished below to collect the points.

The result is a lot of this is a lot of missing points too.

IMO a cq game is best played by the cq rules, and the cq updates should be gospel.

If a rider is banned, he is removed from cq and other riders move up to take his points.

If he is not, well then why should the the cq game have different scores from the cq website on which it is supposed to revolve around.

My 2 cents.

But what is the official ruling?

 

[Hugo Koblet]

hrotha:

You're right. One of the cases I was referring to was Mosquera's. Now that the name is out there, I might as well ask everyone what their opinion is?

Basically the case is like this: Mosquera fails a doping test during the 2010 Vuelta and is provisionally suspended on September 30. Later the suspension was lifted because the drug he tested positive for wasn't on WADA's doping list.
Mosquera is therefore free to ride but is suspended by his team.

What should the ruling be like?

Also, regarding Alex Rasmussen, I suggest that any rider suspended or provisionally suspended when the game starts isn't available to be picked.

Hitch:

Like this year I will only use the official CQ Ranking updates, like you propose. This means that if a rider is suspended but not convicted before the end of the season he won't lose his points.

This is the case with Ricco and Alex Rasmussen this year for instance.

I think that's the best way to do it because there won't be any grey areas. I just follow the CQ Ranking updates.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Right, I've made up my mind. Hopefully everyone is OK with the rulings - it's not hard to please everyone as you can imagine

 

[bicing]

I think the rules are perfect. The rules need to be applied strictly and consistently: in Mosquera's case he has not been suspended so he is free to be chosen. The fact that he has not been selected to ride races is due to the politics of the team, which has come in the form of a team suspension. Pozzato had a difficult time getting his race days up due to politics in the team, as did Hushovd after the Tour de France, but there is no compensation discussion around them. Of course the situations are different but I am just trying to make a point that it's team issues about the doping, not the doping itself, that is causing him to not ride.

This makes him an obvious choice for most people, so it will essentially neutralise the pick. Much like Pellizotti was hyped up to be last year.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

bicing:

I decided a little different in the case of Mosquera, but as mentioned it's hard to please everyone, but I think the rules I've chosen are the most "fair" and transparent.

Thanks to everyone for your contributions

 

[Squire]

So Valverde is in with his 2009 score?

The doping rule says that a rider will only be ineligible if he returns after the 2012 season has started, and the rules state that the season starts with the first .1 race.

 

[bicing]

bicing:

I decided a little different in the case of Mosquera, but as mentioned it's hard to please everyone, but I think the rules I've chosen are the most "fair" and transparent.

Thanks to everyone for your contributions

Ohhh I had not seen the 2012 thread! I thought you were still deciding or looking for inputs on the Mosquera case. No drama

 

[Hugo Koblet]

So Valverde is in with his 2009 score?

The doping rule says that a rider will only be ineligible if he returns after the 2012 season has started, and the rules state that the season starts with the first .1 race.

Valverde was banned from January 1 2010 till December 31 2011 so his last full season was 2009, and his value is hence that of his 2009 score.

I think you have misunderstood something. A rider returning after the 2012 season has started is not eligible to be picked.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Ohhh I had not seen the 2012 thread! I thought you were still deciding or looking for inputs on the Mosquera case. No drama

Hehe that's fine!

I indeed was looking for input, but I just decided that this was what we're going with!

Thanks for all your suggestions by the way - it seems as though you've put in a lot of time thinking and writing!

 

[Squire]

Valverde was banned from January 1 2010 till December 31 2011 so his last full season was 2009, and his value is hence that of his 2009 score.

I think you have misunderstood something. A rider returning after the 2012 season has started is not eligible to be picked.

No misunderstanding. Ineligible = not eligible.

I thought Valverde was banned until January 1 2012. My point was that he should be in the game despite returning in the year 2012, as the CQ game season doesn't start until the first .1 race.

If he was suspended until Dec 31, there is nothing to discuss anyway

 

[Hugo Koblet]

No misunderstanding. Ineligible = not eligible.

I thought Valverde was banned until January 1 2012. My point was that he should be in the game despite returning in the year 2012, as the CQ game season doesn't start until the first .1 race.

If he was suspended until Dec 31, there is nothing to discuss anyway

Oh yeah, now I misread your post

But you're right, though. Thanks for noticing!

 

[skidmark]

This is great. Ultimately, all that wrangling back and forth is mostly just opinion, I can only speak for myself but I'm sure there aren't that many people that thought 'damn, this game really needs more riders' or 'I'll be very angry if dopers aren't a huge bargain next year'... really, most people will probably be satisfied with whatever ruling. Thanks for putting feelers out before deciding to (mostly) keep things the same; although the excitement of this game is certainly upped by the enthusiasm of the 87 participants, it wouldn't be what it was without your enthusiasm for running it.