CQ ranking

[El Pistolero]

Expecting some major shake up with the next CQ update .... I better start looking for a new team for 2012

You can start by buying Valverde

Although everyone will take him.

 

[The Hitch]

You can start by buying Valverde

Although everyone will take him.

Considering hes going to cost 2000 (dopers cost what they had in their last season) i highly doubt that

I feel the same (I am "bottom" but for Wiggins fan), but let's remember that we're only what, 35 seconds into the season? (wheres the link to that video)

Here you go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVVyxDkxezg

46 seconds now.

If i keep watching the video up until the point we are currently in in the season for the rest of the year, that opening music is going to get quite annoying by october

 

[Ferminal]

Considering hes going to cost 2000 (dopers cost what they had in their last season) i highly doubt that

I think there should be an auction. For Valverde and any other returning dopers who someone wants to buy.

Whoever "wins" the auction (bids the most points) must include Valverde at that price. The losers can still pick him up, but his price is fixed at that of the winning bid.

 

[Jancouver]

I think there should be an auction. For Valverde and any other returning dopers who someone wants to buy.

Whoever "wins" the auction (bids the most points) must include Valverde at that price. The losers can still pick him up, but his price is fixed at that of the winning bid.

Auction? I want a real draft. Would be cool to have 100 teams with 25 or 30 unique riders ...

... I dont like to share my riders with anyone

 

[Eric8-A]

My team's pretty bust as well.

Pellizotti has been banned

Vandevelde seems in good shape, but what are the chances he'll actually deliver some good results?

Phinney has already abandoned two races for illness and injury

Greipel's having some bad luck

And also I have a number of continental riders on my team

 

[kurtinsc]

My team's pretty bust as well.

Pellizotti has been banned

Vandevelde seems in good shape, but what are the chances he'll actually deliver some good results?

Phinney has already abandoned two races for illness and injury

Greipel's having some bad luck

And also I have a number of continental riders on my team

Vandevelde? He cost 90 and delived 50 already. He doesn't have to have good results to be a great buy. If he has a season like Tom Danielson had last year (not exactly a spectacular showing), he'll have more then triple his cost.

 

[Ferminal]

Auction? I want a real draft. Would be cool to have 100 teams with 25 or 30 unique riders ...

An organisational nightmare, it would only work if you did it with a handful of teams.

 

[hrotha]

An organisational nightmare, it would only work if you did it with a handful of teams.

I'm sure someone could write a simple program for it. All those fantasy football, baseball or curling websites have drafts, and we have time and lots of obsessed people around here!

 

[The Hitch]

WTF. Who came up with the idea that Vandevelde is doing bad?

Hes got over half his points back and he hasnt even started peaking.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

I'm sure someone could write a simple program for it. All those fantasy football, baseball or curling websites have drafts, and we have time and lots of obsessed people around here!

Obsessed people? Who? Where?

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

I think there should be an auction. For Valverde and any other returning dopers who someone wants to buy.

Whoever "wins" the auction (bids the most points) must include Valverde at that price. The losers can still pick him up, but his price is fixed at that of the winning bid.

This is a brilliant idea as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

This is a brilliant idea as far as I'm concerned.

To be honest, I don't really get it. What's the point in bidding if you can buy him for the fixed price (the highest bid) anyway?

It wouldn't really make any difference if he's fixed at the "auction" price or at ~2000 that he would cost with the current method.

 

[Ferminal]

To be honest, I don't really get it. What's the point in bidding if you can buy him for the fixed price (the highest bid) anyway?

It wouldn't really make any difference if he's fixed at the "auction" price or at ~2000 that he would cost with the current method.

Because people would try and bid low to make him a value pick, others would bid a bit higher because they really want him. I think he might get 1900 points in 2012 and I'm willing to pay a bit for "safe" points so might pay 1100 or 1200. If someone really wants him though they might pay around 1500. People who miss the auction may want him at the revised price, or maybe my original valuation was wrong and I still want him. If he was sold at 1500 there would naturally be more people selecting him as opposed to the zero (or token fanboy selection).

Better than just going by the ridiculously high price which no one is going to pay. It would help stop a bit of the "all or none" where there are certain riders who are either very popular or very unpopular. For very low priced dopers, their price would be forced higher and it would be more of a decision.

 

[kurtinsc]

Because people would try and bid low to make him a value pick, others would bid a bit higher because they really want him. I think he might get 1900 points in 2012 and I'm willing to pay a bit for "safe" points so might pay 1100 or 1200. If someone really wants him though they might pay around 1500. People who miss the auction may want him at the revised price, or maybe my original valuation was wrong and I still want him. If he was sold at 1500 there would naturally be more people selecting him as opposed to the zero (or token fanboy selection).

Better than just going by the ridiculously high price which no one is going to pay. It would help stop a bit of the "all or none" where there are certain riders who are either very popular or very unpopular. For very low priced dopers, their price would be forced higher and it would be more of a decision.

Why would that be different then any other rider?

Currently I didn't select Nibali for his high price, but I might have if he cost half. Everyone (who though of him) selected Haussler and Cobo for thier low prices, but a more reasonable number would have if they cost more.

The main point is finding "value" riders. Dopers either have a lot of value due to riding a limited schedule coming back from their ban (Di Luca, Schumacher) or no value do to the price from their last year (Valverde using current rules). I don't see why it makes sense to assign a different value to returning dopers based on what would cause a "more reasonable" number of teams to select them... any more then doing that to non-dopers who are undervalued or overvalued would.

It gets very complicated and doesn't add much in my opinion.

 

[Ferminal]

Because there is no price for dopers, so it's possible to make whatever rule best finds their "market price".

 

[ingsve]

Just keeping them off the market is a perfectly viable alternative that I favour immensly. There is no reason to artificially inflate the popularity of a cheater by having them become a bargain.

 

[kurtinsc]

Because there is no price for dopers, so it's possible to make whatever rule best finds their "market price".

It's possible to do that with any rider. It's silly... but possible.

I think doing it with dopers is silly too.

I'll reiterate my view:

Riders cost their points from the prior year. If they didn't earn any points, you can't select them. This way we all have the same list to select from, with no special rules or costs. We can all use our eyes to read the same list, not having to remember that some guy had a horrible season and scored 0 points (Cobo) or came back from doping.

But that's just a preference. I'll be fine with whatever we do, as long as the rules and prices are set before we choose. I just don't thing going through trouble to set a price is worth while. It just adds effort to try to make more or less people choose a rider... which isn't really meaningful. As I said... we could do that with any rider... the point is to find deals, not estimate prices.

 

[hrotha]

Riders cost their points from the prior year. If they didn't earn any points, you can't select them. This way we all have the same list to select from, with no special rules or costs. We can all use our eyes to read the same list, not having to remember that some guy had a horrible season and scored 0 points (Cobo) or came back from doping.

What difference would it have make if Cobo had finished just one of the Pro Tour races he entered and scored 5 points? Guys with 0 points may not be in the full list, but they do appear in the individual squads. The info is there.

 

[kurtinsc]

What difference would it have make if Cobo had finished just one of the Pro Tour races he entered and scored 5 points? Guys with 0 points may not be in the full list, but they do appear in the individual squads. The info is there.

I like having a single list. A matter of preference more then anything. It also prevents people from whining about "forgetting" a guy. You can't forget him if he's on the list that everyone selects from.

using a single list also means we can set a point sheet as of a specific day... say the 1st of December. Even though lower level guys may score some points in little races after that, we won't have to re-work rosters to make the points work out if it adds to our team.

Think of it like a fantasy football or baseball draft on line. You can't draft a guy that's not on the list in the system.


Hmmm.

Maybe I should write an online app for this? Might be fun (though I wouldn't want to pay to host it, so it's probably not worth it).

 

[Moondance]

JJ Haedo wins in Tirreno. Good that he's finally starting to repay the (not inconsiderable) investment I made in him.

 

[hrotha]

Of course you can still forget people. There's probably some 3000 guys with points, you'll overlook lots of people if you don't remember they're there.

 

[kurtinsc]

Of course you can still forget people. There's probably some 3000 guys with points, you'll overlook lots of people if you don't remember they're there.

3300 last year.

But believe it or not, I did actually read through the entire list paying special attention to those with less then 20 points, looking for names I knew.

If I don't know them... that's my fault. But if they aren't listed... well that's my fault too for not remembering who doped or dropped completely off the face of the earth I guess.

 

[Ferminal]

3300 last year.

But believe it or not, I did actually read through the entire list paying special attention to those with less then 20 points, looking for names I knew.

If I don't know them... that's my fault. But if they aren't listed... well that's my fault too for not remembering who doped or dropped completely off the face of the earth I guess.

That's why I couldn't find Cobo for so long... if I remember correctly he wasn't on the list. Could be wrong though.

A question... who do people feel is better value at this stage, JJ Haedo or Galimzyanov?

 

[kurtinsc]

That's why I couldn't find Cobo for so long... if I remember correctly he wasn't on the list. Could be wrong though.

A question... who do people feel is better value at this stage, JJ Haedo or Galimzyanov?

Yeah, same goes for me with Cobo. Until someone mentioned a non-doping 0 point rider, I had no idea. I ended up looking through the 2009 list until I noticed.

 

[ingsve]

A question... who do people feel is better value at this stage, JJ Haedo or Galimzyanov?

I would say Galimzyanov. JJ Haedo costs too much at 399 that he would need to win some really big races like Paris - Tours or Milan San Remo to be worth it. Galimzyanov will have an easier time to improve on his lower cost.