CQ ranking

[will10]

Personally I would prefer to ban all returning cheaters altogether. For one reason because I have personal problems with putting them on my team but that's just me. A more serious reason would be that I wouldn't want to inflate the support for a rider like that by having people cheer for them because they're a good points grabber for them. It also makes the game more intersting since they are such obvious choices for people that removing them would remove a good portion of the obvious picks which I think is a good thing.

I would support this, good idea

 

[hrotha]

Well a team can have 33 riders if you include stagieres.

Then we should have 25-50 extra points to sign three u23 riders in August.

 

[The Hitch]

Personally I would prefer to ban all returning cheaters altogether. For one reason because I have personal problems with putting them on my team but that's just me. A more serious reason would be that I wouldn't want to inflate the support for a rider like that by having people cheer for them because they're a good points grabber for them. It also makes the game more intersting since they are such obvious choices for people that removing them would remove a good portion of the obvious picks which I think is a good thing.

As has been mentioned, no doper has yet proved a success though several - Delfino, Tadej look like failures and those 42 people who chose the Cobra have lost out big time.

And people like Vino and ricco and Basso have a lot of people supporting them anyway. Why would having them on a cq team inflate their support anymore than your average rider.

The uci and race organisers let those who get caught doping ( and i phrase it like that delberately) race after they serve their suspension. Why should this be any different.

 

[kurtinsc]

Personally I would prefer to ban all returning cheaters altogether. For one reason because I have personal problems with putting them on my team but that's just me. A more serious reason would be that I wouldn't want to inflate the support for a rider like that by having people cheer for them because they're a good points grabber for them. It also makes the game more intersting since they are such obvious choices for people that removing them would remove a good portion of the obvious picks which I think is a good thing.

That's one of the reasons I support banning all 0-point riders.

I believe I sent my team in while Di Luca's cost was still up in the air, but in the end I just didn't want to cheer for him. I passed on Schumacher and chose not to spend the money on Ricco for similar reasons.

But in reality... if you have a guy for 0 point or a guy who rides for a few months so only costs a small number of points who has a huge potential upside... you really should choose them. The doping ban is both reason to not want to cheer for the guy... and the reason you NEED to choose him if you want to win.

I'm okay with that if it's what makes running the game the easiest for Hugo or whoever runs it next year. But I guess an ideal world for me personally would have a "banned list". Basically, any rider who was banned for more then half of 2010 would not be selectable for 2011. I don't especially like HAVING to choose a doping rider simply because of the fact he doped and that made his point cost low. I prefer searching for injured/unerperformers/new riders.

But again... that's just me. I also like the simplicity of a single list of riders with a point cost on that list... with 0 point guys either not being selectable or costing 0 points. I'll be fine however it works out.

 

[ingsve]

As has been mentioned, no doper has yet proved a success though several - Delfino, Tadej look like failures and those 42 people who chose the Cobra have lost out big time.

And people like Vino and ricco and Basso have a lot of people supporting them anyway. Why would having them on a cq team inflate their support anymore than your average rider.

The uci and race organisers let those who get caught doping ( and i phrase it like that delberately) race after they serve their suspension. Why should this be any different.

Well, even you go on about how you missed Schumacher and I think if it wasn't for this competition he would go through the year in relative obscurity where he belongs. I wish the same could have happened with riders like Basso but for some reason people don't think like me on that issue.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

I think we should just close the discussion now.

There's no point discussion the subject this early so let's just keep this thread about everything else related to the game, and we can discuss next years setup when we get closer.

Thanks

 

[The Hitch]

I wish the same could have happened with riders like Basso but for some reason people don't think like me on that issue.

While i cant speak for Basso the reason many of us like Ricco and Vino is because they have balls.

Also while you can find a lot more about this in the clinic, many of us believe that they are paying not just for their own sins, but for those of many many others.

 

[jaylew]

Personally I would prefer to ban all returning cheaters altogether. For one reason because I have personal problems with putting them on my team but that's just me. A more serious reason would be that I wouldn't want to inflate the support for a rider like that by having people cheer for them because they're a good points grabber for them. It also makes the game more intersting since they are such obvious choices for people that removing them would remove a good portion of the obvious picks which I think is a good thing.

Would they really be obvious picks if their points were based on a percentage of their last full year? The only returning dopers of the most 50 chosen riders are Pelli*, Di Luca, Kash, and Ricco. That's not very many and would they have been chosen as much if their values were 642, 604, 799, and 738 (minus 35%)? Ok, Ricco is virtually the same but that's because he raced a decent portion of the year in 2010 and he was nowhere near as obvious a choice for that very reason. At any rate, I certainly don't think we can just leave them out of the game altogether.

 

[jaylew]

I think we should just close the discussion now.

There's no point discussion the subject this early so let's just keep this thread about everything else related to the game, and we can discuss next years setup when we get closer.

Good idea, Hugo. I had already sent in my above post before seeing this.

 

[ingsve]

Would they really be obvious picks if their points were based on a percentage of their last full year? The only returning dopers of the most 50 chosen riders are Pelli*, Di Luca, Kash, and Ricco. That's not very many and would they have been chosen as much if their values were 642, 604, 799, and 738 (minus 35%)? Ok, Ricco is virtually the same but that's because he raced a decent portion of the year in 2010 and he was nowhere near as obvious a choice for that very reason. At any rate, I certainly don't think we can just leave them out of the game altogether.

I was thinking more based on the rules this year. The 35% rule or something similar would make it a little diffrent I agree.

 

[ingsve]

Also while you can find a lot more about this in the clinic, many of us believe that they are paying not just for their own sins, but for those of many many others.

Ya, I don't care about that. Just because some people don't get caught is no reason to treat the ones that do any diffrently.

I'll leave it at that for this thread so that it can go back to this years comp.

 

[skidmark]

Not neccesarily. The way it works now, Valverde costs 2500 as he should and nobody buys him. The way it should be. Simple and no need to think much on it.

And if for some bizzare reason we were to change it and Piti suddenly costs a lot less, well then everyone has him which spols the game a bit as it measn those doing national teams cant really judge themselves against others.

Why are you sounding like you're disagreeing with me? You just said exactly what I said. I quote myself again: "The doper thing should have some thought though, because CQ points machine Valverde coming back next year would have a huge impact on the game, depending on what was 'charged' for him"

I think you've missed the context of 2 of my posts in this thread today... I'm beginning to suspect you're picking on me...

 

[microdose]

I think we should just close the discussion now.
There's no point discussion the subject this early so let's just keep this thread about everything else related to the game, and we can discuss next years setup when we get closer.
Thanks

I think you've done a really good job first time around Hugo. For next time, my 0.02 = 30 riders, 7500 points, banned list for dopers.

 

[Tuarts]

A bit late I see but:

Be careful, simplicity is a great virtue.

This

To be quite honest I would decrease the amount of points. In the end I was just adding high priced riders, just so that I could make it close to the maximum amount of points, 5000 or 6000 seem more than enough, especially if you make the maximum number of riders 30

And this. 6000 for 30 riders seems like a good challenge, will more than likely make it a closer competition too whilst still keeping the simplicity.

EDIT: Oh and Degenkolb \o/

 

[Ferminal]

Vandevelde on track for payback already.

I think 7500 is a good value. If it was 10000 you would almost be forced to pick a few in the 750-1250 range which makes it hard as very few of these will double their score.

 

[Squire]

Vandevelde on track for payback already.

Which is very good news! I'm also hoping for a good time trial by Sinkewitz. He's likely to jump up a few places, depending on who's close behind him after today (I know Canc is).

Looking to be a good result for me in Oman, now I'm only waiting for Di Gregorio to rip Algarve apart

 

[Ferminal]

Which is very good news! I'm also hoping for a good time trial by Sinkewitz. He's likely to jump up a few places, depending on who's close behind him after today (I know Canc is).

Looking to be a good result for me in Oman, now I'm only waiting for Di Gregorio to rip Algarve apart

lol, I temporarily forgot about Sinkewitz, I like him enough as a cyclist to support him anyway.

 

[hrotha]

Great to see Gesink is paying back some. I took a huge risk by signing him but I think he can score big points basically in every race he does.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Spoiler alert

Great to see Gesink is paying back some. I took a huge risk by signing him but I think he can score big points basically in every race he does.

if he some how holds on and wins oman, that is 110 + 20 + 6 + 6 + 6 = 138. I think anyway, would be a nice start.

83, 66, 58, 50 - for 2nd to 5th respectively.

anywhom, I've had a good couple of days.
Degenkolb, Bos, Gesink.

 

[Eric8-A]

I expect Vandevelde to be on the podium and start racking up his points.

 

[who dat]

Hope TVG can podium in volta ao algarve this week

 

[The Hitch]

Rats Vandevelde gets 50 points for Oman. Thankfully Visconti pipped him at the last second on the green mountain, taking 3 from him

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

if he some how holds on and wins oman, that is 110 + 20 + 6 + 6 + 6 = 138. I think anyway, would be a nice start.

83, 66, 58, 50 - for 2nd to 5th respectively.

anywhom, I've had a good couple of days.
Degenkolb, Bos, Gesink.

+20 i guess

 

[Kwibus]

if he some how holds on and wins oman, that is 110 + 20 + 6 + 6 + 6 = 138. I think anyway, would be a nice start.

83, 66, 58, 50 - for 2nd to 5th respectively.

anywhom, I've had a good couple of days.
Degenkolb, Bos, Gesink.

Same here. Does Matthews 3rd and 2nd places give some points as well? Would be nice

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Same here. Does Matthews 3rd and 2nd places give some points as well? Would be nice

10 + 5
= 15

he is collecting points nicely tho, I originally had him in my team, but took him out mistake.