The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
R_O_Shipman said:thanks to hugo for running the game. Already looking forward to next year. I only joined the forum to play the CQ game and have enjoyed lurking over the updates even if I didn't do very well.
Just a quick question about points going into next year - if a rider has had a year off the bike, not because of doping suspension, then what is his total? 0 points or his last active season?
sure you can work out who I'm thinking of including!
Armchair cyclist said:Time may have come for the 2014 thread to start, but MCM has the right to make first post. Can I raise a couple of issues about about the price of riders who had a suspension during 2013.
General principle: If suspended for any part of 2013, price for the 2014 game is the riders score from the last year unaffected by suspension. That now seems well established.
But:
Is there any discretion in the case of very short suspensions? (I am aware of a rider suspended only until 7th January, so his 2013 season was entirely unaffected)
Did we introduce a 'Rui Costa clause'? This would amount to "If application of the above rule makes a rider cheaper, it is not applied."
mc_mountain said:Actually it looks likely that it will be skidmark who makes the opening post for the 2014 thread - still some prep to be done, so likely to be in early December.
I think the general rule in any doping situation is the last season unaffected by suspension, unless there is more expensive season since (ie Rui Costa).
I think I would favour maintaining that rule, but I know there will be others that would argue against.
skidmark said:So yes, your mystery rider would cost the 2011 cost, since his suspension was from 7 Jan 2012-7 Jan 2013.
Armchair cyclist said:No, he was only suspended for 3 months up to 7 Jan 2013, so his 2012 and 2013 CQ scores were both entirely unaffected by the ban. But he certainly is not good value at his 2011 score.
mc_mountain said:Its a difficult one. comparison would be scarponi in 2013, who I believe wasnt available at his 2012 score for a similar ban.
Armchair cyclist said:And the USADA whistle blowers had bans that were (by design?) of minimal impact. The non-controversial route is to be totally black and white about it, which to be honest is probably what I would suggest, but just wondering whether it is generally felt that this is the best course.
LaFlorecita said:What is wrong with popular picks? They're always a few popular picks in the game.
Armchair cyclist said:No, he was only suspended for 3 months up to 7 Jan 2013, so his 2012 and 2013 CQ scores were both entirely unaffected by the ban. But he certainly is not good value at his 2011 score.
LaFlorecita said:I would be if I were you
Geraint Too Fast said:I think any frustration I had was used up by Van Emden.
18-Valve. (pithy) said:Nothing wrong them per se, but it got a bit ridiculous this year with everyone and their momma having the same riders on their team. In the end, though, no one did great. Many of those riders didn't do much.
OTOH, not one person had both Froome and Porte. They were hardly picked at all, IIRC.
Lortnoc said:Although I hardly post on the forum I enjoy the game very much.
So many thanks to Hugo and everyone else putting in hard work organizing the game!
Hope there will be a 2014 edition.