The 2016 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

Page 45 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Tigerion said:
Netserk said:
There were 11 riders on at least half of all teams. While many of them were good picks, several weren't, so it isn't really the be-all and end-all to have the most popular riders (though skidmark did have them all).

The examples were the ones I remember people over the years being upset about.
Gerrans 2014: 511 >> 1736
Ewan 2015: 95 >> 716
Porte: 2015: 415 >> 1359
Gavaria 2016: 151 >> 833
Boonen 2014: 139 - 783

Partially the suggestion was driven by perceived impact at the start of the game, with people losing interest quickly.
I'm not 100% locked on to the idea, just a thought as it can be annoying when you realise. It was only Gavaria in that list which I missed and given there is a number of riders who only just made the short list cut who I would have dropped

Having such a substitute rule will take away more from the game than it adds to it. Those who are thorough enough to find all the obvious picks deserve to be rewarded. It could also go both ways. For every Kittel and Gaviria there's an Andy Schleck, Pellizotti or Goss.

And you can argue that those who lose interest because of missing an obvious pick are the ones likely to lose interest anyway. Besides, it's perfectly okay and understandable that not everyone follows the game through the season, although more discussion would obviously make it more fun. Don't think your proposed bail-out card will help much though.

I also have some feedback I want to share. In the beginning of the year, I wrote this:

Squire said:
So there will be a KoM competition this year?

In my view such a competition is maybe a bit unnecessary. The leaderboard for such a competition will inevitably be the same as the Green Jersey competition, minus the teams that are doing well overall. I don't think it will create more interest from players who don't already have something to cheer about. I'd wager that, after a few months, the top ten will be quite exactly like the green jersey, with the exception of, say, the top 20-30 teams in the overall.

I think the updates are large enough already. I think adding in a few funfacts and other such statistics (if they're apparent) will be a better way to make the updates even more interesting, although they're quite fine as they are. I'm very much in your camp regarding keeping the simplicity of the game intact. If there is a wish for an additional minor competition, maybe a "Best newcomer" would be better. Such a ranking doesn't necessarily have to be updated every week, to save space and work.

Just my 2c. :)

By and large, I think my prediction was correct. The KoM competition being so similar to the points one dilutes both competitions, in my opinion. I suggest keeping only the points competition next year. If someone decides to actually aim for a sub-competition, the strategy one would have to employ would be the same for both, which kind of underscores my point.
 
Re: Re:

Squire said:
By and large, I think my prediction was correct. The KoM competition being so similar to the points one dilutes both competitions, in my opinion. I suggest keeping only the points competition next year. If someone decides to actually aim for a sub-competition, the strategy one would have to employ would be the same for both, which kind of underscores my point.

I would agree with this, I checked my ranking and followed the green jersey comp but I never looked at the KOM page
 
Lutsenko is picking up a solid amount of points in Hainan. If nothing goes wrong, he wins tomorrow the GC, which results in +200 points this week. This will result in some minor changes in the classification, even in the top 10 if I'm not mistaken. And I will move in the top 40, for what it's worth. :)

Too bad he will cost around 600 points next year (after his wins in Almaty, Hainan late in the season), maybe a little bit too much to include him in my team I guess, although I'm sure he hasn't reached his full potential yet.
 
Even though the season isn't complete yet - thanks for organizing. Sadly almost all of my more hipsterish/less popular picks have given negative ROIs, on the other hand I guess that's just more of an incentive to double down on the bets next season.

Will be interesting to see how many are still willing to have a punt on Bananito next year.
 
Update #41: Very few scorers mean few, but significant, jumps in standings

It's hardly the Worlds or Lombardia, but the Tour of Hainan is the last HC race of the year, and often the opportunity for one rider to dominate and score some points. For those who are still paying attention, Max Walscheid scored his first win of his professional career, and then his 2nd-5th wins as well. Yikes! But he was only picked by one team in this game.

The more popular riders scoring this week were two former U23 world champions, Alexey Lutsenko and Matej Mohoric. The allure of a former U23 champion is pretty strong for this game, as obviously it's hard to be the best in the world and it indicates a pedigree that can certainly translate over to the pros. But Lutsenko and Mohoric have been hard to read in their pro careers so far, as Lutsenko has shown promise in fits and starts while Mohoric has shown little, but turned pro extremely young, and so there's still time for a breakout. As someone who has taken both of them in this game, and who always looks at U23 performers closely, the interesting question is always - are they more of a Duarte/Sicard type or a Matthews/Demare type? The waters are still muddied on that front, but this week's result no doubt gives hope that both can still be closer to the latter (and probably gave some disappointment to players who might have either on their short list for next year).

This Week's Top Scorers

Rank Team Points this week
1 togo95 344
1 Sasquatch 344
1 WheelsuckersPL 344
1 Eyeballs Out 344
1 laarsland 344

Well, that's what you get for the late season. These 5 teams had both those guys, and no other scorers this week, and are therefore in a 5-way tie for first place. 15 teams had Lutsenko, and they are all in the top 16, the sole exception being just some guy in 7th with Mohoric and Niemec. Wallenquist, the sole owner of Walscheid, ends up in 19th with points from only that rider.

This Week's High Movers

Rank Team Up/down
1 Sasquatch (+10)
1 just some guy (+10)
3 Armchair cyclist (+8)
3 Popchu (+8)
5 Object (+7)
5 GP Blanco (+7)

As indicated by the title of this post, there is still some moving to be done, which is sometimes a lot clearer at the tail end of the season when many teams have zero points for the week (which 81 of the 144 teams participating did this week). All of the high movers for this week unsurprisingly had Lutsenko, except the usurper just some guy (mentioned above), who ties for first with Sasquatch!

Green Jersey Competition

Rank Team Total
1 Emericlabordure 308
2 Eric10 221
3 togo95 209.7
4 Slapshot 202
5 scrooll07 180
6 Jancouver 175
7 Roda_na_Frente 173
7 freshman 173
9 LaVelocipede 170
10 Roubaix 169

Yes, I know it's been a competition for pride rather than first place for awhile now, but there is some upheval - with a mathermatical 31.7 points (for a 5-way tie for first place) this week, togo95 leaps into a podium position. All other denizens of the top 10 remain the same.

Polka Dot Jersey Competition

Rank Team Points
1 Emericlabordure 155.4
2 scrooll07 130.3
3 the_fool_on_the_hill 118
4 freshman 117
5 just some guy 100.5
6 Sasquatch 98.7
7 Eric10 96
8 Roubaix 94.5
9 ironted 94
10 Sneekes 90

Similarly on this table, our two first-place tied teams, just some guy and sasquatch, use their 22.5 points each to hop into the top 10, and in jsg's case, the top 5. No other changes at the top.

Top 10 Overall

Rank Up/down Team Points
1 (-) skidmark 15337
2 (-) jeroenk 14707
3 (-) abbulf 14448
4 (-) Squire 14340
5 (+3) togo95 14332
6 (-) Eric10 14306
7 (-2) Hugo Koblet 14206
8 (+1) Kazistuta 14100
9 (-2) search 14093
10 (+5) CraZyCaLL 13818

The very top of the table remains the same, but just like in the green jersey comp, togo95 uses a late surge to make the top 5, and CraZyCaLL comes 5 spots up to make the top 10! Barring an 11th-hour Taihu-Fuzhou surprise, greenedge (who falls to 11th) will just get pipped on the line for a top 10 for posterity's sake.

This week coming up, Taihu Lake starts, but since there are so few competitors I won't do an update until the GC is done. I'll start jumping in on the discussion for next years game too (for Jakob, who asked if there would be one, the answer is 'for sure'). I appreciate the suggestions so far, I've just been super busy so haven't really checked in much.

Spreadsheet at dropbox
 
Pheew, that was close! togo95 within 8 points of my 4th place! Luckily their riders are now all on holiday, so I should be safe.

freshman will be awfully disappointed by the decision to skip next week's update. With a couple of weeks of Asbjørn Kragh Andersen being more or less the only point scorer in the game (with Mareczko and Boivin potentially), freshman could've made a bid for the eternal glory of a final podium in the green jersey competition. :D

And have a look at Eric10's team. Has anyone ever been this close to getting all their riders into profit? :eek:
 
Mar 14, 2009
3,436
0
0
Wow, I just jumped to 15th place.

,,, interestingly enough, if I did not exclude Lopez just because he was is on Astana as I mentioned earlier in this thread before the season even started, I would be in 4th place .... if, if, if ... just if :D
 
Re:

Jancouver said:
Wow, I just jumped to 15th place.

,,, interestingly enough, if I did not exclude Lopez just because he was is on Astana as I mentioned earlier in this thread before the season even started, I would be in 4th place .... if, if, if ... just if :D

Hey, stop diminishing my hard-fought 4th place! :lol:

Wouldn't you have to miss out on some points too, in order to facilitate Lopez? :p
 
Mar 14, 2009
3,436
0
0
Re: Re:

Squire said:
Jancouver said:
Wow, I just jumped to 15th place.

,,, interestingly enough, if I did not exclude Lopez just because he was is on Astana as I mentioned earlier in this thread before the season even started, I would be in 4th place .... if, if, if ... just if :D

Hey, stop diminishing my hard-fought 4th place! :lol:

Wouldn't you have to miss out on some points too, in order to facilitate Lopez? :p

This season is pretty close and competitive and since I don't really consider Skidmark as a true competitor (sorry Skid) even the difference between 2nd and 10th is less than 1000 points and the fight for the 2nd (1st IMHO) is exciting till the very end.

As per Skidmark, he is doing great job organizing and running the show, and I do appreciate his time and hard work. However, since he is the organizer and current official winner, to make his results more believable in 2017, I would suggest that he will submit his team prior to anyone else submitting a team to him. JMHO.

Hey, I''m OK with him doing what he is doing, just in my own head I don't count him as a player, but more like an organizer with access to all the data/info about other players/teams. So his team is something similar to the "game popularity" team to me ;)
 
Mar 14, 2009
3,436
0
0
Re:

Kazistuta said:
And if you had just an inch of objectivity and CQ game history knowledge,you would know your perception is just wrong.

Thanks for organizing and congratz on the win,Skidmark. We'll meet again next year :)

As I said, I'm very grateful for his work, running the game and reports and I'm fully aware of his past results.

As I said, just in my own eyes, I have to put a big question mark next to his name as he has access to all the teams that are being submitted and that puts a big shadow over his result.

I know that it is not easy to pick your team even if you have an access to all the other teams, but you have to agree that if would submit his team prior to receiving all the other teams, his result would be even more impressive.
 
Re: Re:

Jancouver said:
Kazistuta said:
And if you had just an inch of objectivity and CQ game history knowledge,you would know your perception is just wrong.

Thanks for organizing and congratz on the win,Skidmark. We'll meet again next year :)

As I said, I'm very grateful for his work, running the game and reports and I'm fully aware of his past results.

As I said, just in my own eyes, I have to put a big question mark next to his name as he has access to all the teams that are being submitted and that puts a big shadow over his result.

I know that it is not easy to pick your team even if you have an access to all the other teams, but you have to agree that if would submit his team prior to receiving all the other teams, his result would be even more impressive.



As far as I know, he does exactly that.

Happy with my 18th place overall, my best ever finish :) Just wishing i had a bit more luck with Nibali.

I'm not sure whether i'll be able to put together such a strong tem once again.
 
Re: Re:

Squire said:
laarsland said:
Beware, Kuba's annual fall-based Chinese adventure is underway.

Kuba won't have it as easy this year. Apparently they have stuck a huge monster MTF somewhere in the Tour of Taihu. And Eric10 is lurking 36 points below me with Alex Diniz. Oh my!

Yeah, I think you're worse off than I am well-positioned - Kuba don't do prologues well either...
 
Re: Re:

Jancouver said:
Kazistuta said:
And if you had just an inch of objectivity and CQ game history knowledge,you would know your perception is just wrong.

Thanks for organizing and congratz on the win,Skidmark. We'll meet again next year :)

As I said, I'm very grateful for his work, running the game and reports and I'm fully aware of his past results.

As I said, just in my own eyes, I have to put a big question mark next to his name as he has access to all the teams that are being submitted and that puts a big shadow over his result.

I know that it is not easy to pick your team even if you have an access to all the other teams, but you have to agree that if would submit his team prior to receiving all the other teams, his result would be even more impressive.


I would guess almost all serious contenders in this competition are sending their teams within the last 24 hours to make sure to get the latest info included and to be sure about their teams. This means 1 that if Skidmark had to send his team before receiving any teams it would be a huge and unfair disadvantage for him and 2 that if he was indeed getting inspired by other teams (something I dont think he is) then that would have to happen in the last couple of hours and it would be quite difficult for him to do so and also fit the 33/7500 puzzle.

Also I dont think seeing other teams is so much of an advantage that you make it. Ofcourse one might see if one has somehow overlooked a obvious rider (but that should not happen anyway if you have made a thorough research going through all teams for 2017 and the whole cq-ranking on cqranking like im certain Skidmark is doing) so mostly the advantage would be limited to seeing what percentage is taking the complete mystery-riders like Betancur or Arredondo. Besides that we all likely have almost the same 100-riders or so that we think could be good candidates to be picked where ones own feeling ought to be more important when picking than the popularity, so he would not really be able to learn anything or use this.

If people think its a problem with the access to the teams then they should just send in their own team close to the deadline.
 
I agree. I don't think skidmark had an unfair advantage. Yes, he may have had some insight into the popular picks but let's not pretend all popular picks turn out to be good ones and as MADRAZO writes, if you've done enough research, you won't miss an obvious pick. In 2012, when I first participated, I put a team together relatively late, and of course I missed several very popular, very good picks. It was a learning experience and since then I put together a longlist during the season which I go through for my team for the following year, plus I go through pretty much the entire cqranking database several times. I'm sure many if not all of the serious CQ game players do the same. Since 2012, I haven't missed a single popular rider except when I knowingly and willingly ignored and/or omitted that rider.
To win, you have to have the perfect mix of popular picks and some rarer ones. Even with all the cycling knowledge in the world, you aren't guaranteed a winning team. You have to take some gambles and have a fair share of luck. Skidmark had the best team this year, simply. All credit to him :)
 
Re: Re:

Jancouver said:
Kazistuta said:
And if you had just an inch of objectivity and CQ game history knowledge,you would know your perception is just wrong.

Thanks for organizing and congratz on the win,Skidmark. We'll meet again next year :)

As I said, I'm very grateful for his work, running the game and reports and I'm fully aware of his past results.

As I said, just in my own eyes, I have to put a big question mark next to his name as he has access to all the teams that are being submitted and that puts a big shadow over his result.

I know that it is not easy to pick your team even if you have an access to all the other teams, but you have to agree that if would submit his team prior to receiving all the other teams, his result would be even more impressive.

I have to put a big question mark about what kind of person you are Jancouver - JUST MY HONEST OPINION

Can't you just accept that its an incredible achievement to win this game? To do so while also putting in the effort to make it all happen is all the more impressive.

Why do you deserve to enjoy playing this game while being so insulting to person doing the work?
 
Big thanks to Skidmark and unqualified congratulations upon a deserved victory.
Although I was the class clown this year... my first attempt, a late entry and missing obvious tactics (ie. picking riders that were injured last year - Kittel especially), I'm actually happy.
I tried to find cheap, upcoming riders and, actually, was reasonably successful on that score. Most did really well and made a good profit. My big stinkers were the expensive guys.
I reckon I might do a fair bit better next year, with the experience under my belt.
 
Mar 14, 2009
3,436
0
0
Re: Re:

mc_mountain said:
Jancouver said:
Kazistuta said:
And if you had just an inch of objectivity and CQ game history knowledge,you would know your perception is just wrong.

Thanks for organizing and congratz on the win,Skidmark. We'll meet again next year :)

As I said, I'm very grateful for his work, running the game and reports and I'm fully aware of his past results.

As I said, just in my own eyes, I have to put a big question mark next to his name as he has access to all the teams that are being submitted and that puts a big shadow over his result.

I know that it is not easy to pick your team even if you have an access to all the other teams, but you have to agree that if would submit his team prior to receiving all the other teams, his result would be even more impressive.

I have to put a big question mark about what kind of person you are Jancouver - JUST MY HONEST OPINION

Can't you just accept that its an incredible achievement to win this game? To do so while also putting in the effort to make it all happen is all the more impressive.

Why do you deserve to enjoy playing this game while being so insulting to person doing the work?

Not being insulting at all. As I said, I do appreciate all his work and energy and he proved his skills already in the past.

It's my personal opinion, same as somebody submitting a team past the deadline once all the other teams were published. You include them and just put a small asterisk next to their name. This is somewhat similar in my eyes.

Just forget it, he won the game and I'm happy for him. Only he knows if he got any kind of advantage from seeing all the other teams. :eek: