The 2017 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

[Hakkie2]

Re:

Not to mention that CQranking haven't announced the categorisation of the new WT races.

The new races will be categorized halfway between .WT2 and .HC. Winner of Tour of Turkey for example will get 190 points, winner of Dwars Door Vlaanderen 180 points.

Everybody who finishes the race will get at least 5 points.

Probable point scales as posted on another forum:

2.WT3
1 190
2 145
3 120
4 100
5 90
6 80
7 70
8 64
9 58
10 52
11 46
12 40
13 35
14 30
15 27
16 24
17 22
18 20
19 18
20 16
21 14
22 13
23 12
24 11
25 10
26 9
27 8
28 7
29 6
30 5
vanaf31 5

Leader 9
1 30
2 18
3 12
4 7
5 4
6 2


1.WT3
1 180
2 108
3 92
4 78
5 70
6 62
7 54
8 46
9 40
10 36
11 30
12 27
13 24
14 22
15 20
16 18
17 16
18 14
19 12
20 11
21 10
22 9
23 8
24 7
25 6
26 5
27 5
28 5
29 5
30 5
vanaf31 5

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

The score tables are on the CQ site, rather obfuscated by being under the Old tables tab at http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/pointsTablesM.asp

You are correct for one day races, but 2.WT3 stage races are currently shown (as below) as the same as 2.WT2; I guess that means they await updating.
1 220
2 165
3 140
4 116
5 104
6 95
7 86
8 77
9 68
10 59
11 50
12 45
13 40
14 35
15 32
16 29
17 26
18 23
19 20
20 18
21 16
22 14
23 13
24 12
25 11
26 10
27 9
28 8
29 7
30 6
>30 5

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Mother of god! Just as I thought I had it all figured out, I found out that I had completely left out a 500+ rider that I wanted in my team. Back to the drawing board.

 

[PeterB]

Somehow I still feel it is not entirely clear how we want that the rules on ex-dopers apply to certain specific case we have this year. As per the opening post, "Riders who have been suspended for doping and had that affect their 2016 score will not be available simply for their 2016 score. ... Riders who have been suspended by the UCI are on this list ...".
So does this imply that everyone who is on that particular list is not available simply for their 2016 score? Or those, who are on the list, but to whom sanction was not imposed, are they excluded from that rule, because their score was not affected by suspension (although might have been affected by disqualification)?

 

[skidmark]

Re:

Somehow I still feel it is not entirely clear how we want that the rules on ex-dopers apply to certain specific case we have this year. As per the opening post, "Riders who have been suspended for doping and had that affect their 2016 score will not be available simply for their 2016 score. ... Riders who have been suspended by the UCI are on this list ...".
So does this imply that everyone who is on that particular list is not available simply for their 2016 score? Or those, who are on the list, but to whom sanction was not imposed, are they excluded from that rule, because their score was not affected by suspension (although might have been affected by disqualification)?

Sorry, you're right! We had a discussion in the 2016 thread and I forgot to carry it over to the opening post. I've amended it to now include the following: **note that this year there is the exceptional case of some riders that are on this list but were found to have no fault. Those riders are available at 2016 score as there was essentially no doping infraction**

As of yet, CQ has not adjusted these riders' scores to reflect the races in which the positives were found, so if you are picking any of them, be mindful that the CQ December 31st update is the final arbeiter of the scores.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I have sent my selection in: if they all score what they did in 2015, I will have over 14000 points, but I have a few younger guys who I trust will do rather better 2 years further into their careers.

I have used all but 5 points of my budget, and I have:
4 21 years and younger
10 aged 22-23
9 aged 24-27
6 aged 28-29 and
4 who have already celebrated their thirtieth (at least) birthday.

There are 6 Belgians, 5 Italians, 3 each from Switzerland and Germany, and 2 from each of Denmark, GB, France and Spain, 3 from Eastern Europe, 2 non-British Anglophones and 2 South Americans (and one Dutch, to make up the 33).

By the end of 2016, 25 were on teams in the WT, but 4 were on Pro-Conti teams, 2 were riding at Continental team level, and 2 among the lower echelons.

I have 2 riders of more than 600 pts, 4 in the 400-599 bracket; and 7 others above the permitted average spend of 227/rider. There are 7 that cost between 100 and 227, and of the remaining 13 bargain buys, there are 6 who cost less than 50 points, of whom 3 cost less than 10 points.

I was top ten in both of the first years of this, but have not often appeared in the results summaries since then: top 20% of the field would be satisfying.

 

[vladimir]

I am still awaiting a decision on Trofimov. He is currently at 62 points at CQ after DQ in P-N and Catalunya. He is extremly tempting at the cost of the 62 points he is currently on, but since 10 points have been deducted for doping suspension my understanding is that we should use his 2015 points, which means that he should be at 364 for this game???

 

[PeterB]

Re:

I am still awaiting a decision ...

Do you mean decision of some official party, or does game organizer suffice ? Because if the latter, this is what skidmark proposed and added to his opening post in this regard:

**note that this year there is the exceptional case of some riders that are on this list but were found to have no fault. Those riders are available at 2016 score as there was essentially no doping infraction**

So decision is that those who received no sanction as per the UCI document cost their 2016 points, even if they made it onto the UCI list and might have been disqualified from some races and lost points as a result thereof.
Good that CQ already updated scores of those 2 riders in question which can thus be taken as their value and that this topic is discussed so that there is common understanding.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Skidmark has commented on these, but in the 2016 game thread:

Okay, so Shilov and Trofimov are both on the list, but it clearly says 'N/A (no fault)' under their names, so I have no problem with them being available at their 2016 point totals. By 'face value' (to respond to another comment), I meant the value that CQ gives them at 12/31/2016. So if CQ has not taken away Shilov's points for Rioja by then, his unchanged total is what he is worth, even if officially those results are stripped. This is the CQ Ranking Manager Game. I know we use UCI lists to identify dopers, but it is the points total reported by CQ that is the basis of this game, so it seems consistent and simple to use those.

For Davidenok, the issue isn't so much for me to be 'fair' in terms of what he would have gotten as points if his wins were clean, it's to avoid confusion on the behalf of game participants. Certainly, the details are important in this game, and people should be rewarded for paying attention to detail. But there is some confusion if a game participant is looking for riders and comes across his page - if they see that 372 score there under 2014 and think that is what he is worth without clicking through, they might not take him, whereas if his score is 115 (as shown on his 2014 page), they might have. This is the only such discrepancy I've ever seen at CQ, so it's an abnormal case, and their inconsistent methodology is my problem to deal with now. I'm going to have him at 372 unless I hear a compelling case otherwise.

Another funny issue I just thought of - I have no idea how CQ intends to grade the new 'lowest tier' WT races next year, and nothing on their site or message boards that I can find seems to indicate it. I guess that's a bit of a wildcard for next year...

(bold added by me)

 

[vladimir]

Thanks PeterB and Armchair cyclist! Then I think there will be created a version 1.3 of my 2017 team this afternoon :razz: In fact I have now three riders that I really want to fit into my team so I guess there will be some tough decisions later today...

 

[Gigs_98]

I'm having a really hard time creating my team. I think there are a lot of riders with about 100-200 points who could be good, but hardly any no-brainers. Therefore I have 33 riders but I have spent by far less than 7500 points. Now I want to use some a bit more expensive riders instead, to use the whole 7500 points, but I have no idea whom to kick out of my team.

 

[Vesica]

Started way too late with creating my team..But you know it's a real christmas holiday when you're making the CQ-team

I'm having the same 'problems' as Flo, too many neo-pro's on the long list. Also agree with Gigs here above, a lot of potential high-scorers between 100 and 200.

EDIT: I have a question! Were can I find the 0-scorers?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Started way too late with creating my team..But you know it's a real christmas holiday when you're making the CQ-team

I'm having the same 'problems' as Flo, too many neo-pro's on the long list. Also agree with Gigs here above, a lot of potential high-scorers between 100 and 200.

EDIT: I have a question! Were can I find the 0-scorers?

I also had a team that I was happy with at about 7000 points: had to swap in a bit of a risky 500 point man as my last pick.

You could look at the 2015 CQ end of year list and make a comparison column in a spreadsheet to find the 0 pointers who had featured in last year (but be careful of name changes, especially among the Ethiopians), or you could look at the team listings on CQ (such as this).

 

[Kjellus]

I'm in! Spent an "entire hour" this year to set up a team so I've probably forgot some obvious picks, but hopefully some untraditional ones will be a success. Thank you to all of you hosting and playing, makes watching cycling even more fun.

 

[vladimir]

Team submitted!
Some short stats:
No rider above 800 points
Average age 25,4 years
8 riders under 23 years
Riders from 15 different countries with Italy runaway leader with six
As far as I can count 26 of my riders will be at World Tour level in 2017
And I suspect that this will be the first year that I don't have any unique picks
Good luck to all, very much looking forward to see who everyone else have picked (and who I have overlooked) :razz:

 

[skidmark]

Hey, I posted earlier today but I dunno where it went! Something must have messed up with my computer and I shut it off without realizing it didn't post.

Anyway, a couple of things - teams are coming a little more fast and furious, I'm almost up to 20 now (and I'm sure there would be more if Velorooms hadn't been down for the last week, but I hope it's up and running soon as their banner says they're hoping to get it back up today). But a couple of common mistakes to avoid:

1. Please submit teams with just LAST NAME First Name format as stated in original post - don't include the scores/numbers, as that screws up my copy/paste. I just need the names, and don't have time to erase 33 number values line by line, so please make sure you're sending the right stuff.

2. For names that have letters with special characters (accents, umlauts, etc) those need to be included in the name to be read by the spreadsheet. So if you don't have the proper keyboard or know how to create those characters, find the rider's name from the 2016 score tab in the Create Your Team file and copy it from there.

3. Regarding Trofimov, who has been mentioned here - CQ has changed his score to 62 on the site, but their last available download is from November 20th and his score then was 72, so that's what it reads as on the spreadsheet. The rules of the game are that the December 31st update is the final official score for 2016, so presuming CQ puts out their usual download on that date, use that as the final arbeiter of scores. I would assume that change would be reflected there. I know that leaves little time for turnaround before the game starts, but if you don't want that uncertainty, perhaps consider picking a team that has a few points of flexibility.

That's it for now; keep 'em coming!

 

[Vesica]

Started way too late with creating my team..But you know it's a real christmas holiday when you're making the CQ-team

I'm having the same 'problems' as Flo, too many neo-pro's on the long list. Also agree with Gigs here above, a lot of potential high-scorers between 100 and 200.

EDIT: I have a question! Were can I find the 0-scorers?

I also had a team that I was happy with at about 7000 points: had to swap in a bit of a risky 500 point man as my last pick.

You could look at the 2015 CQ end of year list and make a comparison column in a spreadsheet to find the 0 pointers who had featured in last year (but be careful of name changes, especially among the Ethiopians), or you could look at the team listings on CQ (such as this).

thanks!

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

I finished my team as well now, but I don't submit teams until a day before the deadline or so because it usually turns out in the days leading up to the deadline that I forgot about a rider or two and I end up changing things.

So far it looks like I'll have the most international team I've ever submitted, with 21 different nationalities represented.

 

[postmanhat]

Re:

Last year I made the mistake of overlooking European pro-continental/ continental teams who had riders who excelled, this year I'm trying to change that but am probably only feeling a connection to riders due to feeling and youth, not by knowledge (which can work out sometimes).

This my third year of playing and have learnt this can be a very lucrative market to miss out on. Could be even more so this year as the big times might concentrate more on the expanded world tour at the expense of domestic racing. So have a few from Italy so far, a couple from Belguim, but am struggling to find a pick at French pro-conti level. Will have a second, and probably third look

My other more obvious mistake has been missing out 'must haves' such as Gerrans and Demare last year. I think there's four who had disrupted seasons for various reasons and will be on nearly everyone's list

Will probably have only two ever-presents, unless I decide to add Betancur. This has almost become a religious question, rather than one based on any evidence. Will be interesting to see many keep the faith.

Reassuring to see others mentioning the lack of 'big' picks this year. My most expensive could be just over 600

 

[greenedge]

Completely agree with you @postmanhat, especially in regards to the expanded WT calendar and the search for a french PT/CT rider.

 

[rodanafrenteguigs]

Skidmark i already sent my team to you , my name in the velorooms is Guilherme Ribeiro! And my team is much more balanced than last year, with some portuguese youngers, one very good guy, and more 6 within 500- 1300 points .
The others are youngers with some potencial, and one guy with two points but this guy is much better than 2 points!

 

[Vesica]

My prediction for this years game..The one who picks the right neo-pros will win this year. The list of potential 'Gianna Moscon' riders is way too long..I got 22 guys between 20-22 year olds as possibility for my team

 

[DJ Sprtsch]

Yes to the above. I thought I had my team finished and then I started doubting. Found even more riders I want on my team, all in the lower category. Of course, many will not even raise their 20-or-so point score. But still, I find creating the team harder this year than any other.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I've sent in my team.. I have 11 Italians

 

[R_O_Shipman]

My annual post - CQ team is in. It contains...

6 ita
3 col
1 pol
1 kaz
1 spa
4 gbr
2 slo
3 ned
1 cze
2 rus
1 rus
1 aus
1 USA
1 nor
1 ire
3 ger
1 cro
1 chi

25 world tour, 7 pro continental and 1 continental riders. I think there's one safe bet for a unique rider. I have 5 >500 and 10 <100. My total is 7499 - and this year I remembered to work to the real max, not my imagined value of 7,000 that I thought up last year

I imagine, like every year, I have missed a number of reasonably obvious picks, and that I'll finish well down the pack. But still it gives me something to think about whilst staying at the in-laws over Christmas!