The 2021 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

Page 7 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Ok, a final note before I head to work for the day - I have seen a number of folks running down their teams and talking about boring picks (either by way of talking about why they don't pick riders or defensively justifying riders they did pick). I guess I have a different perspective on this than most people, as is likely evidenced by my teams year-in and year-out, but I mostly don't get why people think picking someone like Sonny Colbrelli is boring, so I figured I'd at least explain my perspective on this so people could understand the other side.

First, I guess I'll preface by saying that as a cycling fan in general, I love the obvious excellence of someone who makes audacious attacks, but also have always appreciated the guys who solidly show up in so many races for the whole year (which is why doing research for this edition has made me a Bauke Mollema fan). Seeing guys that get solid results but don't get celebrated is, I suppose, a kind of data nerd version of rooting for the underdog. So maybe I have a different starting point from a fan perspective as well. That's why I've always liked Valverde and his 8 WC podiums more than some, and why when audacious attacks and consistent excellence are married in someone like MvdP, I'm totally on board.

But more specifically, from a game perspective, this game gives a different, exciting spin on watching racing. On one level, I'm enjoying the spectacle, and on another level, I'm tracking where my guys are at and what chances they have. 2018 Worlds and 2019 Amstel Gold were two of the times I have been most excited watching a bike race (for different reasons - 2018 Worlds was seeing Valv finally win after all those placings, 2019 AGR speaks for itself), but the cherry on top of both of them was having my CQ guy win as well. So by that metric, this year's CQ season stands to possibly the least boring and most exciting race-watching I've done. If Dwars Door Vlaanderen ends up with a lead group of 10, and I have Kristoff, GvA, Naesen, Colbrelli, Trentin and Vanmarcke in there, it'll be like Christmas. I can't imagine a more exciting year than to have a bunch of guys who can be at the front of a bunch of races that I'm going to watch.

Granted, three things dampen that excitement. One is if I actively don't like the rider (Froome, for example), another is if 'everyone' has him (uh, Froome again). Another is if I don't actually watch the races he's in, which I'm mostly neutral about, but all things equal of course I'd rather have someone I'm watching and cheering on than Timothy Dupont in a non-televised .1 race. But largely, I don't dislike any of the riders I picked, so I feel like it's going to be the opposite of boring for me to have them on my team.

I guess there is the year-long excitement of catching a breakout phenomenon, like whoever had Pogacar last year (or the year before), the few who had Ackermann a couple years back for example, or times when I've managed to get, like, Moreno Moser in 2012. I get the desire for that in constructing a team, and maybe this is where most people are coming from, in wanting a team full of that. But I mostly get excited about seeing my racers with a chance to score big points, so I anticipate this year being fun to follow.

Anyway, that's where I come from on that front.
 
Ok, a final note before I head to work for the day - I have seen a number of folks running down their teams and talking about boring picks (either by way of talking about why they don't pick riders or defensively justifying riders they did pick). I guess I have a different perspective on this than most people, as is likely evidenced by my teams year-in and year-out, but I mostly don't get why people think picking someone like Sonny Colbrelli is boring, so I figured I'd at least explain my perspective on this so people could understand the other side.

First, I guess I'll preface by saying that as a cycling fan in general, I love the obvious excellence of someone who makes audacious attacks, but also have always appreciated the guys who solidly show up in so many races for the whole year (which is why doing research for this edition has made me a Bauke Mollema fan). Seeing guys that get solid results but don't get celebrated is, I suppose, a kind of data nerd version of rooting for the underdog. So maybe I have a different starting point from a fan perspective as well. That's why I've always liked Valverde and his 8 WC podiums more than some, and why when audacious attacks and consistent excellence are married in someone like MvdP, I'm totally on board.

But more specifically, from a game perspective, this game gives a different, exciting spin on watching racing. On one level, I'm enjoying the spectacle, and on another level, I'm tracking where my guys are at and what chances they have. 2018 Worlds and 2019 Amstel Gold were two of the times I have been most excited watching a bike race (for different reasons - 2018 Worlds was seeing Valv finally win after all those placings, 2019 AGR speaks for itself), but the cherry on top of both of them was having my CQ guy win as well. So by that metric, this year's CQ season stands to possibly the least boring and most exciting race-watching I've done. If Dwars Door Vlaanderen ends up with a lead group of 10, and I have Kristoff, GvA, Naesen, Colbrelli, Trentin and Vanmarcke in there, it'll be like Christmas. I can't imagine a more exciting year than to have a bunch of guys who can be at the front of a bunch of races that I'm going to watch.

Granted, three things dampen that excitement. One is if I actively don't like the rider (Froome, for example), another is if 'everyone' has him (uh, Froome again). Another is if I don't actually watch the races he's in, which I'm mostly neutral about, but all things equal of course I'd rather have someone I'm watching and cheering on than Timothy Dupont in a non-televised .1 race. But largely, I don't dislike any of the riders I picked, so I feel like it's going to be the opposite of boring for me to have them on my team.

I guess there is the year-long excitement of catching a breakout phenomenon, like whoever had Pogacar last year (or the year before), the few who had Ackermann a couple years back for example, or times when I've managed to get, like, Moreno Moser in 2012. I get the desire for that in constructing a team, and maybe this is where most people are coming from, in wanting a team full of that. But I mostly get excited about seeing my racers with a chance to score big points, so I anticipate this year being fun to follow.

Anyway, that's where I come from on that front.
Great post, skidmark! When I mention "boring picks", I mainly refer to riders that I won't be seeing in action - at least very often - like Dupont or Planckaert (thanks for the information about him, btw. I thought something might be up with him when I saw that few had picked him, but I'm not too down about it as it's completely my own fault for not doing any research in him, so I'm fine with that). It's nothing personal against the riders, so "boring" is probably a bit harsh or a wrong word to use.

I do think that this game has made me follow cycling a lot more closely and made me learn about many new riders, so I'm pretty happy with that.
 
Reactions: postmanhat
Ok, a final note before I head to work for the day - I have seen a number of folks running down their teams and talking about boring picks (either by way of talking about why they don't pick riders or defensively justifying riders they did pick). I guess I have a different perspective on this than most people, as is likely evidenced by my teams year-in and year-out, but I mostly don't get why people think picking someone like Sonny Colbrelli is boring, so I figured I'd at least explain my perspective on this so people could understand the other side.

First, I guess I'll preface by saying that as a cycling fan in general, I love the obvious excellence of someone who makes audacious attacks, but also have always appreciated the guys who solidly show up in so many races for the whole year (which is why doing research for this edition has made me a Bauke Mollema fan). Seeing guys that get solid results but don't get celebrated is, I suppose, a kind of data nerd version of rooting for the underdog. So maybe I have a different starting point from a fan perspective as well. That's why I've always liked Valverde and his 8 WC podiums more than some, and why when audacious attacks and consistent excellence are married in someone like MvdP, I'm totally on board.

But more specifically, from a game perspective, this game gives a different, exciting spin on watching racing. On one level, I'm enjoying the spectacle, and on another level, I'm tracking where my guys are at and what chances they have. 2018 Worlds and 2019 Amstel Gold were two of the times I have been most excited watching a bike race (for different reasons - 2018 Worlds was seeing Valv finally win after all those placings, 2019 AGR speaks for itself), but the cherry on top of both of them was having my CQ guy win as well. So by that metric, this year's CQ season stands to possibly the least boring and most exciting race-watching I've done. If Dwars Door Vlaanderen ends up with a lead group of 10, and I have Kristoff, GvA, Naesen, Colbrelli, Trentin and Vanmarcke in there, it'll be like Christmas. I can't imagine a more exciting year than to have a bunch of guys who can be at the front of a bunch of races that I'm going to watch.

Granted, three things dampen that excitement. One is if I actively don't like the rider (Froome, for example), another is if 'everyone' has him (uh, Froome again). Another is if I don't actually watch the races he's in, which I'm mostly neutral about, but all things equal of course I'd rather have someone I'm watching and cheering on than Timothy Dupont in a non-televised .1 race. But largely, I don't dislike any of the riders I picked, so I feel like it's going to be the opposite of boring for me to have them on my team.

I guess there is the year-long excitement of catching a breakout phenomenon, like whoever had Pogacar last year (or the year before), the few who had Ackermann a couple years back for example, or times when I've managed to get, like, Moreno Moser in 2012. I get the desire for that in constructing a team, and maybe this is where most people are coming from, in wanting a team full of that. But I mostly get excited about seeing my racers with a chance to score big points, so I anticipate this year being fun to follow.

Anyway, that's where I come from on that front.
Interesting thoughts. For me, boring riders and boring picks are not quite the same. From a CQ perspective, the guys who you can see getting points almost everywhere they show up are some of the more exciting ones. Last year, Diego Rosa and Kelderman were two of the picks I was most excited about, for that exact reason. This year, Mollema is the opposite of a boring pick, as you alluded to. Also Colbrelli makes my CQ heart beat a bit faster as I imagine a Murilo Fischer-esque Italian fall season. Jake Stewart for the French calendar is the same, though he could also end up not being very good. In general, I love picks with plenty of opportunities who can keep the points coming all season. That also negates the impact of injuries.

Actually, the really exciting riders could be boring picks. As in you might go 5 months with almost no results before one of their crazy attacks stick and they get a big win. Another boring category is the 'will score in a few very specific races' rider. My most boring pick this year is definitely Vanmarcke (not that he's that exciting as a rider either). Almost always a solid classics season, and then the occasional top 10 in some hardman races later in the season. Naesen is similar, though he's more versatile. Nothing is more boring than having your extremely specialized pick ruined by a collarbone fracture just before his only opportunity to score points.

Jungels is also a boring pick, as I don't really know where his big points will come from, I just know that he will get some points somewhere somehow. But when he scores, it doesn't get you thinking 'I knew he'd score in those races' and make you feel like you made a strong, calculated pick.
 
Reactions: postmanhat
Ok, a final note before I head to work for the day - I have seen a number of folks running down their teams and talking about boring picks (either by way of talking about why they don't pick riders or defensively justifying riders they did pick). I guess I have a different perspective on this than most people, as is likely evidenced by my teams year-in and year-out, but I mostly don't get why people think picking someone like Sonny Colbrelli is boring, so I figured I'd at least explain my perspective on this so people could understand the other side.

First, I guess I'll preface by saying that as a cycling fan in general, I love the obvious excellence of someone who makes audacious attacks, but also have always appreciated the guys who solidly show up in so many races for the whole year (which is why doing research for this edition has made me a Bauke Mollema fan). Seeing guys that get solid results but don't get celebrated is, I suppose, a kind of data nerd version of rooting for the underdog. So maybe I have a different starting point from a fan perspective as well. That's why I've always liked Valverde and his 8 WC podiums more than some, and why when audacious attacks and consistent excellence are married in someone like MvdP, I'm totally on board.

But more specifically, from a game perspective, this game gives a different, exciting spin on watching racing. On one level, I'm enjoying the spectacle, and on another level, I'm tracking where my guys are at and what chances they have. 2018 Worlds and 2019 Amstel Gold were two of the times I have been most excited watching a bike race (for different reasons - 2018 Worlds was seeing Valv finally win after all those placings, 2019 AGR speaks for itself), but the cherry on top of both of them was having my CQ guy win as well. So by that metric, this year's CQ season stands to possibly the least boring and most exciting race-watching I've done. If Dwars Door Vlaanderen ends up with a lead group of 10, and I have Kristoff, GvA, Naesen, Colbrelli, Trentin and Vanmarcke in there, it'll be like Christmas. I can't imagine a more exciting year than to have a bunch of guys who can be at the front of a bunch of races that I'm going to watch.

Granted, three things dampen that excitement. One is if I actively don't like the rider (Froome, for example), another is if 'everyone' has him (uh, Froome again). Another is if I don't actually watch the races he's in, which I'm mostly neutral about, but all things equal of course I'd rather have someone I'm watching and cheering on than Timothy Dupont in a non-televised .1 race. But largely, I don't dislike any of the riders I picked, so I feel like it's going to be the opposite of boring for me to have them on my team.

I guess there is the year-long excitement of catching a breakout phenomenon, like whoever had Pogacar last year (or the year before), the few who had Ackermann a couple years back for example, or times when I've managed to get, like, Moreno Moser in 2012. I get the desire for that in constructing a team, and maybe this is where most people are coming from, in wanting a team full of that. But I mostly get excited about seeing my racers with a chance to score big points, so I anticipate this year being fun to follow.

Anyway, that's where I come from on that front.
For me what makes someone like Colbrelli a boring pick (and I was very close to pick him myself and would have done so if he had fitted well in the final pointspuzzle) has nothing directly to do with what kind of rider he is and how he rides or weather I like him. It is just that he is a very stabile rider that is very likely to end fairly close to 1000 points or so, making him a good solid conservative pick, but meaning he likely wont be a revelation, and also that he is just fairly obvious to pick so its not so original to choose him and not much of a gamble. I tend to pick very conservatively myself with plenty of boring picks, so I dont mind it at all and its a nessesary part of the game to make boring picks, but still for me it feels a bit boring.
 
HINDLEY Jai - a unique pick yikes ! he was one of my easier picks so I've probably made a blunder there [checks google to see if he's broken a leg recently]
HIRSCHI Marc - there's not a lot he can't do, so as long as he settles into his new team he should score well
LOPEZ MORENO Miguel Angel - in a normal year I'd have passed as soon as they said he was missing the Giro but maybe this isn't a year to hung up on schedules
MATTHEWS Michael - he'll probably find some reason to sulk but hard to see any excuses now he's back at a team that looks ideal for him
VAN AVERMAET Greg - not on my original shortlist but I needed someone to bulk up the total. Maybe has one good year left, maybe not
TRENTIN Matteo - sounds like he'll be working for Kristoff in the monuments but those aren't his thing anyway, there are plenty of other races
SIVAKOV Pavel - no need to overthink this one
BARDET Romain - picked him last year, wouldn't have picked him again except that the team move looks good for him
MCNULTY Brandon - think he could be a major player in 1 week races and maybe even 1 day hilly races
MOLLEMA Bauke - not confident about this pick, he's been consistently good and healthy for a number of years but the broken wrist is a concern
STEIMLE Jannik - I wrote him off after reading he had heart surgery (!) last year but he wasn't out for long and still has plenty of potential
HAMILTON Lucas - overall, his pro career has been slightly disappointing so far but he's not going to be short of opportunities given what's left on that team
VERMEERSCH Florian - in his first few months as a pro he proved he can sprint, TT and ride cobbles so that's a good start
VALGREN HUNDAHL Michael - one of the easiest picks now that he's escaped to a half-decent team
TEUNISSEN Mike - another easy pick - still good - just didn't race much last year
BUCHMANN Emanuel - not entirely convinced he's going to get back on track but a "safety-in-numbers" pick
BISSEGGER Stefan - lightly-raced so far, could score more points by improving or just by lining up more often
LAPORTE Christophe - Cofidis ! when will I learn ?
HODEG CHAGUI Alvaro Jose - a bit surprised he's as popular as he is - it's now or never for him
BATTISTELLA Samuele - I thought he would be a popular pick. I was very wrong
FOSS Tobias Svendsen - neo-pro season was fine without scoring a ton of points
POLITT Nils - must have
VANMARCKE Sep - suspect his days of churning out 600+ pts a season are over but another safety-in-numbers pick
HALVORSEN Kristoffer - 500 pts wouldn't be a big surprise, neither would quitting the sport
KRUIJSWIJK Steven - a by-numbers pick
JORGENSON Matteo - showed plenty of promise in the 20 racedays which comprised his first pro season
BEVIN Patrick - picked him last year for 400+ so at least it will be a much cheaper mistake this time
TAMINIAUX Lionel - don't know anything about him except that he signed for Van Der Poel's team for 3 years after getting over 300 pts the previous year
EIKING Odd Christian - already thinking I should have put Gallopin in here
VANSEVENANT Mauri - people maybe went a bit overboard about his Fleche Wallonne ride but he looked a good prospect the year before anyway
DEBUSSCHERE Jens - former heavy points scorer makes career-ending move to French 2nd div team ? looking that way so far but hope otherwise
MILAN Jonathan - neo-pro sprinter for the Bahrain outfit
DE PLUS Laurens - reckons he'll get his chance in 1 day races, bless him. Maybe in the Belgian nationals
 
Oct 5, 2018
39
9
1,595
For me, a boring pick is someone like Laporte who costs 100-200 points and scores 600+ points in a normal season in small French races. As in, he's not very good and he isn't new to the scene, but he probably scores a lot of points because of his schedule. An exciting pick for me is someone like Bissegger, who costs 100-200 points and your research shows he's a big talent. You're not sure how many points he will score but you're excited to see what he could do in his first full pro season. He might race the big WT races and need a season to further develop, which could mean he just scores 100-300 points this year. So from a game standpoint it might be smarter to pick the 'boring' Laporte, but he isn't new and you already now his maximum potential. Bissegger might be a 1500+ rider one day, and you want to follow his progress, so it's more exciting to pick him. But it probably won't win you the game. Yet, most seasons there are a few neo's that do score 600+ in their first WT season, and the secret is to pick the right one. For example: In 2018 it was Bernal, in 2019 it was Pogacar, in 2020 it was Almeida. Among others. This year it could be Pidcock, or maybe Leknessund or Bissegger. Or maybe someone else altogether. The problem is that due to Covid, it seems like there are so many insanely cheap riders who could potentially score 600+ points, which makes it almost not necessary to pick any neo's on whom you throw the dice. But, like I said, it's more exciting to me to pick those new ones, even if it costs me the game. Because of Covid, there are just too much guys like Sarreau, Kruijswijk, Buchmann, Laporte, Jungels, Sosa, Grondahl Jansen, De Plus who will probably score more points than guys like Bissegger, Kooij, Eekhoff, Hayter, Leknessund, yet those first list of riders are hardly new kids on the block and thus for me less exciting to follow. Already looking forward to a game after a normal year where research into talent will pay off more. :)
 
Reactions: Hugo Koblet
I wouldn't call my picking Colbrelli boring. In my case it was more of I was looking for a sprinter and I needed him to fit in a specific points range. He looked like a good fit for what I was looking for. He wasn't actually on my original roster. Of course my team also has a bunch of unique picks and only 3 of the top 30 favorite overall picks. This will end up either being very good or more likely very bad.
 
An exciting pick for me is someone like Bissegger, who costs 100-200 points and your research shows he's a big talent. You're not sure how many points he will score but you're excited to see what he could do in his first full pro season.
Your research should also have shown that he's not doing a 'full pro season', but focusing heavily on the track ahead of Tokyo. ;) At least that's what has been said.

I am a big believer in his talent though, but this year is not gonna be his year on the road, I think.
 
Oct 5, 2018
39
9
1,595
Your research should also have shown that he's not doing a 'full pro season', but focusing heavily on the track ahead of Tokyo. ;) At least that's what has been said.

I am a big believer in his talent though, but this year is not gonna be his year on the road, I think.
I've heard something like that. But he did 10 pro races post-covid last year and finished 3 times in the top 5 (30%) and got 12th in BinckBank Tour GC. He will be there or thereabouts in a lot of races this year I think, even if he goes to the Olympics. It's not as if he's not going to do any races besides the Olympics, right? (Right?) I'm fine with him scoring a lot of points this spring and then preparing for thee Olympics in June-July, and scoring a lot of points again in the fall. :)

And hey, a couple of years ago I wouldn't even have heard of him until he'd have won something noteworthy, so I'm doing better each year ;)
 
Isn't a boring pick just a rider you have to have because he is too good value to miss but that means that everybody has him which in turn means that he doesn't really do you any good when he performs well?
Well it does seem like everyone has a different thought on this! Which is fun. But yeah, that hits on the 'everybody has him' and 'I don't really like him' parts of it that I was thinking of. But I mean, like, I've seen Timothy Dupont be called boring on this thread and he's on 13 teams. So that's not the sole definition for everyone, clearly.

But I love the thoughts by everyone here, lots of food for thought. I do agree with elements of what I'm reading from Squire, Madrazo, and Fivezzz. The excitement I get from my guy scoring is definitely something, but it is different than the excitement I get from feeling smart or right about spotting something that I think takes attention and intelligence to spot. Like, Dupont (sorry for beating up on you, I'm sure you're a nice guy) is only on 13 teams, so I should be excited for picking him as he's relatively rare. And I'll be stoked if I see him near the front in the final 2k of a race. But, like, it doesn't take much talent for me to see that he scores a lot of points in .1 and .HC races and pick him because there will be more of them this year. Relative to, say, taking a swing on someone who just had a breakout year but I think has even further to go. Or picking Jake Stewart because he looked good in that one race and I can see him doing more. Or even the years I've picked Contador, or Rodriguez, Sagan, Valverde, Nibali... all these guys I knew were going to score lots, but it's still exciting because it's a big bet and you're curious how many other people took it. I'm sure people with Alaphilippe feel that this year. I do look forward to next year when evaluating emerging talents will be more relevant - even I needed some of that when I forced Leknessund onto my team. But even he is a blue-chipper.

There's different levels of pleasure to take from this game. I take pleasure in having worked through solving the mess of the wealth of good riders at 300-800 points in a way so that I have few regrets about my picks, but that's more meta. It's true that I probably won't feel, like, vindicated for my daring pick when Jungels picks up 100 points in a race next month. But I will be looking out for that Luxembourg champ's jersey in the final few km and be excited if it's there. I guess if it's not I'll be more annoyed for having picked him than someone less safe, so I do get that. But boring ain't boring if it's scoring.

What I'm most excited about is that there's gonna be racing starting in just a few hours! Good luck everyone.
 
Reactions: will-10 and Koronin
Well it does seem like everyone has a different thought on this! Which is fun. But yeah, that hits on the 'everybody has him' and 'I don't really like him' parts of it that I was thinking of. But I mean, like, I've seen Timothy Dupont be called boring on this thread and he's on 13 teams. So that's not the sole definition for everyone, clearly.

But I love the thoughts by everyone here, lots of food for thought. I do agree with elements of what I'm reading from Squire, Madrazo, and Fivezzz. The excitement I get from my guy scoring is definitely something, but it is different than the excitement I get from feeling smart or right about spotting something that I think takes attention and intelligence to spot. Like, Dupont (sorry for beating up on you, I'm sure you're a nice guy) is only on 13 teams, so I should be excited for picking him as he's relatively rare. And I'll be stoked if I see him near the front in the final 2k of a race. But, like, it doesn't take much talent for me to see that he scores a lot of points in .1 and .HC races and pick him because there will be more of them this year. Relative to, say, taking a swing on someone who just had a breakout year but I think has even further to go. Or picking Jake Stewart because he looked good in that one race and I can see him doing more. Or even the years I've picked Contador, or Rodriguez, Sagan, Valverde, Nibali... all these guys I knew were going to score lots, but it's still exciting because it's a big bet and you're curious how many other people took it. I'm sure people with Alaphilippe feel that this year. I do look forward to next year when evaluating emerging talents will be more relevant - even I needed some of that when I forced Leknessund onto my team. But even he is a blue-chipper.

There's different levels of pleasure to take from this game. I take pleasure in having worked through solving the mess of the wealth of good riders at 300-800 points in a way so that I have few regrets about my picks, but that's more meta. It's true that I probably won't feel, like, vindicated for my daring pick when Jungels picks up 100 points in a race next month. But I will be looking out for that Luxembourg champ's jersey in the final few km and be excited if it's there. I guess if it's not I'll be more annoyed for having picked him than someone less safe, so I do get that. But boring ain't boring if it's scoring.

What I'm most excited about is that there's gonna be racing starting in just a few hours! Good luck everyone.
A little warning; don't get your head up too high if you see the Luxembourg champion's jersey seeing that it belongs to Kevin Geniets.
 
While I don't have a great record in the overall competition, I do have a decent record of finding those young, cheap riders that have a breakout season ... Alaphilippe, Schachmann, Mas, Pogacar (2019) and Hirschi (2019 and 2020) for instance .... I'd add Ciccone too. Riders like these have given me immense pleasure through the competition. This year is a bit different. I do love how the CQ game broadens one's knowledge of riders and teams ... and how it brings excitement to some of the more obscure races in the calendar. I suppose I'd class Froome as a boring pick because you sort of have to do it in case he makes a mockery of the usual order of things again by winning a grand tour after breaking his body into pieces. And he's cheap so there's not even a risk. But, frankly, even that's a dubious thought because, if he does do that, it'll be anything but boring. So, I'll be controversial and say that you pop pickers that make your team up with the most popular riders are boring .... that way, when I am ranked 35th and you lot are in the top ten, I can feel better about myself and my team selection. :D

That said, I have no idea if I have a young breakout rider in my team this year.
 
I think you have to find the right balance to get the best combination.

You have to make the "safe" and "smart" investments to get your bread and butter. That is pretty certain to bring back a return, unless everything crash.

But to win the game and gain big profits? You probably gonna have to gamble and go against the grain at some point in your selection. Take a risk/risks that has high potential, for high reward.

The trick is finding most of the safe and smart ones, and then being right on your gamble/risk to kind of set yourself apart from the rest. Balance.

That is easier said than though. The hard part is aligning everything to perfection. Whoever comes closest wins.
 
My riders for Marseilles today, and a quick bit of analysis. Love doing this again :)

Wellens - I''m surprised he's only on 18 teams. Wasn't great in the one-day races last year, but maybe they just came at the wrong time in a strange season. Scored well in the stage races, and for me, can take points in pretty much every race he enters, including today

Calmejane - With AG2R moving focus to the classics and Bardet gone, he will get a lot of opportunities and more support. Not expecting too much in terms of GC, but even just stage-hunting and one-day results should be enough to give a good return.

Trentin - Dueting with Kristoff is a bit of a concern, but like Wellens, his potetntial to score in a lot of races is just too good to resist. Also, I missed him a couple of years ago, and it would be too painful to make the same mistake

LaTour - Difficult to see how he won't be, at least, a good pick.
 
Wow! So that was a fun race. Anyone watch that? I was a little worried that with one 1.1 race comprising most of the week 1 points (aside from riders who've been picked that have done the .2 early races), there'd be like a 30-way tie at the top. But here's the results for Marseillaise:

1st place - unique pick for rote laterne!
2nd place - 5 teams
3rd place - 2 teams
4th and 5th place - not picked by anyone

And nobody has more than one of the above riders.

So great to wake up and have cycling to watch in the morning - much less the double screen of cyclo-cross worlds and the opening road race. Hopefully the other French races will go ahead, and we'll have at least something to watch in the coming weeks, with Besseges, Provence, and Haut Var to get us through to the week of UAE Tour and hopefully, hopefully, Opening Weekend.
 
Oct 5, 2018
39
9
1,595
Boudat already almost at his total 2020 score. Could it have been a good strategy to just pick a couple very expensive top riders likely to score again big in 2021 (Roglic, Pogacar, Alaphilippe, Van Aert, VDP, etc.) and fill out your team with only riders who cost less than 100 points and who could score times 6 to 10 their 2020 score? (Kruijswijk, Sarrreau, Boudat, Jansen, Sosa, Froome, De Plus etc., maybe add Buchmann and Jungels)
 
Boudat already almost at his total 2020 score. Could it have been a good strategy to just pick a couple very expensive top riders likely to score again big in 2021 (Roglic, Pogacar, Alaphilippe, Van Aert, VDP, etc.) and fill out your team with only riders who cost less than 100 points and who could score times 6 to 10 their 2020 score? (Kruijswijk, Sarrreau, Boudat, Jansen, Sosa, Froome, De Plus etc., maybe add Buchmann and Jungels)
Depends on how many races outside of WT that will take place.

A strategy could have definitely been to go top heavy and then filled your team with riders that can score a few hundred points from these type of races, but then you gamble on a lot of those taking place.

I think most have gone pretty "WT-heavy" in their picks.
 
Reactions: manafana
Wow! So that was a fun race. Anyone watch that? I was a little worried that with one 1.1 race comprising most of the week 1 points (aside from riders who've been picked that have done the .2 early races), there'd be like a 30-way tie at the top. But here's the results for Marseillaise:

1st place - unique pick for rote laterne!
2nd place - 5 teams
3rd place - 2 teams
4th and 5th place - not picked by anyone

And nobody has more than one of the above riders.

So great to wake up and have cycling to watch in the morning - much less the double screen of cyclo-cross worlds and the opening road race. Hopefully the other French races will go ahead, and we'll have at least something to watch in the coming weeks, with Besseges, Provence, and Haut Var to get us through to the week of UAE Tour and hopefully, hopefully, Opening Weekend.
Yes, that was indeed a good race! Great way to start the season. Looking forward to the next few races.
 
here are my guys this year:

SAGAN Peter 767
PEDERSEN Mads 736
KRISTOFF Alexander 519
HIGUITA GARCIA Sergio Andres 503
VAN AVERMAET Greg 503
GAUDU David 484
BERNAL GOMEZ Egan Arley 450
THOMAS Geraint 408
LUTSENKO Alexey 397
BETTIOL Alberto 390
COLBRELLI Sonny 347
NAESEN Oliver 344
FORMOLO Davide 291
ZAKARIN Ilnur 179
TEUNISSEN Mike 172
BUCHMANN Emanuel 157
JUNGELS Bob 136
POLITT Nils 89
PLANCKAERT Baptiste 86
VANMARCKE Sep 70
SARREAU Marc 70
ARENSMAN Thymen 65
KRUIJSWIJK Steven 57
PIDCOCK Thomas 57
LATOUR Pierre 49
TERPSTRA Niki 48
CAMARGO PINEDA Diego Andres 35
FROOME Chris 30
VAN WILDER Ilan 26
ALEOTTI Giovanni 22
TAARAMÄE Rein 10
JANS Roy 3
VIGO DEL ARCO Marti 0

off to a flying start with 0 points in the first race, with all of Paret-Peintre, Coquard, Trentin and Calmejane being on my shortlist and various drafts :sweatsmile:.

I had Sagan, Thomas, Latour, Froome and Van Wilder last year and evidently picked them all a year early so I felt I had to pick them again this year.
I also had riders such as McNulty, Pinot, Uran, Steimle, Padun, Dainese, Aru and Oomen that I ultimately decided against picking again. I am a little concerned about a couple of those decisions.

Out of the 20 most popular picks, I have all but De Plus, Bardet, Sosa, Moscon, Evenepoel and Trentin. Have to say I never even looked at De Plus and Moscon, they both totally passed me by, I am sure I could have fitted the former somewhere in my team.

think my most important picks are going to be Kristoff, Pedersen, Bettiol and Formolo; all picked by less than 15 others.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY