The 2026 CQ Ranking Manager Thread

[Squire]

I have a psychological question. What about a rider you don't particularly like, or even dislike, but who could be a good pick? Does having him on your team help you to cheer for him, or does it make absolutely no difference, you still don't like him (even if for no reason)?

Worst case scenario is that they do badly and you dislike them even more!

It could be that I don't particularly dislike many riders, but I feel like it's never made much difference to me whether riders I dislike are on my teams. If someone I really disliked was a must-have pick, I'd pick them. Because in that case it means they would be very popular, and then it doesn't really matter much how they do. And you have 32 other riders you can cheer for. The closest thing for me might be Froome post-crash, but everyone had him and he didn't end up doing well, so he was kinda irrelevant.

Of course, with riders I like, it's different. I like them even more if they're on my team and doing well. And there's been a few riders who I've taken a liking to after having them in my CQ team and who I've followed more closely even after that particular season.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I've come to dislike some riders after not picking them.


Primarily Rui Costa.

 

[YellowSocks]

Worst case scenario is that they do badly and you dislike them even more!

It could be that I don't particularly dislike many riders, but I feel like it's never made much difference to me whether riders I dislike are on my teams. If someone I really disliked was a must-have pick, I'd pick them. Because in that case it means they would be very popular, and then it doesn't really matter much how they do. And you have 32 other riders you can cheer for. The closest thing for me might be Froome post-crash, but everyone had him and he didn't end up doing well, so he was kinda irrelevant.

Of course, with riders I like, it's different. I like them even more if they're on my team and doing well. And there's been a few riders who I've taken a liking to after having them in my CQ team and who I've followed more closely even after that particular season.

It's done, I've made room (quite some room, I thought) for the Ugly Duckling. I hope I won't have to dislike him even more.
On the other hand, some of the riders I like aren't on my team (too inconsistent/bad karma/too expensive compared to what I expect from them). Let's just say there will be suspense on both sides.

 

[skidmark]

Just entered the 50th team! Keep 'em coming - about 48 hours to go until submission deadline, and another day until publication!

 

[manafana]

will enter, off today so going get into it

 

[zigzag wanderer]

@Yellow Knight and @zigzag wanderer will often help in that regard (not that I am usually in danger...)

You should try it - the only way is up!

 

[shalgo]

I have a psychological question. What about a rider you don't particularly like, or even dislike, but who could be a good pick? Does having him on your team help you to cheer for him, or does it make absolutely no difference, you still don't like him (even if for no reason)?

As a cat lover, I nevertheless convinced myself last year that it was okay to pick Tiberi, and look where that got me. Suffice it to say that I like him even less now.

 

[Kazistuta]

I always end up picking some boring cheap over-the-hill sprinters and regret every year, just to end up doing the same thing the year after, thinking "now what if?"
This year at least I've picked a decent amount of young opportunistic riders with potential that I can root for while this years crop of over-the-hill sprinters probably does their usual thing of disappointing me

 

[Squire]

I always end up picking some boring cheap over-the-hill sprinters and regret every year, just to end up doing the same thing the year after, thinking "now what if?"
This year at least I've picked a decent amount of young opportunistic riders with potential that I can root for while this years crop of over-the-hill sprinters probably does their usual thing of disappointing me

This is very relatable. Luckily Bouhanni, Nizzolo, Demare and Ewan have now retired. I've probably had them all in the same team at some point. Unfortunately a few remain, and of course some are in my team. And my most recent change was throwing out a young climbing talent and adding an ageing classics rider, so it's not just sprinters.

 

[hayneplane]

This is very relatable. Luckily Bouhanni, Nizzolo, Demare and Ewan have now retired. I've probably had them all in the same team at some point. Unfortunately a few remain, and of course some are in my team. And my most recent change was throwing out a young climbing talent and adding an ageing classics rider, so it's not just sprinters.

I thought Jakobsen was a prime bounce back candidate. He wasn’t.

 

[EvansIsTheBest]

This is very relatable. Luckily Bouhanni, Nizzolo, Demare and Ewan have now retired. I've probably had them all in the same team at some point. Unfortunately a few remain, and of course some are in my team. And my most recent change was throwing out a young climbing talent and adding an ageing classics rider, so it's not just sprinters.

Eduard-Michel Grosu still has a pro contract in 2026 for those that might be interested (@skidmark).

 

[the asian]

Team submitted and hoping for a bounceback this time

 

[MADRAZO]

Also sent in my team now. Made a bit of a impulsive change of 2 riders in the end tonight, that I didnt really think through much and may regret later, but had to get the team to be 7499 points instead of 7486 as it had been the last few days, as those 14 unused points were just annoying me too much. And if I had not sent it in today I would never have been able to get any sleep tonight. Anyways I feel reasonably satisfied with the team now with only 3 riders I really would have liked to include but couldnt fit in and no picks I feel too bad about. Anyways I think the team is a good mix of both exiting and solid boring picks, so will be interesting to see how it lands in the popularity chart that I usually tops.

 

[adamski101]

team submitted. was really tricky this yearI thought, lot of riders who need bounceback years and a few that need to go to next level. Not confident but it always adds to the enjoyment when watching the racing

 

[Panda Claws]

Also sent in my team now. Made a bit of a impulsive change of 2 riders in the end tonight, that I didnt really think through much and may regret later, but had to get the team to be 7499 points instead of 7486 as it had been the last few days, as those 14 unused points were just annoying me too much. And if I had not sent it in today I would never have been able to get any sleep tonight. Anyways I feel reasonably satisfied with the team now with only 3 riders I really would have liked to include but couldnt fit in and no picks I feel too bad about. Anyways I think the team is a good mix of both exiting and solid boring picks, so will be interesting to see how it lands in the popularity chart that I usually tops.

Relatable. At some point you just need to throw the dice. Was looking at last year's rankings and we both had rather high amount of boring picks when it wasn't a winning strategy (everyone ranked above us had a team with fewer points in 2024).

Might be different this year with how many underperformances there were as many have alluded too in this thread. I did a last minute change-up a few days back to put a couple fewer eggs into the bounceback basket.

 

[skidmark]

Eduard-Michel Grosu still has a pro contract in 2026 for those that might be interested (@skidmark).

Hey! Don't mention potentially game-changing picks before the deadline!!

 

[Nevs]

Also sent in my team now. Made a bit of a impulsive change of 2 riders in the end tonight, that I didnt really think through much and may regret later, but had to get the team to be 7499 points instead of 7486 as it had been the last few days, as those 14 unused points were just annoying me too much. And if I had not sent it in today I would never have been able to get any sleep tonight. Anyways I feel reasonably satisfied with the team now with only 3 riders I really would have liked to include but couldnt fit in and no picks I feel too bad about. Anyways I think the team is a good mix of both exiting and solid boring picks, so will be interesting to see how it lands in the popularity chart that I usually tops.

I believe I left two points on the table this year - which is abnormal because I'm usually obsessed with the 7500

But that's probably because I spaced on this contest until a few hours ago - so I'm doing this "under the gun" so to speak

 

[Squire]

Also sent in my team now. Made a bit of a impulsive change of 2 riders in the end tonight, that I didnt really think through much and may regret later, but had to get the team to be 7499 points instead of 7486 as it had been the last few days, as those 14 unused points were just annoying me too much. And if I had not sent it in today I would never have been able to get any sleep tonight. Anyways I feel reasonably satisfied with the team now with only 3 riders I really would have liked to include but couldnt fit in and no picks I feel too bad about. Anyways I think the team is a good mix of both exiting and solid boring picks, so will be interesting to see how it lands in the popularity chart that I usually tops.

At least we don't have the exact same team, as I'm at 7498 at the moment! The last few years I've actually enjoyed having a rather 'cheap' team. Last year was 7470. Which would mean I was quite happy with the team as I saw no obvious upgrades within a range of 30 points of each pick.

 

[skidmark]

Okay just under 24 hours to go to the submission deadline! 67 teams in so far, around the same as last year at this time so I'm hoping we'll have a typical surge in the last day to get around the amount of teams we've had the last few years.

Just a note about tomorrow - remember that it's the submission deadline, and there will be a further 24 hours after that until the publication deadline when teams are revealed. The historical reason for this is to give teams time to revise any mistakes that are noticed when their original submissions are processed, and to have a bit of grace period for teams that are a bit over the original deadline. Anyway, I wanted to share that reminder to make sure folks don't share their teams quite yet once the first deadline hits.

Tomorrow I will be busy for several hours right up until midnight CET (that's 5pm for me here in Canada and I have quite a busy day) so I won't be able to process most final-hours submissions until after midnight CET, but I have time in my evening to take care of that so I should be able to confirm entries fairly quickly.

That's the update for now, thanks everyone!

 

[Panda Claws]

Out of curiosity I compiled a list of the 'best ever' picks. Essentially, I got all of the best possible picks for every year and then looked at how much the 'optimal team score' would be lowered if they weren't in it.

After all, in my opinion, the value of a pick needs to be measured in the year that it appeared in as it couldn't be picked anytime else.

Overall / highest difference between an optimal team with and without them

1. Isaac Del Toro (2025): 1349 points / went from 890 to 3013
2. Tom Boonen (2012): 1180 points / went from 502 to 2202
3. Arnaud De Lie (2022): 1044 points / went from 57 to 1439
4. Sonny Colbrelli (2021): 970 points / went from 347 to 1823
5. Remco Evenepoel (2022): 836 points / went from 1325 to 3154
6. Pascal Ackermann (2018): 821 points / went from 134 to 1275
7. Joao Almeida (2020): 801 points / went from 112 to 1114
8. Jonas Vingegaard (2021): 788 points / went from 107 to 1254
9. Juan José Cobo (2011): 786 points / went from 0 to 1048
10. Remco Evenepoel (2019): 767 points / went from 0 to 952

Keep in mind that having all picks that did just enough to make 1st team would already get you 19000 - 22000 points. Del Toro hit that mark before he even won Vuelta a Burgos and then proceeded to score another 1349 points.

You could try and make other metrics too. I dabbled around with one that divided a rider's score by the score he'd need to have at least attained to make the 1st team, but that one seriously favored low-cost picks.

Interesting to note though how Evenepoel in 2019 almost made the same difference as Cobo in 2011 despite scoring 96 less points. Essentially 0-cost cyclists only needed to get you 185 points in 2019 v. 262 points in 2011.

I think that was due to the below 100-point crop being a lot more competitive in 2011 (612 -> 8021) than in 2019 (600 -> 6622). The total score of both teams was basically the same (25534 v. 25524).

 

[MADRAZO]

At least we don't have the exact same team, as I'm at 7498 at the moment! The last few years I've actually enjoyed having a rather 'cheap' team. Last year was 7470. Which would mean I was quite happy with the team as I saw no obvious upgrades within a range of 30 points of each pick.

Yes with so many good options this year it will likely be hard to get so many very similar teams, even for us 2 that have often had very similar teams (except not so much last year)

Maybe I should be less obsessed by that 7500 number next year. I think I have always had 7490 as the minimum to feel okay satisfied, and this time I had the team at 7486 for the last few days not being able to upgrade it, but then in the end just talked myself into attempting to do it anyway cutting the 2 picks I felt the least for and trying a couple of others instead fitting the points better. But maybe sometimes the perfect team just does not need all the 7500, your "cheap" teams has done well for sure at least.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Maybe I should be less obsessed by that 7500 number next year. I think I have always had 7490 as the minimum to feel okay satisfied, and this time I had the team at 7486 for the last few days not being able to upgrade it, but then in the end just talked myself into attempting to do it anyway cutting the 2 picks I felt the least for and trying a couple of others instead fitting the points better. But maybe sometimes the perfect team just does not need all the 7500, your "cheap" teams has done well for sure at least.

Maybe it works out differently in this game, but in the other games I run, the spend on the best possible team is often considerably below budget (talking of those other games, Women's game closes on 10th/11th of Jan, and the Emerging riders' game on 19th/20th)

I'm surprised that, of all people, the perennial master of creating the highest popularity score ranking teams is distracted by such an issue.

 

[Earns1985]

Yes with so many good options this year it will likely be hard to get so many very similar teams, even for us 2 that have often had very similar teams (except not so much last year)

Maybe I should be less obsessed by that 7500 number next year. I think I have always had 7490 as the minimum to feel okay satisfied, and this time I had the team at 7486 for the last few days not being able to upgrade it, but then in the end just talked myself into attempting to do it anyway cutting the 2 picks I felt the least for and trying a couple of others instead fitting the points better. But maybe sometimes the perfect team just does not need all the 7500, your "cheap" teams has done well for sure at least.

Last year I stole the title for the most popular (boring) team from you. Let´s see, how this year will end up.

Also this year my team is in my view quite conservative with only 3-4 picks, where I would wonder, if more than 5-10 people would pick them. But also for the other picks, where I think, that these should be pretty common, I could get surprised, as there are so many options this year, that also the in my eyes really obvious ones will not be selected by everyone.
Btw.: My team only consists of 7467 points this year..

 

[shalgo]

I had a baseline cost of 7456 for my winning team in 2024. In 2023, I finished 8th with a baseline of 7477. Last year, I was at 7490 and finished 41st. My team is 7499 this year, so I can only assume I am heading for the bottom of the table.

 

[manafana]

I had leave a 5pt WT rider out for a 0 pt rider to get under budget lets see how much that costs me