Is it just me or is the classics game really boring?

WHINGWE WHINGE

I don't feel it was such an issue at the start when the races were different from one another, but this week is starting to drag. I could pick the same team, but I don't, because I'm allowed not to.

A week of Ardennes classics and the week of proper cobbles (e3, GW, RVV, P-R) could have been separate competitions on their own.

Omloop and Strade Bianche are wonderful races on their own and could be run as one-off competitions, bearing in mind how different the start lists are . KBK and Roma-Maxima were superfluous, and I would have liked a Schildeprijs sprint challenge as a one-off event.

MSR - personally meh but I suspect some people like it,

I've also found it quite boring. Because each race is a separate entity, with unlimited transfers, there's no continuity within your team. I just log in the night before a race, pick a predictable bunch of favourites and 3.0 guys, check in at race finish time to see if I did any good, and then, regardless of success or failure, just forget about the whole thing until the next deadline arrives. I've never felt less engaged with the game (maybe a good thing for my life!)

I seem to remember it was more fun last year when races were grouped into threes, and you had 2 transfers a time. You actually had to check startlists and do a bit of planning to make sure you had a bunch of guys who would score solidly through the block.

I missed the deadline for the Purist Team for the Giro del Trentino, but looking at the game start list I see, wow, to my count, 29 (!) 'Popular' riders...

Dave, is there a way for you to print out a report of who the were the most selected riders for a stage? Sort of like the "Dream Team', but instead of letting us know who were the Top 9 riders scoring-wise, have something that lets us see what were, say, the Top 15 most popular riders selected for a stage? Without having to go rider by rider to see what percentage picked that rider:? ...

It has been slightly more boring than other races, because it is not split into groups this year. All riders values have stayed constant. Which is a shame.

Your point is fair enough (in as much as it's how you feel!), but to be honest I'm really enjoying them. And weren't Gilbert, Cancellara and Degenkolb all priced mid-20s? Vanendert, 2nd in AGR, was less than ten.

I'd agree that the purist is a bit redundant, but I'm quite enjoying being able to pick two teams and I'd sooner have the phoney war than have the option switched off completely for the one-day races. Of course, there's the unofficial forum purist thing for them what want it.

stevemarks wrote:

... the favourites are... expensive... with the very high points scores for the first three, there is little point in going for the 11/20 position potential riders, at the expense of the big guns...

How true... but I can already hear dr say:

drheaton wrote:

...everyone will still pick the same riders, everyone will pick the riders who are most likely to score points. Tweak the game however you want, that will never change.

but I'm of the opposite camp. I believe what you're saying is true... I believe the more flexibility we have in the budget and the less the point differences at the top the more people's willingness to try different lineups, especially if they're trying to play 'catch up'...