Suggestions for the 2013 season

Another suggestion involves a roster of cyclists for a season long purist game. You pick at the start of the season your roster, could possibly be only 9, that you think will score the most points over the season and the game runs season long.
As the game would be run alongside the main game it really makes no odds if riders get injured or are out as you still have the main game to focus on and its tough luck if your team is depleted.

However if you were given say 3 transfers which could be used at any point in the season that may help, although not necessary really.
Not sure of the validity of this one but thought I would suggest it anyway.
If a wild card was implemented I would say it cannot be used in this competition.

That makes it ever better if you have to pick "crap" DS's, then you have to pick ones who might finish in the top 20, plenty of them this season. Also riders from teams the winner might come from OR aim for the last place man

really like the star budget/ds budget idea. that could work well, deciding whether to spunk your 100 on two or three big names or spreading it over four riders.

in fact the best way to get people to pick different teams would be to revise the budget down, not up

I still like the idea of just picking 9 riders regardless of stars / ds.

There has been some stages where the ds sprinters have faired really well and you could literally have had 9 ds' going for the stage.

The 100 / 50 split sounds good. I also like the idea of having a couple of the womens races in, just to make a change.

1, The game is not based on salaries. The new values will be based on the last 12 months performances in various races. Ones they have done well in, they might be a bit more expensive. If they haven't competed or didn't do well. They might be less expensive.

2, There is no way of knowing a riders salary unless its released to the public. So getting salary figures for over 1000 riders is NOT going to happen.

So 20 Star riders? Are you mad, they you would HAVE to scrap the 4/5 spilt as most of the time you'd be lucky to have half of the 20 racing at the same time.

I think there is no further point in discussing the riders points system as its already being worked on for next season

Then you have the problem of 5/20 being on Team Sky

So leaving 15 other riders. By the time you split them into teams, Its only going to give you a few teams with star riders. So lets just say for arguments sake Froome, Wiggo, EBH, Heano, Uran, Nibali, Contador and Kreuziger were the only star's in the TdF next year.

Thats only 3 teams. Meaning you will be FORCED to pick two from the same team. A bit unfair when you are forced to do it.

The system you are talking about involves changing the rules every race to suit the amount of stars involved. Its just not workable as a season long set up. Fine for a one of race. But not the season.

Next year a rider's designation (as a star or otherwise) will change depending on his past form. rider values will be set for each race rather than on a yearly basis, based on past form and also the type of race. why is it complicated? you join a competition, you pick your team. You can still pick a nobody that does well in a tour. if someone does well their value will increase, but it's not like one good tour is going to put them up with people that have a solid year of results behind them.

We've been testing the system based on the current data. JTL was 3 credits in the ToB, his win means that for the Tour Down Under next year (if selected), his value would be around 7. he's still cheap because he's only got one tour's worth of points, and the ToB isn't weighted that highly. If he wins TDU too, well it goes up again. you'll need to pick your improvers when they start to improve.

Yes thats what I think will be the case. A star for the classic's, may not be a star for the GT's. So it might change the amount of stars in various races.

Just to make it even more complicated for you

As your example above. Using 45 stars for the Vuelta, I'm unsure of the actual amount there were, but for arguments sake we'll use 45

198 starters, 45 stars and 153 DS

My rough math has worked out the chance's below. It may not be spot on, but near enough to use as an example to show how the game would be dulled down by removing the 4/5 split.

You chance of picking a scorer in the top 20

From stars = 1 in 14
From DS = 1 in 26

Without having the split

The chances of picking a scorer

1 in 9

Chances of picking the winner

1 in 22

Now obviously, that doesn't take into account the type of stage which may rule out certain riders...example an uphill finish that rules out the big sprinters.

The example I have given would be based on EVERY rider having the same ability, say in a Time Trial. So taking into account the type of stage, the odds of picking scoring Stars and DS goes up and without the split would remain around the same. Slightly less for mountains as you could discount quite a number of riders.

Its only based on the first 20, as working in the chances of being in the break and scoring any kind of point would be nearly impossible.

It would be 1/198 if you could only pick one rider, But you get to pick 9, So its got to be divided by 9

I was trying to keep it simple, because to work out multiple combinations would take me months, working out who you can and cannot afford in your team and then only have two from each team.......

You can pick 9 riders from 198, so VERY basic calculations without going into the 2 from each team, transfer budgets and everything like that.

Before you break it down, the chances of picking a straight out winner would be 1 in 22

If you added everything else in, The chances would go up, because you'd limit your choices, giving yourself less of a chance to pick the winner. It could be up in the 1000's.

Without budget for the Olympics lets say, where you could pick ANYONE, lets say there were 198 riders. That makes I THINK, with my calculations, 1541984268762850 different combinations of 9

Agree with nickobec in some respects regarding the 4 star/5 DS split, perfect example was in the Tour of bejing, had Bos worth 10.7 and no other non-sprinters anywhere near in value, yet couldnt transfer him out for the last stage, ideally id have picked a similar priced DS that may have scored, but ultimately couldnt because of the rule.

I guess its not so much the rule, its more if you have that rule then you shouldnt have an overlap in values, as imo a rider shouldnt be classed as a star if they are valued at less then a DS as it defeats the object of the split in the first place

Can we start the 2013 season now??? I am missing it already.

As long as it doesnt become too easy to pick the top nine riders , and few peopled pick similar squads it will be good.

I liked the way this season it helped if you picked the random riders who won a stage or broke away and just picking the top six in the gc was not always best.

Regarding the values, I think what Dave is saying regarding the profile of a stage when weighting the values comes more into play for a classic, for example if Cav was riding Amstel then his value would be lower than that of his TDF value, based on the fact it is an uphill finish and thus virtually wont figure in winning, so a value of 40 wouldnt be justified for him in such a race (would you agree cgipryan?). I dont think that is trying to point out the winner but merely being reflective of fair values for the race.

Am I right?

yes TER, except currently the spring classics are lumped together as a competition so there wouldn't be a specific value for amstel, rather for the whole comp. but you could expect cav to be dearer for the tour of qatar than for the dauphine, for example

How soon before a race can I pick a rider. Could I pick cav for the tdf whilst the dauphine is on and he is cheap. Or will there be a date when rider values are fixed for the tdf, say a week before it starts and we have a week to pick our squads from scratch???

I think Dave said above somewhere. The races will only be open one at a time and only a bit before the races, so that startlists and things can be verified, so you don't have to keep going and changing your team

Ahgood makes sense. I didnt have all day to read the whole thread...i only managed a weeks worth.