cycling4freaks.com

luques wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:27 am

My Mistake!
Updated!

Basically Slovakia and Great Britain adaptable, but thought evening people would prefer riding the most important races (and there are 2 cat4 and 2 cat 5 during Britain).

Did you change the times for Britain? Wasn't it 14h and 21h first? Anyway, I would also plead for three times, as these are the only interesting tours besides the Vuelta in September anyway. But if you insist in having only 2 times, give them reasonable times at least, not like 11h... 9h or 10h for the morning.

I know that every solution will make one happy, one sad. But make it as happy as possible for most players .

FL: If the final decision was mine I would insist on 2 editions each. And would insist on the times 11-14-18-21!
Editions:
2 editions: Look at the parallel program, I do think that is more important than Britain and Slovakia. The classics have already been downgraded to 4 editions, in an attempt to have better participation, by expanding or keeping the number of editions for tours....
Times:
There's 3 classics parallel to Britain. Being more important IMO they deserve the "better" time. 9 in this case. 10 is the Vuelta, for bug-risk issues it's not recommended to put races at the same time. Although I don't know how often bugs have actually happened due to that and sometimes it's almost unavoidable to have 2 races at the same time. But not in this case for another stage race. So 10 is out during the Vuelta. 9 or 11, make classic fans happy by offering them Québec at 9 (and Montréal, but less of an issue since it's on a Sunday)

Plus 11 is actually not that unpopular, I see the point about office players that want to take their lunch break, but somehow 11 still, in a way inexplicably, has ok numbers. And it's not like 11 for tours is offered all the time either.
Here the numbers (with a grain of salt, the number shown in the calendar is not always the correct one)

January: 1 tour, 5
February 2 tours, 9+7 (and with that strongest time in the morning in February for tours)
March 1 Tour, Paris Nice, 10
April 1 tour, 8
May: 2 tours, 3+8
June: 0
July: 1, 5 teams, same as the other morning tour parallel to the Tour de France,
August: 0

So it isn't getting many times for tours, but when it has one it usually does ok. So I think after just 1 tour in 3 months, ok to offer it once in September.
And as I said at the start, the generally more popular time, 9, for the more important thing, classics, makes sense too.

I just don't get it why you have to compare times of one day races and stage races. Teams who rather want to ride the stage races don't do that because of the times and vice versa. It's not like parallel tours or parallel one day races. So in the end, you force teams to ride a race type they would rather not race, knowing that there is one they would like. And of course, as written before, you can't make it right for everybody. But only two times for a parallel tour to the Vuelta (and only to the Vuelta) is too little in my opinion. Even though there are exciting one day races to ride...

Well, FL, I will try to bridge the gap: One Day Races and Tours are very different, yes, and some might generally prefer one over the other. However, most of the teams ride one day races AND tours depending on many different factors. In general, Tours are a bit favored by having more prize money and higher categories. Which is probably OK since being online regularly requires more effort. (In fact, there is an initiative to balance out prize money a bit more.)

As such, offering a less important tour at higher frequency and/or better times, does affect the other one day races, including classics. Why are these classics important? Well, high category real life races give some identity to the game and some honor to the winners. But if high cat races have low attendance, they become less meaningful, so even less people ride...

So overall I agree that we should consider tours, one day races and their effects on each other altogether. Does that mean 2 times are better than 3? Not necessarily. I tend to agree with the Donkey given low numbers. But maybe if you open the case on how many are riding Vuelta, how many are active recently, how many will ride parallel tours,... you maybe can argue for 3 times.

There is no gap to bridge, Gipfelstuermer. But if you like building bridges, feel free, I like them anyway . And as much as I want to, I can't even argue against the worst part about the calender anyway: the lack of participation in the races. Otherwise, we would not have this discussion at all.

I don't get it, is the problem that editions are 2 or that the tour starts at 11?

As for 2 editions, we can also raise it to 3, problem is players are less and less.
Was thinking, maybe next year would be worth to give Vuelta only 4 spots? It is the only GT to have in parallel important classics.

As for GB tour at 11. At 10 there is Vuelta, classics are practically stucked at 9 not only because more important but also because a classic starting at 11 would end not before 13, risking to finish in a afternoon time basically.
GB Tour stages should be shorter than that (obviously depending on the designer).

Put GB at 10, imo possible, considering the lack of players.

luques wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 28, 2018 8:33 am

I don't get it, is the problem that editions are 2 or that the tour starts at 11?

First I thought, 11h is bad (as I don't like 11h and 17h races in general, but that's my thing) and two editions are too little for the only parallel tour to the Vuelta at that time and a kind of important stage race in September. So it was both. But I can't deny the arguments that there are a) less and less players and therefore probably not enough participation for that many races next to the Vuelta and important one day races and b) that the participation at 11h is not worse than in the pure morning or afternoon.

I still would love to see three (well participated) editions (and an afternoon edition, very selfishly), but I understand the argumentation.

And another thing is the lack of participation in this discussion. The CC (Calender Comitee or Calender Chef as you like, not to mistake with CircleCycle (!)) is doing a good job regarding only one to three opinions from the community, which is not representative at all. So keep it up.

Anti FL!!!!

Ok, anyway, I said my opinion, up to more people voicing there preference or Luques to decide.

Sent him another excel file with basically all possibilities I see:

2 versions with 2+2 GB-Slo
- The PDF now
- Same as now, but change GB and Slovakia times (and adjust parallel times)

2 versions with 3 GB + 2 Slo
- GB 3 times. 11-18-21, Slovakia then 14-20
- GB 3 times 11-15-21 , Slovakia then 18-23(I think the first one fits better, not because of latent anti-FLism, but because of Slovakia with the Vuelta at 22-24 another tour at 23? But ok, might work, don't know.)
Maybe other combinations work too, if you see a good one, propose

1 version with both 3+3 GB-Slo
- GB and Slovakia 3 times: 11-18-21 for GB, 14-20-23 for Slo
See above, if you see a better combination and think this version is the winning version, propose something.

1 version with China II in, but basically can be added to all 5 other versions, since it's at a different date and has little to do with all the other stuff.
- China 10-21
Ok ok, here 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 times, whatever works too....

So well, about "Belgian races" :

Saturday 1st september : Brussels classic : same road as last year. Use 2017 version ... It's not perfect imo in the begin but rest is great and last km a 2 fit with the reality.

Sunday 2nd september : Fourmies : same road as last year. Use 2017 version ... Great design, geat job!

Monday 3rd september : Antwerp Port Epix : I'm working on it... All in all, organisation announces 32km of cobbles sections and 30km of "dirt roads"!

Rest to follow

OH, Antwerp sounds fun!

Thanks for Belgian stuff

Britain finished:

luques wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 28, 2018 8:33 am

Was thinking, maybe next year would be worth to give Vuelta only 4 spots? It is the only GT to have in parallel important classics.

Luques, it sounds a bit like you want to slowly decrease races until there are no races anymore. How about until next year we fix all the bugs, improve the game a bit and advertise this already fantastic game, so that we have 7 Vuelta editions, each with 2 fields, next year?

Gipfelstuermer wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 28, 2018 2:15 pm

luques wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 28, 2018 8:33 am

Was thinking, maybe next year would be worth to give Vuelta only 4 spots? It is the only GT to have in parallel important classics.

Luques, it sounds a bit like you want to slowly decrease races until there are no races anymore. How about until next year we fix all the bugs, improve the game a bit and advertise this already fantastic game, so that we have 7 Vuelta editions, each with 2 fields, next year?

Sounds a bit optimistic

Btw, probably didn't explain myself good enough, it is not a question about decreasing all editions.
But just decrease Vuelta editions in comparison to the others.

So, to take from your example, you say 7 editions of Vuelta, instead it seems to me people would prefer 7 editions of Britain or of classics.
It's not about the absolute number of editions I am talking, but about the proportions between Vuelta, parallel tours and single races (or classics when it is the case).

Maybe reforming prize money may change a bit the scenario but at the moment that's my sensation.

can we do slovakia after 20h? would be the only tour i can ride this month, but just if its after 20h

Montreal and Almaty 21-23 is set up for atleast one of these races to have a near empty attendance (<=5).

High Flyer wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 28, 2018 8:33 pm

Montreal and Almaty 21-23 is set up for atleast one of these races to have a near empty attendance (<=5).

Solution?

Don't think for Almaty(which isn't sure anyway, see the ??(but ok seems very likely)), 21-23 usually does well enough.
Montreal with 5x Vuelta, ? times GB... yeah... but solution? I fear Quebec and Montreal both risk small groups at all times.

Updated.

So...

China in 3 editions, still need to check if we can find the design of it but in.

Almaty I keep confirmed that times, usually 21-23 is good.

Great Britain and Slovakia I confirmed that times, reasons explained up, not perfect but still can't figure out a better solution.

Then, big decision, I was wondering to put the WC Elite at 10 and 15 as I think it is since 2015 it doesn't happen, if there are big reasons against...

luques wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:31 am

Updated.

So...

China in 3 editions, still need to check if we can find the design of it but in.

Almaty I keep confirmed that times, usually 21-23 is good.

Great Britain and Slovakia I confirmed that times, reasons explained up, not perfect but still can't figure out a better solution.

Then, big decision, I was wondering to put the WC Elite at 10 and 15 as I think it is since 2015 it doesn't happen, if there are big reasons against...

Like it One question: can the WC be drawn before the new month? Big race and seeing the RSF-profile in time would be quite good for setting form...

RS Coesitz wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:09 am

luques wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 29, 2018 8:31 am

Updated.

So...

China in 3 editions, still need to check if we can find the design of it but in.

Almaty I keep confirmed that times, usually 21-23 is good.

Great Britain and Slovakia I confirmed that times, reasons explained up, not perfect but still can't figure out a better solution.

Then, big decision, I was wondering to put the WC Elite at 10 and 15 as I think it is since 2015 it doesn't happen, if there are big reasons against...

Like it One question: can the WC be drawn before the new month? Big race and seeing the RSF-profile in time would be quite good for setting form...

I draw a WC some month ago, but don't know if there isn't some modifications or not

Stuff that is designed up.

Antwerp on the third will be pavé and dirt roads, see Gaurain's post above. Times will be 10-15-19-22 (Vuelta rest day, so same times no problem)

Many of the missing 1 day races will basically be the same as last year. But some not online yet, Toscana, Sabatini, Pantani some changes at the start, harder than usual they say, no details. Wallonie impossible to understand the website for me at this point, but expect it to be roughly the same as usual. Impanis maybe small changes, nothing major. (seems the same as last year, but somehow design a bit off) Etc etc. Form will have to do with what's online.

World Championship
As far as I know Luques has to put that on himself, the version drawn by P. is this.

http://www.radsportfreaks.de/radsport/p ... ension=c4f

Antwerp Port Epic finish finally... Saved as ape18 :p

Thanks!

Donkey doing Slovakia

And Doubs

What needs to be designed or checked:

Everything that isn't in the calendar yet after the 16th.
Exception belgian stuff, Gaurain is doing that, think that includes Gooikse and Famenne.

Robyklebt wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:57 am

High Flyer wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 28, 2018 8:33 pm

Montreal and Almaty 21-23 is set up for atleast one of these races to have a near empty attendance (<=5).

Solution?

Don't think for Almaty(which isn't sure anyway, see the ??(but ok seems very likely)), 21-23 usually does well enough.
Montreal with 5x Vuelta, ? times GB... yeah... but solution? I fear Quebec and Montreal both risk small groups at all times.

Turns out the turn out for the day as a whole was bad but I was right in saying that the 23h would have a <=5 attendance. Prob should've said that abetter time would've been something like 9-14-18-22, but part of that is said with hindsight.