Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x teams

chartreusecycle · Post by **chartreusecycle** » Tue Dec 06, 2016 4:33 pm

06/12/16 the Guadeloup tour (5 days) started with only 3 teams. It was a total chaos hopefully stopped by Poké who cancelled the tour.

What is the blocking point to Create a rule avoiding a race to start with less than x teams (5 teams for example) ?

CircleCycle · Post by **CircleCycle** » Tue Dec 06, 2016 4:52 pm

chartreusecycle wrote:06/12/16 the Guadeloup tour (5 days) started with only 3 teams. It was a total chaos hopefully stopped by Poké who cancelled the tour.

What is the blocking point to Create a rule avoiding a race to start with less than x teams (5 teams for example) ?

a total chaos???

CircleCycle · Post by **CircleCycle** » Tue Dec 06, 2016 4:55 pm

so let's describe what happend...

karat ~350k team
CM ~350k team
CC ~520k team

CM asks before the race begins if we should cancel it. Then does a km1 attack (blocked) and a km2 attack. I did tempo and a farmer on km35 siebed everybody, took the money (theoretically) at the cat2 gpm and rode with 7guys in front vs. 2 karaT and 2CM riders...
so far the total chaos.....

chartreusecycle · Post by **chartreusecycle** » Tue Dec 06, 2016 5:55 pm

Riding a 5 days tour with 3 team only is a total non-sens (if you prefer instead of chaos).

Nothing to do with the way we ride.

CC it fucked up my week too. I can not ride today and the tour is lost for me (I expected good result on the flat stage + trying the red).

CircleCycle · Post by **CircleCycle** » Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:16 pm

I was referring to "total chaos"

Hunsrueck · Post by **Hunsrueck** » Tue Dec 06, 2016 9:57 pm

very old topic^^

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4109

luques · Post by **luques** » Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:09 pm

As Huns said, old discussion, if people like to race against 2 teams not much to do, if there is an agreement to close the tour instead, it can be done (but should be improved because takes too much time).

CircleCycle · Post by **CircleCycle** » Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:30 pm

so the one who showed balls by cancelling Guadalupe afternoon edition (just 3 teams starting):

What about cancelling Tour de Pavès 10am?
4 Teams, one is div 7 with 4 races in total and didn't appear for first stage.
and of course it is a total mess because one team is dominating (4 best pavè riders).

luques · Post by **luques** » Thu Jan 12, 2017 4:47 pm

This thing has been discussed for ages and never got a conclusion.

Who doesn't want to cancel the tour says that it is the only time when they can play, so everything is ok.

Who want to cancel the tour says it is a waste of time.

Both are probably well arguments, depending also on the type of Tour (A fantasy one is more easy to cancel than a Tirreno or a GIRO).

Don't see anyway an easy way to solve this.

team fl · Post by **team fl** » Thu Jan 12, 2017 5:41 pm

Why not ask the participants? Let's say to cancel a tour it needs a majority of the participants that votes for it. 5 Teams or more should be out of question imho. Exceptions: If there are only two teams, cancel it if one player says he doesn't like to ride it; and cancel the tour if there is only one team.

luques · Post by **luques** » Thu Jan 12, 2017 5:56 pm

team fl wrote:Why not ask the participants? Let's say to cancel a tour it needs a majority of the participants that votes for it. 5 Teams or more should be out of question imho. Exceptions: If there are only two teams, cancel it if one player says he doesn't like to ride it; and cancel the tour if there is only one team.

I was thinking the same but I got one doubt myself. Let's say a tour of 3 where the favo is clearly a team like Liquigas (or free-team or in general a team that has not few "enemies"), I fear that the vote would be influenced by the reputation of the guy more than other. Don't know if this could be potentially a problem.

P.S. In any case the hope is to not have anymore tours with so poor players, an idea could have been the possibility to play two races at the same time, but there are many things to fix also there.

team fl · Post by **team fl** » Thu Jan 12, 2017 8:06 pm

luques wrote:
team fl wrote:Why not ask the participants? Let's say to cancel a tour it needs a majority of the participants that votes for it. 5 Teams or more should be out of question imho. Exceptions: If there are only two teams, cancel it if one player says he doesn't like to ride it; and cancel the tour if there is only one team.
I was thinking the same but I got one doubt myself. Let's say a tour of 3 where the favo is clearly a team like Liquigas (or free-team or in general a team that has not few "enemies"), I fear that the vote would be influenced by the reputation of the guy more than other. Don't know if this could be potentially a problem.

P.S. In any case the hope is to not have anymore tours with so poor players, an idea could have been the possibility to play two races at the same time, but there are many things to fix also there.

I also thought about that. But seriously, what fun is a tour when two out of three teams don't want to ride it under given circumstances. Even if the team that wants to ride misses a possible win.

Liquigas-CND · Post by **Liquigas-CND** » Mon Jun 05, 2017 7:59 pm

Dauphine 17H only 2 teams....

Luques, why it is not possible to create a rule in order to avoid at least the tours to start with less than 4 teams?

Is it so difficult?

luques · Post by **luques** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 2:37 pm

Liquigas-CND wrote:Dauphine 17H only 2 teams....

Luques, why it is not possible to create a rule in order to avoid at least the tours to start with less than 4 teams?

Is it so difficult?

It's something on the to do list. Actually there is the number to define (I actually agree with less than 4) and also how to do it.

One way is to let the first stage go normally and on the night removing it.
The second way is to not make it start (but there is the risk that people can't be able to race other races that day beacuse of time).

sgumgub · Post by **sgumgub** » Thu Jun 08, 2017 6:47 pm

luques wrote:
Liquigas-CND wrote:Dauphine 17H only 2 teams....

Luques, why it is not possible to create a rule in order to avoid at least the tours to start with less than 4 teams?

Is it so difficult?
It's something on the to do list. Actually there is the number to define (I actually agree with less than 4) and also how to do it.

One way is to let the first stage go normally and on the night removing it.
The second way is to not make it start (but there is the risk that people can't be able to race other races that day beacuse of time).

that would mean one day races would still be possible? If so, better not

luques · Post by **luques** » Sun Jun 11, 2017 10:23 am

sgumgub wrote:
luques wrote:
Liquigas-CND wrote:Dauphine 17H only 2 teams....

Luques, why it is not possible to create a rule in order to avoid at least the tours to start with less than 4 teams?

Is it so difficult?
It's something on the to do list. Actually there is the number to define (I actually agree with less than 4) and also how to do it.

One way is to let the first stage go normally and on the night removing it.
The second way is to not make it start (but there is the risk that people can't be able to race other races that day beacuse of time).
that would mean one day races would still be possible? If so, better not

Well, if you also close one day races for less than 4 teams, this means that some guys won't be able to race that day, so single races will be always guaranteed.
The only stop could be about tours because people have the chance to play single races or other tours.

sgumgub · Post by **sgumgub** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:16 am

What a "race" if there are only 2, sometimes even only ONE Team

team fl · Post by **team fl** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:59 am

sgumgub wrote:What a "race" if there are only 2, sometimes even only ONE Team

Well, ask spinner and r Quick

sgumgub · Post by **sgumgub** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 10:38 am

Yes, I just wanted to come here to post that as well. Pathetic

luques · Post by **luques** » Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:38 pm

Imo there are 2 problems. I was too in favour of the extremistic approach, but 2 things are to consider.

1) A game should give the possibility to everybody to play, if this doesn't happen the game fails by himself. I never saw a game that didn't let me play one full day, it may be that I have to wait maybe 30' or 1h but not as in RSF 3-4 hours until the next race. And RSF is kind of particular too, because you need to be on the game at least 1h and half to play.
Case of today, race at 9h I need to wait until 14h for the next. And if I don't have time to play 2 hours at 14h? Means that for this day I can't play. The worst case scenario could be a player who has the license and you cancel the only timespan where he could play

2)Fair competition. If my race gets cancelled that day I won't have points nor money. In RSF regular play counts much to have a good team. So why should they be penalized for something that is not their fault? Their profit will be in any case lowered by 80% or so, but at least it will not be a day off.

sgumgub · Post by **sgumgub** » Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:10 am

Well, the problem lies in your/the definition of "this game". To me, its not "this" game if there are only 1 or 2 riders, simple as that. The Palmares gets completely worthless, too.
Basicly, just throw some money and points towards their way, if thats the problem. Wouldnt even care about that.
But in no way should that be considered a "race" or "playing this game".

Just my 2 cents.

Robyklebt · Post by **Robyklebt** » Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:17 pm

The problem is that people care more about other people than about themselves.
How exactly does it hurt the game or even other managers if there is a 2 team one day race? One of the 2 wins.
-Will get more money than others who play in stronger races, yeah, good for him. Disadvantage for all the others. That's the way it is. On the other hand the guys riding in bigger groups will have more fun. Which in the end is worth more.
-The winner of the race gets better palmares. Yeah, if you only look at the numbers. If you have any self respect you know how much your wins are worth. And this doesn't hurt anybody really.
-Points. Will get 20% of the points for the win. But yeah, will have placements too, so will get a lot of points. But probably still less than the winner of a full race? Hurts minimally if the guy is in competition with another team for a place in a division or so. But.... Divisions placings are pretty unimportant since there are few teams so a field split basically never happens anymore. And if it does, the 2 team races don't happen anymore.

And let's stop acting as if the guys who start in 2 teams races start there on purpose. We don't know how many teams start when we inscribe normally. Exception last minute inscriptions. Most of the time I guess the teams that end up in a 2 team race would prefer a bigger race too.

And let's stop pretending that the game is full of 2 team races as well. There are too many low participation races but it's not the norm to have a 2 team race.

And if there are too many low participation one day races, the answer is not to cancel 1 day races where 1 or 2 or 3 teams are inscribed, but offering less races. (Including tours, I'd actually rather cancel some editions of low cat tours than one day races) But of course there the problem starts, since for example the great campaigner against low participation races (SgUmBuG) is at the same time the great opposer of not offering even a single race in the morning. Yes, we know, what should be done is offering everything in the morning, cancel everywhere else, but somehow that approach is only convincing that guy for the moment.

Of course having an idiot doing at least parts of the calendar doesn't help either. Putting in a fantasy climbers race when there is the Dauphiné AND Luxembourg in parallel. How enlightened. Putting in a climbers race while the TdS AND the Tour du Sud go on, how brilliant. Even putting in one between tours like will happen after the TdS and TdS (Tour de Suisse, and Tour du Sud, hihi).... In a month when climbers can win Luxembourg or Dauphiné, TdS or TdS, later on Slovenia, GC plus of course stages, do we really need climbing one day races too? Ok, one from time to time can work... but 3, possibly more in a month like this? Well, let's rather discuss about cancelling races with people inscribed than holding people who actively hurt the game by sheer ineptness accountable for their mistakes. (Helping them to do better work is an option only theoretically in this case since Pokemon has proven that he won't accept any advice, he'll just start insulting when you dare criticizing his shitty work.)

cycling4freaks.com

Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x teams

Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x teams

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Re: Create a rule to avoid race starting with less than x te

Who is online