cycling4freaks.com

I know we had some discussions about that in the past. I know that Alk said that the code for the sprint in too complex and won't touch for the moment.
But people (we) complain a lot about it.
So maybe it's time again to discuss the sprint system to give/initiate motivation to Alk to start looking at it.

What people dislikes the more about it, from my personal experience is :

1- the "dependence"
Your sprint result is mainly decided by the train you re following if you don't have one.
Sometimes, I followed a train, and being stronger than the 3rd man of the train, the manage decides to not launch his 2nd man VS the others trains, preferring giving up his chances than doing the best for his team even if it can lead the follower to the win.

2- the "ass covering" thing
Having 2 sprinters and making them follow each other.
You would say that is ok if they are strong enough and having the same level. But when the one covering the wheel is way weaker it's quite strange. Because at a moment he is not able to follow the sprint intensity dropping back and killing the chances of the followers that are much stronger.
By the way how is that calculated? How a 75sprint team mate can steal the wheel from a 90 sprint?
I read some managers calling that unfair.

3- the trick sprint.
The possibility to follow the guy behind you shouldn't exist imo.
The most unrealistic part for me. Stopping the sprint during 50m to allow another team mate to take an huge advantage of the sprint is abusive.

4- the important of the flat in the placement at 450m.
This one is not that important for me, but some managers complained about it so I quote it there.

5- the temporisation of a sprint.
Launching a sprint than stopping.
In a small field it's maybe a bit realistic since it can happen in real life, but in a big field where only one train it doesn't.

Maybe I forgot some other things, so feel free to complete it there.

For my part I dislikes the 3 first things, but I have already used them sometimes since it's not forbidden by the rules and others also are doing it.

I especially know also that Alk hates when you stop sprinting, so I hope he can do something to improve that.
We all know the effort he is making for the game, for free, and others admin too (thanks all) . Noone intention to put any pressure, just to discuss the thing and see what can be improved for a better game experience for all.

I think points 1, 2, 3 and 5 are tactical elements of a sprint. If we wanted it to be less tactical, we could just revert to the old sprint system where the server decided which rider was the strongest and gave them the win, and all you would see is the old animation of the top 10 moving towards the finish.

You make the decision to start the race without a train and be dependent on someone else, follow who you want, and put yourself in a situation where they can do whatever they want without caring about the outcome for you. Trick sprints can be covered in most scenarios. Sprinting and stopping also allow for a variety of tactics, especially in small group sprints.

In my opinion, the only bad thing about the current sprint system is the influence of secondary stats. In flat sprints, before, a 50-60-9x SP was just fine. Now, if you have one guy like that, you're having worse results than a rider with 68 flat-86 SP, which makes the sprint stat a bit of a cosmetic number in your rider stats.

The flat stat makes too much of a difference in getting wheels, and the −2 sprints feel unplayable if your sprinter or train lacks downhill ability. I still remember in some random Cat 1 race seeing someone with an 80/9x/9x train lose to an 80/8x/8x train just because their sprinters had 50/60 downhill and the other guy had 75+ on what was still a flat kilometer. So the best way to fix it while keeping it tactical would be those adjustments.

The "ass-covering" with far worse riders should also be adjusted if any changes are made regarding the influence of secondary stats.

So finally we have the thread! My two cents:

@ 1) In bunch sprints, positioning is the most important thing to be able to win. IMO this is not a problem, it helps teams with own trains which is ok, It is in fact a tactical element (whom to follow, how to react when a way better sprinter follows you etc.). I think this is mainly considered a problem in combination with other topics (for example if the train you follow than follows a guy behind and makes your and his position worse)

@ 2) Maybe the most discussed point in the last months. The code is really not easy to understand, but as far as I get it, the rider gets a constant bonus when he is following a rider of his own team (just for the calculation of the sprint position). IMO the idea behind the bonus was to protect trains, so that noone steals the wheel of your launching guy just to kill your train. so lets say you have 75-84-90 and a 89 guy is following your 84 guy, he shouldn't be able to steal your wheel. But when you hang your 90 sprinter on the best train and help your 84 it has the same result and the 89 guy followin your 90 guy hangs around behind your 84 guy. Thats exaclty the ass covering seen by many over months now, it takes away the smallest chance of the 89 sprinter and gives the ass coverer an imense advantage both against the guy he follows and the guy who is following him.

Why is this bad? Because it is highly unrealistic.
How could we solve it? Bonus is just given when you build a train. So when the foremost rider that launches the sprint is from the same team. So in the situations the bonus initially was meant for.

@ 3) Fully support that, just make it technically impossible to select a rider to follow (in the frontend) that is positioned behind you.

@ 4) I also like the importance of flat but it is probably a bit too much actually

@ 5) I think the full stop sprint we somehow have to deal with (also highly unrealistic in most cases), possible solution would be to disallow stopping (but we still have this option to stop the launch to make space for the rider behind, which imo makes sense)

Some other points to address:
6) Minimum sprint speed: Sometimes when big energy differences in the group are present and the weaker rider is launching the sprint it has some weird effects. The strong guy to follow the weak guy can be positioned in front of the weak rider, he is faster when just "rolling". Don't actually know if it is a problem or just bad tactic, but it looks awkward.

7) Crashes and annoying wheel stealing by lane switching of the launcher. Somehow realistic but not really transparent, it is often not clear what happened, maybe some more logs for such situations.

Some of my thoughts
1) That is not so unrealistic, having a lead-out helps a lot in real life
2) Possibly give a malus for the helping rider in positioning. So if you cover your sprinter, it is harder to follow a sprinter from the other team, but for your train, it has no effect, as the bonus is big enough.
3) Taking the possibility away to follow somebody behind has many unwanted side effects. First, in small groups it is widely used, and I think it would take a tactical option away. In a chaotic mass sprint following a train/rider overtaking you is an interesting tactical element. It would take something away from the game if it were no longer possible.
4) It is part of the game now, and most of the managers train for it. You can have a strong sprinter who needs a train or a specialist to ride solo. As I still like hillsprinters I would like to have the sprinters back who cannot follow on a +5 and are far behind the flatriders on a +6, though.
Additional:
8) We no longer see when a rider is blocked and drops back. This makes some sprints very confusing, especially for new managers. A log entree could help; the old sprint animation, where you saw the rider dropping back, would be even better, but I have no idea how hard it would be to implement this.

to remember this awful thing !!!! ...
I feel like I'm being ripped off about once a week - should I get a second or third sprinter to do this too or could someone (alk .-) technical versus it?

2- the "ass covering" thing
Having 2 sprinters and making them follow each other.
You would say that is ok if they are strong enough and having the same level. But when the one covering the wheel is way weaker it's quite strange. Because at a moment he is not able to follow the sprint intensity dropping back and killing the chances of the followers that are much stronger.
By the way how is that calculated? How a 75sprint team mate can steal the wheel from a 90 sprint?
I read some managers calling that unfair.

bergwerk cycling wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 18, 2025 1:41 pm

By the way how is that calculated?

This is an important question. How bad is the sprint system code, and are fixes possible? As I have written before, give the helping rider a small malus and make it a decision between cover and position.

Radunion wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 18, 2025 5:54 pm

bergwerk cycling wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 18, 2025 1:41 pm

By the way how is that calculated?

This is an important question. How bad is the sprint system code, and are fixes possible? As I have written before, give the helping rider a small malus and make it a decision between cover and position.

It is very complicated and bad. Imagine the worst code you ever tried to understand, lets say this is X and then use POW(X,2.17), thats the amount of badness you have to expect.

flockmastoR wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 01, 2025 9:56 pm

@ 2) Maybe the most discussed point in the last months. The code is really not easy to understand, but as far as I get it, the rider gets a constant bonus when he is following a rider of his own team (just for the calculation of the sprint position). IMO the idea behind the bonus was to protect trains, so that noone steals the wheel of your launching guy just to kill your train. so lets say you have 75-84-90 and a 89 guy is following your 84 guy, he shouldn't be able to steal your wheel. But when you hang your 90 sprinter on the best train and help your 84 it has the same result and the 89 guy followin your 90 guy hangs around behind your 84 guy. Thats exaclty the ass covering seen by many over months now, it takes away the smallest chance of the 89 sprinter and gives the ass coverer an imense advantage both against the guy he follows and the guy who is following him.

Why is this bad? Because it is highly unrealistic.
How could we solve it? Bonus is just given when you build a train. So when the foremost rider that launches the sprint is from the same team. So in the situations the bonus initially was meant for.

We had a look recently in the sprint code recently (or at least tried to). The only change that would be rather simple would be to lower the train bonus, but that would obviously weaken trains at the same time. The more sophisticated solution with checking who was actually trying to build a train is a lot more complex (e.g. the code can no longer check the riders one-by-one) and would require a good understanding of the whole sprint code and even then for sure will have some unforeseen side effects.
So in the end, rewriting the race calculation is imo still the best approach in the long run. However, as written elsewhere I'm nowhere even close to get started with that.

Alkworld wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 19, 2025 8:39 pm

flockmastoR wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 01, 2025 9:56 pm

@ 2) Maybe the most discussed point in the last months. The code is really not easy to understand, but as far as I get it, the rider gets a constant bonus when he is following a rider of his own team (just for the calculation of the sprint position). IMO the idea behind the bonus was to protect trains, so that noone steals the wheel of your launching guy just to kill your train. so lets say you have 75-84-90 and a 89 guy is following your 84 guy, he shouldn't be able to steal your wheel. But when you hang your 90 sprinter on the best train and help your 84 it has the same result and the 89 guy followin your 90 guy hangs around behind your 84 guy. Thats exaclty the ass covering seen by many over months now, it takes away the smallest chance of the 89 sprinter and gives the ass coverer an imense advantage both against the guy he follows and the guy who is following him.

Why is this bad? Because it is highly unrealistic.
How could we solve it? Bonus is just given when you build a train. So when the foremost rider that launches the sprint is from the same team. So in the situations the bonus initially was meant for.

We had a look recently in the sprint code recently (or at least tried to). The only change that would be rather simple would be to lower the train bonus, but that would obviously weaken trains at the same time. The more sophisticated solution with checking who was actually trying to build a train is a lot more complex (e.g. the code can no longer check the riders one-by-one) and would require a good understanding of the whole sprint code and even then for sure will have some unforeseen side effects.
So in the end, rewriting the race calculation is imo still the best approach in the long run. However, as written elsewhere I'm nowhere even close to get started with that.

Yes that was my impression too when I tried to understand the code a year ago. Just came across that bonus (which is also not staightforward to understand as it is used on some kind of pretransformed strength value).

IMO the bonus is too high (also for building trains) it's also too easy to cover your real leader with a minor Sprinter in smaller classic groups. On the other side, stealing the wheel of a guy in a 3 men sprint train happens occasionally and most of the time it is just by accident (expecting a different order). But I don't think that adjusting the bonus will help for the described issues.

Wouldn't it be worth trying (since rewriting is a long way off) to reduce the bonus by 1/3 for your own rider? If the change is fairly easy to implement, you could simply test it and do a trial run over one or two weeks.

This would cover the most extreme cases of asscovering.

From what you've discussed, I probably wouldn't be against a small (!) reduction of the bonus to see if that alleviates the problem a little bit. Don't know if the 1/3 that Bugatti describes is a small or big reduction. It depends how exactly the bonus is calculated. But definitely I'd rather go for a small reduction in the sense of a mini or tiny reduction. Then, write down exactly what you did. Test it for 4 weeks. Decide after 4 weeks if A) it was great or B) needs further reduction or C) needs to be reversed.

But I am interested in Alk/AAD conclusion. I read the pros & cons but was not sure what their conclusion was.

Now, since we have this discussion going, I would also like to ask where you see ass-covering vs. some other issues described in the earlier post, especially in terms of how 'unrealistic' they are:
- Trick Sprint
- Tempo-Change during Sprint (Elaska called it Temporisation of Sprint')
- No Sprint Agreements (Elaska didn't name that specifically, but I would add it here)

If (!) there is consensus that all these are unrealistic, IMO we might want to address them.

Also, these three could potentially be addressed without touching the sprint-code itself, but through restricting the available sprint-options in certain situations (technically: in frontend and backend).

Instead of the bonus, could you apply a malus for riders that are helping other riders at the same place? A few percent (5 ?) would be enough. For trains the change is marginal as the bonus outweighs the malus, but while covering is still possible the covered rider will get worse placement in the sprint. In theory you could still cover your own train, but you need a forth good sprinter that is reasonable fit, I have never seen it.