cycling4freaks.com

A while ago we respectively you had, to let the sprint be more open, introduced the coincident. Meanwhile, the chance is definitely too large. There are far too many parasites, who sponge off the true sprinters and those who really work for it, and in the end pick up the win . Something needs to be done. There you are not for a major reform à la Cerros Sprint trains, here a small suggestion.

I would reduce the mali from -6 now to -4 or -3 in the future and adapt the chance like the following:

51,61% on 0
25,805% on -1
12,905% on -2
6,45% on -3
3,23% on -4

In comparison of two sprinters it means:
Chance, that the sprint difference
stays the same: 35,4806455%
A loses a point to B: 17,68880325%
A loses two points to B: 8,7415245%
A loses three points to B: 4,1623465%
A loses four points to B: 1,667003%

Chances that B loses points to A equivalent.
And yes, I know that this has a quite sharp increase in the chance of everything staying the same compared to what I think, that you have at the moment as values​​. But this is by design. First, in order to have a negotiable starting point, and secondly to really change something.

And yes, i know, you like the existing values for groups. And i do not have any idea if it is possible to program it that small groups have other chances than big ones, but we need a change here. Soon!

pro Zentaron

Of course BSE is right, and I think this was an easily adapted change, if one doesn't want the "big reform". There are still more than enough random-factors in sprint that I'd be glad if we'd reduce at least one of these to make sprint a bit more "calculable".

Souns good yes. Where do the %s come from ?

My? I thought about them and used several papers to create them.

good idea

pro Zentaron

jep ... pro for the litlle reform^^

I am not so sure what effect would have it for the sprint of a small group. You have larger difference in sprint values, so current calculation is preferable. In general I think the sprint is the worst implemented part of the game, it is a very simple solution that has very little to do with real life (I always enjoy watching the sprint trains and the fighting for positions before the sprint starts).

I'm against it.

What exactly do we hope to achieve with it?

IMO the stats show that the 95 sprinters win clearly more than the 92 sprinters. All the complaining nonwithstanding, except some really inept managers, Chaos and Sandow for example, a 95 sprinter will just get his automatic wins here and there and here again.

But clearly not enough...a 95 sprinter looks good, but if every single 92 is able to beat him...maybe even a 91 or 90 with enough coincidence...he's becoming more and more only comitting but less fertile

of course they get their victorys here and here, but what about those 30 races in which you burn your team and some 93 are able to win because of the coincidence...they have enough chances to win in races where the big guns get dropped at a hill, the big guns going 300meter later, the downhill sprints when the big guns have 20 less downhill...and blablabla

i want more more revenue and less coincidence winners...

Of course every single 92 is able to beat him. HE will be with that thing as well, more often than not it's the wrong wheel that fucks the 95+ with regards to the 90-92. Yes, the huge malus happens, but very seldom.

I am sorry not to share your opinion, master ape, but it happens more often than you might realise. Some sort of random factor is okay, as it is first and foremost a game, but in my opinion there is too much of a random-factor in it. But here we are on different sides: you want the 92 to have a decent chance of beating the 95 (or better, and believe me, there are cases when even a 96 with very good form loses to a mere 92). I want the 92 to eat the 95's dust just the same way a 85 mountain rider eats the 88-mountain rider's dust.

Ah, but the 85 doesn't always eat the 88 dust!

hm, hmmm...

from my experience, i can say in round about 240 sprintraces i can remember myabe 10 races where i couldn't belive the result of the sprint. i think at the moment it's very good to calculate how to win. sure you often fail, bust mostly because of weak bw. if it would be even more easier to calculate then i have no more reason to ride if a stronger rider is in the field. so just for my point of few the coincidence is ok. the big problem is to calculate +1 +2 -1 -2, there can happen anything...

so with the arguments i heard at the moments. i'm against a change.

cicli

I see no argument in your point, cicli. So, we shall stay with a bad rule just to animate teams with a bad sprinter to work in the peloton? To turn your argument around: right now we use random as a bait for teams with a bad sprinter to work in the peloton? If it is so, then there should be nor more complaints from groups that the teams with a 92 must not help the fav. And btw, I saw at least as many rsf-mass-sprints decided by pure luck as by choice of a good backwheel

And Master Ape: yes, I agree: there are times when a 85 might follow the 88. But these rare occasions are not decided by random-factors you can't influence.

I remember 6 races in a row, where i got -5 or -6. Was proved by calculating the values after the sprint.
And in Turkey, Lausitz beat me three or four times with his 93, although Fokke had a good wheel (and no bad form) or both went from 50 m and there were no other opponents.
And sure, a 95, 96 or 97 gets his wins. But not that adequate to the costs, he and his team cause in comparison to the wins the mass of 92 or 93 with their crap teams get. And most of the real sprinters have a good but expensive team. And the expensive team is needed, cause every 92 or 93 (and even enough of the 94) just points the finger to the 95, 96, 97 and tells him that he is the one and only favourite and the only one who has to work.
And then there are more and more teams with 2 92 or 93 in the team with helpers that are mostly no help. However, two 92 are equal to a big gun, cause you have more opportunities in the sprint.

And the 2 92 would still have exactly the same advantage, they have to guns...

Scenario often. x teams with two sprinters. You with the 95 can't be in one of these wheels, cause you don't know how they sprint. So you have to be in the wheel of the 90 with no other sprinter in his team, who fails getting his chosen backwheel or goes from 500 in the wheel of his 65 teammate. No other possible choice. (If you are always in the wheel of the other 95 who is in your race, a 92 wins in the most cases, cause every other 95 learns that you are doing this and will be also in your wheel.)

So:
90+6,5=96,5 > 95+9,65=104,65
92+6,5=98,5 > 93+9,85=102,85

Less than two points difference. Happens too often now that this difference is worth nothing because of the coincidence. (And there is still the form, which can equate that, and the team with two sprinters has the possibility to choose two form climax.) However, the 92+93 team often does not work.
With less coincidence and therefore higher chances that everything stays the same, the tempo situation in the most races does not change, but the teams that are forced to work, that with the so called big guns, have better chances. The other ones still have their chance, and they have mostly still a cheap team, so they won't/can't complain. They still will get their money (and wins) without doing anything.

And that's what i want. Not only to decrease the maximum of the coincidence, but also the chances to fall down.

Too many "have to" "no other choice" in this part

Scenario often. x teams with two sprinters. You with the 95 can't be in one of these wheels, cause you don't know how they sprint. So you have to be in the wheel of the 90 with no other sprinter in his team, who fails getting his chosen backwheel or goes from 500 in the wheel of his 65 teammate. No other possible choice. (If you are always in the wheel of the other 95 who is in your race, a 92 wins in the most cases, cause every other 95 learns that you are doing this and will be also in your wheel.)

You can. You can and sometimes have to take that risk and follow a guy with 2 92. Or 92-90 or whatever. Sometimes it works, sometimes not.
And the same for following the other 95. There is a possible other choice. You can follow the other 95. You say if you are always in that wheel, yes, yes, but here you're suggesting never.

But to the proposal. I like the -6. And I don't like your percentages, that make it that in 70% of the cases between 2 sprinters there is not more than 1 point difference in chance. The combination of only -4 and the percentages makes that a very bad and IMO short sighted proposal as well.
Only thinking about the boring 1 day flat races I'm riding right now, why not. THAT's where the 'problem' of parasitism is the strongest.
But think of small tours and GTs too. Not specialized sprinter tours, there the parasitism problem exists to a much lesser extent. And helps the sprinter teams. Less attacking teams, the few 90-92 vs a 95 have their chance to win, they stay in the peloton often. Some help. That system would change too, and in tours, that are not overfilled with sprinters the system now works well.

What you want to do to get less "parasitism" is: Less sprint races.

i see another little problem
p.e.:20 teams
1 96 sprinter
1 95 sprinter
and a lot of 93-94 sprinter
in moment more teams will work to have a sprint, more teams have a chance, etc.

with the new coincidence, i think, only the first 2 are intrested in a MS, but the others are only ready to break away.
i see more chaos rennen(not the idiot manager)

The 94 teams work at the moment mostly from the half of the race or even later. Not everybody seems to be that convinced by his 94 sprinter as MiSa. But okay, it's a help for sure anyway, I won't deny. But they still have their chance, maybe have to work less or maybe now this working from the half is the perfect start for their chances. The 93 mostly even now do not ride for their chance.
And Chaos is what Luna likes to have, so now it's his turn to come here and tell everybody that my idea is the greatest in newer RSF-history.

Another example today

500 jusqu`à l´arrivée
Harry Neuhauser (TT Sports) sprint dans le vent
Harry Neuhauser (TT Sports):
Paul England (TT Sports) essaye de prendre la roue
Paul England (TT Sports) prend la roue
Ephraim Ahasver (Killers) sprint dans le vent
Ephraim Ahasver (Killers):
Milo Vlasic (Killers) essaye de prendre la roue
Milo Vlasic (Killers) prend la roue
Bernard Parker (rv-hamburg) sprint dans le vent
Bernard Parker (rv-hamburg):
Jonathan Pitroipa (rv-hamburg) essaye de prendre la roue
Jonathan Pitroipa (rv-hamburg) prend la roue
Chris Boll (rv-hamburg) sprint dans le vent
Chris Boll (rv-hamburg):
Thierry Doubai (rv-hamburg) essaye de prendre la roue
Thierry Doubai (rv-hamburg) prend la roue
Agustin Raffo (BMC Cycling) sprint dans le vent
Agustin Raffo (BMC Cycling):
Franklin Salas (BMC Cycling) essaye de prendre la roue
Franklin Salas (BMC Cycling) prend la roue
Franklin Salas (BMC Cycling):
Otilino Barguil (BMC Cycling) essaye de prendre la roue
Otilino Barguil (BMC Cycling) prend la roue
Otilino Barguil (BMC Cycling):
Marlon Chala (BMC Cycling) essaye de prendre la roue
Stefan Ratzendorf (Team GAK) essaye de prendre la roue
Marlon Chala (BMC Cycling) prend la roue
Stefan Ratzendorf (Team GAK):
Miguel Santamaria (Team GAK) essaye de prendre la roueWalid Achraf (Elaska) essaye de prendre la roue
Miguel Santamaria (Team GAK) prend la roue
Andreas Trautmann (Hintersprenkler) sprint dans le vent
Andreas Trautmann (Hintersprenkler):
Manfred Kallenbach (Hintersprenkler) essaye de prendre la roue
Manfred Kallenbach (Hintersprenkler) prend la roue




50 jusqu`à l´arrivée
AtliMar Gylfason (LibertySeguros ) sprint dans le vent
Pssi DePetit (gigi-acer) sprint dans le vent
Bayrav Abdul (Killers) sprint dans le vent
Patrik Hughes (rv-hamburg) sprint dans le vent
Charles Kabore (rv-hamburg) sprint dans le vent
Kaarel Hargi (Falkenbier) sprint dans le vent
Ernesto Paella (UC Nantes) sprint dans le vent
Ernesto Paella (UC Nantes):
Fred Mecke (Hintersprenkler) essaye de prendre la roue
Fred Mecke (Hintersprenkler) prend la roue
Jalel Wazari (Elaska) sprint dans le vent
Jen Blackwood (FashionZombies) sprint dans le vent
Jen Blackwood (FashionZombies):
Gerd Heidler (Hintersprenkler) essaye de prendre la roue
Gerd Heidler (Hintersprenkler) prend la roue
Manu Piard (Erzgebirge) sprint dans le vent
Hans Imhof (TT Sports) sprint dans le vent
Uwe Beyer (rv-hamburg) sprint dans le vent
Liseas Peleus (gigi-acer) sprint dans le vent


Red = the teams who ride for the sprint
bleu = the one who win without a single km

his explcation : with those skills of my sprinters, i´m not here to work (90+92)

Oh come on you lamers. Good sprinter does not lead to a good sprint by the manager. Of course everybody can win. But it's about the probability, the chance to win. And the chance for a 95 sprinter is higher than the chance for a 92+92 combo, coincidence included or not. You always have the better basis for a sprint.

And of course it is also important how many sprinter and what kind of other sprinters there are in the peloton.

But if you don't like another team's behaviour in the peloton, just act accordingly. As simple as that.

to the reduction of the mali and boni: I think it's good the way it is right now.

But, why is the system of mali (we don't have a bonus-system anymore) good the way we have it? Just because it is there?
And yes, of course one has to adapt to other teams's behaviour. Insofar the example chosen is just a case of "shit happens", if all the sprinter-stars take the risk of a 50m-sprint (taken a glance, even the 93-sprinter seems to have done so).