cycling4freaks.com

There are beta tests today in the short races...what do you mean, use this version for tomorrow?

Hum to know if we should use it since tomorrow or not, it could be nice if we ride some short race with some usual km, like 6***, 4**, 7**, 1**** I guess, not 17***** or -8****, it isn't enough explicit about how is the new balance .

I am not sure...i would primarily like to see if there are any bugs. And for the extreme KMs is the biggest danger. So that is the reason why we have this in the short races.
If we would use the km of the tomorrow race, everybody could test exactly hat tomorrow could happen. Í don´t like it very much...

Buhmann wrote:I am not sure...i would primarily like to see if there are any bugs. And for the extreme KMs is the biggest danger. So that is the reason why we have this in the short races.
If we would use the km of the tomorrow race, everybody could test exactly hat tomorrow could happen. Í don´t like it very much...

Hum okay for extreme KMs. But implant that the day before RVV...could be funny or freeze totally races because nobody know what will happen, don't know if it is a good thing or not, else if the new balance looks interesting.

you could implement that riders which ride a real race also can ride short races would be easier to test then because much of the important riders are at the 3 day tour and i just can test with the not so good rider

Please please please do not change anything in April. And please not at all from today to tomorrow. I really like the idea of making racing physics better for these parts but again: Please not in one day and not one day before RVV... Do it good, use May for it. Test it, get input. But don't do a hasty maneuver that half of the community does not get anyway and nobody knows the implications of...

The sense of the changes is, that the classic races works fine. So why wait till they are ended?

At a first glance it looks ok.
But can i have more common hills.
Something like 7** and 6*** instead of 17****

skull wrote:At a first glance it looks ok.
But can i have more common hills.
Something like 7** and 6*** instead of 17****

Buhmann wrote:I am not sure...i would primarily like to see if there are any bugs. And for the extreme KMs is the biggest danger. So that is the reason why we have this in the short races.
If we would use the km of the tomorrow race, everybody could test exactly hat tomorrow could happen. Í don´t like it very much...

Buhmann wrote:The sense of the changes is, that the classic races works fine. So why wait till they are ended?

Because teams plan their whole year just for this month and changing the balance and possible outcome a week before the race is disgusting.

I don´t see any problems if balance changes a little bit. It is in my opinion not neccessary that all is calculatable.
Furthermore: I think (and the community also told it) that this is not a new feature but a bug fix. There is no really balance change. Only in case it did not work before. So I don´t know why we should wait. But it is the decision of the community. I really thought that is is desired to solve the problems before all the important races are finished. But maybe I am wrong. But then the problems can´t be as big as suspected.

You could make a poll about it ...
but not sure there is time for this

No need for a poll i think.
You can do it right now.
After the Ronde last Sunday the cobbled-hill season is practically over.
Any race with cobbled hills that may come can be used as exercise.

As i said. I have fixed the balance bugs for pave and very hard hills. so my question is, shall ilwe use it for the normal races now, so that the fixes are available for tomorrow?

Maybe after PR? I don't know what the others think about it... that would be nice to put a fantasy pavé race in the calendar soon to test it

After PR ? Bof different than for RVV, it is like if it will change something before or after, always strongers who are in front, let's put it now

Almost all the drops at PR 9h was on 3* some riders survived on 2 4* kms and drop at the 3*, 4 and 5* aren't selective enough, 74 pavés survived in the 18h race...

I think implementing it now would be nice as poké said

Exactly that was the reason i really wanted it for Paris Roubaix, not after...
I would suggest to integrate it on friday. Best day for me to react if there are any bugs.

Buhmann wrote:Exactly that was the reason i really wanted it for Paris Roubaix, not after...
I would suggest to integrate it on friday. Best day for me to react if there are any bugs.

What if we exchange the dates of Cicle Classic and GP della Liberazione ? So, we could have pave race on a Friday you can check (in 10days)

ps: next small bug you can look at, the 0energy guy that is not getting drop on steep km ! maybe it's not that hard to fix and would be done fast ?

People who have no clue at all about racing and siebing should really not get involved on such a topic.

Luques observation from tests:

1st Test

1) Attacked on the +17 (****) with a climber 87 and 59.9 pavè. Got 28secs over a peloton pulled by 3 77.x pavè men with max 60mountain and 90 flat. He was at (almost) full energy)

2) The steep downhill km looks ininfluent, the flat riders got nothing back on the km after the attack ( -13% and 3*) even with similar downhill skills.

3) On the +9 5*****, a classic 70-79 and 72.7pavè wasn't able to sieb the 3 pavè men that i told up (the weakest has 57mountain), they were doing tempo since the beginning (7kms of red tempo). But he got around 14 secs over the climber.

4) The downhill pavè on the 12km was much influent (-4% and 5*****), the classic man got back 11secs over the climber while having around 100 energies more.

luques wrote:Luques observation from tests:

1st Test

1) Attacked on the +17 (****) with a climber 87 and 59.9 pavè. Got 28secs over a peloton pulled by 3 77.x pavè men with max 60mountain and 90 flat. He was at (almost) full energy)

2) The steep downhill km looks ininfluent, the flat riders got nothing back on the km after the attack ( -13% and 3*) even with similar downhill skills.

3) On the +9 5*****, a classic 70-79 and 72.7pavè wasn't able to sieb the 3 pavè men that i told up (the weakest has 57mountain), they were doing tempo since the beginning (7kms of red tempo). But he got around 14 secs over the climber.

4) The downhill pavè on the 12km was much influent (-4% and 5*****), the classic man got back 11secs over the climber while having around 100 energies more.

True that downhill looks strange, but maybe it is because the % are big. Anyway we usually never have -13***** or 17***** in race so let's see in a real race what happen.

on the 9*****
73-79 with 78.4 pave can't sieb a 68-78 with 72pave or a 72-79 with 69pave ... is it normal/ok for both ?

Buhmann wrote:Exactly that was the reason i really wanted it for Paris Roubaix, not after...
I would suggest to integrate it on friday. Best day for me to react if there are any bugs.

You should never read or take seriously posts by SM. The guy has no clue whatsoever about RSF.

The idiocy "*** siebs more than *****" is the latest proof of it.

The problem is that there are 2 issues with pavé and hill/mountain balance.

Issue nr 1, the one I guess you are trying to address here. Guess, because it's not really clear what your actually doing.

Mountains/hills with pavé don't give "realistic" results. Which is true, although often overstated here. But yes a 9 ***** is much deadlier for the 55-90 with 80 pavé than for the 72-73 guy with 68 pavé. You seem to have been doing something about that, now testing it, good.

Issue nr 2, which is just simply not the same one: Low energy on pavé AND on hills. See Borthwick who got 7 in the Amstel Gold race, because the escape group never siebed him when he was at 0 energy.
The same problem on pavé with low energy. The incredibly clueless SM was talking about that issue here. There guys with little or no energy were not dropped on ***** but later on ***. And for some reason a pretty much dead group will lose LESS on flat pavé than on just normal flat with asphalt and all that modern stuff. While they should be losing MORE. (On hills that part actually works, tempo with low energy guys will lose you lots of time... but on pavé it's buuuuuggggyyyy)
That issue nr 2, which I guess you're not addressing here.
Once again, just for you, issue 2 is:

- On pavé riders with low energy don't lose much time. (And actually green has the same or an even better result than going red (But not sure about the better part anymore)
- On pavé riders with low energy hang on longer in hard pavé sections than they should
- On mountains riders with low energy are not dropped, while they should.

Are you doing something about issue nr 2 as well? It's really the MUCH bigger issue than nr 1....and probably somehow related to "minimum tempo"

Issue 2 is hopefully fixed as well. Would be nice if someone can give me feedback if it is working as expected or not?