cycling4freaks.com

Right now, there are 3 tours at the same time. Yesterday at 11am, i was alone in the singel race... today at 10am only 2 teams... i hope, i will get a few more teams for 16 o clock ... at the moment, i am alone again.

unfortunatly, i can t ride tours, i can t garantee to be online every day at the same time.

next week again, there are 3 tours at the same time... Why is there 3 tours at the same time? i always see there are very less teams in single races, even if there are "only" 2 tours at the same time..

its really really boring, to ride alone, or even with 2,3,4 teams...

in my opinion, the calander should be organized, that there is not more than 1 tour at the same time.

Its really not fun.

i really hope, the plan is to change that...

ist fucking borng and no fun, always to be with 2-4 teams in a single race

We Need a golden rule...not more than 2 Tour online at the same time

Giorno per giorno tutto il calendario del ciclismo !

Day by day the whole calendar of cycling!

These 3 tours are real, your singol race is planned just to let people play if they don't have time to do a tour.

We should cancel a real race, take away the chance to play the game for how it was set up, just to have more people to run the fantasy races? Funny

I personally play because there is a chance to play the real competitions against other real players on the very day of the real race. Before there was no problem to do 4 races simultaneously (3 Tours + single). The problem is not the number of races. With more types of racing you can attract more types of players. The problem is that without news and with the usual problems never solved the game is getting too boring and the players leave.

Rexona wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:21 am

We Need a golden rule...not more than 2 Tour online at the same time

It's not the number of tours, it's the number of editions. The Golden Rule would be pretty useless, since I'm almost sure that if it would be only 2 tours, it would be 4 editions each, so 8. So just one less than it is now. Go for 3+3? Then I'd prefer 2+2+2, something like 10a-15b-18c-20a-22b-24c. Ok with me. Problem is lots of people would complain about a being at 10 while they have the team for c and ride in the morning, etc etc. But ok with me, then I just ride whatever is offered in the afternoon or the 1 day races.

I thas a lot to do with the type of races being added for 1 days.

Earlier in the month, there were 3 tours going on, 2 of which had 50%+ sprint finishes, yet still put 3 sprint races as single races, ended up with 5 at most racers each of the days.

Same thing right now. You have 3 tours that *arguably* rely on classics, and yet there are so far 2 classic races that have been put on. There should've been more classics earlier and more sprint race now.

The single races should be slightly opposite to what tours are going on.

Problematic is same since 2 or 3 years :
- More races -> less teams per races
- Less races -> more teams per races but also less teams which play per day

So what do we won't, more players each day or more players in races ?

Imo main problem is that C4F don't use easy stuff to remember that the game exist. Surely easy to make comeback some players with some mailing. We receive mail when we receive a PM, why not when some races are implant in calendar, the new month is coming or some improvement in the game too ?
I have the impression C4F is the only website in the world which doesn't use mailing

Pokemon Club wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:12 am

Problematic is same since 2 or 3 years :
- More races -> less teams per races
- Less races -> more teams per races but also less teams which play per day

So what do we won't, more players each day or more players in races ?

Imo main problem is that C4F don't use easy stuff to remember that the game exist. Surely easy to make comeback some players with some mailing. We receive mail when we receive a PM, why not when some races are implant in calendar, the new month is coming or some improvement in the game too ?
I have the impression C4F is the only website in the world which doesn't use mailing

+1 Poke
This could me at least a try to call player that stopped.

But many people use fake mail to subscribe in internet games. So I'm not su sure we could find many player like this.
I was wondering why don't you use social pages to sponsor the game? Facebook Twitter ect are free.Not as an activity that occupies advertising spaces. Those certainly have to pay them, but with the simple page. They could also be faster ways to communicate with the C4F community.

Then I repeat. Renew! There's been no change for years. People get fed up with red blue and green work. Attack or follow. Stupid trick on MS that only can make lose other and not add chance to win. Never a risk factor that could affect. Few options for player to show ability.

I put it in here:

We had this discussion before, but for me, it does not look well with the times of one day races. And I still don't consider 11h to be "morning". Anyway, incl. today, we had 4 one day races with no morning edition and one that started at 11h the earliest. We had Britain at 11h the earliest and Slovaquie with no morning edition. Agostini and Bernocchi, cat. 3 races, only have two editions, the latter with no morning edition again. I am sure this will even out until the end of September, and the "morning" is only used exemplary (I am still an afternoon guy), but I really fear that teams that want to ride can't, because their "time" is not served, and that to a degree that makes it frustrating.

I know that there is the problem of a decreasing number of players and not enough participation for many editions. But I fear that players will even less participate if they can't ride races they like because a fitting time is lacking. I don't have a solution for this problem and I understand the problem of the calender guys. So my goal here is not to accuse anybody of something rather than find a decent solution together (without some guys wanting to impose their will because they think they know it all, please).

Maybe it is possible to have a survey amongst player, ingame, let's say you can't login until you answered, where you have to answer which you preferred times are (more than one answer possible with priorisation, maybe). I think that could be a start. Anyway, I appreciate your effort. And if you think "what the hell is FL doing, leave us alone", just write it in here too .


"Fun" fact btw: There are only 120 teams with at least 1 race in September so far...

Agree. Wanted to write something similar recently. I usually play evenings but last week or so had time in the morning only... but there was no morning one day race. Unlucky, yes. But I think a rule like "morning, afternoon and evening should have at least one race per day" makes sense. What does it mean? Well, morning and afternoon then probably need to suffer on "secondary" tours and races. So whenever there are three races (e.g. Two tours and one single race), perhaps only the most important tour should get morning and afternoon.

Btw, all that was written above, advertise the game, create new features, etc. I 100% agree. More players = less problems with the calendar.

and the "morning" is only used exemplary

Well, that's your mistake!
With using the morning as "bait" I can make a nice post showing that the morning is not disadvantaged at all. But I'll refrain since what you want to say basically is: (and if you don't, that's what you should be wanting to say judging from your post) Always offer 5 one day races, regardless of what else is going on.
1 day races are the "safety net" for players in a way: If you don't have time for a stage race, or the stage race offered doesn't fit you, you should always have the possibilty to ride. =1 day race. . And even though I'm responsible for often only putting in 4 one day races lately, I actually agree.
The case since August is special or new,, somehow we decided to put in the classics in parallel only 4 times, hoping to improve the quality of the 4 editions each, San Sebastian (parallel Poland) Hamburg (Binck and Colorado parallel) Bretagne (Vuelta+Deutschland) Bruxelles (only Vuelta, should probably have been 5 then, but somehow for consistency 4 too seemed better) Fourmies, Québec and Montréal (Vuelta and Britain). The plan didn't really work, In August only 2 of the 12 classic editions had 10 or more participants. In September it's 4 of 16. With Montréal that had 2 editions with only 3 teams... 1 with 5 and the main evening 9. Not good.
So main classics only 4, somehow seems logic that then other races with 2 tours parallel (7 editions during the Vuelta) get 4 one day races too. Would somehow feel unfair to the important races if the unimportant ones get more editions. Wrong thinking? Very possible. Today and tomorrow btw simply a mistake, since Britain is over should have gone for 5 editions, simply used to the 4 per day since except on the first it's been Britain in parallel.
So, what to do?
Always offer 1 day races 5 times?
1 day race 5 times, except for classics with parallel stuff during the Vuelta, go down to 4 hoping to make them more competitive? Something in me of course is opposed to that, see above, but on the other hand you can say that winning a fantasy race vs 2 other teams doesn't bother me too much, at least I can ride, while riding a classic with only 2 opponents makes the result secondary, just not much fun, while for a cat 4-5 race it should be fun, tough, hard.
Go down to a 4 standard? But then we immediately get to the cutting problem, we have 5 more or less established "main times"... morning, afternoon, early evening, main evening and late evening.
Gipfel then says that the morning, afternoon and evening should always get their one day race. Why not the early evening? Closer to the evening and afternoon, you can change... not really, not everybody can. And guaranteeing the 3 other times mentioned would basically cut 15 races each from the early and late evening. Not good at all. Or something like 10 cuts for early evening, 20 for late. Don't think that's good either. Or we redefine the times a bit, early evening 17-19, evening 20-21-(22), make 19 evening... At times when there's a tour at 20 and 21 or 20-22 that maybe can work, don't offer the main evening its race but make it 19... can work at times, but not consistently because even if even the main evening hasn't had the consistently high numbers it used to have, it still is the "engine" of the game.
I think if we have only 4 times for one day races, then all times should have to get their cuts.
Let's look at November (30 days..), ignoring the tours (which of course influence the other times offered)
With guarantees for morning afternoon-evening it would be something like 30-30-20-30-10
Don't think that would be good.
But what would be? Of course nothing really, 30-30-30-30-30 best, but if we cut?
24-24-24-24-24 with all lose the same.
24-24-24-28-20 putting the late evening at a disadvantage. which in a way is sensible since it has only 2 times vs the 3 of the other "time zones"
But what should it be?
All 5 actually would be my first choice too, even if that's not what I've been putting in (as you might have noticed the times for minor races are not specified in the pre season PDF, so there it's all Donkey decisions, but this is something I wouldn't want to change since otherwise all flexibility is gone, regardless of changes in numbers, stupid proposals in the PDF etc)
Ok, let's talks Wallonie, which I'll put online today (I hope).
Vuelta 10-16-19-22-24
Slovaquie 14-21
Wallonie: 4 times? 5 times?
If it's 5 I would put in 9-15-18-21-23 easy
4 times?
Other times cut during Slovakia: Friday and Saturday the afternoon, Sunday the main evening. Thursday fantasy, not in yet.
So Wednesday, Wallonie? Afternoon out? Seems logic, but then misses 3 out of 5 days, which seems a lot, but ok.
9-17-20-23 (negative=17 often a weak time, go to 18 better but then the hole afternoon hole becomes even bigger, making it even unlikelier for afternoon stars to ride that race)
11-18-20-23 (negative 11, while I consider it morning, despite FLs protestation Friday and Sunday (but Sunday always special) already have 11, making it 3-2 vs 9 during Slovakia, not ideal.
Cut somewhere else?
Morning? No, only Vuelta parallel, are we crazy?
Early evening: Always tempting, but already 3 cuts during Britain... so 7 of 10 races in the first 10 days, like the morning.
Main evening: No cuts so far, 14-3 teams (second lowest 6, then 8). Possible. But more likely to lose the less important race on thursday, fantasy race.
Late evening: Tempting too, but with Slovakia at 21, Vuelta at 22 then the latest non parallel race would be 20, too early. Ok, occasionnally something parallel is ok, 9-15-18-22?
So if it's not the afternoon would be 20-21 that misses out. Would be something like 9-15-19-23 then. (which most likely will be the time for the thursday fantasy race)
Anyway, what to do for Wallonie? 5 editions? 4? But then which of the versions above? And don't forget not to look only at Wallonie but also Thursday fantasy race then Friday to Sunday (where the times are decided, online/PDF)

It seems to me that you have not understood the intention of my post... I was no accusing you to penalise the morning or any other particular time slot.

But as I read your text, I especially want to show this quote:

1 day races are the "safety net" for players in a way: If you don't have time for a stage race, or the stage race offered doesn't fit you, you should always have the possibilty to ride. =1 day race. . And even though I'm responsible for often only putting in 4 one day races lately, I actually agree.

There is another very immediate problem at the moment with this: Even when you have time for a stage race and the stage race fits you, it is very well possible that you can't ride it because your time slot is not served. And moreover, this is also true to one day races most recently. It even happens that you can't ride the stage race offered AND there is no time slot fitting for the current one day race. I think that is a something we should think about.

And yes, maybe my post leads to strict 5 times for one day races. The question is then: What helps the game get back more participation from players. And what else can we do to a) find out what we need to do and b) gain more participation eventually.

Actually it's more you that haven't understood my post clearly. Reread it.

Robyklebt wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:02 pm

Actually it's more you that haven't understood my post clearly. Reread it.

Grmpf. It's sooooo long!

But I see it now. Sorry for not doing it thoroughly myself. Anyway, the real question is: How can we get more players? . Becuase it looks like all the problems with the calender are based on that problem.

For the current situation, I think you calender guys do your stuff as you seem to think a lot about it and kind of have a plan. At least more than I do...

I ignored the stage race part because IMO that's "secondary". The thing that is the life line is one day races.... as long as you have that you can ride every day in theory. Which basically is sort of what you were saying with the 1 day race part.
Increasing the stage races at this point would just make the one day race participation even weaker I fear, and don't think that's a good idea. With one day races even if it doesn't fit you, you still can try for one day, escape, or do what I like to do, just do nothing and get money.
So in my opinion cover all the times with 1 day races should be first priority. More if more is possible.
But actually still don't know what to do with Wallonnie and Thursday now, or in general. Having a plan doesn't guarantee that the plan is any good, so an opinion still would have been nice (so that I can ignore it, ha!) After the Vuelta going back to 5 1 day races per day at least? (Changing the way it's been handled during the Vuelta in the last week doesn't really convince me either, but if there's an outcry demanding that Wallonnie be there 5 times....)