Climber better in flat

[Buhmann]

Aloha.

In my opinion the most riders lost too much time in flat. With climbers it is very very hard to attack earlier, lets say the next to last mountain. There are always a few Km flat between the mountains, so that the climbers won´t have any chance to keep the margin up to the last mountain. There are too many 70-80er in the peloton (And they are much much cheaper than climbers).
Before we had the 30Sec/Km tact, the flat passage between the mountains were cutted to solve a shorter race distance.. Now there aren´t any races without flat-passages between the mountains. I would prefer to decrease the time differents between 80 flat and 60 flat. We can keep the different between 75 and 80, but the weak flat riders lost too much in my opinion.
Okay, there are some other problems, too. A 80 flat rider with green tempo is like a 60 flat rider, so that the time difference will change there too. We would have to think about it, if this is a problem.

Fazit: Atacks with climbers 1 or 2 mountains earlier shouid be more effectiv and climber team should be worth it more. Now 70-80er helper are much effectivier. Absolute climber teams aren´t worth it.

[Robyklebt]

The problem is that the climbers might become too dominant again. RSF used to be a climbers game in the beginning. Now it's not anymore.
Disagree with the reasons a bit, the flat was cut, yes, but the mountains were cut too in those days. If possible at the same percentage if they were at the same position in the race. It's more the 70+80 riders that exist much more than before that killed the chances of climbers in many races.

But by giving the climbers a better flat skill the risk could be there that they become dominant again... Can't make it too strong, we don't want the climbers as favorites in MSR either... (I know Chiappucci won it...) But agree that right now it's ridiculous how much time a climber loses in the flat compared to what he can win on a 75-80 on a climb. 10 km up at 8%, followed by 10 Km down and 10 Km flat? If the 75-80 has a helper... no need to even try..

Good luck finding the right balance.

[Buhmann]

I don´t think that climber are too strong if we decrease the time diffence in flat...

To keep raelistic results in classic races: The first km of a mountain (or if it is only a 1 km hill), the time difference is not so much for the flat rider. Would be logic...but don´t necessary. Climber won´t too strong if we chance this a little bit. Now they are too weak. Climber helper are not really usefull at the moment. 70-80er are to dominant, for mountain races too.

[Luna]

If climbers AND sprinters AND tie triallers could have a flat skill of 75 or 80, it would solve many other problems in RSF. For example they could paticipate in tempo work, what would make races with 6 or even 8 riders less a problem. Furthermore a climber could attack in the Ardennes classics earlier without having to be accompanied by a team mate. Not to speak of the attacks, Buhmann mentioned above. Also an early breakaway would be possible for them to catch some sprint points (like Hushovd in the last tour) or to go for the stage win (like Mayo at La Toussuire or Garate at Mt Ventoux).

Also in the crosswinds they would be able to participate in the echolons, instead of just hanging behind their helpers.

Flat skills are necessary for them. I've been thinking that for a long time. Maybe that would be better than adjusting the speed ratio between 60 and 80 flat.

[topsport]

one day too late but still funny.

topsport

[Radunion]

Perhaps we need an other differentiation between mountain riders and riders for classical races. The second are strong on short climbs, but loose contact on long climbs. Riders for classical races should still be vital helpers for mountain stages, but it is possible to get rid of them if you have a strong mountain team.

implementation? ... 2 abilities mountain and hills - hills is always larger, on the first 2 km of a climb only the hill ability counts, afterwards gradually the mountain ability becomes important.

[Lizard]

Perhaps we need an other differentiation between mountain riders and riders for classical races. The second are strong on short climbs, but loose contact on long climbs. Riders for classical races should still be vital helpers for mountain stages, but it is possible to get rid of them if you have a strong mountain team.

implementation? ... 2 abilities mountain and hills - hills is always larger, on the first 2 km of a climb only the hill ability counts, afterwards gradually the mountain ability becomes important.

Well, that´s what they do at the Pro Cycling Manager... but even though additional skills are discussable, we can have another solution for this problem: The idea of this "hills"-skill should be implied right in the physique. "Fighting" leads to standing in the peloton longer for the price of plenty of his energy, if the rider in front is stronger than he is (here we can also fit the "Riding in front / back" idea usefully). Else he will be dropped after few Kms with 5% already. If staying in the front he may be able to easily stay there for 3kms, but in the back of the peloton he´ll be dropped quickly...

[Buhmann]

Ok...but in which way does it help the flat-weak climbers?

And i don´t want a skill for hills...i like the way it is.

[Lizard]

In fact kinda off topic.

[Radunion]

Ok...but in which way does it help the flat-weak climbers?

And i don´t want a skill for hills...i like the way it is.

The basic idea was to improve the flat skills of mountain riders, without making them to dominant. In reality there is a huge difference between riders for classical races and for mountains (o.k. there are some riders who can win both).

If you don't want a new skill, you can make a similar calculation with the old skills. Give the mountain riders (and sprinters) a flat skill of about 70 (or change the physics to get the same effect with old abilities). On the first km of a climb the sprint skill improves the climbing ability (as sprinters are good at short climbs - see Flandern). On longer climbs the flat skill above 70 decreases gradually the climbing ability. (Perhaps decrease the sprinting ability of mountain riders to make them worse for classical races)

[ariostea]

i like the buhmann-idea.
because for me the huge difference between mountain riders/sprinters and the flat riders/classics on the flat is one of the most unrealistic things in RSF. BUT Roby is right - on the other hand we need it for not having just a "mountain skill - game", where the monutain riders make one "Sieb" and then tmepo to the end...

in fact the "problem" was made/increased long ago with making the starting skills for youth-classic riders at 56-74, which showed to be very high. would anybody have known we would get riders like 80 mountain 80 flat - we would have set it much lower for sure. (before the youth rider-reform the classics were at 65-82 as top-level)

in my opinion the things we could do without changing the balance too much (let´s say the little steps that won´t hurt much):

1. turn the maximum starting skill for youth riders from 56-74 to 56-73. i never understood why the classics/ flat riders in the high skill are one point better than the mountain riders.

or sth. like: 56-72, 55-72, 54-73, 53-73, 52-74...for starting skills - would be a little bit more detailed already in the starting skills and would build a better bridge between flat riders and mountain riders. (where we could do the sth similar: 73 - 55, 72 - 56, 71 - 58...)
these changes could be done one point every 2 or 3 months (changing RSF is thinking in long terms, believe me...) - so we won´t have any problems with the change (old riders much better than new ones...)

combining this with:

2. making the really bad flat skills ( especially under 60) better in tempo (only in tempo - not in following).

i.e.:
45 flat makes tempo like now 57,5 flat

50 like 60

55 like 62,5

60 like 65

65 like 67,5

70 like 70

70+ unchanged

may be not the revolution Buhmann has in mind - but a step in this direction

or:

45 like 60

50 like 62,5

55 like 65

60 like 67,5

65 like 70

70 like 72,5

75 like 75

2nd variante will already change the balance a little more...

[Robyklebt]

Good ideas, including the start skill revision.. never thought of it actually. Like the revision, at least for the classic riders. Not sure yet about mountain...

Other idea: 70-80 more expensive. Old Buhmann idea that I always opposed.... but since I start to see that he might have been right probably now he opposes it... It would simply change the balance back a bit thanks to the numbers. Now 10 climbers 30 70-80... then 10 climbers 20 70-80es... something like that.

[Buhmann]

i.e.:
45 flat makes tempo like now 57,5 flat

50 like 60

55 like 62,5

60 like 65

65 like 67,5

70 like 70

70+ unchanged

may be not the revolution Buhmann has in mind - but a step in this direction

or:

45 like 60

50 like 62,5

55 like 65

60 like 67,5

65 like 70

70 like 72,5

75 like 75

Yeah, something like that i would prefer.

[Bear]

A good idea of changing that. But I think climbers with 60 - 65 flat lose much of their advantage against climbers with 50 - 55 flat. 55 flat would be enough for most of the climbers or am I wrong in my suggestion?

[Cerro Torre RT]

Decreasing the distance between Mountain riders with very low and low flat skills seems to be an inescable part of such a reform. And it may be like that, that for races only beeing decisive in the end, 55 flat skill will really be enough. But that's what it is right now, too, in many of those. But thinking of that mountain riders with better flat skills will get more usable for other races and earlier action, i think that will be more of a compensation. To mee, flat skill will get more atractive to mountain riders with changes proposed by Ari.