attacking / following

[Radunion]

At the moment you can just follow one opponent, therefore it is often chance which riders are in an attacking group.

I suggest that it should be possible to order a rider to follow every attack. This setting should lead to an increasing energy consumption (for the rider or his helper), and is less effective then following one particular rider.

Additionally it should be possible to prevent attacks. A rider ordered to prevent attacks will behave like somebody who follows everybody (energy loss), but he will increase the tempo if someone else attacks. This increase should be more than red tempo, but the energy loss is the same as for following. All riders that keep in the group also loose energy (regulated by "kämpfen"/fighting).

I hope that this will lead to groups formed by the strongest riders in difficult races, as well as more interesting formations of escape groups. And it is more realistic as the favourites have to watch more than one rider.

[Buhmann]

But now it is tactically. It makes fun to think about which rider you should follow.

Will be escape groups to big if we had such a function? And at the mountain...fewer surprises who win or?

[Luna]

Another thought about attacking and following:

In my opinion, those riders who are directly on the wheel of the attacker should lose more energy then the ones that follow the followers.
Because it should be a factor, who reacts first. And it could more often lead to a situation where the remainder of a group just watches each other,
since nobody wants to be the one who closes the gap and loses more energy than the others. So one has to be clever (or lucky, like always) in his choice, whose wheel to mark. Then it's not always the same rider who is marked by everybody.

I think something like: Attacker 100%, first followers 80%, rest 50%.

[Bear]

I like Luna's idea. Although some managers dont like the word reality, I would say, this idea is a simple way to make RSF a bit more realistic. The followers have to go less meters to get the in the wheel of the attacker and so they need less energy.

[captain ahab]

i competely agree with buhmann on this topic...

if we would have a "follow every attack"-function it would take away a lot of the fun,it would make attacking groups too big and too predictable and too simlpe to get in the group because most teams would use this function if they want to be in the group...it would take away al lot of the spirit of the game...people will no longer have to think(which rider will i follow? which team will make an attack,with wich rider?) ort act(make their own attack),they simply will use this "follow every attack" function...sounds boring to me and will kind of punish active and creative managers and make it easier for boring and lazy managers...and i don't even want to think about it,how offline teams will use this function and ruin the game/the races completely

[Buhmann]

Lunas suggestion is good. I don´t know if the explicit values too, but something like this would be nice.

[Lizard]

I also support Luna´s suggestion, but I think 100/80/50 like his example would be a bit too hard.

[Luna]

Yes, it's only an example. Don't know what would be best. Maybe for the first followers just exactly between the attackers loss and the common loss of the followers as it is now.

[Aixteam]

And ... when more than 1 rider is in the wheel of the attacker , will everybody loose 80% ?
We won't be realistic if we do that ... maybe the strongest (or the worst) should loose the 80% and the rest 50% ?

Don't know if I'm clear

[Luna]

As a punishment i think they all should get the same first-follower-malus. Yes, that's not ultra realistic, but even more realistic than it is now.

[Cerro Torre RT]

Lunas proposal seems good to me, too. And i got the opinion, too, that.


I'd like to introduce some other ideas about attacking/following, a bigger adjustment like proposed by now.

At first, i think the costs for an attack are just to high. I see that as one of the mayor problems why most riders are limited to just one try, even in pretty open races (what i think is not the same in real races). In all types of terrain, to lose something like 70 power just for something like an acceleration of maybe 50 to 100m and just doing tempo afterwards, what is made by riders in tempo, too. My proposal is to reduce that gap to something like 20 to 30, which seems more adequate to me. Probably, that means the outcome of the attacks slightly, but if, only slightly. I think, by now, the difference of power to do and the outcome is too high.

Furhtermore, i would like to tear down the selectivity of attacks in all terrains. But not only taking them down, but linking it to a power loss. Let's say for riders that could follow an attack by now in the mountains, they lose just the percentage buy like they do now. Weaker riders can fight (if fighting is set "Yes"), and lose more power, with few difference to the necessary values few, but increasing fast and non-linear. In the flat, i think riders without aditional losses to go after should be a bit stronger as those that can follow now, but with fighting, that shall be not so expensive like upwards, more could follow like it is by now. But weak guys lose expensivly power, too. Including the Luna-idea may be fine, too, but only for the normal losses, and not for the aditional losses caused by fighting

What brings me to fighting. Where i see many things i hope to get change.
Most important is, fighting should not be turned of if it is not enough to follow. A rider can't know that before fighting, so he loses that power. But he comes out before many riders that are dropped without fighting. And that should be the same with following attacks, he tries first, but does not make it to the group, but is (if tempo is low enough) before the field, depending on his strenght.
Another thing i would like to be changed is that fighting is not just yes or no, but a number you put in, what you permit him to loose for fighting at each km he fights at maximum. Whatever, of it is not enough, he will fight till his maximum and than get dropped, losing fewer time, but much power. Actually, i am thinking of a maximum of 100 for that.

The goal would be, on the one hand, not just to have "can do" and "can't do", but many possibilitys in between, and that it is possible to make more than one sencefull attack if tempo doesn't drop near zero. Espacially at the mountains, i hope that it would be necessary to do more than one attack, and so it'll be hopefully nearer to reality, that a helper is doing tempo, one attack is made, afterwards another, but gap gets closed without those to have been reached beeing totally out of a race (one may be able to afford leaving tempo, and settle back to a group). Counting together, i don't think there will be a markable change in the results (what kind of rider wins), but hopefully a step foward to a more realistic progression of the races.

[Luna]

That's so much at once. I fear Buhmann is discouraged by so many stuff.

Let's put it in a kind of order:

1. First followers pay more energy than the rest of the followers of an attack

No real counter-arguments occured. Even Buhmann finds it a good solution. The question is if more than one riders can be "first followers" at the same time. Buhmann shall decide


2. Making attacks cheaper

In my opinion that would contradict point 1 a little bit. Why not be the first to close the gap to an attacker when it's so cheap?


3. Reducing selectivity of attacks?

I didn't get it. Please explain again.


4. Following an attack (espacially at uphill) even if the rider is unable to follow (because mountain skill too low or not enough energy)

By using the "fight"-function, the manager can decide if a rider shall follow an attack as far as it's possible for him (so that he comes out a few second behind the attacker), or if he shall stay in the group and get the log-message "rider xy is unable to follow".

Pro! An old idea. I think, there were also some counter-arguments but I don't remember them now


5. Replacing "Fight yes/no" with a number to be filled in

Cerro wants to decide how much energy the rider is allowed to spend for keeping up with a group (instead of a fixed value given by the system).

I say, why not?


6. Random factor in following attacks

Buhmann says no, but Radunion and I think, that it would be good, because it is much too caclulable as it is by now. Also not every follower is at the right place in the right moment to follow the selected rider, especially in the big peloton. Everybody must drink from time top time, or make a natural break or this and that. Than a rider is unattentive and can't follow the attack. Buhmann, rethink this topic



Did I forget or misunderstand something?

[Cerro Torre RT]

Point 2 and 3, Making attacks cheaper and reducing the selectivity goes hand in hand for me.

It is, for the most important, proposed by viewing on mountain stages. The thing is: how to make it that one attack and beeing catched does not mean automaticly you are out of it. And that's only possible if the attack is cheaper. But as that would be a single advantage for strong riders, there has to be a counterpart, and that is the reduced selectivity. But only to reduce it like the actual rules would be again a single benefit for the weaker ones. So the thought is: weaker riders lose more energy (up to the full fighting loss) than equal strong riders. But that should not mean a stronger rider loses less, let that relation be like now. so the riders able to follow now in the mountains lose power in the relation like now, weaker ones can follow, too, but have to fight, more or less.

What should be achieved: On mountain finishs (or just followed by a relativly short downhill), it is not any more a one-move-race like it is now. More attacks will be possible to be made, due to lower costs, but not only that, more will be needed to be made to achieve equal selectivity. And this will leave more tactical possibilitys in my eyes.

And i indeed think that can be the same in other terrains. Let some more follow an attack in the flat, but they lose more power, and very much more if they are much weaker. Here the startpoint of loosing more than normal could probably be not at that point that actually is the bordor of "can follow", but a bit higher (10 flatpoints less or something like that). But with very much more power loss even riders with 20 flatpoints less could follow. Will it have a sence for them ? Will surely depend on the situation.

And downhill the same like flat, more or less. Here you could say everybody can follow, but in many cases with more power loss.

[captain ahab]

6. Random factor in following attacks

Buhmann says no, but Radunion and I think, that it would be good, because it is much too caclulable as it is by now. Also not every follower is at the right place in the right moment to follow the selected rider, especially in the big peloton. Everybody must drink from time top time, or make a natural break or this and that. Than a rider is unattentive and can't follow the attack

don't like that idea at all...that makes it too much of a lottery...and when i tell my rider he should follow an attack of another rider,than i expect him to be on the backwheel of that rider in any given situation...no drinking or making breaks there,he can drink when the one whom he follows is drinking and he can go to the loo when the other rider goes to the loo-if he doesn't obey my order i'll kick him out of the team

once we have positions in the peloton we can rethink that whole idea...

[Cerro Torre RT]

Thinking about that, i would suggest certain energy costs for "hanging around" at someones wheel, because this doesn't make itsself all alone. Some like a 0.2 per km.

[captain ahab]

that is an interesting idea...

one has to think-will i hang on one wheel all race long,or will i hang on that wheel just on that few parts of the race,where i think an attack will make sense...

edith is telling me right now that we love that idea too!

[Luna]

Very good idea. Very very! i love it.

[Quick]

I like it too. But i think 0.2/km would be a bit to less...

[Luna]

Yes. 0.2 has only an effect when staying on a wheel for the whole race or so. 0.4 or 0.5 would be better, i think.

[Krom]

Yes a very good idea! Think 0.5/km would be best. It hurts when you hang on the wheel all the time but it's still possible to follow an attack at the end of the race.

[Radunion]

I am not sure. In big groups it is difficult to keep in touch with the other rider, so the energy loss is a good idea. For small groups I don't like the solution.

So make the energy loss dependent on the size of the group. (For small groups, as I argued before, make following more difficult if the tempo is low.)

[Cerro Torre RT]

I agree that the energy loss for hanging should be dependent from the group size.

But I disagree with the following should be harder. As one fokuses on one rider, and allways thinks to himself ok if he goes i go after as soon as i see it, and i look him carefully (nothing else is meant by the "hanging"), it is the same as from the field, plus in a small group it is easier to keep one in sight.

[Radunion]

The reasons why I want to make following more difficult in small groups at low tempo are the following
1) I attack with one rider, 8 riders follow the rider - nobody wants to make tempo. Now it should be possible for me to attack again reduce the size of the group to form a working group.
2)reality: Paris - Roubaix: Cancellara attacked on plain road, low tempo, half the group wanted to follow him but he was able to go alone, what would happen at RSF?

[Cerro Torre RT]

Raduniun 1) It is possible, but just not for everyone. A group of 5 to 8 riders is normally not set up like this that noone can come away alone or with just one or 2. But there are riders that can't and this also happens in normal races, watch LBL. Vino an Kolobniev could, because others looked at other guys. Gilbert couldn't (till they were away and it was allready over), neither Valverde, Schleck or Evans. So what, all right with that. That a group stays together in a couple of attacks happens in reality, and it happens in RSF. The opposite happens in both, 2. To change it to a group nearly allways splits is totally the wrong way in my eyes. If the situation is like that, it is, and it fits pretty good in my eyes.

Radunion 2) Right fact, it can't happen in RSF. But the reason i guess you to blame for that is not what i see. It's not the selectivity. The thing is yes, half of the group wanted to follow, and all of them could. But they all wanted to safe power and looked at each other to make the first push, which was more than enough for a Cancellara (who was at least 95 flat in that race in comparison of 85 the others in maximum, another thing we will probably never have in RSF, and we don't want it to have it) to get out of any possibility to catch him. And so it comes down again to the Luna proposal Nr.1. That is what we need to solve this. and it would help your nr.1 in a certain way, too.

[Buhmann]

Hmm. I think i would prefer getting back lost energy from attacks instead of making attacks cheaper.

The problem i see if attacks don´t cost so much energy: In the final are fewer tactical choices possible. The soulution would be good for the favorites. Now it is possible that the best climber attacks but the other are able to catch him, because they have more energy. If an attack is cheaper, the best climber attacks and propably he will win.