Reform the calendar to have more competitive races

[Pokemon Club]

We debate a lot about that each months since years, it is tim this subjec has his own topic.

Nowadays we are around 120 active players per days. However, we continue to organze the calendar as 4 years ago when we were 150-160 players per day, with a lot of races, probably too much.
The result of that is that a lot of fields aren't competitive anymore, the next overlap Ruta del Sol / Algarve / Oman will again prove that. I think we can't continue this way, the game just lose more and more interest.
So to avoid this definitvely this kind of situation in the future, I want to submit some proposals :

Overlap rules :
- We should stop overlap tours. If there is 2 (or more) tours at the same time, we should ride the one with the highest ranking. If somes have an equal ranking, leso choose himself or open a short vote to decide which one we ride. I think there is some exceptions to that. Tirreno/Paris-Nice, Dauphiné/Suisse, and tours in the same tours on GTs should stay how there are now.
And to finish, the tours we don't rive aren't move at another date, but cancel.
- The same goes for One Day Race too. The highest ranking have the priority, if some at the same level leso decide. If it is possible, we move the races which can't be ride at their originally date a bit before/later. An exception concerning the races overlaping Monuments. I think there should be open to div (4-7), and not div (6-7) as it is now.

Number of field rules :
1 one day race in the calendar = 5 fields
1 one day race + 1 tour in the calendar = 4 fields per races
1 one day race + 2 tours in the calendar = 4 fields for the on day race, 3 fields for both tours
2 one day races = 5 fields for the Monuments, 3 fields for the other races
There is no importaant tours in the same times of Monuments.

I have nothing more in mind for the moment, but it can surely be complete, I wait your views and your reactions now guys.

[lennylenny]

great proposal poke
but many are too egoistic to accept that the tour they want to ride is cancelled

and for all the egoistic guys who can't accept that:
it is only a game, you can also do other thing if you can't ride the race you want to ride

[Team Kazi Blocks]

the problem isn't the number of tours but the number of players.
Newbies in this game quit the game early because the div 1-2 teams almost never lose.
They have to ride for top 10. They dont like that, they want to win sometimes.
Too many tours (like you called) are loved by the newbies. They could win a stage and continue playing the game.
I had the same problem: not enough experience and good riders => I play the game when Iam really bored.

[Cerro Torre RT]

Well, I suspect you think that way, poke:

Fewer races --> more 2 field races --> more low competition races for newbies (in easy theory) + more comeptitve races for stronger teams in field 1

Reality is, in my eyes, more like:

Fewer races --> less fitting starting times --> more experienced teams limited by real live leave out race days --> fewer points for them --> more field 2 for them --> even worse matchups for unecperienced teams

The error in thinking here is, in my eyes, that you proclaim that any competitive team that doesn't find it's prefered time on the schedule, will just ride another one and make the field stronger. That may be true for some, but not nearly for all of them. Quite some of them, due to focus on special kind of races, can simply not compete in every race and thus would, even if experienced, or a lot more rare, if beeing good, still not contribute to the quality of the race. Another number of teams would only be able to ride those races they want half offline, which doesn't help either. And another number of teams just would make field 1 out of riding 30 races a month, without ever truly fighting for victory (though they might believe they do). They do not help competitiveness either. For those reasons, I am unable to buy into the simple "fewer races = better quality" equation. I think there are just too many restrictions, real life, personal preferance and team building wise, to make that happen. I fear that the result may well be that fewer races means forcing more teams into unwanted races and unwanted times means forcing more teams to quit.

[NicoVanarlo]

Fact is we need to do something. Sunday, we was 3 teams in a 21h race, 3! And there were only two tours in the same time. I'm already afraid when we'll got 3 at the end of the month....

[Pokemon Club]

Well, I suspect you think that way, poke:

Fewer races --> more 2 field races --> more low competition races for newbies (in easy theory) + more comeptitve races for stronger teams in field 1

Reality is, in my eyes, more like:

Fewer races --> less fitting starting times --> more experienced teams limited by real live leave out race days --> fewer points for them --> more field 2 for them --> even worse matchups for unecperienced teams

The error in thinking here is, in my eyes, that you proclaim that any competitive team that doesn't find it's prefered time on the schedule, will just ride another one and make the field stronger. That may be true for some, but not nearly for all of them. Quite some of them, due to focus on special kind of races, can simply not compete in every race and thus would, even if experienced, or a lot more rare, if beeing good, still not contribute to the quality of the race. Another number of teams would only be able to ride those races they want half offline, which doesn't help either. And another number of teams just would make field 1 out of riding 30 races a month, without ever truly fighting for victory (though they might believe they do). They do not help competitiveness either. For those reasons, I am unable to buy into the simple "fewer races = better quality" equation. I think there are just too many restrictions, real life, personal preferance and team building wise, to make that happen. I fear that the result may well be that fewer races means forcing more teams into unwanted races and unwanted times means forcing more teams to quit.

I think you understand it wrongly. Currently, I don't care to make it better for newbies or old managers. The fact is that when there is 15 fields per day, I know that there is a big risk that I will play only against 3 or 5 guys, so I prefer just don't play at all and lose 2 hours of my days for that. I see no interest.
Honestly I think it is better to have 8 fields with 15 teams than 15 fields with 8 teams. There is enough races in one year to make all type of riders happy. Climbers won't cry because there is 1 week where there is no mountain finish for example. In all case it is managers who should make their best with the calendar which is propose, not the contrary. So it is sure that it can looks rude to out some race, but sometimes it is needed. For example this year the 17 April we have Amstel +Tro Bro Leon + Giro del Appennino + Vuelta Castilla y Leon. I don't dislike the 4 races, but I see no reason why the Amstel's participation should suffer because of the 3 others races.
And about the times of the races it is sure that it won't always fit with our wish but it all can't be perfect. I think all can be happy that the game propose race between 8h and 24h, so sometimes it is ok and sometimes no but at least the time isn't fix.

[luques]

Lot of good points by Poke.

In my opinion overlapping tours it's not a problem, I mean, how many times it happens every year? We all know that February is full of tours and every year in February we are still here talking about that. The truth is that it is highly predictable what months will be busy with tours.

The real problem is: Organization.

Before the end of the month we should have a pdf file (like the one that leso post in the calendar section and like the one Poke,FL designed for Winter Races) where it is written clearly not only Tours of the following months and their times but also single races and their times (also fantasy races and their times). Once the month is over no modifications are allowed, so no surprises.

If someone comes up designing a tour that it is not planned, don't mind, we don't have to make everything in this world...

The creation of a complete schedule can allow the creation of a Calendar Committee that should just apply what was already decided and help Leso to define, draw and put online the calendar. With a complete schedule I am sure we will already avoid too many overlapping and some "last-minute" modifications.

If there is discussion in the community to make this or that tour, the Calendar Committee will decide.

Another important point is reward at tours, I don't think that the bug that gives a % of money based on players active at tours has been solved, solving this would be already a step ahead.

[lesossies]

Calendar Comitee a good idea.

[Alkworld]

Another important point is reward at tours, I don't think that the bug that gives a % of money based on players active at tours has been solved, solving this would be already a step ahead.

That one has been solved.

[Robyklebt]

Calendar Comitee a good idea.

Don't really think so. Generally the one man committee lesossies is doing a good enough job. (there was something with a Vuelta once, and a general hate for the afternoon for a while, but has gotten better )

The 9 tours scandal.... We probably have slightly more teams than we had a year ago, at least it feels that way (time to ban some ProTourTeam multies maybe?), last year there was 2 too weak groups for those 3 tours(checked 2 hours ago, maybe I'm wrong, tend to forget tedious stuff), the rest was ok. RSF will survive the same without any problems.

[Pokemon Club]

Calendar Comitee a good idea.

Don't really think so. Generally the one man committee lesossies is doing a good enough job. (there was something with a Vuelta once, and a general hate for the afternoon for a while, but has gotten better )

The 9 tours scandal.... We probably have slightly more teams than we had a year ago, at least it feels that way (time to ban some ProTourTeam multies maybe?), last year there was 2 too weak groups for those 3 tours(checked 2 hours ago, maybe I'm wrong, tend to forget tedious stuff), the rest was ok. RSF will survive the same without any problems.

We don't have more people than last year.

For the comitee, if leso thinks it can be helpful for him and the game, let's do that.

[luques]

Calendar Comitee a good idea.

Don't really think so. Generally the one man committee lesossies is doing a good enough job. (there was something with a Vuelta once, and a general hate for the afternoon for a while, but has gotten better )

The 9 tours scandal.... We probably have slightly more teams than we had a year ago, at least it feels that way (time to ban some ProTourTeam multies maybe?), last year there was 2 too weak groups for those 3 tours(checked 2 hours ago, maybe I'm wrong, tend to forget tedious stuff), the rest was ok. RSF will survive the same without any problems.

We don't have more people than last year.

For the comitee, if leso thinks it can be helpful for him and the game, let's do that.

That's exactly what I mean, it should helpful for him, make him save time and just focus on important things of the game.

[Robyklebt]

More helpful if he doesn't have to design all that many races himself I think.
So just design more! (Ok, you both design more than me..., sorry, less time and very little motivation for me, I try occasionally but...) Still, I think the DESIGNING takes more time from leso than the thinking about the calendar, more designers way more useful than a committee. Especially since the guy doesn't really design that well....

[luques]

More helpful if he doesn't have to design all that many races himself I think.
So just design more! (Ok, you both design more than me..., sorry, less time and very little motivation for me, I try occasionally but...) Still, I think the DESIGNING takes more time from leso than the thinking about the calendar, more designers way more useful than a committee. Especially since the guy doesn't really design that well....

Need better designers then need more designers.

[Coroncina2]

Quote luques!
Could be nice know first calendar to set form and equilibrate races( montain classic sprinter tt).
If you need help I can try to design some races.
I don't think new teams quite because of calendar, but maybe :
- need too time to play races (1h 30, 2h...). Could we reduce sec/km from 30 to 15, and less min tactic ?
Example Omloop Het Blad min-tactic al -70 and rest 30sec\km so 2h15!! How about 30km mintactic and rest 15sec\km so 1h12?
- In addition if you can't play regularly you can bild a team to fight vs stronger teams ( without consider bug in training that help always same teams). How about a bonus to new teams maybe a special market when by real nice cyclist? For this we should control better multy not only with ip but controlling how a team play and how take advantage of noobs moves.
- last fix problem with training system and allow to all player have nice training.

[Pokemon Club]

More helpful if he doesn't have to design all that many races himself I think.
So just design more! (Ok, you both design more than me..., sorry, less time and very little motivation for me, I try occasionally but...) Still, I think the DESIGNING takes more time from leso than the thinking about the calendar, more designers way more useful than a committee. Especially since the guy doesn't really design that well....

Need better designers then need more designers.

I think we need also someone who can put races in calendar even when leso isn't here, and without making bug the game of course. Before OL could do that, I guess Buh and some old players could too, but now...

Quote luques!
Could be nice know first calendar to set form and equilibrate races( montain classic sprinter tt).

Equilibrate races ? It already balances a lot. Anyway, you know the principal races enough early with leso's pdf. Even if some races aren't design, you can easily check the profil of races the lasts years, or go in the website of the organizer to have an idea of the profil.

If you need help I can try to design some races.

Don't ask, just design =)

I don't think new teams quite because of calendar, but maybe :
- need too time to play races (1h 30, 2h...). Could we reduce sec/km from 30 to 15, and less min tactic ?
Example Omloop Het Blad min-tactic al -70 and rest 30sec\km so 2h15!! How about 30km mintactic and rest 15sec\km so 1h12?
- In addition if you can't play regularly you can bild a team to fight vs stronger teams ( without consider bug in training that help always same teams). How about a bonus to new teams maybe a special market when by real nice cyclist? For this we should control better multy not only with ip but controlling how a team play and how take advantage of noobs moves.
- last fix problem with training system and allow to all player have nice training.

1) 15 sec tact is too less, 30 sec is n't a lot too. When there is a sieb 30sec is generally too short to check and choose an action for all your riders. The main problem is that we can choose km per km if we want a 30 sec/tact or a mintact.
2) If people can't race often it is their problem, people have a life after all .
3) Markets and trainings have nothing to do here, anyway you already know my opinion about that ^^

[Coroncina2]

Quote luques!
Could be nice know first calendar to set form and equilibrate races( montain classic sprinter tt).

Equilibrate races ? It already balances a lot. Anyway, you know the principal races enough early with leso's pdf. Even if some races aren't design, you can easily check the profil of races the lasts years, or go in the website of the organizer to have an idea of the profil.

I didnt said now it isnt equilibrate but bould bè bèttèr for all know first calendar.

If you need help I can try to design some races.

Don't ask, just design =)

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4740

You all helpèd mè a lot to learn it.

I don't think new teams quite because of calendar, but maybe :
- need too time to play races (1h 30, 2h...). Could we reduce sec/km from 30 to 15, and less min tactic ?
Example Omloop Het Blad min-tactic al -70 and rest 30sec\km so 2h15!! How about 30km mintactic and rest 15sec\km so 1h12?
- In addition if you can't play regularly you can bild a team to fight vs stronger teams ( without consider bug in training that help always same teams). How about a bonus to new teams maybe a special market when by real nice cyclist? For this we should control better multy not only with ip but controlling how a team play and how take advantage of noobs moves.
- last fix problem with training system and allow to all player have nice training.

1) 15 sec tact is too less, 30 sec is n't a lot too. When there is a sieb 30sec is generally too short to check and choose an action for all your riders. The main problem is that we can choose km per km if we want a 30 sec/tact or a mintact.
2) If people can't race often it is their problem, people have a life after all .
3) Markets and trainings have nothing to do here, anyway you already know my opinion about that ^^

1) so 30 sèc in sièbablè kms important kms and 15 in othèrs?
2) this thè point and why nèw playèr (èvèn old) couldnt continuè and gamè losè palyèrs. (If you likè play alonè is not your problèm.)
3) ok wrong placè to discut this.

[auxilium torino]

i think your rules to "make" RSF better in real destroy the game!

Market learn us...more offer, more client!, we need more race and tours, and different, to let all players decide if want play and what want play!
in moment you can play ( you have the team to win or to give a decent position) or you cannot play ( you have the wrong team).

Really bad marketing, sorry!

[Pokemon Club]

i think your rules to "make" RSF better in real destroy the game!

Market learn us...more offer, more client!, we need more race and tours, and different, to let all players decide if want play and what want play!
in moment you can play ( you have the team to win or to give a decent position) or you cannot play ( you have the wrong team).

Really bad marketing, sorry!

More race and tour like that you can ride alone and be happy to make 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9 ?

Anyway there is no good or wrong teams, just good or wrong manager who are not able to adapt their ways of riding with their riders and the races which are propose.

[auxilium torino]

wrong!, before we had more race and MUCH more teams!

But this is too hard to understand for you!

i prefere ride settimana Bartalicoppi, because is an italian race, not intrest for catalun ya, i prefere ride Chile or mexico tour, because i am fans of this region, and the typologie of their race...but is too hard to understand for you! sleep better!

[Coroncina2]

Maybe more possibility to chose when play could improve number or player in all the world.
In addition you / we could use social to make more advertisements of the game.

[Pokemon Club]

wrong!, before we had more race and MUCH more teams!

But this is too hard to understand for you!

i prefere ride settimana Bartalicoppi, because is an italian race, not intrest for catalun ya, i prefere ride Chile or mexico tour, because i am fans of this region, and the typologie of their race...but is too hard to understand for you! sleep better!

Maybe a bit hard to understand that, but it just means that I have a brain to understand things, not sure you can say the same

Anyway you are the only here who aren't able to think about someone else than yourself. If it was me Ruta del Sol Oman Algarve Haut Var can fit together calendar, there is no need to cancel North American stuff as Utah or Alberta, I don't cancel Tour du Portugal, Tour de l'Ain, Poitou-Charentes, Limousin, Loir et Cher, etc...
BUT the only truth is that we aren't enough to have so much things in the calendar currently. So we need to make some choice, and clearly the prestige of the race is the main things which count. A bit as in football. A Serie B game between Pescara and Sassuolo can be better to watch than a Milano AC - Internazionale in Champion's League. But 95% of people will watch the Champions League game instead of the Serie B game else if they played better.

[Liquigas-CND]

Sassuolo is a Seria A team