Looks good!

I wonder if it doesn't make riders around 74/75 too cheap. How about:

AVG	Old	New
70.0	100	100
70.5	100	100
71.0	100	100
71.5	100	100
72.0	110	100	110
72.5	140	110	120
73.0	160	120	140
73.5	190	140	160
74.0	220	160	190
74.5	250	190	220
75.0	280	220	250
75.5	310	260	290
76.0	350	300	320

I like it, definitely an improvement. As df_Trek said, it would be better for the increments to increase at each level, so ascending by 40, then 50, then 40 should be avoided if possible.

Ripley's idea is good too, but may result in teams needing an increased budget since there isn't as much money saved. IIRC there was a big difference in points scored from 74-75 AVG riders to those 76+, so I think Bikex's figures should be good to balance the wages a bit better.

Will look at the formula, but as said the increments are from rounding the values. If we look at the actual averages which have increments of ,1 the increasement will look more natural.


Anyways I kind of forgot what still needs to be done until we can start with renewals, so it probably won't be before this weekend, as the budget has to be calculated.

One part of the budget depends on the division a team is in and as we have lots of disbandments this season I'm not sure which teams should be part of WT.

Looking at last years ranking we have already 14 teams fix for WT and are looking for 4 more:

1	1	Grupo Argos - Quala	WT	11034
3	2	Italo	WT	8297
4	3	Allianz - BMW Cycling Team	WT	8216
5	5	Team Alitalia	WT	6945
6	6	Liberty Seguros	WT	6761
7	7	Aviva Cycling Team	WT	6483
9	8	Suntory Lucozade Sport	WT	6192
10	11	Équipe Cycliste Peugeot	WT	5627
11	10	Sevilla Cycling Team	WT	5612
12	12	Filliers - Mora Pro Cycling Team	WT	4937
13	13	TVM Cycling Team	WT	4895
14	14	Lufthansa	WT	4835
-
14	17	Ceramica Panaria - Autogrill - Cipollini	CT	5784
16	16	Santos - Euskadi	CT	5326

For the remaining 4 teams we can look at the relegating teams and the next positions of the CT teams in the PR rankings:

16	16	Credit Suisse	WT	3577
17	17	CCC Sprandi Polkowice	WT	3545
18	18	VisitUkraine p/b Nemiroff	WT	2849
-
20	19	KBC Godiva	CT	4818
23	23	Vegeta Cycling Team	CT	4068
24	24	Pedal Africa for Qhubeka	CT	4025
26	26	Bosch Cycling Team	CT	3952
27	27	Equinor Pro Cycling	CT	3526
30	28	Team Cymru Wales	CT	3369
31	29	Brugse Zot - Trek	CT	3352
32	33	Shell Pro Cycling	CT	3335

Also other factors like activity could be taken into account.
What do you think who should get the remaining 4 WT spots?

Acitivity-wise and w/ the ranking in mind, imho Credit Suisse, CCC, KBC and Vegeta. Brugse too far down unfortunately, all others not active enough imho.

best 4 teams in prestige ranking between relegated and CT teams can be a good method imo if you look just at meritocracy by results (same way PCM works in careers for PCT and CT promoting system).
anyway activity should play a relevant role imo, but not to extreme like promoting middle ranking teams...
By the way, Brugse Zot managers, seeing their name somehow linked to this talks, want to clarify that there won't be accepted any WT license from disbanding teams, partnerships aren't ready for a step so big, and needs more sponsors research that are not possible in such short time, the team needs to improve on roads to claim better exposure.

Seems like a good time to show some activity

It's difficult for me to say who should be in WT as I'm obviously biased. In a way it would be strange not to relegate as the rules were made clear beforehand (well not clear enough for me but you get the point ). So having basically no teams relegate would be strange because it wouldn't be consistent with the league system that we have, in which the teams that didn't do a good enough job get some sort of "punishment" and have to try to bounce back next year.

On the other hand there are obviously 4 more teams missing and they have to be filled up somehow. You could maybe also argue that the teams in CT that didn't manage to promote directly also didn't do a 'good enough job' so yeah it's a difficult one. Maybe it's also a matter of keeping things dynamic and so allowing more teams from CT some time in WT. So yeah I don't know.

About the wages:
I know it would probably be a lot of work, but a differentiation between rider types might be a good idea, especially TTists. For example Dillier on my team has a pretty high average and so is well above minimum wage. But with 76-77 TT there really is not a lot of scoring potential for him (especially in WT, I think he didn't even score 50 points) so maybe that could be looked into? Maybe I also used him in a completely wrong way.

Without looking into it too deeply, I would say 2 WT & 2 CT. Credit Suisse definitely deserve to stay and I think CCC have done enough also. KBC are well ahead of all the others, so I would have no issues with them being promoted.

IMO, we should see at least one team relegated, which means that VisitUkraine miss out and Vegeta take the last spot (unless there's a higher ranked team signing up in the next 24 hours).

Vali's series of unfortunate misunderstandings should end in relegation because it's fitting and funny. Nonetheless, I agree with the others, in this situation I think the best option is to let Credit Suisse and CCC stay while KBC and Vegeta promote.

This. Or possibly even narrowing down PT by 2 teams with fewer teams overall next season.

I'm not a big fan of pushing the more liked teams up, I'd just offer it to the top CT teams if they accept.

looked at the prestige ranking, and figured out that best solution imo is the one already frequently proposed.
Credit Swisse, KBC, CCC and Vegeta, promoted with this order of priority.
reducing WT teams isn't a bad idea too...with 30 team a 16/14 ratio looks better than 18/12, but I don't want to see GT with less than 22 teams....

I don't see Vegeta having a competitive WT team at all

I think only promoting 2 or 3 teams would also be fair given the smaller CT pool as trek and croatia mentioned.

With my team I'll agree on any outcome. I just like ICL, so I want to still be part of it. It sure would be fine to stay in WT, but it isn't really my decision if that will happen or not.

Yeah I basically feel the same way as dominox, I'll happily continue either way. I actually thought it was already guaranteed that we would go down so I was already focusing on CT. So there definitely won't be any complaints or something like from my side regardless of where we'll be (but don't let that influence your decision ).

Quite a few old names reappear, great to see. Surprised that Vittel has not signed up, and also whitejersey and aquarius are active users with a prior team. Too bad

I'm glad to be back and to see everyone again, and I'm gonna try to make more of an effort to be active and engaged

Glad to have you back!

I agree with Ollfardh, while having active managers is nice it shouldn't decide who gets promoted/relegated. If Vegeta want to stay CT I think that is fair too, they shouldn't be made to compete in the WT if they don't want to.

If the only reason for needing the WT to have 18 teams is to ensure that we get full squads for Grand Tours, I'd say that isn't a good enough reason to keep it that way. We can enter some non-managed teams (such as ICBC) or national squads to complete the 22 if not enough CT teams sign up. I think we will need to have some non-managed teams to fill up the lower CT races anyway, and that has worked well in the past.

Yeah, I agree with that, depending on the amount of sign-ups having 18 WT teams shouldn't be totally necessary. I think that national teams would be the most interesting way to fill those spaces, with riders from teams that aren't entered