Ollfardh wrote:
Well now we're speculating of course, but if Dumoulin hadn't crashed out of le Tour, I'd say he wouldn't even get a top 10 there. The fact remains, the Vuelta is about freshness. Both in game as in real life, there's always someone who gets a good results becuase the rest is tired and he's not.
Let's assume all riders results are valid and no one was doping. Horner did not beat Nibali because he was the better climber, but because he hasn't raced much in 2013. One year earlier, Rodriguez completely collapsed toward the end and had to give victory to a fresh Contador. Cobo and Froome was just weird, but again, two riders with very low racedays.
I would say the same is happening now with Dumoulin, he's in good shape, preparing for the worlds, while all his competitors have already riden Giro or Tour. Aru, Landa, Quintana and Valverde had a really tough time there as well. I think 78 should be enough for Dumoulin. He can compete for the podium if you get his fitness right, but he can't come close to the top riders in single race mode.
All this assuming stats are based on career mode of course.
As you say when Horner won he hadn't raced a GT that year and Nibali had gone deep in the Giro, but Horner still had credentials as a climber of real ability so it really wasn't a shock that he won in the final week despite Nibali's constant attacks on the Angliru.
Dumoulin is quite different and it's speculation how he would've raced in the Tour and how he would do in the Vuelta if the other top riders were fresh. But despite whether the other riders are fresh or not 79 guarantees him a greater realism imo based on how he's ridden in the Vuelta so far than 78 does. If the game treats all the riders with the same freshness Aru, Landa, Quintana and Valverde are all going to to outclimb him anyway, unless their race form and daily form are poor.
Ollfardh wrote:
Well now we're speculating of course, but if Dumoulin hadn't crashed out of le Tour, I'd say he wouldn't even get a top 10 there. The fact remains, the Vuelta is about freshness. Both in game as in real life, there's always someone who gets a good results becuase the rest is tired and he's not.
Let's assume all riders results are valid and no one was doping. Horner did not beat Nibali because he was the better climber, but because he hasn't raced much in 2013. One year earlier, Rodriguez completely collapsed toward the end and had to give victory to a fresh Contador. Cobo and Froome was just weird, but again, two riders with very low racedays.
I would say the same is happening now with Dumoulin, he's in good shape, preparing for the worlds, while all his competitors have already riden Giro or Tour. Aru, Landa, Quintana and Valverde had a really tough time there as well. I think 78 should be enough for Dumoulin. He can compete for the podium if you get his fitness right, but he can't come close to the top riders in single race mode.
All this assuming stats are based on career mode of course.
As you say when Horner won he hadn't raced a GT that year and Nibali had gone deep in the Giro, but Horner still had credentials as a climber of real ability so it really wasn't a shock that he won in the final week despite Nibali's constant attacks on the Angliru.
Dumoulin is quite different and it's speculation how he would've raced in the Tour and how he would do in the Vuelta if the other top riders were fresh. But despite whether the other riders are fresh or not 79 guarantees him a greater realism imo based on how he's ridden in the Vuelta so far than 78 does. If the game treats all the riders with the same freshness Aru, Landa, Quintana and Valverde are all going to to outclimb him anyway, unless their race form and daily form are poor.
But this is also judging from 1 race... In Tour de Suisse he got dropped by Miguel Lopez from Astana and Jan Hirt from CCC on the biggest mountain stage.
Exactly he finished almost 3 mins down to Contador and now he finishes 1:53 to Dumoulin meaning that there's no consistency to his performance. He performed far better than expected and if Dumoulin has developed into a three week rider then there is no reason why Aru's TT can't have improved in a short time period as well.
May be, we'll see in another TT. I got Aru with 70 (like in v1.6). But I don't know what about Valverde. It's next TT, when he performed very well. 73 may be too low for him.
bob7 wrote:
May be, we'll see in another TT. I got Aru with 70 (like in v1.6). But I don't know what about Valverde. It's next TT, when he performed very well. 73 may be too low for him.
Yes Valverde is a pretty good TT rider these days and I guess 74 might be a bit better for him now. as he's about 1 point better than Quintana.
Majka's 73 but he had a bad day and Aru at 70 I now think is too low. The nearest rider to Aru was Cummings today and he has 73. Also Sicard he did well today has a really low TT at 67 needs to be higher finished in 7th spot and when I saw that thought it was a printing mistake at first, Purito though rode like a 66 TT rider so that's correct for him.
I know there are a lot of considerations for a TT like riders defending their position near the top of the GC, good and bad form, wind and course length and today was probably a medium length TT.
I don't know if this is the right topic and if this has to do anything with the stats, but on grand tours i get gaps btw 1st and 10th place like 40-50minutes, it's like every stage the favourites are in 10minutes. Is this actually normal? I cant remember if the old pcms were the same. Maybe a closer stats will do the trick?
Hasbro45 wrote:
I don't know if this is the right topic and if this has to do anything with the stats, but on grand tours i get gaps btw 1st and 10th place like 40-50minutes, it's like every stage the favourites are in 10minutes. Is this actually normal? I cant remember if the old pcms were the same.
Yeah, the gaps between second tier GC guys and the best, are for the most like that. So nothing unusual about that
I sincerely apologize if there already was a discussion regarding the sprinters' statistics, but 41 pages is just a little bit too long to go through.
In my opinion, the sprinters' statistics are off, not by a bunch, but still...
Some things I would adjust:
Kittel: 84 --> 83 (Despite the fact that he has performed better last year, I do not think he is better than the living legend
Cavendish, Cavendish' palmares is too expanded not to be considered the best sprinter of the world, along with Kittel.)
Greipel: 81 --> 82 (Greipel has won 4 stages this TdF, of course, the game was already out at that point, thus I can't blame Cyanide for that.)
Kristoff: 82 --> 80 (He's won two stages in the GT in his entire career, does that make him a better sprinter than Greipel?
I feel he's overrated a tad.)
Sagen: 79 --> 80 (He hasn't been receiving those four green jerseys only by going into the breakaways.)
Bouhanni: 81 --> 80 (Won the points classification in the Giro 2014, won three stages there and won two stages in the Vuelta that year, but he hasn't been able to beat any of the bigger sprinters in the TdF, therefore, I'd gently degrade him.)
Hope to see some argued opinions from other PCM'ers.
Unclemax wrote:
I sincerely apologize if there already was a discussion regarding the sprinters' statistics, but 41 pages is just a little bit too long to go through.
In my opinion, the sprinters' statistics are off, not by a bunch, but still...
Some things I would adjust:
Kittel: 84 --> 83 (Despite the fact that he has performed better last year, I do not think he is better than the living legend
Cavendish, Cavendish' palmares is too expanded not to be considered the best sprinter of the world, along with Kittel.)
Greipel: 81 --> 82 (Greipel has won 4 stages this TdF, of course, the game was already out at that point, thus I can't blame Cyanide for that.)
Kristoff: 82 --> 80 (He's won two stages in the GT in his entire career, does that make him a better sprinter than Greipel?
I feel he's overrated a tad.)
Sagen: 79 --> 80 (He hasn't been receiving those four green jerseys only by going into the breakaways.)
Bouhanni: 81 --> 80 (Won the points classification in the Giro 2014, won three stages there and won two stages in the Vuelta that year, but he hasn't been able to beat any of the bigger sprinters in the TdF, therefore, I'd gently degrade him.)
Hope to see some argued opinions from other PCM'ers.
GT stages are just the tip of the iceberg. You can't rate sprinters only on GT stage wins.
Unclemax wrote:
I sincerely apologize if there already was a discussion regarding the sprinters' statistics, but 41 pages is just a little bit too long to go through.
In my opinion, the sprinters' statistics are off, not by a bunch, but still...
Some things I would adjust:
Kittel: 84 --> 83 (Despite the fact that he has performed better last year, I do not think he is better than the living legend
Cavendish, Cavendish' palmares is too expanded not to be considered the best sprinter of the world, along with Kittel.)
Greipel: 81 --> 82 (Greipel has won 4 stages this TdF, of course, the game was already out at that point, thus I can't blame Cyanide for that.)
Kristoff: 82 --> 80 (He's won two stages in the GT in his entire career, does that make him a better sprinter than Greipel?
I feel he's overrated a tad.)
Sagen: 79 --> 80 (He hasn't been receiving those four green jerseys only by going into the breakaways.)
Bouhanni: 81 --> 80 (Won the points classification in the Giro 2014, won three stages there and won two stages in the Vuelta that year, but he hasn't been able to beat any of the bigger sprinters in the TdF, therefore, I'd gently degrade him.)
Hope to see some argued opinions from other PCM'ers.
Well these are what I have in my DB and to be fair I'm pretty happy with them. Obviously a sprinter can't have the same level of form throughout the year and peaks at different times. Degenkolb hasn't done so well in GT's this year but he's much more of a classics sprinter like Kristoff anyway, with a big endurance to do it after long hard races so keeping them at around 80-81 is pretty realistic. Sagan might be worth going back to 80 but he does already have an ACC that matches the very best so maybe not.
I also view ACC almost as important for a sprinter as his main stat which is why I've put it here after the main sprint stat, some of these ACC stats might need to be looked at.
Marcel Kittel 83 83
Mark Cavendish 82 83
Andre Greipel 82 80
Alexander Kristoff 81 79
Nacer Bouhanni 80 80
John Degenkolb 80 80
Peter Sagan 79 83
Elia Viviani 79 78
Giacomo Nizzolo 78 78
Sacha Modolo 78 79
Arnaud Demare 78 78
Bryan Coquard 78 80
Andrea Guardini 78 79
Unclemax wrote:
I sincerely apologize if there already was a discussion regarding the sprinters' statistics, but 41 pages is just a little bit too long to go through.
In my opinion, the sprinters' statistics are off, not by a bunch, but still...
Some things I would adjust:
Kittel: 84 --> 83 (Despite the fact that he has performed better last year, I do not think he is better than the living legend
Cavendish, Cavendish' palmares is too expanded not to be considered the best sprinter of the world, along with Kittel.)
Greipel: 81 --> 82 (Greipel has won 4 stages this TdF, of course, the game was already out at that point, thus I can't blame Cyanide for that.)
Kristoff: 82 --> 80 (He's won two stages in the GT in his entire career, does that make him a better sprinter than Greipel?
I feel he's overrated a tad.)
Sagen: 79 --> 80 (He hasn't been receiving those four green jerseys only by going into the breakaways.)
Bouhanni: 81 --> 80 (Won the points classification in the Giro 2014, won three stages there and won two stages in the Vuelta that year, but he hasn't been able to beat any of the bigger sprinters in the TdF, therefore, I'd gently degrade him.)
Hope to see some argued opinions from other PCM'ers.
GT stages are just the tip of the iceberg. You can't rate sprinters only on GT stage wins.
