|
PCMdaily DB Stat Discussion - PCM15
|
| Paul23 |
Posted on 31-05-2016 15:24
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4411
Joined: 10-08-2011
PCM$: 400.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
I know we talked about Baptiste Plackaert not too long ago, but I wasn't satisfied with his stats at the time and since he just keeps improving, so I want to bring him back to the table. He has shown to be a great sprinter the last few years and this year he showed he can do a bit of classic work as well. He's 18th in this year's CQ ranking with a few wins and results that should give him higher stats:
https://www.cqrank...;current=0
He's 40th in the CQ Ranking tho.
|
| |
|
|
| jph27 |
Posted on 31-05-2016 15:26
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7339
Joined: 20-03-2010
PCM$: 900.00
|
Paul23 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
I know we talked about Baptiste Plackaert not too long ago, but I wasn't satisfied with his stats at the time and since he just keeps improving, so I want to bring him back to the table. He has shown to be a great sprinter the last few years and this year he showed he can do a bit of classic work as well. He's 18th in this year's CQ ranking with a few wins and results that should give him higher stats:
https://www.cqrank...;current=0
He's 40th in the CQ Ranking tho.
Yeah, in the overall ranking. Ollfardh was referring to the ranking for this season only, in which he is 18th. |
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 31-05-2016 15:27
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
Paul23 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
I know we talked about Baptiste Plackaert not too long ago, but I wasn't satisfied with his stats at the time and since he just keeps improving, so I want to bring him back to the table. He has shown to be a great sprinter the last few years and this year he showed he can do a bit of classic work as well. He's 18th in this year's CQ ranking with a few wins and results that should give him higher stats:
https://www.cqrank...;current=0
He's 40th in the CQ Ranking tho.
I got him at 18, are you sure you're looking at this year's ranking?
EDIT: gimme them Zabels!
Edited by Ollfardh on 31-05-2016 15:28
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| Spilak23 |
Posted on 31-05-2016 15:27
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 22-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
He's 18th this season. 40th in the last year.
|
| |
|
|
| AndreasEng |
Posted on 31-05-2016 17:22
|
Free Agent
Posts: 108
Joined: 25-09-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Majka shouldnt get downgraded because of the Giro i dont think, he was clearly not on his peak. |
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 17:57
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
AndreasEng wrote:
Majka shouldnt get downgraded because of the Giro i dont think, he was clearly not on his peak.
Majka is still going to be at 80 mtn as his 2015 Vuelta is still relevant. It was just really a case of him not hitting peak form when he should have.
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 31-05-2016 17:58
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
AndreasEng wrote:
Majka shouldnt get downgraded because of the Giro i dont think, he was clearly not on his peak.
Why not? If you're team leader in a Grand Tour, how can you turn up with mediocre form?
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 18:12
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
AndreasEng wrote:
Majka shouldnt get downgraded because of the Giro i dont think, he was clearly not on his peak.
Why not? If you're team leader in a Grand Tour, how can you turn up with mediocre form?
Lol but you're right it's amazing how often this happens, but then again Nibali wasn't looking too good either until Steve K crashed.
In fact only Steve K and Chaves of the favourites seemed in great form with the latter in Chaves only having some REC problems in the end.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 16:13
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| AiZaK |
Posted on 31-05-2016 18:48
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1190
Joined: 13-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
In my opinion Majka would be 79 in mountain
Edited by AiZaK on 31-05-2016 18:58
|
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 18:57
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Throughout the latter part of last year most people wanted him at 80 which he got. It doesn't make sense to downgrade a top rider so quickly, we'll see how he does over the rest of the season.
Also more importantly there are some stat matrix changes coming when PCM16 gets released and I know some of these will effect the climbing stats, so that will have to come into consideration as well and I'm certain a rider like Majka will get some changes then also.
|
| |
|
|
| Forever the Best |
Posted on 31-05-2016 19:14
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3803
Joined: 27-06-2014
PCM$: 400.00
|
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish. |
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:02
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish.
Not everybody on 81 or 80 is going to perform as they should due to pre-race condition and daily form. Kruijswijk is on 80 same as Majka and most of their other stats are similar, now in-game if Kruijswijk were to start the giro with great pre-race form and good daily form indicators and Majka poor pre-race form and poor daily form indicators then it's very possible that Kruijswijk could beat him after 21 stages by about 3 to 4 mins, which is what happened in real life anyway.
Now if Kruijswijk for example were to ride the Vuelta this year and not do that well, it's still not adequate to decrease him if he was good enough for 80 at the Giro earlier in the year as not enough time has gone by. Majka is now in the position where if he continues to underperform in the mtns then he would get a decrease at the next big mtn test but even then that depends on other factors like fatigue if he rides the Tour etc.
Stat form especially for bigger riders, is done over roughly a 6 month period or between GT's otherwise we would be shifting these riders up and down after every race which would be unrealistic as real life form wouldn't be taken into consideration.
All the Giro stats have been done now and finalized but if you want to get your suggestions in before they go to the press room as it were then that would be great, as very last minute changes are still possible.
Edited by Tafiolmo on 31-05-2016 20:08
|
| |
|
|
| Forever the Best |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:06
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3803
Joined: 27-06-2014
PCM$: 400.00
|
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish.
Not everybody on 81 or 80 is going to perform as they should due to pre-race condition and daily form. Kruijswijk is on 80 same as Majka and most of their other stats are similar, now in-game if Kruijswijk were to start the giro with great pre-race form and good daily form indicators and Majka poor pre-race form and poor daily form indicators then it's very possible that Kruijswijk could beat him after 21 stages by about 3 to 4 mins, which is what happened in real life anyway.
Now if Kruijswijk for example were to ride the Vuelta this year and not do that well, it's still not adequate to decrease him if he was good enough for 80 at the Giro earlier in the year as not enough time has gone by. Majka is now in the position where if he continues to underperform in the mtns then he would get a decrease at the next big mtn test but even then that depends on other factors like fatigue if he rides the Tour etc.
Stat form especially for bigger riders, is done over roughly a 6 month period or between GT's otherwise we would be shifting these riders up and down after every race which would be unrealistic as real life form wouldn't be taken into consideration. But maybe Majka was just very good at Vuelta against riders in poor form? |
| |
|
|
| Ton1Mart1n |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:09
|
Domestique
Posts: 400
Joined: 14-06-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Could somebody please post some screendumps of:
1. The ranking of mo riders
2. The ranking of Hill riders
3. Overall stat ranking
I dont Care which dB its from i just want to see some of your ratings.
Thanks
“When it’s hurting you, that’s when you can make a difference”
|
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:14
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish.
Not everybody on 81 or 80 is going to perform as they should due to pre-race condition and daily form. Kruijswijk is on 80 same as Majka and most of their other stats are similar, now in-game if Kruijswijk were to start the giro with great pre-race form and good daily form indicators and Majka poor pre-race form and poor daily form indicators then it's very possible that Kruijswijk could beat him after 21 stages by about 3 to 4 mins, which is what happened in real life anyway.
Now if Kruijswijk for example were to ride the Vuelta this year and not do that well, it's still not adequate to decrease him if he was good enough for 80 at the Giro earlier in the year as not enough time has gone by. Majka is now in the position where if he continues to underperform in the mtns then he would get a decrease at the next big mtn test but even then that depends on other factors like fatigue if he rides the Tour etc.
Stat form especially for bigger riders, is done over roughly a 6 month period or between GT's otherwise we would be shifting these riders up and down after every race which would be unrealistic as real life form wouldn't be taken into consideration. But maybe Majka was just very good at Vuelta against riders in poor form?
That's a point that we are aware of when doing stats and we know season fatigue plays a big part in shaping the Vuelta more than it does the other GT's. But around that time Majka was a rider that was on the verge of being 80 and I think it was a valid suggestion and he became an 80.
As we try to be as democratic as possible I'll certainly bring Majka up to the rest of the DB team whether he should be a 79/80 mtn and any others can post what they think here as well, which is probably the best way to decide him.
|
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:14
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish.
Not everybody on 81 or 80 is going to perform as they should due to pre-race condition and daily form. Kruijswijk is on 80 same as Majka and most of their other stats are similar, now in-game if Kruijswijk were to start the giro with great pre-race form and good daily form indicators and Majka poor pre-race form and poor daily form indicators then it's very possible that Kruijswijk could beat him after 21 stages by about 3 to 4 mins, which is what happened in real life anyway.
Now if Kruijswijk for example were to ride the Vuelta this year and not do that well, it's still not adequate to decrease him if he was good enough for 80 at the Giro earlier in the year as not enough time has gone by. Majka is now in the position where if he continues to underperform in the mtns then he would get a decrease at the next big mtn test but even then that depends on other factors like fatigue if he rides the Tour etc.
Stat form especially for bigger riders, is done over roughly a 6 month period or between GT's otherwise we would be shifting these riders up and down after every race which would be unrealistic as real life form wouldn't be taken into consideration. But maybe Majka was just very good at Vuelta against riders in poor form?
That's a point that we are aware of when doing stats and we know season fatigue plays a big part in shaping the Vuelta more than it does the other GT's. But around that time Majka was a rider that was on the verge of being 80 and I think it was a valid suggestion and he became an 80.
As we try to be as democratic as possible I'll certainly bring Majka up to the rest of the DB team whether he should be a 79/80 mtn and any others can post what they think here as well, which is probably the best way to decide him.
|
| |
|
|
| Forever the Best |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:17
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3803
Joined: 27-06-2014
PCM$: 400.00
|
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish.
Not everybody on 81 or 80 is going to perform as they should due to pre-race condition and daily form. Kruijswijk is on 80 same as Majka and most of their other stats are similar, now in-game if Kruijswijk were to start the giro with great pre-race form and good daily form indicators and Majka poor pre-race form and poor daily form indicators then it's very possible that Kruijswijk could beat him after 21 stages by about 3 to 4 mins, which is what happened in real life anyway.
Now if Kruijswijk for example were to ride the Vuelta this year and not do that well, it's still not adequate to decrease him if he was good enough for 80 at the Giro earlier in the year as not enough time has gone by. Majka is now in the position where if he continues to underperform in the mtns then he would get a decrease at the next big mtn test but even then that depends on other factors like fatigue if he rides the Tour etc.
Stat form especially for bigger riders, is done over roughly a 6 month period or between GT's otherwise we would be shifting these riders up and down after every race which would be unrealistic as real life form wouldn't be taken into consideration. But maybe Majka was just very good at Vuelta against riders in poor form?
That's a point that we are aware of when doing stats and we know season fatigue plays a big part in shaping the Vuelta more than it does the other GT's. But around that time Majka was a rider that was on the verge of being 80 and I think it was a valid suggestion and he became an 80.
As we try to be as democratic as possible I'll certainly bring Majka up to the rest of the DB team whether he should be a 79/80 mtn and any others can post what they think here as well, which is probably the best way to decide him. Also if you are gonna downgrade Nibali you should downgrade Majka as well because the pre-race condition doesn't apply to Nibali according to you(general stat makers).
If Nibs is still 82 then it can be fine but with Nibali a 81 there is no way Majka should be 80.Also Kruiswijk should be 2 stats higher than Majka I think. |
| |
|
|
| I_Mayo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:21
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1481
Joined: 25-05-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish.
Not everybody on 81 or 80 is going to perform as they should due to pre-race condition and daily form. Kruijswijk is on 80 same as Majka and most of their other stats are similar, now in-game if Kruijswijk were to start the giro with great pre-race form and good daily form indicators and Majka poor pre-race form and poor daily form indicators then it's very possible that Kruijswijk could beat him after 21 stages by about 3 to 4 mins, which is what happened in real life anyway.
Now if Kruijswijk for example were to ride the Vuelta this year and not do that well, it's still not adequate to decrease him if he was good enough for 80 at the Giro earlier in the year as not enough time has gone by. Majka is now in the position where if he continues to underperform in the mtns then he would get a decrease at the next big mtn test but even then that depends on other factors like fatigue if he rides the Tour etc.
Stat form especially for bigger riders, is done over roughly a 6 month period or between GT's otherwise we would be shifting these riders up and down after every race which would be unrealistic as real life form wouldn't be taken into consideration.
All the Giro stats have been done now and finalized but if you want to get your suggestions in before they go to the press room as it were then that would be great, as very last minute changes are still possible.
 |
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:22
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
The Schleck Fan wrote:
Lol if Nibali and Kruiswijk are 81 there is no way Majka is 80.
I will make a long suggestion about the riders stats(who went to the Giro) tomorrow when my exams finish.
Not everybody on 81 or 80 is going to perform as they should due to pre-race condition and daily form. Kruijswijk is on 80 same as Majka and most of their other stats are similar, now in-game if Kruijswijk were to start the giro with great pre-race form and good daily form indicators and Majka poor pre-race form and poor daily form indicators then it's very possible that Kruijswijk could beat him after 21 stages by about 3 to 4 mins, which is what happened in real life anyway.
Now if Kruijswijk for example were to ride the Vuelta this year and not do that well, it's still not adequate to decrease him if he was good enough for 80 at the Giro earlier in the year as not enough time has gone by. Majka is now in the position where if he continues to underperform in the mtns then he would get a decrease at the next big mtn test but even then that depends on other factors like fatigue if he rides the Tour etc.
Stat form especially for bigger riders, is done over roughly a 6 month period or between GT's otherwise we would be shifting these riders up and down after every race which would be unrealistic as real life form wouldn't be taken into consideration. But maybe Majka was just very good at Vuelta against riders in poor form?
That's a point that we are aware of when doing stats and we know season fatigue plays a big part in shaping the Vuelta more than it does the other GT's. But around that time Majka was a rider that was on the verge of being 80 and I think it was a valid suggestion and he became an 80.
As we try to be as democratic as possible I'll certainly bring Majka up to the rest of the DB team whether he should be a 79/80 mtn and any others can post what they think here as well, which is probably the best way to decide him. Also if you are gonna downgrade Nibali you should downgrade Majka as well because the pre-race condition doesn't apply to Nibali according to you(general stat makers).
Now Nibali's different as he has an upgrade in RES and a REC almost the same as Quintana now to compensate. also before the final mtn stages Nibali wasn't always climbing 2 points better than Majka anyway something worth bearing in mind.
But as said a vote will come in for it anyway based on opinions here and with the team.
|
| |
|
|
| DiCyc |
Posted on 31-05-2016 20:29
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1636
Joined: 09-03-2015
PCM$: 200.00
|
Is Gijs Verdick removed from the DB? |
| |
|
