|
Tour of the Czech Republic Discussion
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 16-11-2016 12:59
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
The race was described as a hilly event in the HC races presentation. The profiles may not show a pure puncheurs race, but that's how the race was intended to be and that's the most important thing - how the race was intended to pan out, not how the profiles may or may not look.
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 22:23
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 16-11-2016 13:11
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
Calling it a "hill event" means to me that the hills stat should be important of course, but not the only stat that matters. If it was a 250km race, you'd have to figure out Stamina should play a role. If there seem to be medium mountains on the profile of 1 or 2 stages, like we have here, MO stat should be there as well if you want a shot at the GC. Of course not at 100% ratio as mentioned before.
To give another example from the same presentation thread, Österreich Rundfahrt is described as "mountainous", that doesn't mean MO should be the only stat, as the profiles show there's also a hill finish and a pancake flat time trial.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 16-11-2016 13:18
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
To give another example from the same presentation thread, Österreich Rundfahrt is described as "mountainous", that doesn't mean MO should be the only stat, as the profiles show there's also a hill finish and a pancake flat time trial.
What? The profiles of those stages clearly show a hilly rating and a flat rating. Here, all the stages are rated as hilly. If the 2nd and the 4th stage here would have had a mountain rating on the profile, it would have been absolutely fine for the mountain stat to have a crucial impact, but not in this case.
Anyway, when you read that a race with 5 hilly RATED stages is a hilly event, you don't expect the mountain stat to have a big impact on the outcome of the race.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 16-11-2016 13:42
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
In the end we all agree that no hilly rated stage in the MG should have a 100% mountain rating, right?
Actually hilly rated stages should always be somewhere between 0 and 0.50 as above 0.50 it should earn a mountain symbol.
Usually the MG stages work well in those ranges and this allows a lot of stages for pure puncheurs or allrounder puncheurs.
Unfortunately here the rating was very much wrong and hence a replay is set to come later this evening.
To your interest the replay is not played with 100% hill as the profiles indeed show a bit harder climbs. But hills will be the primary stat nevertheless as it`s a hilly stage race with 5 hill rated stages.
For the future those kind of profiles might not be suited for pure hilly races and hence need to be considered to be changed. But this is for a later thread and the off season planning. |
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 16-11-2016 13:44
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
To give another example from the same presentation thread, Österreich Rundfahrt is described as "mountainous", that doesn't mean MO should be the only stat, as the profiles show there's also a hill finish and a pancake flat time trial.
What? The profiles of those stages clearly show a hilly rating and a flat rating. Here, all the stages are rated as hilly. If the 2nd and the 4th stage here would have had a mountain rating on the profile, it would have been absolutely fine for the mountain stat to have a crucial impact, but not in this case.
Anyway, when you read that a race with 5 hilly RATED stages is a hilly event, you don't expect the mountain stat to have a big impact on the outcome of the race.
Are you sure you're looking at the right race? Ok there's a few flat stages as well, but those shouldn't impact the GC unlike the hill finish and the flat TT in this "mountainous race".
And it says about this race "a 5-day hill event". This can be read in more than one way. You seem to have read it as 5 days pure hills, which is definitely reasonable, but you can just as well read it as a 5 day event with a focus on hills. Different things of course.
Which brings me back to the original point, that the profiles can currently be considered the only reliable source of information. Therefore the profiles should always matter, not what was intended to happen in the thread of last year.
But yeah, as I said before, regardless of what is decided here, a bigger discussion is needed. I think we can agree on that at least 
And partialy Zabel'd by Roturn 
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 16-11-2016 13:47
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
Which brings me back to the original point, that the profiles can currently be considered the only reliable source of information. Therefore the profiles should always matter, not what was intended to happen in the thread of last year.
You mean the profiles that have a hilly icon?
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 16-11-2016 13:57
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Which brings me back to the original point, that the profiles can currently be considered the only reliable source of information. Therefore the profiles should always matter, not what was intended to happen in the thread of last year.
You mean the profiles that have a hilly icon?
How many times do I have to say that I agree it should not be a mountain stage? Just that MO stat should have an influence?
To be honest, I rarely look at the icons. It's the profiles that matter. Cobble-rated stages can end in mass sprints and hill/mountain stages depend on the final, not on how the total is rated.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:00
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
alexkr00 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Which brings me back to the original point, that the profiles can currently be considered the only reliable source of information. Therefore the profiles should always matter, not what was intended to happen in the thread of last year.
You mean the profiles that have a hilly icon?
How many times do I have to say that I agree it should not be a mountain stage? Just that MO stat should have an influence?
To be honest, I rarely look at the icons. It's the profiles that matter. Cobble-rated stages can end in mass sprints and hill/mountain stages depend on the final, not on how the total is rated.
And where did I the mountain stat shouldn't matter?
I said that the mountain stat should not be the main factor of stages like this, which in this case it was.
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:03
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
alexkr00 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Which brings me back to the original point, that the profiles can currently be considered the only reliable source of information. Therefore the profiles should always matter, not what was intended to happen in the thread of last year.
You mean the profiles that have a hilly icon?
How many times do I have to say that I agree it should not be a mountain stage? Just that MO stat should have an influence?
To be honest, I rarely look at the icons. It's the profiles that matter. Cobble-rated stages can end in mass sprints and hill/mountain stages depend on the final, not on how the total is rated.
And where did I the mountain stat shouldn't matter?
Top op this page, "pure puncheurs race".
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:12
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
Ollfardh wrote:
alexkr00 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
alexkr00 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Which brings me back to the original point, that the profiles can currently be considered the only reliable source of information. Therefore the profiles should always matter, not what was intended to happen in the thread of last year.
You mean the profiles that have a hilly icon?
How many times do I have to say that I agree it should not be a mountain stage? Just that MO stat should have an influence?
To be honest, I rarely look at the icons. It's the profiles that matter. Cobble-rated stages can end in mass sprints and hill/mountain stages depend on the final, not on how the total is rated.
And where did I the mountain stat shouldn't matter?
Top op this page, "pure puncheurs race".
That was in reply to your previous post and I was trying to emphasize that the race should be for puncheurs in the first place. If they have a good mountain stat, of course it should come in handy. So it's the hill stat that matters most, while the mountain one is a secondary one like RES, STA or ACC.
A rider like TJ Slagter should at best at the same level as as someone like McCarthy, not totally destroy him.
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:19
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
Back to race discussion I guess. Let`s try to finish this race as positive as possible and then discuss ideas how to avoid this in future later in the "Ideas for 2017 and things to change thread".
Stage 1 online. |
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:21
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
You mean No Subject online
Wrong forums section too 
|
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:21
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
My team still played stage 1 on passive, no harm done
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| fjhoekie |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:27
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4476
Joined: 25-07-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Well, Same as on the original stage 1, good to see both Cunego AND Prevar up there, this time even snatching a few bonus seconds.
Manager of Team Popo4Ever p/b Morshynska in the PCM.Daily Man-Game |
| |
|
|
| tastasol |
Posted on 16-11-2016 14:49
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2889
Joined: 11-09-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think I actually saw Meyer this time. Weird how he never seems to be near the top in finishes like this, considering his strong sprint.
|
| |
|
|
| Selwink |
Posted on 16-11-2016 15:29
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8856
Joined: 17-05-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
And here's me thinking the first run of stage 1 couldn't be worse...
|
| |
|
|
| Roman |
Posted on 16-11-2016 15:55
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4386
Joined: 29-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
RIP Ondrej Cink's KoM jersey ambitions. 
|
| |
|
|
| trekbmc |
Posted on 16-11-2016 15:56
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7366
Joined: 11-07-2014
PCM$: 700.00
|
Well I just hope this replay sees Cunego, Slagter and LLS do decently, because it disappointing to see a great stage for me taken away, even if I can understand why. Shame for Croatia top though.
As for the stage itself, some good work with most the team around the top 30 but not anywhere near the results we had last time, so not sure how to feel about it. Congrats Eden and thanks for the replay roturn.
"What done is, is one." - Benji Naesen
|
| |
|
|
| Shonak |
Posted on 16-11-2016 17:25
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15615
Joined: 16-07-2013
PCM$: 350.00
|
When you are happy that Pulido is in the break but then realize that this is MG and not ICL.. 
Well too bad about the lost stage win of Vanendert. Maybe lighting strikes twice and he can grab another one. Thanks for taking over the race so fast, roturn.
"It’s a little bit scary when Contador attacks." - Tommy V
|
| |
|
|
| Kentaurus |
Posted on 16-11-2016 19:05
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3999
Joined: 26-07-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
RIP my 4th-5th finish and points from guys not named Summerhill...
AZTECA - NBCSN  |
| |
|
