marcoplv95 wrote:
"We" consider results over last years, giving more importance to latest.

That means that you won't see dumb stats like in the WorldDB, Kittel is still good but not as years ago

AiZaK wrote:
@Benji, Poels and Kittel are very good riders, they showed many years, if you give now Poels only 75 in Climbs or Kittel only 77 in Sprints, they never would repeat his great stages in Le Tour de France for example, and they can repeat, because they are a super riders.

I agree for example, Kittel was 82, I would give 81. Poels was 79 in Climb and Hills, so now I would give 78/78

BenjiNaesen wrote:


My point exactly. How can you call Kittel having 82 instead of 83 last year a 'dumb' stat...

You're now introducing us to having them on 75 and 77, that's not the point of the discussion, no sober person would do that. He's making the argument that WorldDB has stats like that, which it doesn't. I'm just defending the WorldDB from fake statements like the one Marco is inventing in his previous statement. This is like the third time I have to go into an argument because someone is spreading lies about our attributes on PCMDaily.

Is there no way two databases can work next to each other without having to lied about or called dumb because the creators have a different view on making a database?

The community of this game isn't that large, so there's no point in trying to divide it in smaller groups even further.

Yellow Jersey wrote:
I know why you're saying that but by that logic I would give Wellens 80COB straight away, he attacked on the Muur and flew up the Bosberg..

I know it cant be replicated in the game, but the Bergs are totally different efforts than the pure Cobbles of Paris-Roubaix, Flandres climbs are efforts of 1-3 minutes which the puncheurs love, only the really light ones dont (see Alaphillipe), remember Valverde also was really strong in DDV if im not mistaken..

So I think 73 is well balanced, but I wouldnt of course go higher until he did a Paris-Roubaix, or any flat cobbled classic

Ollfardh wrote:


Then his puncheur stats you give him are overrated because he suffered so much that last stage. He's obviously a talent, but let's not overrate him because he won his first big race. He benefitted a lot from a breakaway and showed guts, but he won't repeat this win anytime soon. The two key stages this weekend he suffered too much to give him the stats you suggest.

clamel wrote:
Do this feel correct.
Navardauskas and Roberto Ferrari have outclassed Hodeg in 4 different sprints in a fairly flat terrain ap. 170-190km races. It was bunch sprints and even Ackerman and PSagan came in behind these.

Looking at the stats might indicate why.
Hodeg flat=72 spr=75 acc=76
Ferrari 75-76-77
Navardaiskas 77-74-74 (he might have had some good days)

Roberto Ferrari for one should be lowered. He had a couple of good sprints last year, but not this year. Navardauskas don't do too many bunch sprints what I can see, so perhaps even he could have his sprint even lower. He would still beat many in smaller group sprints.

I think this type of sprinter (Navardauskas) are the hardest to make right. Hence my previous notice on that GC (even puncheurs) guys should have sprints lowered. They should not get involved in big bunch sprints, and with lower sprints they might not. Then that lower sprint should be enough to win smaller group sprints where all the heavy fast guys are not in.

I know so many more stuff might have brought this on, but some might agree on Ferrari perhaps.