|
PCM.daily Stat Discussion
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 13-09-2020 19:41
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
It’s great to see members putting up latest stat suggestions here for climbing stats but there are some important points to consider imo.
As I put above there are a large amount of riders that crashed before the Tour and others that have crashed during the Tour so that should be noted. Also it’s not really a case of just saying who’s first and second should be 82 mtn, who’s third and fourth should be 81 etc as it's a lot more involved than that with the game having 13 attributes per rider of which 4 are directly related to climbing and others partly.
Also importantly the quality of climbing has been quite poor largely due I believe to the lack of racing over the season and therefore there has been a lack of depth with only Jumbo excelling as a climbing team. Therefore most riders will be the same, meaning that they will have more or less the same climbing stats that they had before the Tour. Despite that though there has been some revelations such as G.Martin before bad luck hit him and again today and Porte riding his best for a number of seasons so these two are definite improvers.
Stats as always will be decided on the last mtn stage but I can say now that unless Roglic does something unbelievable he will be 81 mtn because if he were 82 that would be insane with his huge TT and Res stats. Also Pinot will probably drop to 81 which he was before the last update, this is not because of his lack of ability but largely due to his inconsistency and constant bad luck, Finally no way is Uran worth 81 mtn he’s a 79-80 and nearer a 79. As said this has not been a great Tour for climbing and last year’s edition was the best in many years until they cancelled those final stages.
|
| |
|
|
| Forever the Best |
Posted on 13-09-2020 20:06
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3803
Joined: 27-06-2014
PCM$: 400.00
|
Arberg wrote:
Arberg wrote:
Roglic is my and the bookmakers' favorite to win the tour.
Quintana has not shown anything in the big races for several years.
Quintana had a nasty crash in Friday.
The user formerly known as 'The Schleck Fan'
Gracias Alberto.
|
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 13-09-2020 20:12
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Oddly enough just a few days ago Arberg gave Quintana 81 mtn which is the second highest climbing stat that we are using at the moment. Quintana will be 81 mtn and remember he is a weak 81 as his back-up stats are less than some of the other riders.
|
| |
|
|
| AiZaK |
Posted on 13-09-2020 21:00
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1190
Joined: 13-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
In my opinion:
Roglic 81
Pogaçar 81
Urán 79
Miguel Angel Lopez 80
Adam Yates 79
R. Porte 81/80
Landa 80
Enric Mas 78/79
N. Quintana 79/80
T. Dumoulin 79
Valverde 78
Guill. Martin 78
Pinot 80
Bardet 79
D. Caruso 77
Bernal 80/81
Rolland 76
Carapaz 78/79
Kuss 79
Bilbao 78
Marc Soler 77
Esteban Chaves 77/78
Edited by AiZaK on 13-09-2020 21:08
|
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 14-09-2020 08:48
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Aizak thanks for the stats and many are the same as what we have but some observations.
I'd say A.Yates is worth 80 as he's one of the few riders that has been able to attack out of the Lotto train and keep it going for a while and also started the year well and looks to getting back to the potential he showed a few year's ago. Porte I'd have no more than 80 as he has some good back-ups for a GT rider (rec excepted) Mas and Dumoulin could be 78/79 and 79/80. Quintana will stay 81 again a crash victim. Martin worth a 79 imo and Pinot 81. The collapse by Bernal is similar to that of Pinot and largely due to injury or sickness and if we ignore that then probably still worth the highest stat of 82 and finally Carapaz here we need to remember that he was going to ride for the Giro and had prepared for that and was forced to ride the Tour because of the poor form of both Thomas and Froome and for me a defo 80 still and has ridden the Tour short of top form.
|
| |
|
|
| Arberg |
Posted on 14-09-2020 10:25
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 265
Joined: 09-04-2018
PCM$: 200.00
|
What about van Aert in mountain ? 74-75 ? |
| |
|
|
| Arberg |
Posted on 14-09-2020 10:47
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 265
Joined: 09-04-2018
PCM$: 200.00
|
https://sport.tv2...t-er-vildt
Roglic needs to have at least 82 in mountain. His stats against Bernal speaks for itself! |
| |
|
|
| hansw |
Posted on 14-09-2020 10:51
|
Amateur
Posts: 21
Joined: 17-07-2018
PCM$: 200.00
|
Tejada will be updated by you too, right? He was e.g. one of the last 20 or so cyclist yesterday. |
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 14-09-2020 14:02
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Putting Roglic to 82 mtn would actually make him even better due to his super RES than Froome when he was at his very best with 82 mtn. Both Froome and Roglic had/have the best teams BUT Froome would do outstanding long range attacks which warranted an 82 mtn whereas Roglic mostly just follows his team in this Tour and attacks near the very end. So for Roglic to be worth 82 mtn he will need to show that he can match Froome in a longer range attack and there is still time for this happen because at the moment he is nicely protected by his team that has huge climbing stats with Dumoulin, Kuss, Bennett and WVA and would've been even stronger had Kruiswijk been there too.
Don't be tricked by Bernal being super powerful with 82 mtn as his hill is quite low, his RES is not high and like most Colombians his TT and flat are not great. We tend to stat traditional Colombian climbers like Bernal and Quintana with high climbing stats and good acc and lower backup stats and the more powerful ones like Lopez and Uran a bit differently with higher RES.
WVA is at 74 mtn and Tejada has been improved to 77/75.
|
| |
|
|
| Arberg |
Posted on 14-09-2020 14:46
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 265
Joined: 09-04-2018
PCM$: 200.00
|
Tafiolmo wrote:
Putting Roglic to 82 mtn would actually make him even better due to his super RES than Froome when he was at his very best with 82 mtn. Both Froome and Roglic had/have the best teams BUT Froome would do outstanding long range attacks which warranted an 82 mtn whereas Roglic mostly just follows his team in this Tour and attacks near the very end. So for Roglic to be worth 82 mtn he will need to show that he can match Froome in a longer range attack and there is still time for this happen because at the moment he is nicely protected by his team that has huge climbing stats with Dumoulin, Kuss, Bennett and WVA and would've been even stronger had Kruiswijk been there too.
Don't be tricked by Bernal being super powerful with 82 mtn as his hill is quite low, his RES is not high and like most Colombians his TT and flat are not great. We tend to stat traditional Colombian climbers like Bernal and Quintana with high climbing stats and good acc and lower backup stats and the more powerful ones like Lopez and Uran a bit differently with higher RES.
WVA is at 74 mtn and Tejada has been improved to 77/75.
Froome was 83 in mountain in 2013. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 22-11-2024 13:23
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 14-09-2020 15:15
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Arberg wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
Putting Roglic to 82 mtn would actually make him even better due to his super RES than Froome when he was at his very best with 82 mtn. Both Froome and Roglic had/have the best teams BUT Froome would do outstanding long range attacks which warranted an 82 mtn whereas Roglic mostly just follows his team in this Tour and attacks near the very end. So for Roglic to be worth 82 mtn he will need to show that he can match Froome in a longer range attack and there is still time for this happen because at the moment he is nicely protected by his team that has huge climbing stats with Dumoulin, Kuss, Bennett and WVA and would've been even stronger had Kruiswijk been there too.
Don't be tricked by Bernal being super powerful with 82 mtn as his hill is quite low, his RES is not high and like most Colombians his TT and flat are not great. We tend to stat traditional Colombian climbers like Bernal and Quintana with high climbing stats and good acc and lower backup stats and the more powerful ones like Lopez and Uran a bit differently with higher RES.
WVA is at 74 mtn and Tejada has been improved to 77/75.
Froome was 83 in mountain in 2013.
But for the last several years 83 has not been used in the DB for mtn and Froome has usually been 82 or 81.
Edited by Tafiolmo on 14-09-2020 15:27
|
| |
|
|
| Arberg |
Posted on 14-09-2020 16:36
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 265
Joined: 09-04-2018
PCM$: 200.00
|
Tafiolmo wrote:
Arberg wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
Putting Roglic to 82 mtn would actually make him even better due to his super RES than Froome when he was at his very best with 82 mtn. Both Froome and Roglic had/have the best teams BUT Froome would do outstanding long range attacks which warranted an 82 mtn whereas Roglic mostly just follows his team in this Tour and attacks near the very end. So for Roglic to be worth 82 mtn he will need to show that he can match Froome in a longer range attack and there is still time for this happen because at the moment he is nicely protected by his team that has huge climbing stats with Dumoulin, Kuss, Bennett and WVA and would've been even stronger had Kruiswijk been there too.
Don't be tricked by Bernal being super powerful with 82 mtn as his hill is quite low, his RES is not high and like most Colombians his TT and flat are not great. We tend to stat traditional Colombian climbers like Bernal and Quintana with high climbing stats and good acc and lower backup stats and the more powerful ones like Lopez and Uran a bit differently with higher RES.
WVA is at 74 mtn and Tejada has been improved to 77/75.
Froome was 83 in mountain in 2013.
But for the last several years 83 has not been used in the DB for mtn and Froome has usually been 82 or 81. Does not change the fact, that Bernal has never beaten Roglic in a stage race. |
| |
|
|
| Ollfardh |
Posted on 14-09-2020 18:07
|
World Champion
Posts: 14563
Joined: 08-08-2011
PCM$: 9100.00
|
And in which big races did they meet before?
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
|
| |
|
|
| AiZaK |
Posted on 14-09-2020 18:57
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1190
Joined: 13-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
I agree with Roglic 81, he is amazing in CRI too, he is a beast!! |
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 14-09-2020 19:14
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Arberg wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
Arberg wrote:
Tafiolmo wrote:
Putting Roglic to 82 mtn would actually make him even better due to his super RES than Froome when he was at his very best with 82 mtn. Both Froome and Roglic had/have the best teams BUT Froome would do outstanding long range attacks which warranted an 82 mtn whereas Roglic mostly just follows his team in this Tour and attacks near the very end. So for Roglic to be worth 82 mtn he will need to show that he can match Froome in a longer range attack and there is still time for this happen because at the moment he is nicely protected by his team that has huge climbing stats with Dumoulin, Kuss, Bennett and WVA and would've been even stronger had Kruiswijk been there too.
Don't be tricked by Bernal being super powerful with 82 mtn as his hill is quite low, his RES is not high and like most Colombians his TT and flat are not great. We tend to stat traditional Colombian climbers like Bernal and Quintana with high climbing stats and good acc and lower backup stats and the more powerful ones like Lopez and Uran a bit differently with higher RES.
WVA is at 74 mtn and Tejada has been improved to 77/75.
Froome was 83 in mountain in 2013.
But for the last several years 83 has not been used in the DB for mtn and Froome has usually been 82 or 81. Does not change the fact, that Bernal has never beaten Roglic in a stage race.
There's not much point going on here and we as the DB Team will decide on what we think is best for Roglic in mtn based around his other stats etc. If other members state that he should be 82 then we will consider this more but as you're the only one really stating that he should be 82 and also not really taking into consideration his huge 78 RES there is not much point in debating this further. For the record Roglic has 78 RES and Bernal 73 RES that is a significant difference in stat ability and makes Roglic like an 82 anyway by putting him to 82 mtn he will feel like 83 mtn. I can't really make this any clearer than I already have.
|
| |
|
|
| Arberg |
Posted on 16-09-2020 16:58
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 265
Joined: 09-04-2018
PCM$: 200.00
|
Mountain stats.
82: Roglic, Pogacar, Bernal
81: Pinot, Lopez, S.Yates, Kruijswijk, Blichmann
80: Landa, Porte, Nibali, Thomas, Quintana, Froome
79: Bardet, Dumoulin, Urán, A.Yates, Carapaz, Kuss, Mollema, Majka
78: Valverde, G.Martin, Barguil, Fuglsang, Sivakov, Mas, Evenepoel
Edited by Arberg on 16-09-2020 17:13
|
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 16-09-2020 19:54
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
We have actually decided to revamp the mountain stats a bit by using more riders on 82 which means we have stretched out riders from 77 to 81 as we were getting too many riders on 81 and 80 mtn and hope this will create more diversity in the climbing stats. So what that means is a lot of riders that were say 79 before will be 80 etc as part of the stretch out and will post later the relevant riders from this Tour, so this stretch out will probably see 3 or 4 riders with 82 mtn.
Most importantly bear in mind that last years Tour, Giro and Vuelta are also very relevant, so Pinot with this stretch out will probably end up as 82 but with poor rec etc, as it's so hard to actually stat him as he's capable of climbing brilliance one moment and total collapse the next.
Arberg it's always good that you put these stats  but would be more useful for sprint and TT to put also acc and pro as they are almost as important as the sprint and TT stats themselves.
|
| |
|
|
| Ho0liGaN |
Posted on 18-09-2020 02:48
|
Junior Rider
Posts: 42
Joined: 30-06-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I'll point out two things i've done to get results where I like them to be.
First of all. I've had the same problem trying to get my own view on the stats. Too many people who are in real life not on the same level, getting the same stat. For that simple reason, I've upped the maximum stat to 83. I know you guys have your reasons to not do that, But it gives just that little bit extra to differentiate.
It solves more problems though, with a higher max stat you cannot only differentiate within that stat, but also fix some of the wonky relationship Punchers have with their mountain stat.
Most notably Fuglsang, alaphilipe mollema, poels and and Nibali are easier to stat when the variance in the top is greater. Fuglsang was often (out)performing GC riders in grand tours, and while he has shown in the past to be able to win in 1 week races, he's not a real GC rider. Mollema, Nibali, Poels. Climbers who all have won the hilly clasics, LBL, San sebastian, Lombardia are on the other hand GC riders with a really big engine but who lack the serious punch that riders like Alaphilipe, WVA or MvdP have. With upping the max by one, you can accentuate just a little bit more.
Secondly, one fix i've found for very good performing, but always "unlucky" rider is massively lower the REC stat across the board. I've always felt that the 3rd week in game felt nothing like the 3rd week in real life.
Everyone with a REC stat over 73 can win a GC ingame (looking at you Fuglsang).
People like Landa, Kruiswijk etc. have never felt like they were any stronger in the last week than their competition.
We can discuss all day long if Pinot deserves 81 or 82 in climbing, that wont fix the fundamental problem I have with this game, and that is the bloody Form of the day element. It can WILDLY change the outcome of the race. a -2 vs a +2 can be a difference of 6-8 stats. - Small aside - By giving higher max stats to riders the FOTD has less impact on really good days, as PCM has a build in max stat which will be reached earlier when your base stats are higher.
But back on topic. riders like Pinot, Porte and the Yates brothers always seem to have something happen to them. While we know they should be able to win/compete for the win in a GC they've never done it. The best way to get this represented in game is with the REC stat. But as I said earlier, the fall off in form during a 3 week event isnt big enough once you get like 74 or 75 in REC. So what do you do? Thats right, drop that REC across the board by 4-5 points. Then, go back to your sprinters, give them their points back, so they will be able to finish the tour without any problems. And give back all the points to guys who, in the last 3-4 years have proven to be able to win a GC or are known for their strong 3rd week.
Ill give you an example of how certain riders are statted (and please note, that these stats are given with my own personal and recency bias and your opinion may be very different) I wont give the top 10 in each stat, just giving certain examples.
Roglic and Pogacar are without a doubt the worlds best climbers right now, Last vuelta, and current tour have proven that. They've been given 83 in CLI with 78 and 76 in REC.
Next I'll point out riders like Froome, Nibali, Kruiswijk and Landa, who've proven in the last couple of years to become "better" than their opponents as the days pass. Froome is a tough one since his injury and now knowing where he stands currently, and Nibali is starting to show signs of aging. So those 2 CLI stats have been adjusted accordingly.
Froome has 79 CLI, 80 REC (you can easily still give him 81 CLI if you believe he will come back to top form) but still has massively strong support stats
Kruiswijk, while never outright the strongest climbers basically never has a bad day. is statted ad 81 CLI and 81 REC. When push comes to shove he wont be able to follow the best climbers, but his consistency will see hhim make podiums on the regular
Nibali is statted at 79CLI and 82 REC currently I dont think we'll ever see him win something really big again. But while his pure performance is down, he should be able to make top 5 on the regular.
Landa is statted at 82CLI and 80 REC. What he's shown over the years, espcially the Giro last year where he was the best climber by a landslide, and is likely going to finish top 6 this tour will always have in contention, but he cant TT at all, so wont ever win the GC.
Contrast them to riders like Yates', Pinot, Fuglsang (Porte). They've shown they can be strongest on a given day, but never make it till the end. I've lowered their REC stat massively to give a proper representation of this.
Pinot has 82 CLI, 68 REC. Very good hill stats, and decent support stats.
Yates 81 CLI, 70 REC. as we can see this tour, He's slowly losing out on the guys that have better REC, the earlier stages he was able to hang on to the group. But these last few stages he's getting dropped earlier and earlier. Again, good hill stat, and decent support stats.
Finally Fuglsang. 78CLI 82 HIL and 63 REC. Absolutely massive support stats, a proper timetrial. If he would have a REC stat above 73, he'd be a GC contender. But in real life he isn't and the only way to keep him balanced in single day classics, 1 week events, and grand tours is to give him abyssmal REC. |
| |
|
|
| Tafiolmo |
Posted on 18-09-2020 08:51
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1962
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Great post and one the longest and best ever to appear on the stats forum, so well done
First off I pretty much agree with all your assessment as I have found the same issues and after playing the current Tour de France with the latest update I found the main problems to be the high hill riders doing too well and the problems with the rec stat as well. For this reason when Croatia suggested to me to use 82 max mtn I agreed with the idea not just being to create greater differences with the climbers but to increase the ability of the natural climbers over those that do better in hills. In the current Tour de France I'm playing I'm almost finished with Thomas about to win with Roglic in second BUT Fuglsang third and before that into the second week Valverde was in yellow and looking too strong and realized that the mtn stat of the natural climbers needs to be even greater, as the hill stat of those two riders was acting as a huge equalizer. Also add into the mix the rec levels which I do agree should be lower to show how certain riders respond in the final week and clearly Fuglsang with 72 is not having too much effect.
Daily form is something I also hate in the game as it swings around too much and throws up too much randomness and the game AI is in effect the main problem with how the stats are playing out but that is something that we can't directly fix with the DB but we can try to indirectly influence some things.
As for fixing these stat issues the best we can, I aim to do the following before the next update:
1. Use a 82 or 83 max mtn to create even bigger differentials and to separate the natural climbers from the punchy ones but at the same time try and allow natural climbers to do well on races like Lombardia and LBL. At the moment with the current stats riders like Bernal and Landa win these races just as much as Fuglsang so want to be careful in increasing their climbing stats too high but I agree that GT performances should take priority.
2. Another fix but I'm against it is tinkering with the ACC and RES stats as I think of these stats as 'character stats' and therefore will leave them.
3. To compliment the climbing stats greater differences in the rec stats will be done.
Once again thanks for the comments and would be interested in seeing your suggestions for sprint stats as in the Tour I'm playing Bennett with 81/82 has performed as as or even better than at the Tour whereas Ewan with 81/83 and even getting a better leadout hasn't but that of course is probably just down to form but maybe these stats are good because on one stage Pedersen with 77/78 was able to beat them both in the sprint.
Edited by Tafiolmo on 18-09-2020 08:57
|
| |
|
|
| AiZaK |
Posted on 18-09-2020 09:13
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1190
Joined: 13-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Tafiolmo I think David de la Cruz must be 77 again in Climber and a little more energy/endurance, 68 its too low, maybe something like 72 more or less? |
| |
|
