Johan92 wrote:
When is it finished? 1 month, 2 months, to weeks, to days, foru hours, fem months, one week?
To awnser your question: I don't know, if we include stages in the V1, it will take a while longer, if we make a V1 without, and a V2 with, it could be released earlier, but I don't know
As the V1 of the DB is coming to his end, it's time to test wheater we like the results or not. Today I did a little test: Milano - San Remo.
This years primavera knows only 1 big favourite: Eddy Merckx. If somebody is able to prevent him from winning it will probably be Herman van Springel, his teammate, or one of the sprinters. I'll control Molteni.
After a relaxing first half of the race, the peloton starts to speed up, thanks to Team Salvarani, at the passo Turchino, it doesn't hurt a lot of riders, but when we encounter Le Manie the peloton breaks into pieces. (Again, thanks to Salvarani) My sprinters are having a hard day at that point.
Thank god the pack gets together again, or at least, 100 riders, with al my riders still there. And then, when we are at the foot of the Capo Mele, Flandra - Mars speeds up, only the better climbers can follow.
But when we are on the Capo Berta, we know why Flandra - Mars was working so hard: Roger de Vlaeminck attacks! He was one of the favourites, so we can't let him go. We couter the attack with Spruyt and Merckx, the following group: Merckx, Spruyt, Guimard and Diaz Diaz. At the foot of the Cipressa they catch de Vlaeminck, who is left behind.
Then Merckx attacks, no one can follow. On the top van Springel joins the following group. But in the downhill section Guimard closes the gap to Merckx, that was not what I hoped for. Now only the 3 Molteni riders and Guimard are in the front.
But Guimard is to strong, he attacks on the Poggio and we can't follow him. That's the way it is. In the downhill section van Springel tries to close te gap, but it's to late.
The results:
If anyone wishes to help with testing, you're welcome
Early on, I want to see how the pack deal with an escapee. Cue Julien Stevens. The one man break lasts a long time, as it take a lot of time for the peloton to really wake up. Once the first cobbled section starts, people are dropping like flies, and it's no exception for Molteni. Soon enough, the peloton kicks into life, and speeds up dramaticly. Soon, Stevens is caught. At 40K to go 3 of our riders drop off, and we only have Marino Basso (+5) and Eddy Merckx (0). Attacks fly away, but the 30 strong peloton handles all of them well. Finally one sticks from Cyrille Guimard, and Eddy decides to go. He is followed by Walter Godefroote. Those three riders enter Roubaix together, but then Merckx attacks! In the Velodrom he has a slight advantage, and decides to start sprinting early. It may have been to early though, as the other two were coming back quickly. Would they catch him?
1. Julien Stevens was far from being a breakaway specialist. He rode either as a domestique or as a sprinter (he had good finishing speed, and also competed in track cycling), Otherwise, he didn't have the endurance to sustain a good attack in a major classic, and even less so in Paris Roubaix.
2. Even though he was an outstanding all-round rider and surely a good nordiste, I don't see Cyrille Guimard getting a podium place in Roubaix. Perhaps in the Ronde van Vlaanderen, where he did take advantage of his great "punching" ability, but in Roubaix he couldn't aim higher than a Top 10 finish. For that matter, Eric Leman or Evert Dolman were certainly more of a factor in Roubaix than Guimard.
3. Too less Vlaeminck. Roger de Vlaeminck was then considered - unanimously - to be the best nordiste in the peloton and, even though he would only win his first Roubaix one year later, he was already the favourite and the marquee rider. He often loved to "test" the other riders in the cobbled sections, drive a few short attacks and continually disturb the normal flow of the pack (ask Merckx: he hated Vlaeminck for a reason).
Still, I like the way Merckx won over Godefroot, because it's very close to what I imagine happening in RL: Godefroot had good sprinting speed (which he would lose later in his career, though) and excellent riding technique, but he struggled when he had to react to a powerful surge, that is, precisely the kind of attacks Merckx was renowned for. They were arguably, along with Vlaeminck, the best nordistes in the peloton, but while Godefroot would try to take it out to the final sprint, Merckx would certainly launch a surprise attack as he did in the test.
1. Julien Stevens was far from being a breakaway specialist. He rode either as a domestique or as a sprinter (he had good finishing speed, and also competed in track cycling), Otherwise, he didn't have the endurance to sustain a good attack in a major classic, and even less so in Paris Roubaix.
2. Even though he was an outstanding all-round rider and surely a good nordiste, I don't see Cyrille Guimard getting a podium place in Roubaix. Perhaps in the Ronde van Vlaanderen, where he did take advantage of his great "punching" ability, but in Roubaix he couldn't aim higher than a Top 10 finish. For that matter, Eric Leman or Evert Dolman were certainly more of a factor in Roubaix than Guimard.
3. Too less Vlaeminck. Roger de Vlaeminck was then considered - unanimously - to be the best nordiste in the peloton and, even though he would only win his first Roubaix one year later, he was already the favourite and the marquee rider. He often loved to "test" the other riders in the cobbled sections, drive a few short attacks and continually disturb the normal flow of the pack (ask Merckx: he hated Vlaeminck for a reason).
Still, I like the way Merckx won over Godefroot, because it's very close to what I imagine happening in RL: Godefroot had good sprinting speed (which he would lose later in his career, though) and excellent riding technique, but he struggled when he had to react to a powerful surge, that is, precisely the kind of attacks Merckx was renowned for. They were arguably, along with Vlaeminck, the best nordistes in the peloton, but while Godefroot would try to take it out to the final sprint, Merckx would certainly launch a surprise attack as he did in the test.
Maggot controled Stevens, so he decided that Stevens had to attack, Stevens is a sprinter, (sprint: 79). Guimard is quite a problem, he was good in flandres, but when he is good in flandres he is good in roubaix to in Pcm. Perhaps he needs a little lower Plain stat.
Then about de Vlaeminck: Don't worry, in my test he won both Flandres and Roubaix, both with about 2 minutes in front, i guess he fell or had a flat tire or just didn't plan his attack well. But you're right about Guimard, i shall look at it.
The logic of PCM makes it somewhat difficult to replicate a rider like Guimard. Basically, he was a sprinter who was also very effective as a climber, as a puncheur and as a nordiste. His weakest spot was the time trial, but even so it'd take a really long TT for him to lose valuable time. One might think of Valverde, but no, they are quite different and there hasn't been any rider in recent years similar to Guimard.
I'd say that Guimard should be given some four points less in his cobbles rating than the best nordiste. He wouldn't be a top favourite for the Roubaix, but, combined with his strong uphill and fighting skills, he'd still be a contender for the Ronde de Flandres, as he often was.
As for Julien Stevens, and speaking in PCM terms, his endurance and his baroudeur skills were really low (near 50s). He could sustain top speed for 1 or 2 km, but he'd quickly hit the wall if forced to make a longer effort.
Well, come to think of it, I believe you're right, because if you lowered those stats, he wouldn't even show up for the events at which he was most proficient (sprints). Sprinting does leave something to be desired in PCM...
mesq wrote:
The logic of PCM makes it somewhat difficult to replicate a rider like Guimard. Basically, he was a sprinter who was also very effective as a climber, as a puncheur and as a nordiste. His weakest spot was the time trial, but even so it'd take a really long TT for him to lose valuable time. One might think of Valverde, but no, they are quite different and there hasn't been any rider in recent years similar to Guimard.
I'd say that Guimard should be given some four points less in his cobbles rating than the best nordiste. He wouldn't be a top favourite for the Roubaix, but, combined with his strong uphill and fighting skills, he'd still be a contender for the Ronde de Flandres, as he often was.
As for Julien Stevens, and speaking in PCM terms, his endurance and his baroudeur skills were really low (near 50s). He could sustain top speed for 1 or 2 km, but he'd quickly hit the wall if forced to make a longer effort.
Well, come to think of it, I believe you're right, because if you lowered those stats, he wouldn't even show up for the events at which he was most proficient (sprints). Sprinting does leave something to be desired in PCM...
Indeed, by far the greatest talent of Guimard is impossible to replicate in PCM: his fantastic tactical sense and sharp wit.
PCM's stats are very limited and leave a heck of a lot to be desired.
I attacked with Stevens to see how the Peloton would react. It was just a test. Vlaemink crashed. Guimard went really far ahear so he was there at the end.
