SotD wrote:
And then, some vote wrong, like South Africa.
Yep, that was me and i was already warned about that by SN and picked Cuba instead.
Also ,i completely forgot Slovakia, that is pretty embarrasing, isnt it? (maybe i dont want Sagan in the WC as long as he is not riding for me).
Anyway, i understand your frustration, but as long as this will be decided by free votes, i see no problem in people picking anything they want, even obscure picks. Maybe change of system can prevent that, as you are suggesting, It is not big issue for me.
It wasn't meant as an attack, when I wrote that about South Africa. It was just so people could see how I got the numbers I did We all make mistakes. I didn't vote for Slovakia either, I tried to vote for the best sprinters not yet present, it was meant as an example. I don't see why picking a 74Sprinter or a 73 HI rider with no backup stats are concidered feasable. We should be bigger than that imo. So picking the best riders left isn't necessarily the same as we all agree on who should be picked, and as such having 20 nations to pick from would probably still make some interesting results. But it would prevent people from picking shit riders just because they have them in their team.
Most of those who already picked Eritrea and China won't even have their riders in the teams as someone else is better, and even if they do they will be helper for a rider who will finish somewhere between 50-100. I can't see how that is "fun" even for the manager of the rider.
SotD wrote:
And then, some vote wrong, like South Africa.
Yep, that was me and i was already warned about that by SN and picked Cuba instead.
Also ,i completely forgot Slovakia, that is pretty embarrasing, isnt it? (maybe i dont want Sagan in the WC as long as he is not riding for me).
Anyway, i understand your frustration, but as long as this will be decided by free votes, i see no problem in people picking anything they want, even obscure picks. Maybe change of system can prevent that, as you are suggesting, It is not big issue for me.
It wasn't meant as an attack, when I wrote that about South Africa. It was just so people could see how I got the numbers I did We all make mistakes. I didn't vote for Slovakia either
I know, i was just pointing out that i was that black sheep voting for team already in.
And about Slovakia, you are probably not aware, but i am rated biggest fanboy of Sagan on the site and i was born there, so because of that i felt a bit embarrased that i forgot.
I'm not impressed at all that you decided to post the latest standings without asking me first. Anyone who has yet to vote can now look at that table, and react to it - whereas without your post they would most likely just have voted independently as it would be too much effort to count all votes.
The whole point of the vote was allow popular smaller nations a chance to compete. Otherwise I would just have gone straight off Nation rankings. It is ultimately going to need more than 'self-focused' votes for a team to secure a spot in the main road race. And as an extra point, the winner of the B race goes into the main race, if there is a standout rider who misses out due to the voting, there is the chance to prove himself.
You are perhaps forgetting that this is also a vote for countries to get into the B World Championships, and I really don't see the issue of active managers trying to get their own riders into that race.
Also, I see you mentioned Algeria. Their best rider is actually Lagab who has had an awesome Classics season - Top 3 in a PT classic, winning a PCT stage race - and I would say deserving of a ride in the B Worlds.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 22-01-2015 15:07
Yep, as Bjartne said. Top 24 nations in main Worlds, next 24 in B Worlds.
It happened in real life at least once, used as qualification for smaller nations for the Beijing Olympics. Ivan Stevic won it, and wore that Blue striped jersey in races afterwards.
SportingNonsense wrote:
I'm not impressed at all that you decided to post the latest standings without asking me first. Anyone who has yet to vote can now look at that table, and react to it - whereas without your post they would most likely just have voted independently as it would be too much effort to count all votes.
If you didn't want people to react to it, you should have made the votes on PM. Sorry to say, but any idiot could add up those figures. Feel free to delete if you want, but I really don't give much for your "don't do unless permitted", in this case. In fact that is rarely the case I aprove on that way.
The whole point of the vote was allow popular smaller nations a chance to compete. Otherwise I would just have gone straight off Nation rankings. It is ultimately going to need more than 'self-focused' votes for a team to secure a spot in the main road race. And as an extra point, the winner of the B race goes into the main race, if there is a standout rider who misses out due to the voting, there is the chance to prove himself.
Fair enough, but I don't agree with the way it's done, hence my post of suggestion. I don't want to dictate how things are done, but I feel obliged to say my oppinion if I think something can be done better. If you, and others, feel this is the way to do it, then fine. Atleast now I have raised the question for debate. And in terms of the great rider perfoming well in the B Worlds, you know as well as I, that with less great nations to keep things together, the better chance of an attack sticking from the early phase. It might not happen, but I would be less surprised to see a fluke B-World Champion than a fluke A-World Champion
You are perhaps forgetting that this is also a vote for countries to get into the B World Championships, and I really don't see the issue of active managers trying to get their own riders into that race.
True. But that could have been decided another way. Like voting for B Worlds first - Only including those nations that haven't been included in the A Worlds, and then without telling the results make the vote for the A Worlds where 5-6 out of 20 predetermined teams win. That way those 5-6 teams wouldn't influence on the teams taking part in the B-Worlds as they would just move up to the A.
Also, I see you mentioned Algeria. Their best rider is actually Lagab who has had an awesome Classics season - Top 3 in a PT classic, winning a PCT stage race - and I would say deserving of a ride in the B Worlds.
Absolutely. The B Worlds... But he wouldn't deserve to ride the A Worlds. Neither would Wen Hao Li, yet he came quite close. And that is my point. If enough teams have a shitty chinese rider in their team, we might see China at the worlds, and then 2/3 of those voting won't even have their rider in the race, and the leader won't be able to do anything at all. As long as they are in the B-Worlds I have no problem with it, and like I said, the top 5 here is fine, but the principles of the votings are not spot on in my mind. I would be happy to help develop a (in my oppinion) better way of voting for next season, but as long as I'm the only one who finds this a "bad" way of doing so, then I can accept things done this way. But like I said previously, I feel that I should say my thoughts on the matter as part of the game, especially as this is something easily tweaked.
Edited by SotD on 22-01-2015 16:18
SportingNonsense wrote:
Yeh, Sagan has something like 72 sprint
But seeing how a lot of "flat" stages have panned out so far I wouldn't be surprised to see one of the better hilly riders/GC riders perform well here if the race is ridden fairly hard. He does have a good HI and DH stat, and a lot of the race, in Canada, have those bumps. He has a good acceleration and a good endurance stat aswell. That is why I also think Cancellara would be doing well.
Yeah, I see no big deal with Sagan not getting into that WC A race, he firstly needs some big training boost to really have a chance in races like this one. But I am sure he will be way bigger name in the future, I overpaid for him for a reason.
Actually B-Worlds is quite a nice idea in my opinion, we could even have C-Worlds, we have enough countries available for that. We could even have quite a funny system, where countries whose riders finish top 3 in C-Worlds could then race in B-Worlds and same there with a promotion from B-Worlds to A-Worlds. Maybe an idea for the next season.
And maybe an idea in addition to that - we could maybe have continental championships as well. European Champs, Asian&Oceanian Champs, All-African Champs, Pan-American Champs. A chance to win an extra jersey for the next season and an extra win/podium could be nice and it would give managers another choices to make in this game.
SportingNonsense wrote:
I'm not impressed at all that you decided to post the latest standings without asking me first. Anyone who has yet to vote can now look at that table, and react to it - whereas without your post they would most likely just have voted independently as it would be too much effort to count all votes.
If you didn't want people to react to it, you should have made the votes on PM. Sorry to say, but any idiot could add up those figures. Feel free to delete if you want, but I really don't give much for your "don't do unless permitted", in this case. In fact that is rarely the case I aprove on that way.
All it is common courtesy, or plain simple politeness. A pity that you don't give much for that then, as I thought you'd become a much less abrasive manager recently than in the past. This voting discussion could easily have taken place in a few days instead, with just a little more patience on your part.
Everything is thought through.
1. Better to have posted votes for general game activity
2. If someone wants to go through and count them up before voting themselves then fine - but I deliberately decided not to post updated standings, and did not expect anybody else to. (Ok, so that particular part was not thought through )
3. More fun to have the final Worlds spots taken by a vote, so filling the field with favoured nations, rather than trying to get the 100% strongest field possible.
I knew the vote would play out the way it did, and that is why I chose to do it. If the goal was the strongest field, like you are pushing for, a vote is a waste of time - I would pick them myself, and leave the voting to exclusively be for B Worlds.
I don't get the fuss over Sagan really. Put his stats on a rider from Algeria and nobody would care that he was missing out. But because he is so good in real life, it gets noticed. There are many riders in the DB more likely to do well if the race turns hard, and a lot of them will be in the race anyway, selection permitting.
And finally, if China really had got enough votes to get in the main Worlds, there's nothing to stop me from blocking it and leaving them in the B Worlds, due to not being good enough.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 22-01-2015 16:44
I personally voted for countries my riders are from, as I probably won't have many riders in the race due to having riders from obscure nations. I'd find it more interesting to see one of my riders in the break than a completely full strength field, so I wouldn't class any votes as votes 'wasted'.
All it is common courtesy, or plain simple politeness. A pity that you don't give much for that then, as I thought you'd become a much less abrasive manager recently than in the past. This voting discussion could easily have taken place in a few days instead, with just a little more patience on your part.
Well I just think we don't necessarily agree with what is politeness or courtesy then. Because I didn't link the list because I wanted to be provocative, which I tend to feel you believe. Atleast with the response you gave me. If I knew it was a problem, then obviously I wouldn't have done it, but there was nowhere posted that it was a problem, and seeing how people in general post updates on this and that, I kinda didn't think of it as a major problem. It wasn't even a service, just a point to my post and thoughts. But I don't like being told to ask before I say something. I really don't. And I don't care if that is you or anyone else. I stick by the rules, and if nothing is listed then I tend to say my oppinion, as I believe that is probably fine. Like I said, I didn't post it to be offensive towards you, or inpolite. IMO it didn't turn inpolite, until you wrote that I shouldn't have done so without asking for permission.
Everything is thought through.
1. Better to have posted votes for general game activity
2. If someone wants to go through and count them up before voting themselves then fine - but I deliberately decided not to post updated standings, and did not expect anybody else to. (Ok, so that particular part was not thought through )
3. More fun to have the final Worlds spots taken by a vote, so filling the field with favoured nations, rather than trying to get the 100% strongest field possible.
Fair enough. Like I said in the previous post, I just didn't agree that this was the best possible solution, but seeing as it is going like you think it should go, then I can't say anything about that. I can easily accept the way things are going, I just wanted to point out, that I think/thought it could be done better.
I knew the vote would play out the way it did, and that is why I chose to do it. If the goal was the strongest field, like you are pushing for, a vote is a waste of time - I would pick them myself, and leave the voting to exclusively be for B Worlds.
I don't necessarily agree with that. People see stats very differently. I wouldn't necessarily pick an 80 sprinter above an 77 one on this terrain. It isn't entirely flat, and it is very long, so I would say that stats such as endurance, HI (to some extend), flat and acceleration could be more important. A lot of managers doesn't vote like that, and with having the 20 best nations, 2 might be a given, but I don't think the rest 3-4 would.
I don't get the fuss over Sagan really. Put his stats on a rider from Algeria and nobody would care that he was missing out. But because he is so good in real life, it gets noticed. There are many riders in the DB more likely to do well if the race turns hard, and a lot of them will be in the race anyway, selection permitting.
Sagan is just an example. It could be Nepomnasniy aswell, and a lot of other riders. I selected Sagan because people knew him, and he did decently in the Pro Tour, so people knows he can potentially do a top 10, on the right circumstances. I don't agree that people wouldn't care if he was algerian. I don't look at nationalities, I look at riders, and qualities. I wouldn't pick sweden myself, as I think atleast 10 nations are better, but I do understand why people vote for them. I don't understand why anyone would vote for Jamaica or Eritrea. Not with this route.
And finally, if China really had got enough votes to get in the main Worlds, there's nothing to stop me from blocking it and leaving them in the B Worlds, due to not being good enough.
Well if that is the case, then I pull everything I have said back - But you haven't said anything about that before. So how should I know that you were selective in the votes. And if you are, why are we able to vote for everyone?
SotD wrote:
I don't understand why anyone would vote for Jamaica or Eritrea. Not with this route.
It all boils down to whether or not you can grasp the fact that people can enjoy the game without needing to win every race.
Not sure if you're trying to be provocative by grouping Eritrea with Jamaica here though, seeing as my PCT team is Eritrean. 36th in the rankings is a whole lot more different to 0 ranking points.
Well if that is the case, then I pull everything I have said back - But you haven't said anything about that before. So how should I know that you were selective in the votes. And if you are, why are we able to vote for everyone?
I don't see that it's necessary to try and guess every scenario for a thread that was intended to add a fun element to the game. I'm not saying I would definitely reject China, but I'd certainly consider it.
We all make mistakes. I didn't vote for Slovakia either, I tried to vote for the best sprinters not yet present, it was meant as an example. I don't see why picking a 74Sprinter or a 73 HI rider with no backup stats are concidered feasable. We should be bigger than that imo. So picking the best riders left isn't necessarily the same as we all agree on who should be picked, and as such having 20 nations to pick from would probably still make some interesting results. But it would prevent people from picking shit riders just because they have them in their team.
