Wild Dog wrote:
I think it's a question of changing the value for each race category (WT, .hc, .1 etc.) so the difference is bigger. That way the Tour for example will count even more and riders such as Sagan and Valverde will not be the best in sprints and mountains respectively.

Of course I can adjust this while copying and pasting it into a database. Give Kittel 84, Cavendish 83 and the rest 82...

zachbastian wrote:
Voigt

Lachi wrote:
I think it is a good system even if random riders like Voight or Sagan do not fit. It is easier to fix certain riders than to create a whole DB.

sammyt93 wrote:
2 thoughts strike me looking through the most recent set of data.

the being that the sprint stats on a whole look high, highlighted by 7 guys being on the joint highest sprint and after looking at the raw points value of them I believe that the points to stat threshold for sprint might need adjusting a little as there's quite abit of variation in the points for those tied on 83. The lowest is Cavendish on 4690.17 points and the highest is Sagan on 6953.395 points.

Judging solely off the point value Sagan and Greipel should probably be joint highest, then Kristoff, Kittel then Bouhani and Degenkolb. Then Cavendish who isn't that much higher then Demare and they could be on the same level.

The second thing is that Valverde tends to have alot of racedays so he has a lot more chances to score points. I'm not sure how many more he has compared to Froome, Contador and the rest but I'd imagine it has had some impact on his points value and subsequently on his stats.

I was thinking it might produce a better outcome if there was a way of dividing the points by the umber of racedays as it should bring guys like valverde who race a lot and have a lot more chances to score points back to a more comparable level to others and would help avoid penalising anyone who has crashed and had to miss large or key parts of their season. For example Boonen missing the cobbled races in 2013 although it doesn't look like that's had an effect in the current stats.

Yes I know that could create a few more problems like Wiggins and Sorenson doing well in cobbles despite only taking part in 1 years worth instead of multiple seasons like the specialists but it should help the top guys anyway.

Although looking at the latest results Cobble might need stretching out in the same way, though I've not yet looked at their raw points value it still seems a little odd seeing 5 guy tied on the highest stat.

sammyt93 wrote:
the being that the sprint stats on a whole look high, highlighted by 7 guys being on the joint highest sprint and after looking at the raw points value of them I believe that the points to stat threshold for sprint might need adjusting a little as there's quite abit of variation in the points for those tied on 83. The lowest is Cavendish on 4690.17 points and the highest is Sagan on 6953.395 points.

Judging solely off the point value Sagan and Greipel should probably be joint highest, then Kristoff, Kittel then Bouhani and Degenkolb. Then Cavendish who isn't that much higher then Demare and they could be on the same level.

TankNL wrote:
As announced, I've created a .cdb based on ASOdb2014.
Did nothing else but copy and past the stats from the Excel.

I only did a couple minor adjustments, just because I feel like that would become more realistic (like I said in this thread, its not about an individual, but about the Algorithms);

Mountain;
Valverde 83 -> 80
Contador 82 -> 83
Froome 82 -> 83
Ten Dam 77 -> 78 (because I'm Dutch )
Peraud 79 -> 80 (could be 81, but then Its solely on the TdF)

Cobbles;
Terpstra 83 -> 82
Sagan 83 -> 81

Sprint;
Kittel 83 -> 84
Cavendish 83 -> 84
Kristoff 83 -> 82
Degenkolb 83 -> 82
Sagan 83 -> 80
Bouhanni 83 -> 80

Fighter
Voight 74 -> 80

Here is the edited .cdb file; https://dl.dropbo...lStats.cdb
I hope a couple of you guys can help me with some test runs.

sammyt93 wrote:
I love the Idea of using the multiplier for a decay of results, assuming you are able to keep this up to date will the results change bracket automatically?

Maybe adjusting the multiplier to 1, 1.5, 2.5 instead of 1,3,5 would help those that have missed a race goal for a season but I don't know what effect that would have on everyone else or on the stats in general.

TankNL wrote:


the problem then is that Aru, Kelderman, Maijka won't be more than in the middle of the pack and guys like Scarponi and Basso will be more in the top, than the should be. But feel free to toy around with the numbers... that's why I do this "project" open source...

Paul23 wrote:
now it looks quite good...
i would still give voigt 85 in FTR....but thats maybe because im german...

BTW: nice, that you've made some adjustments on the stats. now they look better than before...

you said, you make this project open source...so we could make some tests ourselfs and we could write you suggestions, or what do you mean by open source(yes, i know what open source is, but everyone handles it a bit different)

ContadorVelasco wrote:
average results imo

TankNL wrote:

I'm trying hard to appreciate you opinion, but can you explain yourself a little bit more? Did you do a test run? Are you replying on the results that OlegTinkov has posted? If so, what is average in you oppinion? Without that, you comment is rather useless, but that is just my honest opinion.