PCM.daily banner
21-12-2024 16:22
PCM.daily
Users Online
· Guests Online: 27

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 162,191
· Newest Member: Felipeanott
View Thread
PCM.daily » PCM.daily's Management Game » [Man-Game] Discussion
 Print Thread
PCM 22 Testing
Ulrich Ulriksen
First of what will be a few posts on this. I ported the Mangame 21 DB into PCM22, I used the 21 season because I didn't want to be testing races that haven't happened yet. If anyone wants the DB let me know.

I played some with the US Pro Cycling Challenge first. The good news is the fourth best sprinter problem is gone. The bad news is I am a little worried that the problems with leadouts are worse. Going to look at this more.

But since it simpler I decided to focus on the impact of the new RDC variable. I used TTs to test this because they are easy to test and I am guessing that the impact of RDC changes in a TT are a decent proxy for the broader impact.

In the USA PCC I got early good signs. The correlation coefficient between my best guess at the stats impacting the prologue and the actual results increased from .80ish to .92 for the 2021 6k prologue from PCM20 to PCM22 (RDC = 2). When I tested the shorter prologue from this season, which is pretty much a pure PRL test, I got correlations in the .95 range with the prologue stat.

But wanted to formalize this and also isolate the impact of moving versions from the impact of limiting RDC = 2 in PCM22. Because the latter is a proxy for the impact across all races.

So I ran the Celtic Chrono 12 times (each test = 1 stage). 4 x in PCM20 (first 2 were actual race from last year), 4 x in PCM22, RDC = 5 and 4 x in PCM22 RDC =2.

I am not a statistician so hopefully there are no statical fallacies here. Table below is the correlations and the correlation squared (=r2) between my guess of the stats that drive the results and the actual results. I am using a blend of TT and RS for this, which generated the highest correlations - the share of RS is a little higher in PCM22. The first row is the average correlation across each test between stats and results. The second row applies the correlation to the average rank across two tests and the third calculates the correlation between stats and the average results across all 4 tests. So the first row represents how the game is played except for TT classics where we do 2 runs (which probably isn't needed in PCM22)

VersionPCM20PCM22PCM22
RDCNA52
Single Test Rank Ave Correlation 0.8242 0.8465 0.9295
Two Test Rank Ave Correlation 0.8971 0.9188 0.9534
4 Test Ave Rank Correlation 0.9348 0.9516 0.9721
Single Test Rank Ave R2 0.679 0.717 0.864
Two Test Rank Ave R2 0.805 0.844 0.909
4 Test Ave Rank R2 0.874 0.906 0.945


So I think this table is full of good news. By moving to PCM 20 to 22 we get small improvements in the correlation of the average single race .8242 to .8465 but narrowing RDC to two gets us another gain up to .9295. Also I would note that the average single run in PCM22 RDC=2 is more correlated than the average of 2 runs in PCM20 and almost as strong as if we ran 4 runs.

The r2 just puts this in terms of % of variation explained. The amount of increase in variation explained by stats from PCM22 RDC = 5 to PCM 22 RDC = 2 is about 15% (.864 - .717). And I would guess that is probably a conclusion we can extend across other race types (maybe not sprints).

Bringing this home in another way Zmorka's finishes in each test were:

PCM21: 10, 1, 1, 8
PCM22 RDC = 5: 2, 15, 19, 15
PCM22 PDC = 2: 1, 1, 2, 1

Unless you are Nemo, I think RDC = 3 might be good enough.

The test result can be downloaded here if you want to do your own review:

https://www.mediafire.com/file/rilhun...ts.7z/file
Man Game: McCormick Pro Cycling
 
quadsas
I had been thinking that two is probably a bit low, cause +2 and -2 are negligible, the evidence supports that it removes a very large portion 'randomness' (its only random if your rider fails not the other way around tho). I was gonna run some +3s on my own because I feel like +3/-3 more accurately represent good and bad days which should exist in the game.
deez
 
jandal7
quadsas wrote:
I had been thinking that two is probably a bit low, cause +2 and -2 are negligible, the evidence supports that it removes a very large portion 'randomness' (its only random if your rider fails not the other way around tho). I was gonna run some +3s on my own because I feel like +3/-3 more accurately represent good and bad days which should exist in the game.

Think I agree with this but haven't played PCM22 or seen those testing results so would be interested!

Thanks for your great work Ulrich Smile
24/02/21 - kandesbunzler said “I don't drink famous people."
15/08/22 - SotD said "Your [jandal's] humour is overrated"
11/06/24 - knockout said "Winning is fine I guess. Truth be told this felt completely unimportant."

[ICL] Santos-Euskadi | [PT] i.imgur.com/c85NSl6.png Xero Racing

i.imgur.com/PdCbs9I.png
i.imgur.com/RPIlJYr.png
5x i.imgur.com/wM6Wok5.png x5
i.imgur.com/olRsxdu.png
2x pcmdaily.com/images/mg/Awards2021/funniest21.png x2
2x i.imgur.com/TUidkLG.png x2
 
Ad Bot
Posted on 21-12-2024 16:22
Bot Agent

Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09

IP: None  
Croatia14
Just here to thank Ulrich for the amazing effort!
pcmdaily.com/files/Awards2019/moty.png
 
Jump to Forum:
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Latest content
Screenshots
Sniff Sniff
Sniff Sniff
PCM 08: Funny Screenshots
Fantasy Betting
Current bets:
No bets available.
Best gamblers:
bullet fighti... 18,676 PCM$
bullet df_Trek 17,674 PCM$
bullet Marcovdw 15,745 PCM$
bullet jseadog1 13,752 PCM$
bullet baseba... 10,539 PCM$

bullet Main Fantasy Betting page
bullet Rankings: Top 100
ManGame Betting
Current bets:
No bets available.
Best gamblers:
bullet Ollfardh 21,990 PCM$
bullet df_Trek 15,820 PCM$
bullet Marcovdw 15,200 PCM$
bullet jseadog1 13,700 PCM$
bullet baseball... 7,432 PCM$

bullet Main MG Betting page
bullet Get weekly MG PCM$
bullet Rankings: Top 100
Render time: 0.31 seconds