ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues

Fantasy Leagues => Other Sports Leagues => UCI WorldTour => Topic started by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 03:32:23 AM

Title: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 03:32:23 AM
Edit: two new leagues created based on the discussion below:
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?board=3318
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?board=3307



We're bigger than ever, we're more active than ever, we're having fun... how about another cycling league? ProFSL has a million baseball/basketball/hockey/football leagues, yet only one soccer league (by yours truly) and only one cycling league. I could set up another forum and another spreadsheet rather quickly, I think.


Proposed roster format: something very original, so that there is no overlap with this one. Ideas that come to mind, separately or in combination:
League A. national teams, where we first get a number of riders from our nation (with a combined 2015 score cap)
League B. national teams, where we first bid money on the nation we want, but later get a 50% discount when bidding on riders from our own country
League C. realistic balanced teams where everybody has 1 GT contender, 1 top sprinter, 1 young sprinter, 1 time trialist, 1 geezer, 1 injury survivor, 1 wasted talent, 1 surprise transfer... (would start by agreeing and announcing who the X GT contenders etc. are, X being the total number of participants)
League Z. something completely cuckoo, say... one rider per team born each year? (16 riders per team: 1995+, 1978-, plus the 14 in between)


Proposed calendar & scoring: either something original and wacky OR the exact same as here so that there is zero added in-season maintenance.


Proposed Start: December 15, when the dust settles over auctions here, yet there is enough time before TDU, and we're bored waiting for Xmas.


May the brainstorming begin :disco:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ghedebrav on November 07, 2015, 03:48:06 AM
You're crazy. But yes, more leagues = good.

An idea that has been rattling round the airless void that is my mind is a 'lowball' league. Poker players among you will recognise the term as describing the heirachy of winning hands being turned upside-down, so the weakest hand wins.

League D. So we would all pick squads of riders who rarely start, often crash, and never finish with the leaders. Lowest score at the end of the season wins.

I think we'd have to restrict it to World Tour teams only, maybe squads of fifteen. We'd all have a hard time processing the value of riders in this system, so better would be a neo-pro style draft for the whole squads, albeit with a much shorter clock limit.

That's my cuckoo idea anyway FWIW.

Of the OP suggestions, I like the 'realistically balanced' League C idea best, though it might be the trickiest (or most time-consuming) to do because the categories are quite subjective and some riders cross boundaries of definition.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ghedebrav on November 07, 2015, 04:07:01 AM
League E. The more I think about the INTERnational league though...

OK- so let's imagine a system whereby we have a squad of (let's say) twenty riders. We can only have one rider of any given nationality (and no, Froome doesn't count as Kenyan). No duplicate riders between teams.

So - how to decide who gets to pick who? Blind auction. Let's say we all have a budget of 10 million Space Credits. We all have to bid on rights for twenty nations. Once all the bids are in for each nation, a draft is set up for each country bid upon, with the highest bidder given first pick and so on. In the unlikely event of tied bids (you can bid to individual creds, and I think stipulating that none of your own bids can be of equal value would also reduce the possibility of e.g. loads of one credit bids).

So a two-stage game - first the blind nation auction, then multiple drafts.

It leads to some interesting tactical choices, especially regarding nations that have one or two outstanding talents but little strength in depth, versus the traditional cycling powers (so how much more would you bid on, say, Slovakia, over the Netherlands?).
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 04:21:09 AM
You're crazy.

Look who's talking :rofl:


Lowest score at the end of the season wins.

League D - Very curious! My (minor) objections:
- as a human, I don't want to cheer others to fail.
- as a gamer, I don't want a season ruined in one day: http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=27420
- as a Sunday cycling fan, I feel very incompetent building a team of dudes I've never heard of.


Of the OP suggestions, I like the 'realistically balanced' idea best, though it might be the trickiest (or most time-consuming) to do because the categories are quite subjective and some riders cross boundaries of definition.

Those would be set in stone before each season by a high committee aka the Łbernerds, with a quick round of feedback from others. This process as such, as well as naming the categories in the first place, could be a nice little puzzle methinks.


We can only have one rider of any given nationality (and no, Froome doesn't count as Kenyan).

FYI my original idea was to have a vast majority of your riders from ONE country. But yours is cool too, let's call it League E - INTERNATIONAL.


OK- so let's imagine a system whereby we have a squad of (let's say) twenty riders. We can only have one rider of any given nationality (and no, Froome doesn't count as Kenyan). No duplicate riders between teams.

So - how to decide who gets to pick who? Blind auction.

Or even an open one? Possibly more fun and more strategizing :disco:
I have no idea how, mechanically speaking. But I'll ask other game designers.
(The following national drafts - I'm lovin' it!)
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ghedebrav on November 07, 2015, 04:41:47 AM
I'm on a long train journey and there's not much to look at out the window...

Re. Season ruined in one day in lowball - that's one of the reasons I'd limit it to WT only - most breakaway winning randomers are from PCT or lower (especially in .HC or WT races). I take your point about cheering on failure - I was thinking more about my unerring ability to curse riders; doing this might curse my picks with success!

Re. Blind auction - honestly I find these things fascinating as a dilettante game theorist. But for a practical reason too - it would make the draft order rank a lot easier to figure out.

Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 04:43:13 AM
Allowed myself to edit our previous posts with labels of different ideas, so that we can refer to them more clearly.

Also, another:

League F - a game of expectations: you have e.g. 10000 or 20000 points. It's all just one big draft, where every person chooses one rider (or three? or five?) whenever it's their turn. The cost of all riders is set in stone by the higher one of their 2014/2015 CQ scores.

Note that this can be combined easily with any of League A, B, C, D, or E.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 04:47:15 AM
Re. Blind auction - honestly I find these things fascinating as a dilettante game theorist. But for a practical reason too - it would make the draft order rank a lot easier to figure out.

I fear it would come out brutally unfair, thus ending your season within seconds. Imagine you place the majority of your money on Slovakia and Poland, yet finish juuust second and third respectively. Suddenly you're stuck with Velits, Paterski, and the 17th pick in all other countries.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 05:02:37 AM
League G - a league of contrasting expectations: like F above, but just 2015. You draft 2 riders, and your final score is the score of the cheaper of the pair minus the score of the more expensive one. Example: you draft Pozzovivo (972) and Landa (967). Your final score is Landa2016-Pozzovivo2016. Could be negative even :P


And yes, I should cut down on coffee :o
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: TERatcliffe26 on November 07, 2015, 06:41:47 AM
I like the idea of C to be honest, Abit NFL draft like in a way
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: oliveira on November 07, 2015, 07:51:59 AM
I like the national leagues A and B. Mostly the B. And a blind auction could work, if you could only get discount in one country. You place your price for the different countries and if you win more then one country, you get the one you placed the highest bid.
 Someyhing like this:


              France  Belgium  Spain  Slovakia Poland
Player A     1M      1.7M       2M        0        100m
Player B    1.1M    1.8M       2.1M     500m   700m
Player C      1         1            1         1          1
Player D     500m   700m      1M       200m   150m
Player E     600m   500m      800m    200m   300m

Player A Belgium 1,7M
Player B Spain 2,1M
Player C Poland 1
Player D Slovakia 200m
Player E France 600m
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 08:15:32 AM
Indeed, that's as far as I came too. This could be applied to C and E as well.

In C it'd result in the most balance maybe, since the blind auction (or, in this case: blind ordering) not only doesn't seem decisive (having the first pick might be a blessing or a curse) but also could be determined without too much controversy. You'd only have to indicate via PM all categories ordered by how badly you want the first pick. Then I'd run some behind-the-scenes mumbo jumbo and return the official order, according to which each player has exactly one 1st pick, one 2nd pick, one 3rd pick etc.

The remainder of C would also be rather straightforward. No more craziness, just announcing your pick: 1 post per DS in total X threads for X categories.



Coming back to B, I guess what we both want deep down is leading our own countries:
:Portugal: oliveira
:Belgium: davy duck
:Poland: moi etc.
Which brings us to League BBB: we assign all countries from the start, agree on some kind of equation that limits your total budget based on past results of your compatriots (http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/cqRankingCountry.asp?current=1), and proceed to another free-for-all crazy auction period with the 50% compatriot discount.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ghedebrav on November 07, 2015, 09:32:59 AM
Death match between me, Joel & TER for the UK? :o

Or how about I just take the Northerners? Swifty, Cav & the Yates twins for a start?
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 07, 2015, 09:41:31 AM
Death match between me, Joel & TER for the UK? :o

Or how about I just take the Northerners? Swifty, Cav & the Yates twins for a start?

I'll have Froome, G, Yogi and Rowe.

TER can have Fenn and JTL.

Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: TERatcliffe26 on November 07, 2015, 10:08:10 AM
I will take Aus, if none of the other players are Australian...

Or whoever finished higher for Road.cc last year takes UK? ;)
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: glomser on November 07, 2015, 10:15:12 AM
I would take Holland then...

I see also a League G: You can only have one rider per country. So you have to choose if you want Valverde, Contador or Rodriguez or an other Spanisch rider. Same for every other country. Would go for a maximum of 15 riders... And you're free to pick the countries. So there can be more than 15 countries. If you let everyone bid on the riders, I think everyone will get some strong riders as the losers from one country can win other countries becuase they din't spent their money already...
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 11:06:29 AM
OK OK, so what I'm hearing is: the exact rules we can still discuss (whether closer to B, C, G, or a mix), but I can already start setting up a new league of national teams? :disco:

Need a strong name :agent:

The only race I can recall as being ridden by national teams is the one, the only...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_Race
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ace on November 07, 2015, 11:56:20 AM
10 round snake draft

7500 Budget

Cost is higher of 2014/15 CQ scores

Scoring .HC and above
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Teton on November 07, 2015, 12:24:53 PM
I would be all in for another Cycling League or two. I have another idea based on leagues I run in Baseball and Football(USA).

Prospectus Maximus Cycling

Select 30 Riders per team
X number of Teams (Depends on interest)
Uses current spreadsheet format, scoring and race calendar.
All Riders MUST be NeoPro riders as defined in our current league.
Draft or Auction? TBD

Year 1
First 5 rounds (if Draft) or selections (by each team) are automatically signed to a 3 year contract. Riders 6 through 30 (if draft) or selections are signed to a 1 year contract.

Year 2
You have 5 riders under contract from year 1.
You may re-sign up to 5 of your riders who have expiring contracts to new contracts from 1-3 years. (This allows you to keep your top riders throughout their careers.)
You fill the balance of your team with NeoPro riders signing each to a contract of 1 - 3 years as you select them in the draft or auction.

Year 3 and onward.
You have riders under contract. You may re-sign up to 5 of your riders who have expiring contracts to new contracts from 1-3 years. You fill the balance of your team with NeoPro riders signing each to a contract of 1 - 3 years as you select them in the draft or auction.

Trades allowed.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ghedebrav on November 07, 2015, 12:26:22 PM


Or whoever finished higher for Road.cc last year takes UK? ;)

I disagree.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 12:48:37 PM
All Riders MUST be NeoPro riders as defined in our current league.

Ambitious format, but I wouldn't take part. This needs insane knowledge. Unlike American college sports, 3 guys around here follow espoirs, plus 4 more among the other 7 billion. And even if I spent months googling those no-names, in the end it would all be about the luck of the Alaphilippes vs. the Sicards anyway.

(Just one man's opinion.)
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 07, 2015, 01:46:14 PM
Ambitious format, but I wouldn't take part. This needs insane knowledge. Unlike American college sports, 3 guys around here follow espoirs, plus 4 more among the other 7 billion. And even if I spent months googling those no-names, in the end it would all be about the luck of the Alaphilippes vs. the Sicards anyway.

(Just one man's opinion.)

I think you're right. Much as I read a little about Espoirs, its very rare when they are on TV and to be honest you need to see the riders to make any sort of judgement at all.

Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 07, 2015, 01:48:48 PM
Again, calling for a good name :agent:

Unless somebody has a sexy idea, I'll call it "Cycling Cup of Nations" or something, so that both the cycling and the national teams stand out to whoever on ProFSL sees the name.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 07, 2015, 01:57:41 PM
Can I make a suggestion that would improve the overall experience...more banter and threads and involvement in all the races during the season. I'm going to post a lot and hopefully others do too.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: glomser on November 07, 2015, 03:48:19 PM
Again, calling for a good name :agent:

Unless somebody has a sexy idea, I'll call it "Cycling Cup of Nations" or something, so that both the cycling and the national teams stand out to whoever on ProFSL sees the name.

 I was thinking of a song of John Denver: Take me home country roads. And take the last two words: Country Roads...
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 07, 2015, 03:56:03 PM
The Rainbow Cup?

Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Teton on November 07, 2015, 04:25:21 PM
The Rainbow Cup?

I like it! :winner:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: BluesBrothers on November 07, 2015, 05:51:52 PM
I like the idea that we can all pick the same riders. We all take 4 from the top 15(cq-ranking), 5 from 16 to 40, 5 from 41 to 80, 5 from 81-130  and 6 from the rest. So we all have 25 riders and use the same format as in our current game. Now we can all have our favorites. Because we still need the different types of riders in our teams the teams should be quite different.

This way it dont matter howmany will join, all riders are available to everybody.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 08, 2015, 02:36:32 AM
I like the idea that we can all pick the same riders.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think plenty of those games already exist. I don't usually invest my time in non-revolutionary projects :P
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Teton on November 08, 2015, 03:00:45 AM
Modified option.

Just a different take.


Contract Cycling League

Select 30 Riders per team
X number of Teams (Depends on interest)
Uses current spreadsheet format, scoring and race calendar.
Draft or Auction? TBD

Year 1
First 5 rounds (if Draft) or selections (by each team) are automatically signed to a 3 year contract. Riders 6 through 30 (if draft) or selections are signed to a 1 year contract.

Year 2
You have 5 riders under contract from year 1.
You may re-sign up to 5 of your riders who have expiring contracts to new contracts from 1-3 years. (This allows you to keep your top riders throughout their careers.)
You fill the balance of your team with NeoPro riders signing each to a contract of 1 - 3 years as you select them in the draft or auction.

Year 3 and onward.
You have riders under contract. You may re-sign up to 5 of your riders who have expiring contracts to new contracts from 1-3 years. You fill the balance of your team with NeoPro riders signing each to a contract of 1 - 3 years as you select them in the draft or auction.

Trades allowed.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 08, 2015, 03:08:09 AM
A bit similar to our current league, no?
If I understand correctly, the main difference is keeping some riders forever.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Teton on November 08, 2015, 03:18:44 AM
A bit similar to our current league, no?
If I understand correctly, the main difference is keeping some riders forever.

Similar but with 1-3 year contracts, and the ability to re-sign up to five riders riders each year. No drops. Works best as a snake draft.

Perhaps not different enough from the current league. :toth:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: joecool37 on November 08, 2015, 05:50:55 AM
I like the simple idea of a league where we have a snake draft and mae our teams that way.

Itīs easy and simple, but still fun.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: GTF on November 08, 2015, 07:36:39 AM
I like the simple idea of a league where we have a snake draft and mae our teams that way.

Itīs easy and simple, but still fun.

 :iatp:

But just to mix it up a bit, you could have 'prime rounds' in the draft - like cycling crit's have prime("preem") laps - where you'd sign riders on 2 year 'prime' contracts. These rounds could be based on prime numbers. 

The prime numbers between 1 and 30 are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29 - so if we have 30 man teams this would result in;

Year 1 - 30 rounds, 10 'prime' contracts.
Year 2 - 20 rounds, 8 'prime' contracts.
Year 3 onwards - 22 rounds, 8 'prime' contracts.

All riders on the same value contract so no budget to get confused with, but it requires more thought than a straightforward draft.


p.s. I have given this idea less than an hours thought, so if there's a major flaw don't be afraid to tell me.  :toth:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: joecool37 on November 08, 2015, 08:43:35 AM
Sounds interesting.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 08, 2015, 09:58:32 AM
Ladies?

Teams of 10, budget 2,500. Same rules as the men.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ghedebrav on November 08, 2015, 10:48:05 AM
Ladies?

Teams of 10, budget 2,500. Same rules as the men.

Yes - great idea.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 08, 2015, 11:17:39 AM
Yes - great idea.

Winner gets a vacuum cleaner?

But seriously, I suspect not many of us are completely au fait with the women's scene. I know a very small amount but certainly not much. It would also show our support for women's cycling, and, at the same time would not detract in any way from the main game we are playing.

Clearly we'd all need to do a bit of homework over the next couple of weeks, but if we said we'd start next weekend...

CQRanking Cycling Fever and PCS would be good starting points, 2016 could be a season of learning and it would be something we could continue/expand next year and beyond.

The more I think about it, the more keen I am.

Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Florry on November 08, 2015, 11:39:36 AM
I like the idea women's competition idea, the others I am not sure about cause they are different formats I am not familiar with, snake draft sounds cool though :toast:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: glomser on November 08, 2015, 04:49:08 PM
Ladies?

Teams of 10, budget 2,500. Same rules as the men.

 There are only 2 or 3 ladies who score very much points.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: glomser on November 08, 2015, 04:51:20 PM
I could work, but I know form another league where we have a ladies section, that most of the ladies only score a few points.

But if we try it I'm in...
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 08, 2015, 05:21:22 PM
Alright, seems we're converging to something quite cool:
Please vote/argue below:
(Gimme your thoughts. Don't expect democracy though.)


PS
My nerdy brain briefly salivated over that prime idea, but in the end 1-year contracts make it both easy and different from what we already have.


Ladies?

Sorry, I think I know more about women's footy...
I mean, go wild, but don't count on me.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ace on November 08, 2015, 06:29:33 PM
How does a snake draft work with National teams?

I suppose we could have:

2 round draft to select nations.

Option to select Spain 2 etc.

Then pick 5 riders from each of your nations (Spain 2 would have to wait for Spain 1 to pick 5).

Total budget of 5,000 per team.

I think it's simpler (and better) to have a 10 round snake draft with a budget of 6,000 and you can only pick one rider from each country.

Country Roads was also a better name  :P
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 08, 2015, 06:45:44 PM
How does a snake draft work with National teams?

If we're drafting, the nations become mere labels indeed. Just corrected my question above.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: joecool37 on November 08, 2015, 06:55:34 PM
Everything sounds interesting. (The woman league would be the only one where I would pass).

But my vote would go to a easy league. 30 round snake draft, only 1 year contracts. So we just have to rate the riders for their 1 year value. Everyone has the same chance.

In year two the snake draft will start in reverse order of the 2016 final standings. So the worst team has the first pick in the 2017 draft. And so on.


Itīs easy and simple, but a lot of fun.



Not really sure how we will do it with nationals, but that could end pretty unbalanced at the end unless we find a good solution here.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ghedebrav on November 08, 2015, 07:36:38 PM
So essentially it would be our current game but with a different method for rider selection and different team names - no significance to the choice of nation?

If not, I'll bagsy Colombia.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: BluesBrothers on November 08, 2015, 08:49:26 PM
I will take Monaco, dont like to pay taxes
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ace on November 08, 2015, 09:47:19 PM
I'm in favour of a shorter draft (10 rounds).

Don't like specifying by rider type (or anything else that's subjective and/or requires work).

Having a budget adds some strategy.

One rider per country and/or real life trade team (or something similar) brings a twist.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 09, 2015, 04:00:43 AM
If we're drafting, the nations become mere labels indeed.

I mean, not immediately (when there is a cost assigned to each rider), but the more I think about it, the less chance I see for implementing nations as anything more than a mere label in any format:

One rider per country and/or real life trade team (or something similar) brings a twist.

IMO if our teams remain small, this would hardly matter and thus becomes just a weird little detail more than anything.



Summing up:

League 1 - totally gonna happen
Basically Ace's original idea and what I posted above. I like the cost assigned to a rider, meaning draft order hardly matters:

League 2 - would be equally easy to run
For those who don't like the historical cost attached to each rider, and those who prefer balanced teams over those with only sprinters/climbers. I like the fact that this boils down to what fans get excited about: "is Cav better than Kittel", "is Landa better than Porte", not "is Greipel better than Pinot". Again, draft order barely matters, as each person gets one 1st pick, one 2nd pick etc.

League 3 - is there interest for more crazy auctions?
Many people enjoy those auctions more than the season itself. Is there interest in more bidding wars? We would still need to come up with a fresh set of rules, so that we don't just repeat what we already have. Options that spring to mind:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: glomser on November 09, 2015, 11:37:29 AM
For League 1 and 2 I'm in. I think 2 more leagues for now is OK. Maybe in the future we can look at other posibilities.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Teton on November 09, 2015, 12:43:08 PM
I'm all in for whatever is decided. Although League 1 and 2 seem best. I would be glad to help if needed.  :toth:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: joecool37 on November 09, 2015, 01:06:24 PM
I guess I am also in whatever we decide.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 09, 2015, 02:53:59 PM
Tadaaaaaaam :judge:

Announcing it here first for the people who helped me create it. Tomorrow I'll inform the rest of the league, and after that the rest of the interwebs. Recruiting help much much appreciated!

http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?board=3318
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?board=3307
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 09, 2015, 04:47:30 PM
I'm in. Obviously.  :toast:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: davy duck on November 09, 2015, 04:49:41 PM
An idea slipping in my unexperienced -gaming-mind ...
A real-stockmarket based auction.
You buy and sell riders during the season based on their cq-ranking. You pay X% extra when you buy and sell. The goal is that they gain more points in the race or for the time you bought them for.
Small team ...
Big budget ...
Possibility to loose a lot of budget though.
You can play whole season with the same riders (safe), you can play short term buying and selling constantly (higher risk), different tactics ...

It adds more gameplay during the season.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: davy duck on November 09, 2015, 04:51:12 PM
I'm in off course du-uh  :toth:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 09, 2015, 04:53:09 PM
There would be an argument for a smaller game like the one we have, in which you can buy and sell for whatever value, profits carried over. So, I have dawg, he wins the Dauphine and someone bids £2m to take his contract. Likewise he gets injured and I can offload him to the highest bidder.



Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: joecool37 on November 09, 2015, 05:27:50 PM
Looks good Garfield  :toast:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 10, 2015, 06:07:25 AM
Looks good Garfield  :toast:

Thanks! Preparing the spreadsheets as we speak.

However, I'm asking myself whether it even makes sense to play as national teams. In the end the rules make it irrelevant, and it doesn't really feel natural to draft cyclists to join your nation. Maybe we stick to our trade teams after all?
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: BluesBrothers on November 10, 2015, 09:31:12 AM
For me it dont add anything to be a national team.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: joecool37 on November 10, 2015, 11:00:07 AM
I would also prefer the normal cycling teams.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Teton on November 10, 2015, 11:15:13 AM
Agree. Trade teams.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 23, 2015, 12:52:59 PM
I'm going 73%-offline for 3 weeks, but this is just to let you know I haven't surrendered entirely on the national teams league front.

One format I've been thinking about is something similar to RC, but you'd start with a team of 3-5 (fixed or your choice?) riders representing your country, and your budget gets limited accordingly.

Optionally, one of those riders could cost you 90% of the budget he should, another - only 80%.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 23, 2015, 02:09:56 PM
What about we have mini competitions during the season, which work on the same basis as The Rainbow Cup i.e. quick-fire draft - each team has 6 picks for 3,000. So do you go for a biggie like Froome or Kristoff, or do you go for a few smaller riders.

1) Spring Classics
2) Giro
3) Tour
4) Vuelta

We'd have to start them a week or two before the race and do quick picks. But most of the big riders will have been confirmed way before anyway.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 23, 2015, 02:33:24 PM
Not bad!
A. I could request a separate forum for "Mini Leagues".
B. I'd split 1) into cobbles and Ardennes.
C. I'm in Rio almost all August, so possibly would need help setting up la Vuelta.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Joelsim on November 23, 2015, 03:16:49 PM
Not bad!
A. I could request a separate forum for "Mini Leagues".
B. I'd split 1) into cobbles and Ardennes.
C. I'm in Rio almost all August, so possibly would need help setting up la Vuelta.

Well it would add a bit of excitement with auctions during the season.
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Teton on November 23, 2015, 03:26:35 PM
Count me in! :toth:
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: glomser on November 23, 2015, 06:47:11 PM
Sounds funny
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Garfield on November 26, 2015, 12:28:50 PM
Another idea: to have a league with a simplistic single draft, where strictly progress counts. (This was the hidden idea behind RC, but many people misunderstood the concept and consequently built poor teams, so this is an attempt to make it more explicit.) As soon as you draft Valverde, your total score goes to -3152, and you spend entire 2016 trying to first erase the deficit and then score some more hopefully. So it doesn't actually matter if you draft for -3152 and score 3162, or draft for -152 and score 162.

A variant could even be to score not for the entire year, but only till the first team surfaces above zero and ends the game immediately. (With a sizeable obligatory minimum amount spent.)



Sounds funny

Why? What's the problem?
Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: glomser on November 26, 2015, 07:18:42 PM
Another idea: to have a league with a simplistic single draft, where strictly progress counts. (This was the hidden idea behind RC, but many people misunderstood the concept and consequently built poor teams, so this is an attempt to make it more explicit.) As soon as you draft Valverde, your total score goes to -3152, and you spend entire 2016 trying to first erase the deficit and then score some more hopefully. So it doesn't actually matter if you draft for -3152 and score 3162, or draft for -152 and score 162.

A variant could even be to score not for the entire year, but only till the first team surfaces above zero and ends the game immediately. (With a sizeable obligatory minimum amount spent.)



Why? What's the problem?

 Oh, there's no problem.  But I thought it was the idea not to start too many leagues and I see constantly attempts to get more leagues...

That's ok with me, but I didn't expect more leagues this season...

What about RC wasn't it clear enough that it was going about progress. I also thought it was a league with a few riders and a low budget to get the strongest team you could form with these rules and restrictions... 

Title: Re: Call me crazy
Post by: Ace on November 27, 2015, 12:23:57 PM
I don't like some of the RC teams but Valverde isn't necessarily terrible pick.

Ideally you'd draft 8 x 750pt riders who'd all score 1k plus. Unfortunately there aren't even enough riders to take all the 500-1500 pointers who'll likely show a profit plus the obvious cheap guys.

You are best off spending most of the 6k so if you think Valverde can repeat his 2015 or come really close then surrounding him with profit guys isn't the worst thing you could do depending on where you're drafting.

Of course taking him in the first is sub-optimal; unless you think that all the best 1-1.5k guys have gone and someone might take him before you get another chance. Plus if a few teams draft too top heavy early on whilst you you go cheap then suddenly you might be looking at guys like Greipel and Pozzovivo in order to spend your budget (2.5k of probable non profit now spread between 2 riders).

If we all adopted very similar strategies then the draft would have been entirely predicated on draft position and ending up with the 'right' guys among those in the value range for each of your picks. As it is i think most people put thought into their budget and tried to build a team that would show a profit at the end of the season.

Plus it's impossible to blindly adopt a strategy in a draft when you can't be sure how other teams will behave.

And lest we not forget this is all supposed to be for fun; which is why certain teams might have targeted riders they liked who they don't have in other games rather than trying to squeeze every possible point and hypothetically if you spend most of your money and have a couple of possible improvers then you have a chance.

:toth:
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on March 16, 2016, 10:15:53 AM
More ideas, partially discussed before:

1. Given how amazingly quick our drafts are: is it possible to have a big league like this with only one big global draft of all riders and their fixed salaries?

2. I think something similar has been proposed above: when thinking about cyclists, their form or future potential, we almost treat those as shares of some specific value on the stock market. Would it be doable to design a format where I buy 20% of Kwiato as price X, and then sell it high some weeks later, to spend the money elsewhere? X being influenced by either the results or simply supply/demand. This would need a dedicated game master (I'd never find the time) and a solid mathematical model from somebody who understands the stock market. Anybody?
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on March 16, 2016, 03:02:09 PM
What about...

Everyone gets 7,500 to spend to buy a team of say 25 riders.

It is a draft, BUT with the lower of the scores for the past 2 years' CQ.

Then when everyone has filled their team of 25, each team gets another 1,000 to spend (on top of what they have saved from the original 7,500) and 5 empty slots.

This would surely promote some bargaining, whereby teams could then sell any rider for any price.

An example. Manager A has bought Dan Martin for 526. Manager B is willing to pay 850 for him so buys him for that. Similarly 3 months into the season, Manager C wants to get rid of Degenkolb as he is out for 3 months and Manager D then buys him for 450k as a risk. Blah blah.

The transfers can happen all season, so an example would be it's May and Kristoff has scored his main body of points in the Classics so his value in reality is now much lower, whereas it's coming up to the Tour, so Froome's value could soar. (But it is all based on what ANOther Manager is willing to pay at that point in time).

It would have to be one year contracts though, and by doing the worst of 2 years' CQ we don't hinder top riders like Kristoff/Valverde being picked either.

It could be fun, and different enough from the main game so as not to detract from it.

We could even do this now as a trial run game before starting it in earnest next season. It could get all managers on to the forum on a regular basis to see the 'transfer list' of riders people are willing to sell. Completely fluid.

At no point can any manager spend more than he has available obviously. It could end up with one manager having loads of money and few riders, someone else has excellent riders but no money, but then 2 months later the first manager has sold a couple and is back in the market...

Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on March 17, 2016, 07:10:22 AM
Sorry Joel, not a big fan. The first part sounds silly: you go into the deepest project in the entire community (a global draft of 300-400 cyclists is amazingly difficult) yet the rules encourage fishing for all the sad things in life (injuries, illnesses, and doping suspensions), while having the top pick (aka your next Kittel) gives you a great start. The second part sounds unpredictable and chaotic. I will admit buying and selling cyclists like football players has some potential, but I pity both the commish and whoever is trying to tame the spreadsheet with those daily transfers.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: glomser on March 18, 2016, 09:36:30 AM
Joel's idea has been done in some other forums. Most of these leagues are still running with diferent rules. I know a league where you buy a rider and can keep him his whole career. Another league is working with difernet contracts. For youngsters you can give 3 contracts of 4 years and for the rest you've got contract of 3 (with a max of 6 including the youngsters) ,2 (with a max of 12 including the contracts named before) or 1 season length. So any rider can be in your team for a maximum of 4 seasons. And every season you have several bigstars who's contract is running out.

Also the drafts are different. I know the simple bidding with a deadline. Or a kind of snake draft. where the team finishing last can start every round. With a maximum of 12 rounds. Of course you may quit whenever you like. The CQ-ranking is the price you pay for a rider.

Both leagues have a max of 30 riders. But it's not neccesary to fill all places.

So it is do-able. When you put a deadline you can do the draft in 2 weeks. For the draft it will take a bit longer, but with the districtions of 12 hours it can be done quite quickly. Mostly that one stops after a week of 3...

Both leagues are pretty succesful and doing wel for many seasons now. I've been in both leagues and I know BluesBrothers have been too. It's quite some work to lead them, but as I said it is do-able.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Canto on March 18, 2016, 11:57:45 AM
I have this kind of format in my Dynasty MLB league.
- the amount of the 1st year contract is the amount of your winning bid ( auction draft)
- you decide number of year you want to sign the player (maximum 5), knowing that each year you will have salary increase of 10%
- at the end of the year you can either resign the player (50% increase of his last year contract) or release him (go back to FA market)
- during the season you can sign FA, for a 1 year contract. These players can be resigned with a 150% increase of salary
- Rookie can only be signed for 3 years. These rookies at the end of their rookie contract go to a claim auction draft
- you could also have a prospect team

I think this is applicable to Cycling
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: glomser on March 22, 2016, 06:47:38 PM
More ideas, partially discussed before:

  • Start on October 17, 2016
  • In case we're slower than predicted: forced finish when TDU is some days away
  • 12 hours clock, temporarily reduced to 1 hour if you missed your previous deadline

Starting on 17 october is for me only possible if I'm sure that my turn will start at 18 october. Otherwise it's 100% sure I'm not able to pick within the 12 hours as I'm not online that whole day...
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: glomser on March 22, 2016, 06:53:13 PM
I have this kind of format in my Dynasty MLB league.
- the amount of the 1st year contract is the amount of your winning bid ( auction draft)
- you decide number of year you want to sign the player (maximum 5), knowing that each year you will have salary increase of 10%
- at the end of the year you can either resign the player (50% increase of his last year contract) or release him (go back to FA market)
- during the season you can sign FA, for a 1 year contract. These players can be resigned with a 150% increase of salary
- Rookie can only be signed for 3 years. These rookies at the end of their rookie contract go to a claim auction draft
- you could also have a prospect team

I think this is applicable to Cycling

Depents on how you want to draft. you also can do a snake draft and let the managers chose later what contracts the riders get. With some limits of course. For 25 riders. I would suggest a max of 2 riders with a 4 seasons contract; max of 5 riders with 3 seasons or longer contract and only 12 riders can have 2 seasons or longer. In that case less than your half team have longer contracts... With the bidding you can use what is used for UCI... And every year you have a neo draft. Even that can be with a bidding or a draft...   
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: davy duck on April 11, 2016, 12:12:08 PM
2 new ways of drafing came into my mind:

- As the cobbles quick pick have shown that it's all about the leader, you could simply do 6 drafting rounds, where the rider picked in round 1 doesn't count, budget doesn't matter. I suppose everybody will exclude the really big guys. But perhaps the first pickers exclude small riders, and it becomes a little tactical.

but better:

- a draft in time. to avoid problems of guys not doing what they have to do. There is no order of picking. The earlier you pick the lower points the rider scores.

example, like a fruit auction (14 teams - fixed deadline of course):
team A picks Sagan: score x 1
team B picks Van Avermaet: score x 1.05
team A picks Vanmarcke: score x 1.1
...
Team C picks Van Lerberghe as last: score x 5.50

Also possible with time slots:
10 days picking:
riders picked in the first day: score x 1
riders picked the second day: score x 1.1
...
or riders picked in the first hour:: score x 1
in second hour: score x1.01.

It doesn't have to be linear even, it could go exponential even. That makes it really worth the gamble of waiting.
Team budget can even be skipped then.
A team with Vanmarcke, sagan, van avermaet, cancellare and kwiatek can lose from Kuznetsov, thwaites, saramotins, erviti, sieberg.


You could do the same but changing the value of the rider. But impact will be much lower then.

(still looking for something to get around the cq-scoring-system whereby the winner is awarded extremely in comparison to the rest. :-)
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: davy duck on April 27, 2016, 05:29:59 AM
Another picking way ...

TEAM A, B, C and D pick riders.
first round: teams make their first pick at the same time without they know the pick of each other (sending it per mail or so): (picking without taking budget into account)
example result: A picks Froome, B picks Froome, C picks Quintana, D picks Valverde.
C gets Quintana, D gets Valverde, because they are the only ones that pick that one rider. A and B have to pick again because they have picked equal, but they can't pick Froome anymore (and of course quintana and Valverde)
So second round of first pick: A picks Sagen, B picks Kittel.

A and B aren't allowed to pick Froome again.

Second pick: A picks Van Avermaet, B picks Aru, C picks Froome, D picks Aru
Result: A gets Van Avermaet, C gets Froome, B and D have to pick again and can't pick Aru anymore.

Should work for 15 teams, picking 8 riders or so. Very tactical!
Some work for the administrator, but No problem of doing that.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: glomser on April 30, 2016, 06:43:54 AM
Another picking way ...

TEAM A, B, C and D pick riders.
first round: teams make their first pick at the same time without they know the pick of each other (sending it per mail or so): (picking without taking budget into account)
example result: A picks Froome, B picks Froome, C picks Quintana, D picks Valverde.
C gets Quintana, D gets Valverde, because they are the only ones that pick that one rider. A and B have to pick again because they have picked equal, but they can't pick Froome anymore (and of course quintana and Valverde)
So second round of first pick: A picks Sagen, B picks Kittel.

A and B aren't allowed to pick Froome again.

Second pick: A picks Van Avermaet, B picks Aru, C picks Froome, D picks Aru
Result: A gets Van Avermaet, C gets Froome, B and D have to pick again and can't pick Aru anymore.

Should work for 15 teams, picking 8 riders or so. Very tactical!
Some work for the administrator, but No problem of doing that.

 Looks nice, but I guess this will take some time as  you can have a lot of extra rounds to get all the teams filled.

And a question. Do you work with a budget in this or is it just try to pick the strongest team without a limit?
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: davy duck on May 01, 2016, 04:08:43 PM
can work with or without budget restrictions. But I think there is no need to set a budget.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on May 02, 2016, 07:08:22 AM
Very luck-dependent, not my cup of tea :P
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on October 01, 2017, 06:32:46 AM
It's this time of year already!

I'm all ears for your ideas/complains.

Of course no better league than Wall Street Cycling will ever exist, but we can still try!
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on October 06, 2017, 05:47:58 AM
Quick Fix sucks. Worth saving?
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=309685
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on October 06, 2017, 04:50:23 PM
My only comment would be that all points scored by a teamís riders should count. So, if you have 12 scoring players in your TDF line-up then you get all the points. I donít think using real team sizes of 8 or 9 adds anything to the game.

Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Canto on October 25, 2017, 08:25:51 AM
in UCI WT, I find frustrating not being able to keep a guy I got at a good price, and not beeing able to keep one more year. So what about (same as the dropping rule) being able to sign a one year contract (or maybe 2) to one (or two) of our rider at 150% of his actual salary ?
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on October 25, 2017, 09:34:25 AM
in UCI WT, I find frustrating not being able to keep a guy I got at a good price, and not beeing able to keep one more year. So what about (same as the dropping rule) being able to sign a one year contract (or maybe 2) to one (or two) of our rider at 150% of his actual salary ?

Trust me, we all find it frustrating. Luckily, there is a solution:
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?board=3466

Seriously though, it's something we discuss every October. Personally, I feel like we don't need to complicate*. But as usual I'm all ears if more people disagree. (Btw the rule would be 1 rider of $40+, signed before TDU, 200%)

* Because it's yet another additional rule. Because it's subject to potential abuse. Because the drop rule had a very special motivation of the manager staying active even after their star rider gets seriously injured or caught doping. Such motivation is lacking here.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on October 26, 2017, 07:36:54 AM
Iíd be up for it.

How about 40-200 at 200%

210+ at 150%

One rider per team only.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: oliveira on October 26, 2017, 10:55:27 AM
in UCI WT, I find frustrating not being able to keep a guy I got at a good price, and not beeing able to keep one more year. So what about (same as the dropping rule) being able to sign a one year contract (or maybe 2) to one (or two) of our rider at 150% of his actual salary ?

I think it only replicates what happens out there. If you sign a rider for one year based on his season n-1results and then the guy has his breakthrough, the price you have to pay to extend his contract has no correlation with his prior contract price.

IMO, this extension could be an option but you would have to choose what rider you wanted to extend for, say, 200%, before his first season at the team starts.

Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on October 26, 2017, 12:33:46 PM
I think it only replicates what happens out there. If you sign a rider for one year based on his season n-1results and then the guy has his breakthrough, the price you have to pay to extend his contract has no correlation with his prior contract price.

Hear hear!

IMO, this extension could be an option but you would have to choose what rider you wanted to extend for, say, 200%, before his first season at the team starts.

I wouldn't be opposed, if more people feel like adding such a rule. Hell, you could book the 3rd year at 400% and so on.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: derrudi on October 26, 2017, 03:58:26 PM
I would love to sign Oomen for 60k next year (200% of his 30k wage now), but I also think it would be totally unfair to have riders for a wage far below their market value.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on October 26, 2017, 04:25:45 PM
I would love to sign Oomen for 60k next year (200% of his 30k wage now), but I also think it would be totally unfair to have riders for a wage far below their market value.

The proposals are suggesting itís not including neo pro picks as clearly they are going to progress.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: GTF on October 27, 2017, 04:31:16 PM
Wouldn't this rule have a negative impact on neo-pro draft?
People could sign the best U23 riders (who probably won't score anything in the game) just to have 'first option' on them the following year.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on October 29, 2017, 07:48:46 AM
Wouldn't this rule have a negative impact on neo-pro draft?
People could sign the best U23 riders (who probably won't score anything in the game) just to have 'first option' on them the following year.

If they cost 40 or more. And if they are a neo then they can only be purchased in the neo draft for 30.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on October 29, 2017, 08:07:06 AM
If they cost 40 or more. And if they are a neo then they can only be purchased in the neo draft for 30.

He means undrafted, very young riders.
So basically Cunego for 2002 at $40, then giving you $80 in 2003 (still horrible), and $160 in 2004 (gold).
But if you have this kind of vision, maybe you deserve to kick ass :)
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on October 30, 2017, 07:43:11 AM
He means undrafted, very young riders.
So basically Cunego for 2002 at $40, then giving you $80 in 2003 (still horrible), and $160 in 2004 (gold).
But if you have this kind of vision, maybe you deserve to kick ass :)

True. But if itís only one per year that you can extend in this way itís pretty unlikely.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: TERatcliffe26 on October 30, 2017, 03:23:47 PM
Here's another suggestion, the option of 2 years for your 2nd neo pick?
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Teton on October 30, 2017, 03:51:54 PM
Here's another suggestion, the option of 2 years for your 2nd neo pick?

I like it.. require the 2nd year be determined when the selection was made.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on October 31, 2017, 07:57:57 AM
Looking forward to more feedback and more ideas! An overview of currently discussed changes:

UCI World Tour
My opinion: undecided. If it ain't broke, don't fix it? That being said, I serve at the pleasure of the directeurs sportifs.



Quick Fix
My opinion: must change heavily (http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=309685.0). The first change listed above sound inevitable if you want to win with the last pick.



Country Roads
My opinion: should change for more control and fairness, deeper experience, and a game which is less like all the others.



Rainbow Cup
My opinion: Why not? (http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=244063.msg1290719#msg1290719)



New leagues
Nothing proposed till now.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on October 31, 2017, 10:41:44 AM
My views.

UCI WT

Happy with both of the suggestions.

QF

Not in this one but the first change would make it more interesting.

CR

Would prefer a straight snake draft with no categories as itís fairer to the teams later in the draw. The first choosers could get Sagan, Froome. Quintana, GVA etc and the later picks get first dibs on a couple of the Pinots and Bardets - see my post in the Country Roads section.

Rainbow

Fine as is.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: glomser on October 31, 2017, 03:10:09 PM
World Tour

Like both ideas

QF

Like the points system by round... But I haven't got Whatsapp so I will drop this game if that would be added.

CR

Isn't it possible to let all players sent in their top 5 per categorie. Also let them also make a list of these categories in points with 20 points to spent on this. fe. with 10 categories you can give 9 of them 1 point and 1 categorie 11, but you can also spread the points.

Then Managers get the first choise in the categorie where they have add the most points to. The number 2 gets then his highest pick that is free and so on... If there is a tie no one gets the pick... Not all riders will be chosen so we start with another draft. But only now we get 15 points to add and still make our top 5 lists...

I'm not sure this will work but it's only an idea to change things... And a little bit different from Garfields idea.

RC

Maybe here;s the points per round is also possible.. So 1 point for round one pick 2 points for round 2 pick...
Like the idea of one rider per real-life team. For nations I'm not sure as there aren't many good Slovenians, Russians, Polish. Letzeburgian or South African riders...  So it's only for the big countries as France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Netherlands and GB... And perhaps Germany.


New leagues:

It it an option to do something with the neo's? Like chose 3 or 4 of them for a max of 500 points or so. And the team with the biggest increasement wins...

Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Teton on October 31, 2017, 04:28:38 PM


UCI World Tour


I like both ideas, but am not sure we should make any changes to this hallmark league.



Quick Fix

Increasing the score by the round selected makes sense.
The clock issue is a tuff one, worse with the time zones involved. As I help run the drafts, I felt real unpopular last year as I skipped people who timed out. I think it would help if EVERYONE linked their PM's to Their Email on this site.
I think we should stick with CQ scoring  whenever possible.
I have no Idea what "WhatsApp" is??

Country Roads

Perhaps eliminated a couple of the weaker categories. Geezer, Global, Rebound.

Rainbow Cup

I think we should stick with CQ scoring  whenever possible.
No changes. Not sure how the Nations, or real-Life??, would help this league.


New leagues
We currently have a strong list of unique league options.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Canto on November 01, 2017, 03:00:53 PM
Like both  ideas for the UCI Word tour.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: oliveira on November 02, 2017, 01:48:14 PM
I think we should be very cautious about new rules for UCI WT as new rules bring more complexity to the game and it is more difficult to recruit new DS if the rules are not simple enough.

I mean, I like the ideas, but I think we should preserve the relative simplicity of our main game.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: davy duck on November 03, 2017, 11:47:42 AM
UCI World Tour
    For signings Ä40+, immediately announce an extension at 200% salary.
    Optional 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders.

I donít like both.
Itís needless extra complexity in my opinion. It feels like or speculating for dumb luck, or ruining partly the next season. It has nothing to do with the main goal of this game.
And I believe both will have a modest impact on the ending result.

Quick Fix
    Round 2 picks score double, round 5 picks score x5 etc.
    No more clock penalties.
    Use previous season's main game score as price tags.
    Draft via WhatsApp if still too slow.

Yes-yes-no- and no
1st no:  itís almost inpossible to have a correct list of riders with their result of the main game. As Iím sure there are some (minor) mistakes in the score counting. CQ changes results sometimes after we copy/pasted them in our form. Mostly itís in the back of the result: f.e. riders out of time limit. So I prefer the original CQ score.
2nd no: Instead of drafting clock, you could make fixed time frames for everybody. Then you know way in advance when itís your turn. You could anticipate this way by sending a top 3 to a mod or a colleague you trust. As some people never heard of whatsapp, itís a bad idea.

Country Roads
    Customize your draft order or a single draft in spite of 12 categories.
The categorizing is just the thing that makes this game other than all the other games. Perhaps there is need for more thinking about the categories, and which riders to put in those categories. You could go crazy in those categories. It doesnít have to so with cycling. Ideas: categorizing per country, only riders with ďbalĒ in their name, a rider may be in multiple categories that way there is no limit on the number of categories, a category with riders who have the name of a cartoon figure, etc etc etc Ö

Rainbow Cup
Keep as is in my opinion. Absolute freedom who to pick.

FYC
Keep as is in my opinion. Let it go in this format for 2 more season, and see how things go with the extensions.
I really love the format. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact I crushed you all  :disco:
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: TERatcliffe26 on November 03, 2017, 01:47:19 PM
WT

Not fussed about the first one
Big problem with the current way Neo is done which is why i made the 2 year for 2nd pick suggestion. If anything your 2nd pick should be 2 years and first pick 1 year. Basically people at the top of the draft can get a Gaviria for 2 years, yet my pick low down in the 2nd round goes after 1 year whilst still maturing. I cant see the sense/fairness in this way of doing it. Yes I get that those that have struggled get the early picks but 2 years of Gaviria compared to a 1 year 2nd round pick far outways the difference in scores generally from top to bottom come the end of the season over 2 years.

Quick fix

Not a throwing dummies out of the pram, but it needs a massive shake up for me to continue with it, and for me the biggest problem is the use of CQ scoring as it is. This is used the same for all the games, and in this game you effectively have to use a score when drafting that is non reflective of there ability in the races we use for this game aside from the big boys of which you cannot afford more than 1 or 2. Dupont for an example had a score of around 1000, none of which came from any races we use (except maybe the odd points in some of the early classic races), same with Dumoulin, 800 odd CQ with very little from WT races

Country roads

Kinda gave my opinion already, keep the categories but use a snake draft whereby people pick form whichever category as you go through the draft until they have a rider from each, so they make there own importance on category

The rest of the games seem fine
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 03, 2017, 02:48:09 PM
I agree with you TER. My neosí scores added up across all 3 years Iíve played the game donít add up to a single year of Gaviria, Ewan or similar riders. The draft being the same both times also doesnít help when youíre near the bottom. Very unfair.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 04, 2017, 08:20:52 AM
Many thanks for everybody's feedback :toast:

UCI World Tour

Decision - mixed reviews, thus no changes in 2018.

(The game itself wouldn't improve much, thus doesn't need to become more complex.)

However, Tom's newest idea of 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders sounds VERY interesting because it would remove a toxic situation where you start the auctions already 1000+ points behind somebody (vide Gaviria's 2017), and thus would improve the game considerably. It was first raised mere hours ago, but I'd like to listen to more feedback here, and then announce the decision for 2019 WITHIN A WEEK, so that nobody tanks in vain.



Quick Fix

Most likely decision - three changes:
The latter opposed by Davy, but I disagree: we don't care how reliable the number is. It is just an arbitrary number, everybody knows this number (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tNCwcyt9DaS2AFS_Hek8vIsBLWK_EFBy2JShBLFghtk/edit#gid=2106002949), and is still obliged to explicitly include this number when posting a pick. Fewer untouchable riders + more sneaky picks = even better chances with a late pick. Details still to be discussed in order to make sure we're not opening a Pandora's box. There would be a wide array of free riders. A single year of feedback is a fresh twist to the usual "higher of the last two" we use, but also creates some injury-riddled bargains like KŲnig in any GT. All riders would become cheaper, thus the budget would probably need to go down to 2700.



Country Roads

Most likely decision - a single draft in spite of 12 categories.
Of course the relative scoring remains.
Almost 200 picks, thus a clock of 12 hours and an earlier start, just after the WorldTour insanity slows down.



Rainbow Cup

Most likely decision - no changes.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 04, 2017, 10:37:10 AM
Yep, I prefer all neos on 1 year contracts. Very very unfair to get 2 bonus years.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: GTF on November 05, 2017, 07:29:30 PM
I'm not sure there's any problem with the neo-pro draft as it is now - there is very little correlation between the draft order and final standings. I think it's important to remember that for every Gaviria, there are other big talents who do nothing for 2 years (e.g. Dombrowski). An early draft pick does not guarantee future success.

Having said that, I'm not opposed to Tom's idea but for a different reason. I think 1st-rounders would almost certainly command lower salaries/shorter contracts if they were on the open market a year earlier, which wouldn't be a bad thing IMO.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Ace on November 08, 2017, 01:03:42 AM
I prefer the strategy that 2 year contracts create (can pick a rider for a year ahead if that suits your timeline better). Only thing i'd say is that it should be illegal to trade for them (i was highly opposed to this tactic last year as i believed it violated the spirit of the game but decided not to say anything).
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 08, 2017, 04:45:32 AM
I prefer the strategy that 2 year contracts create (can pick a rider for a year ahead if that suits your timeline better).

I guess that's why Tom proposed a switch: 1 year in round 1 to get a scorer, 2 years in round 2 to get a talent.

Btw I'm not a huge fan of his idea (because 2nd round is sheer lottery), I would rather just simplify to 2x 1-year contracts.
I don't even see passing in the second round as a proof that it's useless. It's a strategical choice of how to utilize a roster spot, and it could work or not.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Florry on November 08, 2017, 08:37:49 AM
Personally I wouldn't change the neo pro draft and no that's not because I was lucky enough I got to select Gaviria in my first year, as GTF has pointed out an early pick doesn't guarantee success, and we have to remember most neos only start getting major results after a year in WT. I believe spotting talent is the main goal of this draft, and if you pick a rider that is going to become really big, you should be rewarded for it.
I get where the criticism of the current draft comes from, but I would sooner make all contracts (both 1st and 2nd round) 2 years, like in real life, and reverse the draft order for the 2nd round.

Also, I tend to agree with Ace on the subject of trading neo's the year they've been signed in the draft. Year after, all good. IMO.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 08, 2017, 11:49:48 AM
Definitely reverse the draft order for the second round. 100%.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Florry on November 08, 2017, 12:02:37 PM
Definitely reverse the draft order for the second round. 100%.
It makes sense. 1st and last pick is still an advantage over 20th and 21st pick, but not as big of an advantage.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 08, 2017, 12:07:58 PM
It makes sense. 1st and last pick is still an advantage over 20th and 21st pick, but not as big of an advantage.

Hugely. In every other game it's a snake draft. I've said this every year but it gets ignored. Hugely unfair on the teams who pick last.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: TERatcliffe26 on November 08, 2017, 12:09:41 PM
Surely if trades are in the game its up to the owner and other party who is traded, unless someone is taking advantage of a newbie for example
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 08, 2017, 12:23:18 PM
Surely if trades are in the game its up to the owner and other party who is traded, unless someone is taking advantage of a newbie for example

Costa's sitting on a beach at the moment. Or maybe he's not riding for a reason, who knows.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 09, 2017, 02:40:58 AM
I believe spotting talent is the main goal of this draft, and if you pick a rider that is going to become really big, you should be rewarded for it.

Still, we have to acknowledge it's immensely luck-based.
In 2014, Benoot was Vervaeke's u23 domestique, and so they went 9th and 3rd respectively in the 2015 draft. I got lucky.
So the argument is: to get heavily rewarded or punished for 2 years is a bit much. I must admit I'm still leaning towards 2x 1-year contracts.



Also, I tend to agree with Ace on the subject of trading neo's the year they've been signed in the draft. Year after, all good. IMO.

My gut feeling is closer to Tom's TBH, but let's hear other people's opinions first.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: DJW14 on November 09, 2017, 09:47:08 AM
Fwiw, I agree with Florry's suggestion of 2x2 years
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: LosBrolin on November 09, 2017, 10:15:42 AM
Fwiw, I agree with Florry's suggestion of 2x2 years

Same.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Canto on November 09, 2017, 11:09:39 AM
Agree with 2 years contracts for both round.
Today the 2nd round pick are quite often useless, but could be a good bet in their second year.
ok also with the snake
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 09, 2017, 01:59:24 PM
2 years is good, helps on the nurturing talent side and enables people to gamble a bit.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: cranky on November 09, 2017, 03:11:16 PM
I'd be happy with 2 x 2 year contracts from a snake draft.

Also agree with Ace that there should be a restriction on trading neos.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 10, 2017, 02:04:49 PM
For some structure: a reminder of (now numbered) potential 2019 changes currently being discussed, plus a new one at the bottom:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

My opinion: undecided, but I can see why it came up. After some years we've all become experts. This season :Lampre: Luis destroyed us, but teams 2-10 all finished in that 7300-8300 range. The season before that, the two teams on top of the rankings had Ewan and Gaviria as neos, while no fewer than 7 teams right behind them finished within mere 700 points. To give one of those teams 2 free years of the next superstar is like Christmas and Easter together.

2. 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

My opinion: probably unnecessary, it's a sheer lottery. None of us have ever heard of Patrick MŁller, Simon Sellier, William Barta, Nicola Conci, Damien Touze, Giovanni Carboni, Matteo Fabbro, Corentin Ermenault, Bram Welten, Valentin Madouas, or Nathan van Hooydonck. We cannot know if they're good enough to become successful pros. Their bosses don't know if they're good enough to become successful pros. They don't know themselves if they're good enough to become successful pros! Also, it's irrelevant that they mostly sign 2-year contracts IRL - this is still a puny fantasy game. And passing remains an option.

3. Snake draft order

My opinion: undecided. The argument that we use it in all other games is irrelevant, because there we start from scratch. Here, :Lampre: kept Pozzovivo at 240k and Kwiato at 610k, that's why the current system is designed specifically to help out those who finished at the bottom as much as possible.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades

My opinion: undecided. For a quick check on how you feel about it, you can visit the :RadioShack: sheet and ask yourself whether my kindergarten squad is good strategizing or rules abuse. Voices above range between Tom's "unless you're new, you should know what you're doing", via Fleur's "2nd year only", all the way to Ace's "entirely illegal, violates the spirit of the game".

5. A brand new brainstorming subject: new definition of neo-pro?

This year suddenly a lot of people are struggling to understand our definition:
"Neo-pro is a rider born in 1995 or later who wasn't on a real-life professional team (WT/ProConti) in spring 2017"
Also, when somebody new joins in the future, things would be easier for them if our definition matched the one used IRL.
If that's something we want to consider, it would require 2 changes: removal of age limit, and taking into account previous seasons too.
I believe the accurate wording would be "Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Curious to hear your thoughts, but please think twice. Sligthly worried about any Pandora boxes like geezers who happen to have ridden for a conti team for the last decade. Example of neo-pros if the definition changes:
2017 - Dupont http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=7948
2018 - A. Jensen http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=17088
2019 - you-know-who http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=21971
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Florry on November 10, 2017, 02:15:32 PM
I just wrote this in the general discussion thread but I suppose it fits better in here:

If I may be so bold, I think we should consider changing the neo draft rules for next year. These would be my suggestions:
1. Snake draft
2. 2yr contracts in both rounds
3. A rider is eligible if he hasn't raced for a professional (PCT or WT) team before and fits the age criterion (see 4). This is excluding traineeships, riders who have only raced at pro level as a trainee are eligible, also a contract signed in August or later is seen as equal to a traineeship.
4. Increase age criterion by a year or two. For this year, for example born 1993 or 1994 and later, instead of 1995 and later.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Florry on November 10, 2017, 02:39:09 PM

2. 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

My opinion: probably unnecessary, it's a sheer lottery. None of us have ever heard of Patrick MŁller, Simon Sellier, William Barta, Nicola Conci, Damien Touze, Giovanni Carboni, Matteo Fabbro, Corentin Ermenault, Bram Welten, Valentin Madouas, or Nathan van Hooydonck. We cannot know if they're good enough to become successful pros. Their bosses don't know if they're good enough to become successful pros. They don't know themselves if they're good enough to become successful pros! Also, it's irrelevant that they mostly sign 2-year contracts IRL - this is still a puny fantasy game. And passing remains an option.
I don't mean to offend, but I have heard of and followed the progression of the names in bold. I would say none of my 2nd-round neo picks in the 3 years I've played this game have been random selections.
Most neos only begin to shine after a couple months or even a year on a higher level, of course they need time to adapt. To me, it makes sense to give them another year to really prove themselves, if you know what I mean.

Quote
3. Snake draft order

My opinion: undecided. The argument that we use it in all other games is irrelevant, because there we start from scratch. Here, :Lampre: kept Pozzovivo at 240k and Kwiato at 610k, that's why the current system is designed specifically to help out those who finished at the bottom as much as possible.
While I understand trying to help those that finished low in the rankings, we have a saying in Dutch, not sure if it exists in English: "new round, new chances". Basically everyone gets the same opportunities to build a strong team, and while some will have an advantage thanks to good signings in earlier years, I don't think it's necessary to handicap those teams so much. One or two good signings don't win you the game, it's the best team overall that wins. First and last pick in the neo draft is an advantage over two picks right in the middle, but not as big of an advantage as it is now.

Quote
4. Restriction on neo-pro trades

My opinion: undecided. For a quick check on how you feel about it, you can visit the :RadioShack: sheet and ask yourself whether my kindergarten squad is good strategizing or rules abuse. Voices above range between Tom's "unless you're new, you should know what you're doing", via Fleur's "2nd year only", all the way to Ace's "entirely illegal, violates the spirit of the game".
Personally, I am not a fan of hoarding all the 2-yr neos. I understand it may be a smart tactic, but I tend to agree with Ace that it violates the spirit of the game. You can get 10 to 15 riders for next to nothing that have huge potential to score big. However, in the 2nd year, we can more accurately judge the value of the neos, and if anyone is still willing to trade at that point, so be it, I don't see it as any different to normal trades.
 
Quote
5. A brand new brainstorming subject: new definition of neo-pro?

This year suddenly a lot of people are struggling to understand our definition:
"Neo-pro is a rider born in 1995 or later who wasn't on a real-life professional team (WT/ProConti) in spring 2017"
Also, when somebody new joins in the future, things would be easier for them if our definition matched the one used IRL.
If that's something we want to consider, it would require 2 changes: removal of age limit, and taking into account previous seasons too.
I believe the accurate wording would be "Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Curious to hear your thoughts, but please think twice. Sligthly worried about any Pandora boxes like geezers who happen to have ridden for a conti team for the last decade. Example of neo-pros if the definition changes:
2017 - Dupont http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=7948
2018 - A. Jensen http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=17088
2019 - you-know-who http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=21971
I hope this does not violate forum rules but I run a game on another forum which focuses on young riders, and the eligibility criteria for that game are:

Riders need to fit one of the following two main criteria
i) be a first year professional rider (of any age), be it at World Tour or Professional Continental team.
ii) be riding at Continental level or lower, born in 1992 or younger, without having previously ridden as a professional.

For clarity, riders should not have already ridden a full year as a professional at either World Tour or Professional Continental level Ė riding as a stagiaire does not prevent selection. Riders who have signed their first pro contract in August (or later), are considered for the purposes of this game as no different from stagiaire riders.

But as you say, this would allow for some weird selections, last year Brazilian team Funvic moved up to Pro Conti, so we saw several people select older riders, for example Diniz, who was 30 at the time. It's weird.
I would suggest increasing the upper age limit just slightly, but I think it's most important to make any rider that has raced as a professional before ineligible, of course excluding trainees/stagiaires. In this case, a rider could have ridden as a trainee for 3 years in a row, as long as they fit the age criterion they are still eligible.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 10, 2017, 02:40:24 PM
For some structure: a reminder of (now numbered) potential 2019 changes currently being discussed, plus a new one at the bottom:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

My opinion: undecided, but I can see why it came up. After some years we've all become experts. This season :Lampre: Luis destroyed us, but teams 2-10 all finished in that 7300-8300 range. The season before that, the two teams on top of the rankings had Ewan and Gaviria as neos, while no fewer than 7 teams right behind them finished within mere 700 points. To give one of those teams 2 free years of the next superstar is like Christmas and Easter together.

2. 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

My opinion: probably unnecessary, it's a sheer lottery. None of us have ever heard of Patrick MŁller, Simon Sellier, William Barta, Nicola Conci, Damien Touze, Giovanni Carboni, Matteo Fabbro, Corentin Ermenault, Bram Welten, Valentin Madouas, or Nathan van Hooydonck. We cannot know if they're good enough to become successful pros. Their bosses don't know if they're good enough to become successful pros. They don't know themselves if they're good enough to become successful pros! Also, it's irrelevant that they mostly sign 2-year contracts IRL - this is still a puny fantasy game. And passing remains an option.

3. Snake draft order

My opinion: undecided. The argument that we use it in all other games is irrelevant, because there we start from scratch. Here, :Lampre: kept Pozzovivo at 240k and Kwiato at 610k, that's why the current system is designed specifically to help out those who finished at the bottom as much as possible.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades

My opinion: undecided. For a quick check on how you feel about it, you can visit the :RadioShack: sheet and ask yourself whether my kindergarten squad is good strategizing or rules abuse. Voices above range between Tom's "unless you're new, you should know what you're doing", via Fleur's "2nd year only", all the way to Ace's "entirely illegal, violates the spirit of the game".

5. A brand new brainstorming subject: new definition of neo-pro?

This year suddenly a lot of people are struggling to understand our definition:
"Neo-pro is a rider born in 1995 or later who wasn't on a real-life professional team (WT/ProConti) in spring 2017"
Also, when somebody new joins in the future, things would be easier for them if our definition matched the one used IRL.
If that's something we want to consider, it would require 2 changes: removal of age limit, and taking into account previous seasons too.
I believe the accurate wording would be "Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Curious to hear your thoughts, but please think twice. Sligthly worried about any Pandora boxes like geezers who happen to have ridden for a conti team for the last decade. Example of neo-pros if the definition changes:
2017 - Dupont http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=7948
2018 - A. Jensen http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=17088
2019 - you-know-who http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=21971

Good post Daniel. Feedback to come.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: TERatcliffe26 on November 10, 2017, 03:07:19 PM
1. I guess you kind of already know my point of this one, its the bonus years of the big riders are the problem for me, over the nurturing of talent for the others

2. I think it depends on the year, but i guess the problem is when you see someone get to keep gavaria but you manage to sneak in a good 2nd round pick but loose then in the bidding the next year and he goes on to score a hatfull. I think it should be the same over both years whether that be both at 2 years or both at 1. Think id prefer both at 1 than both at 2.
(Also I know Barta quite well, but you may know from some of my picks in other games that I follow Axeon and riders who have developed from them, which made me a bit gutted I couldn't get Powless)

3. Again it can depend on the year and also how many teams we have in the game, at a high amount of teams its more irrelevant, but if we were ever to reduce significantly it could make a difference, as better riders would be available in the 2nd round. only one rider on my list made it to the start of 2nd round who Garfield took, however had we had reduced teams to say 14/15 (and the 2nd round order reversed) its possible I could have taken him or either crass or dunbar which would have been massive. But like I say as it stands with a high amount its not so much of a disadvantage

4. you know my stance on this.
Although I totally disagree with Florry's assessment that you can pick up 10-15 riders for next to nothing. There (imo) have been a lot of riders going for 60/70/80k and even higher that in the past would have gone for 30/40k (even the relative nobodies), I think picking up cheap riders has become so hard now

5.I think the rules etc around age are perfectly fine and certainly should not be any increase in ages.
Anyone who is born prior to the year of 1995 as it is this year should be in the normal bidding and left to us to pick up on that potential diamond out there
 
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Florry on November 10, 2017, 03:53:15 PM

4. you know my stance on this.
Although I totally disagree with Florry's assessment that you can pick up 10-15 riders for next to nothing. There (imo) have been a lot of riders going for 60/70/80k and even higher that in the past would have gone for 30/40k (even the relative nobodies), I think picking up cheap riders has become so hard now

That is my point. It has become so hard to pick up cheap riders, yet Garfield has managed to amass a whole herd of $30k riders that could potentially score a large number of points (especially from last year's perspective, when their potential was even more unknown) through his admittedly smart trading.
Of course, you could see this as a way to make it "easier" to pick up cheap riders with potential to score, you could also say it is against the spirit of the game.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: TERatcliffe26 on November 10, 2017, 05:57:30 PM
I misunderstood what you meant by it. But surely that means that 1 year for picks is better then and takes that away, as if you trade youve only got them for that season and that trade arguement kinda disapears
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Ace on November 11, 2017, 10:41:36 AM
For some structure: a reminder of (now numbered) potential 2019 changes currently being discussed, plus a new one at the bottom:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

2. 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

My preference has been the same since the league began; 2 years for 1st round picks, 1 year with a non-guaranteed 2nd year for 2nd round picks.

Additional idea: Open FA a couple of days before the draft for bidding on Neos only, but teams must start the auction at 420k or more. This would prevent anyone getting a rider considered a pretty sure thing to score well for just 30k for 2 seasons.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades

I of course meant the same as Florry; no trades in first year. The game works better when everyone is trying to field a competitive squad.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Ace on November 11, 2017, 10:46:08 AM
Also had an idea for an additional game.

Bid for 1 year contracts (25 man teams) but you can keep any rider at double the cost the following season.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 11, 2017, 11:31:11 AM
Thanks for your contributions, guys! Keep them coming, and I'll try to decide something concrete next week.

Bid for 1 year contracts (25 man teams) but you can keep any rider at double the cost the following season.

If I understand correctly, that's 500 separate auctions. Basically another very big game, but not really all that different from the existing main game?

Btw I've been pondering about something else we could do more regularly, but not quite as intense as Wall Street. The best I've come up till now is a little guessing game where before a race (or even a stage) we each have the option to name one rider who'll score for us. Of course the same rider could (and often would) be chosen by multiple people, no problem.

Challenges:
Example implementation:
Implementation details:
Thoughts? :afro:
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: DJW14 on November 12, 2017, 04:53:24 PM
For some structure: a reminder of (now numbered) potential 2019 changes currently being discussed, plus a new one at the bottom:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

My opinion: undecided, but I can see why it came up. After some years we've all become experts. This season :Lampre: Luis destroyed us, but teams 2-10 all finished in that 7300-8300 range. The season before that, the two teams on top of the rankings had Ewan and Gaviria as neos, while no fewer than 7 teams right behind them finished within mere 700 points. To give one of those teams 2 free years of the next superstar is like Christmas and Easter together.

2. 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

My opinion: probably unnecessary, it's a sheer lottery. None of us have ever heard of Patrick MŁller, Simon Sellier, William Barta, Nicola Conci, Damien Touze, Giovanni Carboni, Matteo Fabbro, Corentin Ermenault, Bram Welten, Valentin Madouas, or Nathan van Hooydonck. We cannot know if they're good enough to become successful pros. Their bosses don't know if they're good enough to become successful pros. They don't know themselves if they're good enough to become successful pros! Also, it's irrelevant that they mostly sign 2-year contracts IRL - this is still a puny fantasy game. And passing remains an option.

3. Snake draft order

My opinion: undecided. The argument that we use it in all other games is irrelevant, because there we start from scratch. Here, :Lampre: kept Pozzovivo at 240k and Kwiato at 610k, that's why the current system is designed specifically to help out those who finished at the bottom as much as possible.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades

My opinion: undecided. For a quick check on how you feel about it, you can visit the :RadioShack: sheet and ask yourself whether my kindergarten squad is good strategizing or rules abuse. Voices above range between Tom's "unless you're new, you should know what you're doing", via Fleur's "2nd year only", all the way to Ace's "entirely illegal, violates the spirit of the game".

5. A brand new brainstorming subject: new definition of neo-pro?

This year suddenly a lot of people are struggling to understand our definition:
"Neo-pro is a rider born in 1995 or later who wasn't on a real-life professional team (WT/ProConti) in spring 2017"
Also, when somebody new joins in the future, things would be easier for them if our definition matched the one used IRL.
If that's something we want to consider, it would require 2 changes: removal of age limit, and taking into account previous seasons too.
I believe the accurate wording would be "Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Curious to hear your thoughts, but please think twice. Sligthly worried about any Pandora boxes like geezers who happen to have ridden for a conti team for the last decade. Example of neo-pros if the definition changes:
2017 - Dupont http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=7948
2018 - A. Jensen http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=17088
2019 - you-know-who http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/rider.asp?riderid=21971

1/2.: As I mentioned, I would go with option 2. The reason for that is primarily that it rewards knowledge / research, or sometimes just a good hunch. Do I know a lot about Touze? No. But I did watch the u23 WC race this year precisely because it's useful for games like this, so in that sense if he turns out to be a star in the next couple of years then it make sense to be rewarded for that at least a little. Of course sometimes guys will get Gaviria / Ewan and will have a big advantage in the 2nd season, but the point of the game isn't for us all to have equal teams, but to be rewarded for having decent judgement about how riders might progress.

3. Seen as most of us seem to be in agreement that there is probably less than a whole round of well-known neo pros who everyone wants, it seems fair to me if the first round starts with the bottom placed from last season, and then the order is reversed for the second round.

4. Picking neo pros is one of my favourite elements of the game so I don't really see why you would bother trading someone you have just drafted. I would be happy with any of the situations, but do agree that it does go against the spirit of the game somewhat.

5. The definition of "neo-pro", as I have always understood it, is that it is not age limited but refers simply to a rider in their first season at WT or PC level. So MVP and Dupont are fine with me, but not young riders who have been on pro teams, dropped to Conti level then come back up.

The reason I think the "spring" element is confusing is that riders who have been stagiaires in previous years would still be considered neo pros in January 2018. So for me the rule should be:

"At the time of the neo-pro auction, any rider who has previously never ridden on a full year contract for a World Tour or Professional Continental team is eligible".
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: glomser on November 12, 2017, 05:25:32 PM
Thanks for your contributions, guys! Keep them coming, and I'll try to decide something concrete next week.

If I understand correctly, that's 500 separate auctions. Basically another very big game, but not really all that different from the existing main game?

Btw I've been pondering about something else we could do more regularly, but not quite as intense as Wall Street. The best I've come up till now is a little guessing game where before a race (or even a stage) we each have the option to name one rider who'll score for us. Of course the same rider could (and often would) be chosen by multiple people, no problem.

Challenges:
  • Scoring would have to be relative, otherwise a single Grand Tour guess annihilates a million other bets.
  • Complete lack of activity should hurt you a tiny bit, but not too much. You should be able to dynamically choose your activity level between daily, regular, and occasional.
Example implementation:
  • Grand Tour GC: 15 for 1st place, 10 for 2nd, 6 - 3rd, 3 - 4th, 1 - 5th, 0 - no bet or 6th, -1 - 7th, -2 - 8th, -3 - 9th, -4 - 10th or lower.
  • World Tour stage race or a monument: 10 for 1st place, 6 for 2nd, 3 - 3rd, 1 - 4th, 0 - no bet or 5th, -1 - 6th, -2 - 7th, -3 - 8th or lower.
  • Grand Tour stage or a World Tour one-day race: 4 for 1st place, 2 for 2nd, 1 - 3rd, 0 - no bet or 4th, -1 - 5th, -2 - 6th or lower.
  • Any smaller tour/stage, for you Tropicale Amissa Bongo experts out there: 2 for 1st place, 1 for 2nd, 0 - no bet or 3rd, -1 - 4th or lower.
Implementation details:
  • If you want to place the first bet in any race, you start a thread with the race name. Others reply.
  • You insert your own scores into the score sheet.
  • Changes possible until the deadline - midnight local time.
Thoughts? :afro:

Do we start with points or do we all start at 0 and after a race we can score or lose points?

But this looks like a predicition game. Maybe we can go for a podium. So you name the winner, second and third. For the winner right you score 5 points, for number 2 you score 4 points and for number 3 you get 3 points, if they are placed on the right spot. If you name someone, but nog on the right place you get only 1 point. example. You guess that Sagan wins the MSR, Colbrelli on 2 and Matthews on 3. Auctually Sagan wins, with Matthews on 2 and Kristoff on 3. Your points will be 5 for Sagan and 1 for Matthews.  I would only take the WC races to guess on and make a sort of overall classement.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: cranky on November 12, 2017, 05:42:52 PM
Also had an idea for an additional game.

Bid for 1 year contracts (25 man teams) but you can keep any rider at double the cost the following season.

I'd be happy for another game along the above lines to begin. I always find the bidding process more interesting and enjoy following the riders I win more than on other games where we pick through draft.

To reduce the game size you could limit the teams to 20 riders.

You could always include other rules to separate it from the main game as well, if everyone wants something a little different.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 13, 2017, 09:36:55 AM
You could always include other rules to separate it from the main game as well, if everyone wants something a little different.

Let's not forget 500 auctions = 500 times a moderator has to move the thread & add the rider to the team sheet.
So to convince me, there would have to be more people willing to go all over again AND - like you mention - a couple of very cool new rules to separate it from the main game. I'm all ears :)
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: davy duck on November 13, 2017, 11:55:44 AM
The guessing game has some potential ...
some addings:
1. It would be nice to add an originality factor.
2. It would be more fun to put more then one name, let's say the podium.
3. You should play with the timings ...

1. example: in a race 10 players pick sagan, and 1 player picks vermote. Sagan wins and Vermote ends 8th. Winner gets 10 points, but as he is picked 10 times his points are divided by 10. So Sagan: 1 point. The 8th gets 3 points, divided by 1 pick = 3pts. This in combination with my 3th point will provide firework bets.

2. Needs no explication.

3a. In this case, no doubles allowed. let's say the auction starts 100h before the race. If you pick your rider immediately he will get only 1% of the points. After 50h it's 50%. You could do that 3 times for 3 names (your podium). Imagine what that will give with the froome-bet in the tour.

3b. You could allow doubles, but that might become extremely complicated. Then 2nd sagan-pick should have less reward then the 1st pick and so on. In combination with my first point, it might become very mathematical.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 15, 2017, 07:49:42 AM
Davy, I like your ideas, but in practical terms:
I need it to remain simplistic in terms of guessing if I want people to join, and very very simplistic in terms of scoring if I want everybody to count their own points. Here is what I have in mind: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x0SOLrswTiG7pjiEkLXtdzj5MpknRSvDgXhUx60pjnc/edit#gid=643640090
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 17, 2017, 01:48:53 PM
2019 draft format - summary thus far:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

Pro: Tom, Joel, myself
Con: Ace, Fleur, Daniel, Erkka, David, Steve, Bryan, Luis
Undecided: Jack (not fussed either way)
Probable outcome: no.

2. Optional 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

Pro: Tom, Martin, David, Fleur, Daniel, Steve, Bryan, Luis
Con: Davy, Joel, myself (luck-dependent)
Undecided: Ace (proposing a non-guaranteed variant instead)
Probable outcome: yes.

3. Snake draft order

Pro: Fleur, Joel, Steve, Daniel, Bryan (all citing fairness)
Con: Luis, myself (bad teams need all the help they can get)
Undecided: n/a
Probable outcome: yes.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades
Players drafted less than 12 months ago are not eligible for trades.

Pro: Ace, Fleur, Steve (against the spirit)
Con: Luis, Tom, Joel, Bryan, myself (more strategic)
Undecided: n/a
Probable outcome: ???

5. A brand new definition of neo-pro
"Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Pro: Daniel
Con: Luis
With an age limit: Fleur, Tom, Joel, Bryan
Undecided: myself
Probable outcome: ???



New game brainstorming moves here: http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=313669.0
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Joelsim on November 17, 2017, 02:59:37 PM
1&2 Single year contracts.

3 Snake draft order.

4 No problem with trading as long as itís not a collusion between friends.

5 Like the definition and I would add Ď25 or under on the date of the first race (TDU)í.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 17, 2017, 03:05:44 PM
Thanks, updated!
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Teton on November 17, 2017, 03:39:06 PM
MY VOTE:

2019 draft format - summary thus far:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

NO

2. Optional 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

YES

3. Snake draft order (NeoPRO)

YES

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades
Players drafted less than 12 months ago are not eligible for trades.

NO

5. A brand new definition of neo-pro
"Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."
With an age limit: YES
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 17, 2017, 03:46:00 PM
Thanks Bryan, updated again!
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: oliveira on November 17, 2017, 03:47:00 PM
1. 2 year
2. Optional 2 year
3. Good as it is now.
4. Con. The auction can go very wrong and this is a nice way to keep focus on the game.
5. I like it as it is
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 17, 2017, 03:51:29 PM
Muito obrigado! Updated :judge:
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Canto on November 17, 2017, 04:06:21 PM
1- no, prefer to keep 2 years
2- yes for the optionnel 2. Years
3- snake draft
4- no restriction for neo trade
5- ok for the definition with the age limit
Thanks
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Pricey on November 17, 2017, 04:12:21 PM
1. Keep at 2 years
2. Optional 2nd year
3. Snake draft
4. No real opinion on this
5. Agree with this if itís with an age limit.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: glomser on November 17, 2017, 05:19:48 PM
2019 draft format - summary thus far:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

Pro: Tom, Joel, myself
Con: Ace, Fleur, Daniel, Erkka, David, Steve, Bryan, Luis
Undecided: Jack (not fussed either way)
Probable outcome: no.

2. Optional 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

Pro: Tom, Martin, David, Fleur, Daniel, Steve, Bryan, Luis
Con: Davy, Joel, myself (luck-dependent)
Undecided: Ace (proposing a non-guaranteed variant instead)
Probable outcome: yes.

3. Snake draft order

Pro: Fleur, Joel, Steve, Daniel, Bryan (all citing fairness)
Con: Luis, myself (bad teams need all the help they can get)
Undecided: n/a
Probable outcome: yes.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades
Players drafted less than 12 months ago are not eligible for trades.

Pro: Ace, Fleur, Steve (against the spirit)
Con: Luis, Tom, Joel, Bryan, myself (more strategic)
Undecided: n/a
Probable outcome: ???

5. A brand new definition of neo-pro
"Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Pro: Daniel
Con: Luis
With an age limit: Fleur, Tom, Joel, Bryan
Undecided: myself
Probable outcome: ???



New game brainstorming moves here: http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=313669.0

On 1: No, keep the 2 years
on 3: Maybe a draft where the weakest team starts every round, to make the weaker teams stronger
on 4: Not sure what would be the best option
on 5: Agree and with the age limit
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: GTF on November 17, 2017, 06:09:15 PM
1-4; these are non-issues for me so I suppose I'm against them all, but I'm not fussed either way.
5; I do agree with the new neo-pro definition (including age limit).
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: scrooll7 on November 18, 2017, 03:06:30 AM
1. Keep at 2 years
2. Optional 2nd year
3. Con.I don't like this draft order
4. No restriction for neo-pro trade
5. Agree with this if itís with an age limit
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 18, 2017, 09:56:38 AM
Decision time:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

Pro: Tom, Joel, myself
Con: Ace, Fleur, Daniel, Erkka, David, Steve, Bryan, Luis, Kristian, Martin, Chris, David
Undecided: Jack (not fussed either way)
Decision: no change.

2. Optional 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

Pro: Tom, Martin, David, Fleur, Daniel, Steve, Bryan, Luis, Kristian, Chris, David
Con: Davy, Joel, myself (luck-dependent)
Undecided: Jack, Ace (proposing a non-guaranteed variant instead)
Decision: yes. Rules updated.

3. Snake draft order

Pro: Fleur, Joel, Steve, Daniel, Bryan, David, Chris (all citing fairness)
Con: Martin, Luis, Kristian, myself (bad teams need all the help they can get)
Undecided: Jack
Decision: yes. Rules updated.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades
Players drafted less than 12 months ago are not eligible for trades.

Pro: Ace, Fleur, Steve (against the spirit)
Con: Kristian, Luis, Tom, Joel, Bryan, David, myself (more strategic)
Undecided: Martin, Jack, Chris
Probable outcome: highly unlikely.

5. A brand new definition of neo-pro
"Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Pro: Daniel
Con: Luis
With an age limit: Fleur, Tom, Joel, Bryan, Kristian, Jack, Martin, Chris, David
Undecided: myself
Decision: yes, u23. Rules updated.
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: oliveira on November 24, 2017, 01:39:20 PM
Let's not forget 500 auctions = 500 times a moderator has to move the thread & add the rider to the team sheet.
So to convince me, there would have to be more people willing to go all over again AND - like you mention - a couple of very cool new rules to separate it from the main game. I'm all ears :)

I thinked a bit about what could be a new concept and I came to this idea:

1) Auction for, say, 20-25 riders each team. Everybody must fill every spot on the team. Budget 5000;
2) You choose your team hierarchy. 5 leaders that will score 100% of their cq-world-tour-game-points, 5 free role riders rthat will score 80%, 10 gregarios that will score 50 or 60%.
3) at the end of the season the team that wins get an extra budget, the last teams loose some budget. BUT the game gets harder for the winner and easier for the last spots. The winner only gets 4 leaders for next season, and the last spots get 6 or 7 leaders from their 25 rider team that will score 100%.

What you think?
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: Garfield on November 24, 2017, 03:15:33 PM
You might want to talk to Ace or join the discussion over at LBB. He wanted to run another auction game, so maybe you guys want to join forces?

btw I don't understand point 3. Why make it both easier and tougher for the winner? people will get confused and pulling a bit in both directions won't have a huge effect. My instinct would be to either make it just tougher, or forget the extra rule altogether...
Title: Re: Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)
Post by: oliveira on November 27, 2017, 11:31:39 AM
I'm happy there's another auction game in the pipeline, and I think Ace's concept is good.
Anyway, I can help on that new game.