collapse


just some guy

  • Fourth Generation humanoid bot
  • Hall of Fame'r
  • Country: 00
  • Posts: 37833
  • Liked: 11458
  • Awards: 2020 Tour de France CQ Game winner2017 Spring Classics CQ game winnerBest Avatar of 2016JSG News Filter Award 2014Poster of 2014Thread of the Year 2013Most Helpful Member 2013Art of Brevity 2012Most helpful member 2012Best member of staff 2012
Re: Fans Rankings project.
« Reply #30 on: February 27, 2012, 13:54 »
That's true. You would need a starting value for all riders and races, which would be that of CQranking (or whatever is chosen) and then the value of riders would automatically adjust during the season according to this system or something similar.

There is one additional issue though, which is that of stages in stage races. If the point system in a stage race is build on the same system as the above mentioned, it would mean that stage wins later on in a stage race would be worth less than one early in the race.

Say on stage 18 X% of the riders have withdrawn from the race the, that would mean that the current value of the starting riders combined is lower than on stage 1.

Of course this could easily be solved by using an average current value instead of a total.

or have the  total being the same for stage 1 and stage 21 ie the value at the start of the stage race sets the points value on the last stage ?
  • ReplyReply
  • Of course, if this turns out someday to be the industry standard integrated handlebar-computer-braking solution then I'll eat my kevlar-reinforced aerodynamic hat.

    Larri Nov 12, 2014

    Hugo Koblet

    • Neo Pro
    • Country: dk
    • Posts: 253
    • Liked: 153
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #31 on: February 27, 2012, 13:56 »
    or have the  total being the same for stage 1 and stage 21 ie the value at the start of the stage race sets the points value on the last stage ?

    Yup, that's a good idea!
  • ReplyReply
  • All this talk about equality. The only thing people really have in common is that they are all going to die.

    Capt_Cavman

    • Road Captain
    • Country: jp
    • Posts: 2209
    • Liked: 1284
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #32 on: February 27, 2012, 14:01 »
    If I was a student or otherwise unemployed, I'd think this was a great idea. I'll be interested to see if you can find a compromise between objective and subjective criteria. That sounds a bit more negative than I actually feel and I'll happily chip in with words of wisdom in the unlikely event that any occur to me.

    Looking at Hugo Koblet's model above, it strikes me that there needs to be some weighting for how bothered the cyclists are, prize money perhaps. You clearly have a field in Mallorca that would make the Vuelta look a bit low key, and yet the riders aren't really doing much more than a training ride.
  • ReplyReply

  • Hugo Koblet

    • Neo Pro
    • Country: dk
    • Posts: 253
    • Liked: 153
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #33 on: February 27, 2012, 14:23 »
    Looking at Hugo Koblet's model above, it strikes me that there needs to be some weighting for how bothered the cyclists are, prize money perhaps. You clearly have a field in Mallorca that would make the Vuelta look a bit low key, and yet the riders aren't really doing much more than a training ride.

    That's certainly true but probably one of the hardest things to take into account.
  • ReplyReply

  • The Hitch

    • Winner 2012 Tour de France prediction game
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: pl
    • Posts: 2805
    • Liked: 842
    • Awards: 2013 Annual Prediction Game2013 CQ Ranking Vuelta Game Post of the Year 2013Race Preview of the Year 2013
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #34 on: February 27, 2012, 16:40 »
    Yes Hugo, was really hoping for your input.

    But what if instead of using cq values for riders, we use PCM ones. Not neccesarily the official ones but maybe one of the independent editions.
     
  • ReplyReply
  • Despite the self-serving data benders and associated propaganda to the contrary, I am led to believe that there are pockets of organised, highly sophisticated dopers, even within 'new age' cycling teams. Personally, I don't accept that the 'dark era' has ended, it has just morphed into a new guise.

    Hugo Koblet

    • Neo Pro
    • Country: dk
    • Posts: 253
    • Liked: 153
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #35 on: February 27, 2012, 17:43 »
    Yes Hugo, was really hoping for your input.

    But what if instead of using cq values for riders, we use PCM ones. Not neccesarily the official ones but maybe one of the independent editions.

    Hmm, I don't know that much about PCM. How would that work?
  • ReplyReply

  • Dim

    • Grand Tour Winner
    • *
    • Country: gb
    • Posts: 9100
    • Liked: 3360
      • Velorooms
    • Awards: Race Preview of 2014Best Post 2012
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #36 on: February 27, 2012, 18:29 »
    Well the idea in cycling is that one can't lose points for doing races. Doing races is something that  is encouraged. At the worst one fails to gain points for a race, but having riders lose points for a race while those who do not race stay at their totals, would imo not work with cycling. J Rod for one would be massively underated.

    The IG markets rank actually works on a rolling ranking, so each year you are defending the points you won last year. So if for instance in 2011 you rode and finished 2nd in the giro bringing in x number of points,then if you didnt ride the giro in 2012 you would actaully slip down the rankings as those points dropped off of your total.

    Its a ranking system that is generally more suited to tournament play, where you get x number of points for reaching say the semi final of a minor tournament, but the same number of points for reaching the 1/4 finals of a bigger tournament.

    So in a way, losing points for performing badly in a race (in comparison with the previous year) are the basic fundemental of all rolling rankings.
  • ReplyReply

  • Martin318is

    • Domestique
    • Country: au
    • Posts: 614
    • Liked: 163
    • Less interesting than he seems on paper
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #37 on: February 27, 2012, 23:16 »
    clever and quite simple

    By far the most important criteria if any project is going to go ahead.
    Leave complexity at the door!
  • ReplyReply
  • About Masters Club racing:
    ".. if I can't double the petrol money, I'm headin over the mountains instead" - Michael Fox, Team SAS

    timmy

    • Neo Pro
    • Posts: 278
    • Liked: 12
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #38 on: February 28, 2012, 01:10 »
    indeed. The only other viable and simple system i can think of would be having set values for races then there are different variables depending on the field.

    Ok so let us say the giro is worth 100 points for a win. The quality of teh field can then alter that score. Like so;

    Fields:
    a) Premium (20%)
    b) Strong (10%)
    c) Standard (0%)
    d) Below average (-10%)
    e) Weak (-20%)

    What determines a specific field can be another discussion, just the idea.

    If the field should have a premium field and a rider wins said that race; 100 points + 20% = 120 points for the win.
    In a weak field the rider would get 80 points. This system would deduct or add points depending on the field strength.

    This sytem therefore would still have set values for races depending on a base score we gave the races in the beggining, but we wouldnt have a situation where Qatar and Paris-Roubaix have similiar points scheme based on premium fields. Races would still have set scores, but these scores would reflect the field to some degree. So Qatar can reward points for having a strong field, but it will still give scores within reason, because lets face it Qatar is not a bigger race in the scheme of the season regardless if it gets a good field or not.

    anyway they were just some thoughts.

    ---

    Regarding the implementation onto the website, the more I think about this the harder it is ;D
    I agree with martin you will have to have pre-set scoring system, far too difficult to implement a 'on-the-fly' system, where special circumstances can affect score. It simply isn't viable.
  • ReplyReply

  • DinZ

    • 2.2 is where it is at
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: zm
    • Posts: 3795
    • Liked: 359
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #39 on: February 28, 2012, 02:15 »
    think Hugo has shown in numbers, what i was struggling to get across in words. This is pretty much exactly what i was getting at

    removes opinion from the equation. Stops people rating races based on how important they think they are and should give an actual rating.

    trying to get my head around whether there could still be an issue around riders consistently winning smaller races, so increasing scores, and therefore making those races seem more important, thus increasing their score even more. I hope that real world dynamics would prevent this, so if a rider is winning enough smaller races he will gradually move on to better things. Also by starting with a CQ ranking we are already biasing towards what most people regard as the bigger races

    I think the exciting thing about this is it is unique. as far as i know none of the existing rankings uses a system like this to work out scores.

    and while it does not seem completely fair to reward domestics equally depending on their team leaders performance, it is the only way to remove opinion from the scores. And again real world applications come into play, better domestics will be picked for better races and therefore get better points if their leader performs.

    I still like the idea of a voted for man of the match type score. something that can allocate a small percentage of total points for say 3 riders in each race to reward an exceptional performance.

  • ReplyReply

  • DinZ

    • 2.2 is where it is at
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: zm
    • Posts: 3795
    • Liked: 359
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #40 on: February 28, 2012, 02:20 »
    If I was a student or otherwise unemployed, I'd think this was a great idea. I'll be interested to see if you can find a compromise between objective and subjective criteria. That sounds a bit more negative than I actually feel and I'll happily chip in with words of wisdom in the unlikely event that any occur to me.

    Looking at Hugo Koblet's model above, it strikes me that there needs to be some weighting for how bothered the cyclists are, prize money perhaps. You clearly have a field in Mallorca that would make the Vuelta look a bit low key, and yet the riders aren't really doing much more than a training ride.

    How reliable is distance an indicator. I have always had the feeling that there was a link between the quality of a race and distance. It always worked that way in lower ranked racing does it still apply to Pro's?

    the only issue i could see then is a queen stage in a GT where the climbing is ridiculous but overall Km's is shorter. So maybe a factor that takes into account overall distance and climbing meters to give a rating for a race.

    I am biased as i am slightly fixated with trying to remove opinion from the ranking and think it would be fascinating to build something completely numerical to see how it actual stacks up.
  • ReplyReply

  • Hugo Koblet

    • Neo Pro
    • Country: dk
    • Posts: 253
    • Liked: 153
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #41 on: February 29, 2012, 09:39 »
    I don't know if anyone misunderstood my "test system", but it's still based on some classifications of races. All races would use the CQranking system as a base value, and then calculate from there. All 1.HC races would then use the point scale for 1.HC races as a base and adjust from there and 1.1 races would use the point scale for 1.1 races as a base and adjust from there.

    As an experiment I decided to try using the above mentioned system on grand tours and monuments. It's still based on current rankings this day, so still not entirely precisely.

    It turned out that the GT's would be weighted like this:

    Giro: 77.5%
    Tour: 127.6%
    Vuelta: 94.9%

    On CQranking.com the GT's are divided into GT1 and GT2 to separate Tour de France from the other two. However, if we try applying the above stats on point scale where there is no differentiations between the grand tours and use this as a base:

    Stage win:

    70
    40
    25
    15
    10
    7
    5
    3
    2
    1

    GC (only top 10):

    500
    375
    315
    270
    245
    220
    195
    170
    155
    140

    We get these numbers:

    Giro:

    Stage:

    54,3
    31,0
    19,4
    11,6
    7,8
    5,4
    3,9
    2,3
    1,6
    0,8

    GC:

    387,5
    290,6
    244,1
    209,3
    189,9
    170,5
    151,1
    131,8
    120,1
    108,5

    Tour:

    Stage:

    89,3
    51,0
    31,9
    19,1
    12,8
    8,9
    6,4
    3,8
    2,6
    1,3

    GC:

    638,0
    478,5
    401,9
    344,5
    312,6
    280,7
    248,8
    216,9
    197,8
    178,6

    Vuelta:

    Stage:

    66,4
    38,0
    23,7
    14,2
    9,5
    6,6
    4,7
    2,8
    1,9
    0,9

    GC:

    474,5
    355,9
    298,9
    256,2
    232,5
    208,8
    185,1
    161,3
    147,1
    132,9

    Turning our heads towards the monuments, based on quality of the field they would be weighted like this:

    Milan-San Remo: 111.1%
    Paris-Roubaix: 78.7%
    Ronde: 91.1%
    Liege-Bastogne-Liege: 117.5%
    Lombardia: 101.6%

    If we use the CQranking points scale as a base (only top 10):

    275
    180
    145
    132
    120
    108
    96
    85
    75
    63

    We get this:

    Milan-San Remo:

    305,5
    200,0
    161,1
    146,7
    133,3
    120,0
    106,7
    94,4
    83,3
    70,0

    Paris-Roubaix:

    216,4
    141,7
    114,1
    103,9
    94,4
    85,0
    75,6
    66,9
    59,0
    49,6

    Ronde:

    250,5
    164,0
    132,1
    120,3
    109,3
    98,4
    87,5
    77,4
    68,3
    57,4

    Liege-Bastogne-Liege:

    323,1
    211,5
    170,4
    155,1
    141,0
    126,9
    112,8
    99,9
    88,1
    74,0

    Lombardia:

    279,4
    182,9
    147,3
    134,1
    121,9
    109,7
    97,5
    86,4
    76,2
    64,0

    Now this is where I think this system fails. I really do not think that Lombardia is worth more/more prestigious than the Ronde or Paris-Roubaix, and I think most would agree on this. Perhaps, if a system like this was chosen, an exception should be made for races like these?

    Anyway, remember it's just an experiment, but feel free to discuss.
  • ReplyReply

  • Francois the Postman

    • National Champion
    • Country: scotland
    • Posts: 934
    • Liked: 972
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #42 on: February 29, 2012, 09:52 »
    Now this is where I think this system fails. I really do not think that Lombardia is worth more/more prestigious than the Ronde or Paris-Roubaix, and I think most would agree on this. Perhaps, if a system like this was chosen, an exception should be made for races like these?
    The same can be said about the Giro ending up well below the Vuelta.
  • ReplyReply

  • Hugo Koblet

    • Neo Pro
    • Country: dk
    • Posts: 253
    • Liked: 153
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #43 on: February 29, 2012, 09:57 »
    The same can be said about the Giro ending up well below the Vuelta.

    Exactly. And remember that the Giro handed out 5 wildcards instead of 4 last year, which would probably mean that the Giro would be rated even lower this year.

    Addressing this problem and the one that someone else mentioned about the Challenge Mallorca races, that they are overrated in a system like this, I think the best way of doing this is using a system based on a) the official classifications, b) quality of the field and c) subjective opinion where c) is the tool to adjust the mistakes.

    So for instance, even though the Giro would be rated below the Vuelta, Lombardia would be rated above PR and RVV, the Challenge Mallorca races would be rated very highly, an "expert panel" would adjust these scores to make them more fitting: upgrading the Giro, downgrading the Challenge Mallorca races etc.

  • ReplyReply

  • Eshnar

    • Domestic Rider
    • Country: it
    • Posts: 91
    • Liked: 56
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #44 on: February 29, 2012, 10:42 »
    Just noticed this whole thread  ;D
    I'm really interested in the project. Especially the discussion and definition of the ranking system. Maths are my passion and I'm not bothered about thinking of that the whole day.
    Just an early suggestion about the issue you are discussing (the field related race weight): Judging the value of the race just adding the value of its riders clearly leads to huge mistakes. One simple fix could be weighting the field with respect to the result. The ranking of the rider who won matters MORE than who came 2nd and so on. By this method you can take into account automatically the effort of the supposed big boys.
  • ReplyReply

  • Capt_Cavman

    • Road Captain
    • Country: jp
    • Posts: 2209
    • Liked: 1284
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #45 on: February 29, 2012, 12:49 »
    So for instance, even though the Giro would be rated below the Vuelta, Lombardia would be rated above PR and RVV, the Challenge Mallorca races would be rated very highly, an "expert panel" would adjust these scores to make them more fitting: upgrading the Giro, downgrading the Challenge Mallorca races etc.

    The issue here is that you have classics that GT riders ride (and place well) and cobbled classics that they don't.

    The danger is that you get a cycle of lowering the value of the race because the higher rated riders don't ride it; that then means that the cobbled specialists don't receive as many points for it; that then means that the following year, the race becomes further devalued because its start list isn't as highly ranked. This continues until Paris Roubaix is ranked below the Monsal hill Climb.

    I would be tempted to group races by type and compare relative rider strength within that type alone. E.g. Paris Roubaix is a 100 point race, OHN, GW, KBK etc are measured against PR and no other race.
  • ReplyReply

  • DinZ

    • 2.2 is where it is at
    • Classics Winner
    • Country: zm
    • Posts: 3795
    • Liked: 359
    Re: Fans Rankings project.
    « Reply #46 on: February 29, 2012, 13:02 »
    The issue here is that you have classics that GT riders ride (and place well) and cobbled classics that they don't.

    The danger is that you get a cycle of lowering the value of the race because the higher rated riders don't ride it; that then means that the cobbled specialists don't receive as many points for it; that then means that the following year, the race becomes further devalued because its start list isn't as highly ranked. This continues until Paris Roubaix is ranked below the Monsal hill Climb.

    I would be tempted to group races by type and compare relative rider strength within that type alone. E.g. Paris Roubaix is a 100 point race, OHN, GW, KBK etc are measured against PR and no other race.

    Yeah was thinking about this the other day as cycling is one of the only (or few) sports where riders specialize in sections of the season. So is yet another issue to factor in.
  • ReplyReply

  •  

    Recent Posts

    Re: Roadbooks by subZ37O
    [March 04, 2021, 10:50]


    Re: le Samyn by t-72
    [March 02, 2021, 08:03]


    Re: le Samyn by t-72
    [March 02, 2021, 07:55]


    Re: le Samyn by Mellow Velo
    [March 02, 2021, 07:39]


    Re: le Samyn by search
    [March 01, 2021, 22:32]


    Re: le Samyn by t-72
    [March 01, 2021, 20:30]

    Recent Topics



    Top
    Back to top