Classiques Belges

Moderators: systemmods, Calendarmods

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:49 pm

I was informed about it but i cannot resolve the problem. It seem that it was not an error from me but a "bug" (no cobbles with a mountain sprint in the same km?).

I think it's beter to put the sprint one km later to keep the real sprints in our races. But leso, make as you want. As you think it's the best. I finish the Ronde van Vlaanderen tomorrow.

I am active ol, but it's a big job to make all these races! I must make the Gold Race, Flèche Wallonne and LBL after, but I have to make my real life too. Don't worry, i make my best! ;)
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

lesossies
Site Admin
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:49 am
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by lesossies » Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:21 pm

Luna wrote:GPM out. That 4 points are not so important, I guess.
I think too. GPM by De Panne is not a big challenge.
GPM out.

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Robyklebt » Mon Mar 29, 2010 7:05 pm

Could be that we have the same problem in the first stage as well, don't know, didn't check, but seems possible.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

Luna
Posts: 1764
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Luna » Tue Mar 30, 2010 2:17 am

Oh dear. Yes, that looks quite probable. Bad organizers. It should be forbidden to place mountain prizes on top of Hellingen.

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Fri Apr 02, 2010 3:26 pm

Next job now:
- Amstel Gold Race
- Flèche Wallonne
- Lièbe - Bastogne - Liège
;)
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Robyklebt » Fri Apr 02, 2010 7:28 pm

Kappelmuur:

306

We had it at 408 in Het Volk. It's the same as muur von gerardsbergen, no? So why do we have it at 306 now all of the sudden?
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

Quick
Posts: 1462
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Quick » Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:50 pm

Why do you draw the races?As far as the course hasn't changed, why not use the 09 version? In fact we made our form-planning because of this profiles.
J-Czucz hype train

Luna
Posts: 1764
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Luna » Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:51 pm

The course has changed

Quick
Posts: 1462
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Quick » Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:55 pm

Flandern yes. But Amstel, LBL and Fleche also? I know that redoute is missing this year...probably would be enough to draw this part new...and not the whole race. Otherwise it finally ends up in a 4 or in a 6 what would change the race-character completely...
J-Czucz hype train

iBanesto
Posts: 299
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 12:17 am
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by iBanesto » Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:00 pm

Fancy voodoo magic has made the Berendries disappear. Where is it? I hope it can be found until Sunday. Hopefully between Km 225 and 236.

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:29 pm

Quick, when you see iBan + VC Aywaille on a race, it's the 2009 profile with the mountains and pavés update (correct word?) to have a continuation during the 2010 flandrian season. Most of these races are not verry different.

For the Ronde, it change this year, so it was necessary to make a new profile. Paris - Roubaix, we keep the 2009 version.

Maybe i make an error with the Muur, but it's too late i think: lesossies is on hollidays! Bah, i can make an miserable error! :oops:

For Amstel, Flèche and Liège, i make it because leso ask me to make it. Simply like this. But if there is no difference, i don't change it! We already have a nice collaboration next year for these races (if i good remember). ;)

And La Redoute is not missing this year! Did you want i make a cardiac-attack? :evil:
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:34 pm

iBanesto wrote:Fancy voodoo magic has made the Berendries disappear. Where is it? I hope it can be found until Sunday. Hopefully between Km 225 and 236.
25. Berendries (berg)
940m long (average: 7%, max.: 12,3%)
km: 229
RSF 2010: 7
Like in Het Nieuwsblad

Where is my Berendries? I make allthe difficulties first, to be sure i don't forget it. Maybe it's a problem when i check it after making, or i make a mistake. I try to call lesossies!
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

lesossies
Site Admin
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:49 am
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by lesossies » Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:13 am

OK Aywaille I look after it and correct it.
Nos stress please.

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:20 am

Thank you leso, you are the right people in the right place! ;)

I just stress a little (hmmm beter to say that i never stress) because i want to make it correctly for all the managers. Thank you and sorry again. ;)

And thank you all to see my errors! :P
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

lesossies
Site Admin
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:49 am
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by lesossies » Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:24 am

I know it
The "monuments" stress is heavy but take it easy.
I stay behind you.

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:36 am

Thank you leso. ;)

More time for my next profiles. I think all can be ok. ;)
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

lesossies
Site Admin
Posts: 1945
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:49 am
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by lesossies » Sat Apr 03, 2010 1:39 am

Robyklebt wrote:Kappelmuur:

306

We had it at 408 in Het Volk. It's the same as muur von gerardsbergen, no? So why do we have it at 306 now all of the sudden?
Muur changed to 308 -> 8% 3*
Pavés not so heavy 3* OK

Berendries changed too

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:50 am

Here the informations about the Amstel Gold Race:

(euh, i know that the Amstel is in the Netherlands, but i don't want to make a topic for only this race. And of course the race come a little in Belgium, around Gemmenich)

Image

1. Maasberg (km 10,7)
Gemeente : elsloo
Vanuit : elsloo
Hoogte : 62 m.
Lengte : 500 m.
Hoogteverschil : 22 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.4 %
RSF 2010: 4%
Image

2. Adsteeg (km 30,5)
Gemeente : Beek
Vanuit : Beek
Hoogte : 112 m.
Lengte : 500 m.
Hoogteverschil : 27 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5.4 %
RSF 2010: 5%
Image

3. Lange Raarberg (km 37,5)
Gemeente : Meerssen
Vanuit : Meerssen
Hoogte : 124 m.
Lengte : 1300 m.
Hoogteverschil : 59 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.5 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 3%
Image

4. Bergseweg (km 54,1)
Gemeente : Voerendaal
Vanuit : Voerendaal
Hoogte : 180 m.
Lengte : 2700 m.
Hoogteverschil : 90 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 3.3 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 2% / 2%
Image

5. Sibbergrubbe (km 66,0)
Gemeente : Valkenburg aan de Geul
Vanuit : Valkenburg
Hoogte : 145 m.
Lengte : 2100 m.
Hoogteverschil : 87 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.1 %
RSF 2010: 4% / 5%
Image

6. Cauberg (km 71,4)
Gemeente : Valkenburg aan de Geul
Vanuit : Valkenburg
Hoogte : 137 m.
Lengte : 1200 m.
Hoogteverschil : 69 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5.8 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 2%
Image

7. Wolfsberg (km 92,6)
Gemeente : Noorbeek
Vanuit : Noorbeek
Hoogte : 191 m.
Lengte : 800 m.
Hoogteverschil : 35 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.4 %
RSF 2010: 4%
Image

8. Loorberg (km 98,2)
Gemeente : Slenaken
Vanuit : Slenaken
Hoogte : 225 m.
Lengte : 1500 m.
Hoogteverschil : 83 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5.5 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 4%
Image

9. Schweibergerweg (km 108,3)
Gemeente : Gulpen
Vanuit : Schweiberg
Hoogte : 220 m.
Lengte : 2900 m.
Hoogteverschil : 114 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 3.9 %
RSF 2010: 5% / 3% / 3%
Image

10. Camerig (km 114,7)
Gemeente : Vijlen
Vanuit : Epen
Hoogte : 281 m.
Lengte : 4300 m.
Hoogteverschil : 163 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 3.8 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 4% / 3% / 4% / 2%
Image

11. Drielandenpunt (km 127,7)
Gemeente : Vaals
Vanuit : Vaals
Hoogte : 321 m.
Lengte : 3700 m.
Hoogteverschil : 142 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 3.8 %
RSF 2010: 5% / 5% / 4% / 2%
Image

12. Gemmenich (km 130,5)
Gemeente : Blieberg
Vanuit : Gemmenich
Hoogte : 273 m.
Lengte : 900 m.
Hoogteverschil : 58 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 6.4 %
RSF 2010: 6%
Image

13. Vijlenerbos (km 134)
Gemeente : Vaals
Vanuit : Vaals
Hoogte : 269 m.
Lengte : 1800 m.
Hoogteverschil : 92 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5.1 %
RSF 2010: 4% / 6%
Image

14. Eperheide (km 143,8)
Gemeente : Gulpen-Wittem
Vanuit : Epen
Hoogte : 225 m.
Lengte : 2300 m.
Hoogteverschil : 103 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.5 %
RSF 2010: 5% / 4% / 2%
Image

15. Gulpenerberg (km 151,8)
Gemeente : Gulpen-Wittem
Vanuit : Partij
Hoogte : 153 m.
Lengte : 700 m.
Hoogteverschil : 57 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 8.1 %
RSF 2010: 8%
Image

16. van Plettenbergweg (km 155,4)
Gemeente : Eys
Vanuit : Wittem
Hoogte : 141 m.
Lengte : 1000 m.
Hoogteverschil : 42 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.2 %
RSF 2010: 4%
Image

17. Eyserbosweg (km 157,2)
Gemeente : Gulpen-Wittem
Vanuit : Eijs
Hoogte : 187 m.
Lengte : 1100 m.
Hoogteverschil : 89 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 8.1 %
RSF 2010: 8%
Image

18. St. Remigiusstraat (km 163,1)
Gemeente : Simpelveld
Vanuit : Simpelveld
Hoogte : 214 m.
Lengte : 1000 m.
Hoogteverschil : 77 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 7.7 %
RSF 2010: 8%
Image

19. Vrakelberg (km 168,5)
Gemeente : Voerendaal
Vanuit : Ubachsberg
Hoogte : 178 m.
Lengte : 700 m.
Hoogteverschil : 55 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 7.9 %
RSF 2010: 7%
Image

20. Sibbergrubbe (km 176,4)
Gemeente : Valkenburg aan de Geul
Vanuit : Valkenburg
Hoogte : 145 m.
Lengte : 2100 m.
Hoogteverschil : 87 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.1 %
RSF 2010: 4% / 5%
Image

21. Cauberg (km 181,9)
Gemeente : Valkenburg aan de Geul
Vanuit : Valkenburg
Hoogte : 137 m.
Lengte : 1200 m.
Hoogteverschil : 69 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5.8 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 2%
Image

22. Geulhemmerweg (km 185,4)
Gemeente : Valkenburg aan de Geul
Vanuit : Geulle
Hoogte : 126 m.
Lengte : 1000 m.
Hoogteverschil : 62 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 6.2 %
RSF 2010: 6%
Image

23. Bemelerberg (km 198,2)
Gemeente : Margraten
Vanuit : Bemelen
Hoogte : 127 m.
Lengte : 900 m.
Hoogteverschil : 45 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5 %
RSF 2010: 5%
Image

24. Wolfsberg (km 215,3)
Gemeente : Noorbeek
Vanuit : Noorbeek
Hoogte : 191 m.
Lengte : 800 m.
Hoogteverschil : 35 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4.4 %
RSF 2010: 4%
Image

25. Loorberg (km 220,9)
Gemeente : Slenaken
Vanuit : Slenaken
Hoogte : 225 m.
Lengte : 1500 m.
Hoogteverschil : 83 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5.5 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 4%
Image

26. Gulpenerberg (km 229,2)
Gemeente : Gulpen-Wittem
Vanuit : Partij
Hoogte : 153 m.
Lengte : 700 m.
Hoogteverschil : 57 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 8.1 %
RSF 2010: 8%
Image

27. Kruisberg (km 234,7)
Gemeente : Eijs
Vanuit : Wahlwiller
Hoogte : 162 m.
Lengte : 800 m.
Hoogteverschil : 60 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 7.5 %
RSF 2010: 7%
Image

28. Eyserbosweg (km 236,8)
Gemeente : Gulpen-Wittem
Vanuit : Eijs
Hoogte : 187 m.
Lengte : 1100 m.
Hoogteverschil : 89 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 8.1 %
RSF 2010: 8%
Image

29. Fromberg (km 240,5)
Gemeente : Voerendaal
Vanuit : Ubachsberg
Hoogte : 166 m.
Lengte : 1600 m.
Hoogteverschil : 64 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 4 %
RSF 2010: 4% / 3%
Image

30. Keutenberg (km 245,0)
Gemeente : Valkenburg aan de Geul
Vanuit : Schin op Geul
Hoogte : 136 m.
Lengte : 700 m.
Hoogteverschil : 66 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 9.4 %
RSF 2010: 9%
Image

31. Cauberg (km 257,3)
Gemeente : Valkenburg aan de Geul
Vanuit : Valkenburg
Hoogte : 137 m.
Lengte : 1200 m.
Hoogteverschil : 69 m.
Stijgingspercentage : 5.8 %
RSF 2010: 6% / 2%
Image
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

VC Aywaille
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Liège, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by VC Aywaille » Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:00 pm

Normally Gaurain make "La Fleche" and "Liege - Bastogne - Liège".

We will add the informations here after (for the coming years), or Gaurain will make it himself during his work.
VC Aywaille
The team to beat

Il ne faut jamais juger les gens sur leurs fréquentations : Judas, par exemple, avait des amis irréprochables! (Verlaine)

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Robyklebt » Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Het Volk 11

Pain in the ass, not over yet, but post the things I've done so people can complain.

Main sources
Het Volk homepage: For length etc.
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorie: ... elgi%C3%AB
http://rvv.be/fr/tourisme
And Aywailles work from 2010 see his posts in this thread.

Possible problems: The pavé seem to be rated fairly high. I really don't have a clue how they compare to Paris-Roubaix... 2 different organisers probably don't use the same scale. Could be that their 4 stars would be a 3 star in PR...
For the moment I just take the RVV rating. Other opinions would be very welcome though.

Pavé 1: Haaghoek:
2010: -202+202
2011:-401 400

More cobbles, source
http://rvv.be/fr/tourisme/pentes-et-pav ... 0/haaghoek

Flanders site, ok, Het Volk says 2000 meters, they say 1700m, but it's the same, they give it 4 stars, ok.
Change in % is just what my measurement gave.

Helling 1: Ten Bosse

450m long (average: 6,9%, max.: 8,7%)
km: 236
RSF 2010: 6

2011: copied from 2010

Helling 2: Guilleminlaan
2600 meters long, no other info
Seems to go up only 64 meters in those 2,6 Km
3-3-1 for me... strange that that qualifies as a helling, if somebody knows more enlighten me.

Helling 3 Eikenmolen
610m with an average of 5,9%
Max.: 12%
RSF 2010: 6
2011: 6

Helling 4: Kruisberg:

Change from Aywailles 10 version
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruisberg_%28Ronse%29
http://rvv.be/fr/tourisme/pentes-et-pav ... /kruisberg
Here you see the version with pavé, Oudestraat or whatever it's called. Het Volk takes the newer road, no pavé. And the climb at the bottom different too, not from the city center but from the east. It's less steep. So
2011: 2-6

Pavé 2:
11. Donderij + Hof te Fiennestraat: First mystery according to their map they don't pass the second road... but ok, maybe the end of Donderij is called Hof bla bla.
800m + 300m
http://rvv.be/fr/tourisme/pentes-et-pav ... s/donderij
rated as 4. It's longer too 1500 a bit mysterious, but will stick to one Km.
2011: 402

Helling 5 Taaienberg
http://rvv.be/fr/tourisme/pentes-et-pav ... Taaienberg
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taaienberg
According to the Het Volk site 530 meters 6,6% which is actually what the rvv numbers give if you calculate them
Last year 6 and 2 pavé
2011: 206, the same.

Helling 6: Eikenberg
Get the links yourself
2011: 206, like 2010

Helling 7 Wolvenberg

2011: 8, like 2010

Pavé 3:
Holleweg
http://rvv.be/fr/tourisme/pentes-et-pav ... 1/Holleweg
IMO the other way around from here. And 2400 meters they say, so
2011: 401 -401 -202
2400 meters so I use the Skullmethod and give half the pavé for the next km.

Helling 8: Leberg
Same as 2010: 6%

Helling 9: Looking at the picture at the RVV Site, decided that was more than a * pavé. Even if it's only 300 meters long, the mountain itself is only 463 too, 7% average, keep it at 7, so don't cut the pavé too much. Could have gone for ***, but because it's not the full length of the climb went for **
RSF 2010 107
RSF 2011: 207

Pavé 4: Bostekrouterstraat 300 meters, Start Km 172.7 No mention about the state of the pavé, I assume it's *** why later
Pavé 5: Paddestraat: RVV link says 3, so be it. 2300 meters. Start 173.7, end 176. obviously
Pavé 6 Liphoovenstraat 1300 meters. *** according to STarts at 176.5, finishes 177.8

So.... all three individually would be fairly easy.
nr 1 *, only 300 meters, can assume it's a 3 like the ones close by.
nr 2 *, ***, *** 300 meters in one km, so 1, then 3
nr 3 either *, *** or **, **, 500 Meters of 3=1,5, 800 meters of 3=2,4, so both ok, I would go with * ***

But all three so closely together...
From km 173-178
reality- 700 meters unpaved-300 meters ***, 700 paved- 2300 ***- 500 paved 1300 *** - 200 paved. Total: 2100 meters no pavé, 3900 ***
RSF with above system: 2km * 2 km *** 1 km * 1 km ***
Good? Really no clue on this one, could make it in x different ways and none really is correct.

1. Like above
2 Put nr 4 one km earlier and/or nr 6 one km later to have 1 or 2 one Km breaks in between the sectors. (reality 700 +500 meters)
3 Combine the 300 from nr 4 with the 300 from nr 5 and make it a ** right before nr 5
4: Forget the Skullzmethod, make it * 1km nothing, *** **** nothing ***
5 Same as 4 but add the missing 600 meters as * star each in the 2 sectors
6 Roby reads the whole thing wrong and it's really easy.

No clue, opinions more than welcome. Actually I demand opinions here...

Finally did:
Ok, I finally did

the first * one km ahead. So now km 172 instead of -1 is -103, 173 is -1 instead of -103
Then 174 *-***-***-*-***

Pavé 7: lange Munte 2500 meters no info on the RVV site

Pics here:
http://koenwolk.wordpress.com/2010/02/2 ... nge-munte/
Comparing with pics from the rated sectors on the RVV I'd go with 3
RSF 2011:-201, 302, 300

Pavé 8: Steensomething. 700 meters in the city. 100 is closer to the goal than last year because now it's actually where it is. The pavé stops 1,7 or so km before the end of the stage. 2 at RSF, so 600 meters longer than in reality.
Last edited by Robyklebt on Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

User avatar
NoPikouze
Posts: 2964
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 3:57 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by NoPikouze » Sat Feb 12, 2011 4:56 pm

* / * / *** / *** / * / *** Sounds good no ? Ok one break for the 700m would be nice too
Also, you could try to rearrange the kms. Forget the first 700 unpaved meters if there are several undecisive kms before them.
Or the first 200, which makes: 500 unpaved - 300 *** - 200 unpaved / 500 unpaved - 500 *** / 1000 *** / 800 *** - 200 unpaved / 300 unpaved -700 *** / 600 *** - 200+ unpaved :arrow: */ **/ ***/ **(*)/ **/ **

A more straightforward solution: put every sector into the profile independently:
300 at *** + 700 unpaved = *
Paddestraat Adaptation RSF 2010: 201 / -203
One km with * for the transition
Lippenhovenstraat Adaptation RSF 2010: 301
Only 5 kms though, but I guess that's because they dont start at km xxx.00

Ok, maybe i'm just writing crap... Good luck.
Imo the RSF result is more important than to follow reality on every inch of the road, which is almost impossible.
Qui sème le vent récolte le tempo...

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Robyklebt » Mon Feb 14, 2011 6:03 pm

Ok, I finally did

the first * one km ahead. So now km 172 instead of -1 is -103
Then 174 *-***-***-*-***
Lange Munte went for **-***-*** finally, thanks to NoPiks suggestions not to make it too easy using the skull method, 500 meters at ***, 1 Km * would have been too easy.

Thanks to NoPik for the help!

Complaints now still welcome, but insults can be expected in the answers as well, you could have complained before!
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Robyklebt » Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:54 pm

Since I seem to have been elected by general silence to do this... ok.

Dwars door Vlanderen 2011

Here the hellingen from 2011 and how I did them. Only change worth noting probably the Oude Kwaremont, from 306 304 to 306 303. Like it better.
Will later add Aywailles numbers from 2010 and iBans from 2009 (when available) for comparison later. Complaints and corrections welcome.

Nieuwe Kwaremont 5 4
Katteberg 206
Leberg 6
Valkenberg 6
Eikenberg 206
Steenbekkendries 303
Knokteberg/Cote de Trieu 7
Oude Kwaremont 306 303
Paterberg 206
Tiegemberg 5
Holstraat 5
Nokereberg 204

Will do Nokere Koerse next.
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

Luna
Posts: 1764
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Luna » Sun Feb 27, 2011 6:10 pm

Robyklebt wrote:Since I seem to have been elected by general silence to do this... ok.
a clear vote.


thanks for your work

Robyklebt
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Classiques Belges

Post by Robyklebt » Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:14 am

Nokere Koerse


Kruisberg 2 6
Hotond 4 (but it's not the climb from the bottom)
Kluisberg 7
Tiegemberg 5
Nokereberg 204

Think nothing changed, Kruisberg the non pavéroute again like in Het Volk, different approach, but in the end comes to the same 2 6

Next E3
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests