Money according to categories

race and calendar global organistion

Moderators: systemmods, Calendarmods

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

Money according to categories

Post by Robyklebt » Thu Apr 05, 2018 7:45 am

Luques in the April thread:
luques wrote:
Thu Mar 29, 2018 3:08 pm
Gipfelstuermer wrote:
Thu Mar 29, 2018 2:27 pm
One more thing which is more a question of RSF principles or philosophy: Do we prefer 2 parallel tours with 2-3 editions each or do we prefer 1 tour with 5 editions? What makes managers happier?

Like with Alps and Croatia, managers will complain "I want to ride Alps, but I only have time in the afternoon!" or "I want to ride Croatia but I only have time in the morning!". Would it be better to only have Alps? Managers would complain "Why is there only Alps? I can't ride it with my sprinter team."

Would be interesting to hear your opinion.
As for me both solutions have their pro and con.

For the solution 1 tour 5 editions, the pro usually is the partecipation while the con is the lack of different tours, there isn't much variety.

For the other solution (which is the one used at the moment) pro and con are reversed, more type of races, less players per race.

What is preferred by managers of rsf? Hard to say. I think the second one, truth is that I rarely found managers in a 3 teams tour complaining, most of the time were other people not playing it complaining about it. While the players were perfectly fine with it.
Instead, many were complaining about "only climber tours" or "why we are not playing all the calendar".

And yes one problem can be "why that tour is not at this hour" but with the forum and pdf uploaded so early I hope most of the people will express their opinion soon enough.

Probably something on the system part should be made also to really set a difference between tours (yes there is a difference of points, but what is the real advantage to get points?).

Anyway open to read some new ideas if someone has.
Stupid post, after all you yourself already came up with a very brilliant idea in this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=37&t=2166

CC (Cycling Circle, Circle Cycle, difficult name) forbid me to post in that thread, so I have to make a new one.

The great Luques-idea:
luques wrote:
Fri Sep 01, 2017 10:46 pm
Actually the idea I like really much is changing the prize money. Take for example Fourmies, the winner gets 120k. Heidelberg Pokal the winner gets... 120k.

I know that points are different, but honestly nobody cares about them (being div1 champ is almost useless except for palmares). What counts more is money to be able to have a good team that can compete in top races.

My idea? Do that the winner of PR gets 200k and the winner of a fantasy race 60k. The good things I see are:

1) No more crazy teams for a mountain/hilly low cat tour or race. The same could actually be obtained by changing the amount that the sponsor covers based on race categories.

2) Best teams will tend to play the most important races, letting little teams the rest.

Probably there are other ways to achieve this but I think it is really something we should tend to. I mean, div1 teams that play most important races, for example in this period not Alberta but Vuelta or Fourmies + Bruxelles + Montreal etc.. and little teams trying to emerge in low cat races.
Donkeyposal:

One day races:
Cat 1: 0.6
Cat 2: 0.8
Cat 3: 1
Cat 4: 1.2
Cat 5: 1.5
Cat 6: 2.0 (so no change to now)
Only for the money at the finish, not for intermediates.

Stage races are a bit more difficult I fear. In a way don't think high category tours need more money around, there really is enough there already. So while I'm fully convinced by my Donkeyposal for 1 day races muss less sure about what to do for stage races:

-----GC-----stages
Cat 1: 0,6----0.6
Cat 2: 0.8----0.8
Cat 3: 1-----1.
Cat 4: 1.2.----1.3
Cat 5: 1.4----1.6

Favor the stages a bit over the GC? Maybe? To encourage stage hunters to join important tours too? If both the same, I'd go for the GC version for stages too, not the other way around.

For jerseys a special scale I'd say. It used to be way too high, forgot how much. 30'000? 40'000 Then Buh changed it, now for GTs or cat 4 tours it's really to little, Ok, seems to be 20'000, which seems ok actually for cat 4 or maybe even 5
Cat 1: yellow 5000-rest 2500
Cat 2 yellow 7500-rest 3750
Cat 3 yellow 10'000-rest 5000
Cat 4 yellow 20'000-rest 10'000 or 15'000-7500
Cat 5 yellow 30''000-rest 15'000 or 20'000-10'000

Donkey thinks the Luques Idea is brilliant. And thinks something like that should be implemented. And this isn't something that has to wait until autumn, the offseason. On the contrary, it's even better to implement it during the season. In Winter we will all suffer from lower income, since there are no high category races, so better to start early so that we can "compensate" with higher earnings during the season. For May no problem. Or if that's too sudden, go for it for June first.

It might actually be that overall there will be too much money... stage races, maybe go down there further ? 0.5-1.3?

Anyway, discuss, then implement!
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"!

luques
Posts: 2233
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by luques » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:08 am

All my posts are brilliant 8-)

Actually what scares me the most is the offseason, as most of those races will be cat 1 or cat 2 at most.

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

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Robyklebt » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:18 am

Yes, the offseason can be a concern. That's why starting in the season is better. Off season has lower participation, so often we actually earn more money then during the season. And the purists who refuse to ride the offseason, (thus hurting the game) aren't punished as much anymore if there's less money around. But, the risk is that with less money even less people start?

If you (in another brilliant phase) realize that in winter there isn't just enough money around, then you can just so some universal (c4f is the universe) basic income at RSF, give 10'000 per race to teams or something:)
But in the end we don't know until we try, I think winter should still be ok. And right now we actually rather have too much money around.
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"!

Tukhtahuaev
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 7:07 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Tukhtahuaev » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:36 am

Definitely supporting this. Proposed numbers seem ok, but would need to be evaluated again after a bit of time.


Regarding the available money in winter I don't see much of a problem. I made a lot of money over the winter and even if I only got 70% of that (I think it would have been a bit more actually, but too lazy to work that out) it would have been possible to keep my team at the same size.

Gipfelstuermer
Posts: 1513
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:43 am
Location: Weltenbummler
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Gipfelstuermer » Thu Apr 05, 2018 1:45 pm

Yes! Very good proposal! I am pretty sure that a majority will be PRO money according to categories.

But, let's think about it more scientifically. Let us start with the current situation. Is there a good and complete overview of prize money for all categories? For instance, I can not view cat 6 prize money. Is it really 2x? Checked for MSR. Was not exactly 2x for my team, I belive.

When we have the complete overview, we should add a statistic on number of cat1, cat2, ..., cat6 one-day races and tours during the year. (Historical numbers are probably good enough.)

Then, we can discuss how we shift money. The key point is: We probably want to keep money supply constant. (At least for a quick solution and if we do not change market values, salaries, taxes, etc. at the same time.) That means, what we give to high categories, we have to take from low categories.

One more thing: I hope, we agree, that we only change prize money. Not salary. Otherwise small teams will be disadvantaged.
GIP MASTERPLAN
Gameplay: Flexible Min-Tact. Improve Sprint System. Windkante.
Marketing: Re-attract old players. Advertisement. Social Media.
New Players: Fair Start Budget, New Tutorial.
Fairplay: Improve FPC features, Fair Prize Money Disribution.

High Flyer
Posts: 225
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by High Flyer » Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:42 pm

1) No more crazy teams for a mountain/hilly low cat tour or race. The same could actually be obtained by changing the amount that the sponsor covers based on race categories.

2) Best teams will tend to play the most important races, letting little teams the rest.


Disagree with both of these points.
Big teams will still join small races and low cat tours aslong as they are still sure to get the win, esp when there are no tours in few days.

Also, maybe im wrong, but I feel you are looking at this in the eyes of those who aim for many GC's in tours. I don't really agree that we should be "forcing" or encouraging better/ older teams to avoid small races and going to tours.

Maybe i'm misunderstanding the post.
Image
Image

Gipfelstuermer
Posts: 1513
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:43 am
Location: Weltenbummler
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Gipfelstuermer » Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:35 pm

Ok, I want to feed you with some data for 2017. (Ignoring special things like number of editions and pelotons <10 teams)

One-Day Races
Cat 1: 240
Cat 2: 81
Cat 3: 24
Cat 4: 13
Cat 5: 8
Cat 6: 5

Pay per One-Day Race is 659,600. (Supposedly 1,319,200 for Cat 6)
Total 248,009,600.

Ok, so now take the Donkeyposal.
(0,6*240 + 0.8*81 + 1.0*24 + 1.2*13 + 1.5*8 + 2.0*5) * 659,600 = 178,355,840 (-28%)


Tour-Stages
Cat 1: 40
Cat 2: 136
Cat 3: 152
Cat 4: 58
Cat 5: 70

Pay per Tour Stage is 1,128,000. (658,500 for stages, 469,500 for GC)
Total 514,368,000 (300,276,000 for stages, 214,092,000 for GC)

Take the Donkeyposal again.
(0.6*40+0.8*136+1.0*152+1.3*58+1.6*70)*658,500 = 310,943,700 (+3.5%)
(0.6*40+0.8*136+1.0*152+1.2*58+1.4*70)*469,500 = 212,401,800 (-0.8%)
Total 523,345,500 (+1.7%)

So we should probably adjust to keep total prize money over the year constant. But other than that, the idea can work.
GIP MASTERPLAN
Gameplay: Flexible Min-Tact. Improve Sprint System. Windkante.
Marketing: Re-attract old players. Advertisement. Social Media.
New Players: Fair Start Budget, New Tutorial.
Fairplay: Improve FPC features, Fair Prize Money Disribution.

High Flyer
Posts: 225
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by High Flyer » Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:48 pm

Ok, so now take the Donkeyposal.
(0,6*240 + 0.8*81 + 1.0*24 + 1.2*13 + 1.5*8 + 2.0*5) * 659,600 = 178,355,840 (-28%)
Please no.
Image
Image

Gipfelstuermer
Posts: 1513
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:43 am
Location: Weltenbummler
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Gipfelstuermer » Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:21 pm

High Flyer wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:48 pm

Please no.
Hope, you realized that was not my idea, just some data on the Donkeyposal. (And he probably just threw some vague numbers in the forum.) So obviously the total should be +/- 0.0% afer the change. Do we agree on that? Or does anybody really want to increase/decrease total prize money for one-day races?

By the way, a possible solution could be that Cat. 2 is more the base case. For instance:

Cat. 1: Factor 0.9 (108k for the winner)
Cat. 2: Factor 1.0 (120k for the winner)
Cat. 3: Factor 1.25 (150k for the winner)
Cat. 4: Factor 1.5 (180k for the winner)
Cat. 5: Factor 1.75 (210k for the winner)
Cat. 6: Factor 2.0 (240k for the winner)

Makes:
(0.9*240 + 1.0*81 + 1.25*24 + 1.5*13 + 1.75*8 + 2.0*6) * 659,600= 245,701,000 (-0.9%)

Still -0.9%! (Probably made up by more editions for higher categories and less often <10 teams for higher categories).

Then, for tours make it slightly different because here we generally have higher categories. As a rule a stage win on a tour is as good as a one-day race win of one category lower.
Cat. 1: Stage-Factor 0.8 (96k for the winner) / GC-Factor 0.8 (40k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 2: Stage-Factor 0.9 (108k for the winner) / GC-Factor 0.9 (45k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 3: Stage-Factor 1.0 (120k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.0 (50k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 4: Stage-Factor 1.25 (150k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.1 (55k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 5: Stage-Factor 1.5 (180k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.2 (60k/day for GC-win)

Makes:
Stages: (0.8*40+0.9*136+1.0*152+1.25*58+1.5*70)*658,500 = 318,648,150 (+6.1%)
GC: (0.8*40+0.9*136+1.0*152+1.1*58+1.2*70)*469,500 = 213,246,900 (-0.4%)

In total 531,895,050 (+3.4%) for tours, which solely comes from making stage-hunting more attractive. And that is very important in my point of view. For example, sprinter teams are rarely seen in tours currently. Maybe because of sprint system, but maybe also because they earn little in GC and not enough in stages.

So this is just another example. You can play with the numbers as you like.
GIP MASTERPLAN
Gameplay: Flexible Min-Tact. Improve Sprint System. Windkante.
Marketing: Re-attract old players. Advertisement. Social Media.
New Players: Fair Start Budget, New Tutorial.
Fairplay: Improve FPC features, Fair Prize Money Disribution.

luques
Posts: 2233
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by luques » Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:23 am

High Flyer wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:42 pm
1) No more crazy teams for a mountain/hilly low cat tour or race. The same could actually be obtained by changing the amount that the sponsor covers based on race categories.

2) Best teams will tend to play the most important races, letting little teams the rest.


Disagree with both of these points.
Big teams will still join small races and low cat tours aslong as they are still sure to get the win, esp when there are no tours in few days.

Also, maybe im wrong, but I feel you are looking at this in the eyes of those who aim for many GC's in tours. I don't really agree that we should be "forcing" or encouraging better/ older teams to avoid small races and going to tours.

Maybe i'm misunderstanding the post.
In my opinion not. If I am a big team and I have to decide between a fantasy race that gives me 80k and Paris Roubaix that gives me 200k (and all the other places are scaled as well, I mean also the 2nd, 3rd etc gets more), I would start to have doubts in partecipating at the first one.

It's pretty clear instead that if the ratio is 1:1 (you get the same amount here or there) then I don't even see the advantage of risking in PR maybe with high salary.

Moreover, it seems to me just a common sense, that an important race should have a bigger reward than a fantasy one.

I had also in my mind a sponsor system, where basically always stays as it is now, but at the end of the month the sponsor rewards you based on the race you partecipated in, the victory you got etc... but would take more time, nothing is ready anyway.

As for Gipfel, nice calculations, could be a good starting point, just one thing that need to be considered is that the impact of single races is minor than tours. In other words, when there are tours running often the partecipation in single races is reduced at minimum, and with the % cut based on the number of managers difference reduces.

An example, let's say that for cat 1 race win now you get 120k and after you will get 80k. If a race gets cut of 50% because only 5 managers are online, the difference between the 2 goes down from 40k to 20k (the first getting 60k the second 40k).

User avatar
Pokemon Club
Posts: 3184
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:37 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Pokemon Club » Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:56 am

Bah only one question luques : at the end is it something you can implant quickly or not ? Because if it is as for it is the form... :roll:

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

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Robyklebt » Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:08 am

Total should be +/-0 at the end. Mmh, we don't completely agree on that, no. I don't. I see no problem in a decrease in money.

But ok, -28% for one day races seems a lot, bah, clearly too much. Thought 0.6 sounded good, but clearly too low.
0.8-0.9-1.0-1.2-1.5-2.0? 221'295'800. Would be 89,2%, seems ok for me.

But recheck my calculation.... never trust a Donkey with numbers.
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"!

High Flyer
Posts: 225
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by High Flyer » Fri Apr 06, 2018 6:35 pm

@Gilf
Yeah, I realized it, dont worry ;)

@Donks
89.2% seems alot much better

@Luques
In my opinion not. If I am a big team and I have to decide between a fantasy race that gives me 80k and Paris Roubaix that gives me 200k (and all the other places are scaled as well, I mean also the 2nd, 3rd etc gets more), I would start to have doubts in participating at the first one.
But that would never happen as cat 6 and 5 don't have cat 1 races beside it

A more realist example would be a high cat tour vs 1 day races, and there are many many example of big teams not going to them, maybe barring TDF and GIro.

I agree that big real race should be worth more, but I just feel like we should be careful when decreasing one day low cat races pay only / mainly because you increase tour pay.
.

Other than that, I'm quite fine with the rest.
Image
Image

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

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Robyklebt » Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:28 pm

Too late for May I guess.
But can we get something going for June?
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"!

luques
Posts: 2233
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by luques » Fri May 04, 2018 8:13 am

I was checking, something for June can be done. Single races look more easy as there is only final result involved, tours have much more variables, but at the end, we are only speaking about prize at the end of the stage/single race?

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

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Robyklebt » Sat May 05, 2018 3:52 pm

Good!

But what?
And should be for:
- 1 day races
- stages in stage races
- GC in stage races
- jerseys in stage races

No change for intermediates etc obviously.

How?
I'm not fully convinced by the proposals yet...
1 day races: ok, the 0,8-0,9,-1,0-1,2-1,5-2,0 seems somewhat ok to me
jerseys, my original proposals seems ok to me as well. If somebody has a better one, go for it.

Stage races: Mmh... Look at the Giro, the most expensive teams are from 577'995-687'441. That's a lot. And by adding more money to a GT we might see more and more expensive and ultra-expensive teams. That don't improve the quality of the races, on the contrary. Of course the expensive teams are fueled by too much money in the game too, so if the money in general decreases a little bit it might offset it. But the proposals we have now so far don't really do much of that. Ok, 1 day races, but if I get it correctly stage races stay roughly the same and even increase a bit? (Thanks to GTs and important ones, yes). So maybe would be better to go a bit lower for stage races? Gipfels proposal is much better than Donkey original one on stage races, but maybe go a bit lower?

For stages 0,75-0,85-0,95, 1,15-1,45 ? So always 0,05 lower than 1 day races? Sort of makes sense to have it like that, after all the 1 day race is more "valuable" than the stage of the same category.
GC, Gipfels proposal actually looks good, but see the start of the stage races section. Maybe go 1,05 for cat 4 and 1,1 for cat 5? Or both 1,1? Cat 5 being 3 weeks, gets the money from the multiplication of stages...

Anyway, that's what the Donkey is thinking, better ideas?
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"!

scorpsche
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2018 11:50 am
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by scorpsche » Fri May 11, 2018 2:08 pm

I think for GTs only (Giro, TDF, Vuelta) instead of raising price money you can raise the team wage border from 375k to 500k for e.g. (or any other border above 375k).
So teams can come with super teams to these tours having a bit of safety.
I am riding with a mediocre team right at the Giro and have 458k which is only 8th most expensive team.
I think a cheap team with only 1-2 strong riders can have much more earnings in the end and I don't know how really expensive teams dealing with that.

Just a thought :ugeek:
TeamSWE - Best team in the universe!

Golden State Team
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Golden State Team » Tue May 15, 2018 5:13 pm

scorpsche wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 2:08 pm
I think for GTs only (Giro, TDF, Vuelta) instead of raising price money you can raise the team wage border from 375k to 500k for e.g. (or any other border above 375k).
So teams can come with super teams to these tours having a bit of safety.
I am riding with a mediocre team right at the Giro and have 458k which is only 8th most expensive team.
I think a cheap team with only 1-2 strong riders can have much more earnings in the end and I don't know how really expensive teams dealing with that.

Just a thought :ugeek:
I like this idea.

Team Australia
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Team Australia » Tue May 15, 2018 5:30 pm

Not playing a lot at the moment, but just read through the thread and want to add my 2 cents: In my opinion the approach of Gipfel looks very good. In a first step do the reform in a way that does not change aggregate earnings. Just make sure the distribution among races of different categories is in a way that is desired. Implement it, see what effect it has. In a second step debate aggregate earnings. If we come to the conclusion that aggregate earnings are too high, cut them for all categories by the same percentage.

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

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Robyklebt » Mon Jul 02, 2018 12:51 pm

Robyklebt wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:28 pm
Too late for May I guess.
But can we get something going for June?
Third of July maybe?
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"!

luques
Posts: 2233
Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 7:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by luques » Mon Jul 02, 2018 3:49 pm

Of 2019 yes!

Liquigas-CND
Posts: 443
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:40 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Liquigas-CND » Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:03 am

Gipfelstuermer wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:21 pm
High Flyer wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:48 pm

Please no.
Hope, you realized that was not my idea, just some data on the Donkeyposal. (And he probably just threw some vague numbers in the forum.) So obviously the total should be +/- 0.0% afer the change. Do we agree on that? Or does anybody really want to increase/decrease total prize money for one-day races?

By the way, a possible solution could be that Cat. 2 is more the base case. For instance:

Cat. 1: Factor 0.9 (108k for the winner)
Cat. 2: Factor 1.0 (120k for the winner)
Cat. 3: Factor 1.25 (150k for the winner)
Cat. 4: Factor 1.5 (180k for the winner)
Cat. 5: Factor 1.75 (210k for the winner)
Cat. 6: Factor 2.0 (240k for the winner)

Makes:
(0.9*240 + 1.0*81 + 1.25*24 + 1.5*13 + 1.75*8 + 2.0*6) * 659,600= 245,701,000 (-0.9%)

Still -0.9%! (Probably made up by more editions for higher categories and less often <10 teams for higher categories).

Then, for tours make it slightly different because here we generally have higher categories. As a rule a stage win on a tour is as good as a one-day race win of one category lower.
Cat. 1: Stage-Factor 0.8 (96k for the winner) / GC-Factor 0.8 (40k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 2: Stage-Factor 0.9 (108k for the winner) / GC-Factor 0.9 (45k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 3: Stage-Factor 1.0 (120k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.0 (50k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 4: Stage-Factor 1.25 (150k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.1 (55k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 5: Stage-Factor 1.5 (180k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.2 (60k/day for GC-win)

Makes:
Stages: (0.8*40+0.9*136+1.0*152+1.25*58+1.5*70)*658,500 = 318,648,150 (+6.1%)
GC: (0.8*40+0.9*136+1.0*152+1.1*58+1.2*70)*469,500 = 213,246,900 (-0.4%)

In total 531,895,050 (+3.4%) for tours, which solely comes from making stage-hunting more attractive. And that is very important in my point of view. For example, sprinter teams are rarely seen in tours currently. Maybe because of sprint system, but maybe also because they earn little in GC and not enough in stages.

So this is just another example. You can play with the numbers as you like.

I think is not a good idea to increase that much the prizes vs actual prizes for stages in cat 4 and 5 tours.
Same for GC in Cat 4 and Cat 5 tours cause this will actually be in favour the big teams riding mainly high cat races.


Imo modify as per below:
Cat. 4: Stage-Factor 1.15 (138k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.08 (54k/day for GC-win)
Cat. 5: Stage-Factor 1.25 (150k for the winner) / GC-Factor 1.14 (57k/day for GC-win)

The rest seems ok..

Imagine how much money I would have made with 180 K /day (stage factor) and 60/day GC win...
-GC: Giro'15,'16,18,19;TDF'16,'18,'20;Vuelta'16,'17,'18;Tirreno'16,Catalunya'16,'18,Suisse'16,Romandie'16, Vasco'19,Andes'16
-Stages won in GTs:57
-Classics:17

Gipfelstuermer
Posts: 1513
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:43 am
Location: Weltenbummler
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Gipfelstuermer » Wed Sep 19, 2018 3:27 pm

Probably true. Good idea from Liqui.

Luques, when are you gonna implement this? :)
GIP MASTERPLAN
Gameplay: Flexible Min-Tact. Improve Sprint System. Windkante.
Marketing: Re-attract old players. Advertisement. Social Media.
New Players: Fair Start Budget, New Tutorial.
Fairplay: Improve FPC features, Fair Prize Money Disribution.

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

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Robyklebt » Wed Sep 19, 2018 4:28 pm

On GC, sounds ok (could actually go to 1.05-1.1 too, but ok, not too abrupt, sounds ok)


For stages I think going up more is ok. After all want to make it more attractive for stage hunters too. Yes, more money in stages drives teams more expensive as well, which isn't ideal but a stage win at a GT is worth quite a lot I think. The Donkey proposal in his last proposal post to him looks better, 1.45 for GT stages. (mmh, just see already proposed 1.05-1.1 there too... ha, maybe I'm for that after all as well).
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
Coroncina2
Posts: 358
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Money according to categories

Post by Coroncina2 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:48 pm

I agree with give more money to begger races. It make no sense that who play day by day all singol small race make more money than who play a GTs at same time. It's not realistic.
But to win a big tour or singol day classic you need to have a big team. Ok maybe you can be a big manager and win vs bigger team or you can be lucky, but the biggest team will probably continue to win (someone will win classics someone will win GTs someone will win stages of GTs).
My question is how or when new team could start to be competitive if teams that are winning now will got more money?

PS: what kind on category we will use? UCI category will be full adapt or with some reason some race will move up or down of cat. because of someone will like more some kind of race?

PS2: we got 3 months to test it with fantasy races. Why we should wait till may june or july :?:
Mens sana in corpore sano

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests