Team sizes

[Luna]

Pro real team sizes now. Make the fields 25 teams with 8 riders -> 200 riders. (It's boring to race with only 11 teams...)
Stop this 9 riders per race standard. 9 riders only at the Grand Tours, please. It doesn't kill the sprinters teams. It's still very well possible to control a race with 8 riders per team, although one of them usually only has got one leg (=low flat sill). Anyway I seldom see a Cavendish or Farrar participate in the tempo work during a race.

Give the managers the freedom to chose up to 2 riders less than the allowed maximum riders per race.

Make it more real at that point.


In order to maintain the balance in the starting conditions make it obligatory for a team to consist of at least 9 riders, even if they could start a race with less than 9.

[auxilium torino]

I am of the opinion of Luna at 200%

[Zentaron]

Anyway I seldom see a Cavendish or Farrar participate in the tempo work during a race.

That's not the point. The point is the need of (more) helpers.
(Does not mean, that i'm against it. I have too less experience with 8 riders. Maybe it's enough, maybe not.)

[NoPikouze]

A single team should not be able to control a whole race alone anyway. Unless it's an extremely strong flat team like the greatest HTC ou Tmobile teams...

Sign up less riders as the max. I'd like that too, it's realistic and convenient. But maybe it doesn't actually fit into RSF.

8 riders per team, seems better to me. I'm not sure what is the real number to be honest. 9 is almost only on GTs I believe (?)
But with 8, everybody might send 2 in the group instead of only one, or am I seeing that wrong ?

[auxilium torino]

If all teams have a 6 or 7 riders, all teams have the same problem

Furthermore, it would be interesting for all, without 'having to watch some teams that have 3 or 4 sprinter, every race

[Luna]

It would be same for every team. So no big disadvantage. The flat skill of sprinters and/or climber could become more important. But is it so bad? Everybody would know that beofre the race and could adapt their strategy.

I would be okay with giving the races for 4-6 riders one rider more, so that it would be 5-7.

But actually any cat 1 race could well be with that 5-7 riders.

So:

cat 1 -> 5-7 riders
GTs -> 7(?)-9 riders
rest -> 6-8 riders

[auxilium torino]

A single team should not be able to control a whole race alone anyway. Unless it's an extremely strong flat team like the greatest HTC ou Tmobile teams...

Sign up less riders as the max. I'd like that too, it's realistic and convenient. But maybe it doesn't actually fit into RSF.

8 riders per team, seems better to me. I'm not sure what is the real number to be honest. 9 is almost only on GTs I believe (?)
But with 8, everybody might send 2 in the group instead of only one, or am I seeing that wrong ?

Real
GT 9 riders
UCI 1.1 6 to 8 riders
UCI 1.2 4 to 6 riders
Nat. min.1-max. 6

[olmania]

All the tactics in race will change with that :
- controlling/Chasing
- Escapes, 2guys in front ... hard !
- Leaders
- Big attacks, impossible to do big gk attack with 3-4strong guys, because all are not protected, or some of them had to ride before
- Sprints, trains
...

RSF's tactics will change a lot for more realism if we do that

[Luna]

That's a pro argument, isn't it?

[Rockstar Inc]

realism realism...i like realism...but if the races get less riders...you have to adjust the one-legged-riders too....

and yes, it's totally different for "favorites" and possible puncheurs...

if you don't have "to do tempo" because of yellow or a strong sprinter it's a big advantage...these teams can protect their leaders or attackers like today...but the other side will not be able to protect their helpers in the future...maybe one helper beneath the leader...okay, for teams like Luna or Aux, who tell us every 3,4,5 month excatly the same proposal it's a perfect way to ride their actual style...easier and more promising than now...

there are two sides of the medal...

[Luna]

As you correctly noted, I tell the same thing for month, no years. Much longer than I have this team, whose racing style would fit into the system, for now, coincidentally. And I'll continue telling the same thing, when my team developes into another direction, like it's doing so all the time. Btw I still have a climber and probably always will. I would have to deal with it like all others. It's not fair to argue in that way.

It's no obligation to constantly give the sprinters 2 supporters by their side. It's the choice of the managers. Maybe they chose to keep fresh one more flat rider, so that they still have something to give against the attackers. Then the sprinters with 60+flat have a bigger advantages compared to those with 60-. what's the problem with that?

And when it really would come to difficulties for those controlling the race, I tell you, then it's a race where also in RL the teams would have those problems. Then it has to be that way.

As for the problem with the one-legged riders: I told before that I never saw a Cavendish or a Farrar participate in the chase. Also no Contador and no Schleck are seen at the very front of the peloton.

And as I said, for races which normally are for 4-6 riders, give them 5-7 in compensation for the fact that in those races, in deed, Cav and Farrar would work earlier than in the finale, but cannot at RSF.

[lesossies]

Real
GT 9 riders
UCI 1.1 6 to 8 riders
UCI 1.2 4 to 6 riders
Nat. min.1-max. 6

It could be a direction for RSF:
Proposal:
Cat 6 Races and GTs : 9 riders
Cat 5 Races and Cat 4 Tours: 8-9 riders, can be definitively defined/discussed for every race/tour.
Cat 3-4 races and Cat 2-3 Tours : 6-8 riders
Cat 1-2 races and Cat1 Tours : max 7-8 riders

I´ll prefer a concrete rule for all races than a solution/discussion for every race .

[Luna]

1. Maybe the Campeonate de los Andes could get 9 riders, too. It's kind of the 4th Grand Tour of the year.

2. Especially the bigger one day races live from the fact that there are not 9 riders to control evetrything as if it were a flat sprinters race. Why still allowing 9 riders for the Ronde, Liege-Bastogne, all the other Monuments and big classics? Not to forget that in many of those races there are no one-legged riders to protect (for example the cobble races or those where the 70/80s have their shot).

3. Why keep the allowed maximum at 8, even for cat 1 races or those where there are are only 6 in RL?

4. Is there any reason at all against more realistric team sizes apart from the one-legged team captains? Keep in mind that we could still make the 4-6 races for 5-7 to compensate that disadvantage.

5. Of course the salary refund should adapt when a manager choses not to send the full contingent, meaning 40k less for every rider you leave at home.

[Zauberlehrling]

Luna, I understand your argument with the reality, but:

You seem to see, that Cavendish never rides during the day, but as I see, he does NOT need always 2 Helpers, just to come fit to the sprint. That's the big difference, the first 100 rather slow km, Cavendish will get twice a bottle from a companion, that's it. Here in RSF, my Cavendish (Razzo...) needs one helper for the slow km, then two.
That means, because who makes tempo cannot help, that I have two (if I take Tanner too four) riders, who can do nothing else than protect my leader. You say, that I can put just one helper on Razzo, clear I can, but the one with 92 Sprint won't.... so disandvantage for the strong one.

I am FOR this change, if the one-legged leaders loose much less energy as a compensation, then it's ok and also realistic.

Don't come with realism on one part and ignore it in the other part!! Contador doesen't need more than half a helper on a mountain stage (except those who make tempo, but they are not counted in RSF), Chatelain does.
That's a big big difference, and as long as this is not changed, I see no sense in changing the teamsize!

[gaurain rx]

Luna, I understand your argument with the reality, but:

You seem to see, that Cavendish never rides during the day, but as I see, he does NOT need always 2 Helpers, just to come fit to the sprint. That's the big difference, the first 100 rather slow km, Cavendish will get twice a bottle from a companion, that's it. Here in RSF, my Cavendish (Razzo...) needs one helper for the slow km, then two.
That means, because who makes tempo cannot help, that I have two (if I take Tanner too four) riders, who can do nothing else than protect my leader. You say, that I can put just one helper on Razzo, clear I can, but the one with 92 Sprint won't.... so disandvantage for the strong one.

I am FOR this change, if the one-legged leaders loose much less energy as a compensation, then it's ok and also realistic.

Don't come with realism on one part and ignore it in the other part!! Contador doesen't need more than half a helper on a mountain stage (except those who make tempo, but they are not counted in RSF), Chatelain does.
That's a big big difference, and as long as this is not changed, I see no sense in changing the teamsize!

You put the words out of my keyboard

[Cerro Torre RT]

well, but please note that those one-legged riders do not lose a bit more energy than a 70-85 for those km where the tempo is low, so normally for some like 70% of the race. Every Captain needs a helper there, no madder which values he has. So i do not see the big difference.

[auxilium torino]

well, but please note that those one-legged riders do not lose a bit more energy than a 70-85 for those km where the tempo is low, so normally for some like 70% of the race. Every Captain needs a helper there, no madder which values he has. So i do not see the big difference.

thanks!

[Rockstar Inc]

Another point: in RL one helper carrys food and drinks for "all the leaders"...here at RSF one helper is the "butler" for only one guy...

something ala "one helper helps two or three riders and loose more energy" could be an option...

[Robyklebt]

I like the direction of the discussion.. while I have no opinion about nr of riders yet, reform of the "Grundlagen" sounds exciting! But won't hijack the thread. Just note once again that that's what's needed first and foremost.

8 or less riders for other riders would favor the "parasite-outsiders" over the "favorites" as it is now. Would it be a huge problem? Probably not, we would adapt. And in many races it's already the "parasite-outsiders" that win it. How often do the favorites win Paris-Roubaix and Flanders? How often LBL and Lombardia? The change maybe would be that attacks from far (which at RSF means km 1-20, unfortunately almost never 100-150) get better chances, depending on the group, is it a group with attacking parasite outsiders or helping and now (ex parasites) outsiders But in the end the change wouldn't be that huge.

What happens to riders nr 7-14 or so in Winter? That's a bit my concern though.

[Luna]

ZL:

When a RL-race gets fast at the final half of the race the leaders of course need more than one rider to keep them out of the wind while riding near the front. And they are not the riders who make tempo. They are still some bikelenghts away from the tempo workers, just building the "front wall" of the house for their leaders to hide behind.

And for Razzo the 2 bottles he receives from a companion help him not to lose 150-250 energy units at the whole distance. The units are just spread out on every single km of the race in RSF. Don't know if it must be that way. But it could stay that way without making it impossible for Razzo to win the sprint.

What Roby says is also true. The so-called parasites would have an even better chance. But they do so already, at least in the mass sprints. It's not seldom that the big guns only watch each other while a 88 sprinter comes with his own train and grabs the win. It's a full niche at RSF. Some teams are specialisted to that, because you have a real chance that way. What comes with it is that Razzo could shout out and demand help from teams with sprinters who have a view skill points less. If not the Zauberlehrlinge are always allowed to play different tactics than that of constantly riding for a mass sprint from beginning of the race to the end. The races would become more open. What doesn't mean that the better teams would have fewer chances. It's maybe only their assumed leaders who not always come into play.


I don't hink we would need a major reform of the substructure for that.


Roby: Riders No 7-14 would do the same as riders 10-14 do now. Maybe we would come to an other idea later...

[gaurain rx]

I just want to know what is the basement - Goal of the proposal?

Making the race more realistic?

Make it more open?

Or something else

[Rockstar Inc]

Goal:

a little bit realism, and a very big part of "higher chances for puncheurs, less controlled races and more outsider victorys"

[gaurain rx]

Goal:

a little bit realism, and a very big part of "higher chances for puncheurs, less controlled races and more outsider victorys"

Well, it seems contradictory

[Luna]

Goals:

- Making the team sizes adequate to the race. The organizers design their races in the awareness of the expected number of riders per team. Doing every race with 9 riders disobeys the real character of the races. They become more controlled than needful.

- Correcting Buhmanns mistake at the birth of RSF when he thought that bike races simply are ridden with 9 riders per team. Would he have known before we would have smaller team sizes for 4 years. Nobody would complain. Nobody would demand 9 riders for any race outside the GTs.

- Making the number of teams per peloton higher. That would lead to smaller chance of splitting the races into several groups. Than the split could be made as soon as there are more than 200 riders inscripted to a race, instead of when 23 teams are registered. Deviding the groups into at least 100 riders per peloton would make the minimum number of teams in one of the groups 100/8 = 12.5 teams, instead of 11 teams (for group one. 12 for group two).

- I'm sure there are more goals. They just don't come to my mind right now.

[auxilium torino]

also make it possible to run short races, which at this moment is automaticamante refused.

Decreases in cash prizes ...
automatically, with a split in the twenty-sixth team, the race will allow a larger number of teams for a field

we would have a basical number of 13 teams for a group,to 25(6 to 8 riders pro team), but in races with 6 riders for a team we can allowed to 33 teams pro group.
The prize money would remain as now, and, raising the number of teams in the group, it would lower the prizes won by each, increasing the interest in a top five position, and the interest in to win a stage.

this solve the big problem with to much win!