cycling4freaks.com

It breaks my heart that the NC's had so many riders from inactive teams. They also have the right to a good career! Therefore, I suggest that riders from teams who have not been logged into their account for more than 2 (maybe 3) months are automatically transferred to the transfer market. This ensures an improvement in the market and at the same time these riders are given another opportunity for a career.

Not a good idea. a lot of teams are seasonal players. and this would not help to bring back former players.

No more discussion about it? Okay, so it was obviously not a good idea.

Chemnitz Pro Cycling Team wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 02, 2023 9:58 am

No more discussion about it? Okay, so it was obviously not a good idea.

I am against it for the reasons mentioned. I also find it sad that great riders are not available for the market. What we should do to make the market better again is to increase the number of active teams. When you take away those riders, those teams will not be motivated to buy any new riders in the future. So what you create is a one time small benefit and probably end up on less active teams (during the real season).

I totally understand both sides and I'm not sure which side I'm on. Currently, I am tending more towards the proposal of Chemnitz. If we decide to implement something like this the proposal should be adjusted to not punish the teams affected.

1. No log in for minimum 3 months, maybe 4 months?
2. Check if the affected team is in div. 3 to 8 (no reset in div. 1 & 2 possible).
3. Check if the 'Total Capital' fell below a specific value due to retired riders (e.g. 15 Million)
4. Exclude teams with temporarily bans

All teams still affected after the filter would reset themselves either way. This way the riders would be brought to the market a little earlier.

I can imagine that too like Schnugge/Chemnitz
so the farmer have to do 1 race in 3-4 month ...


but no problem to let it like it is ... its not my problem if the great riders dont do there job

It like to "reopen" this topic but i'd like to have a closer look at the banned teams. There are many teams with bans at all and I assume some of them have a permanent one (e.g. multis). Some of those teams have riders that will never get a chance to start the career but I think they should get it.

What do you think about that?

Schnuggeritos wrote: ↑

Thu May 11, 2023 10:53 am

It like to "reopen" this topic but i'd like to have a closer look at the banned teams. There are many teams with bans at all and I assume some of them have a permanent one (e.g. multis). Some of those teams have riders that will never get a chance to start the career but I think they should get it.

What do you think about that?

That could be another option for the FPC, "ban" as one option, "dissolve team" as the extended option. Just a note there, dissolving cannot be reverted (riders would be sold), so FPC should handle that with care.

Why should riders from an illegal multi account come to the transfer market? And based on what rule should the FPC decide about selling or not selling them?

Gipfelstuermer wrote: ↑

Thu May 11, 2023 9:46 pm

Why should riders from an illegal multi account come to the transfer market? And based on what rule should the FPC decide about selling or not selling them?

Why should riders be punished, because their team managers got banned?

Chemnitz Pro Cycling Team wrote: ↑

Fri May 12, 2023 9:16 am

Why should riders be punished, because their team managers got banned?

It's not really a punishment because many of them would not exist without the banned team. Auto generated riders and all those riders where only that team had a bid. And riders bought in Div6/7 which you would then offer to Div1-5 potentially...

Ok ok, so what about the riders, that somebody else had a bid on, and lost that auction to an account that was banned later on? Ok, maybe that team should get a chance to hire this one rider. But it's a very rare case and that team might not really have an interest anymore a few months later potentially?

I think the overall "make the transfermarket more attractive" topic shouldn't be mixed with fairplay cases