2022 Teams & Points average

[Endeavour 681]

45 minutes ago, JanAndersen said:

Salary cap but build your team as you see fit. Admittedly I haven’t thought about the implications or reasons it might (not) work. 
 

**edit. I’ve thought about it and it’s a ridiculous idea

A lot of brown envelopes under table if you went down salary cap road.

[Jaizer 2,864]

1 minute ago, Endeavour said:

A lot of brown envelopes under table if you went down salary cap road.

"Sponsorship" opportunities

[GS550 449]

1 hour ago, Falcon1983 said:

Well I'm sure say selecting one or two rising stars then it's free for all wont work as clubs cant afford it or may go bust trying 

Someone on this forum came up with a good idea of rounding averages up and down, and when explained it was or at least sounded pretty good

Issue with averages is it doesnt reward those that have a good year and you get riders who drop their averages on purpose

Right now I have no idea what the answer is 

Sorry but rounding averages up or down doesn't make sense.  Somebody that's 5 foot 9 inches tall is 5'9'' they aren't 6 foot.  Don't see how rounding averages up and down is some cure for all ills.  If somebody has a good year (nowt to do wi tyres btw) then rounding their average down isn't going to make a lot of difference unless its rounded down so much that it becomes artificially low.

Most of us are fed up with all the tinkering and constant rule changes ad nauseam.  As somebody else said, limit team building average to 42 and leave it alone for a few years.  Keep it simple.

 

 

[GS550 449]

19 minutes ago, Endeavour said:

As in rising star Josh Bates

I'd rather just get rid of all the daft rules and endless changes and tinkering.

[HenryW 1,178]

On 10/24/2021 at 8:31 PM, GS550 said:

Sorry but personally I've never been a fan of "categories" and "grades".  The average self categorises anyway to 2 decimal places.  Simple.

If there has to be greater control than just an overall team build points limit, is it maybe not easier to limit the combined averages of the top 3 as i think used to be the case a while ago, was it maybe 25 or suchlike, although to be honest I've lost track of the various rules.

I guess it maybe depends on what you are trying to achieve with "categories"/"grades"...
Averages DO self categorise to 2 decimal places, but that might not be the aim with a grading system...and all averages are not equal. Two riders could have the same average but have achieved them against a very different standard of opposition due to the way that the race format works.

You only have to look at the way that Denmark grades riders to see how things can be worked to achieve a particular aim. 
For example, it doesn't matter how badly a foreign rider scores in the Danish league, you will never see them receiving a D grade.
Across the grades, you will see Danish riders with lower grades than foreign riders with similar or even lower averages.
As another example, Benjamin Basso had a higher average than Damian Drozdz and Kevin Wolbert this season, but is graded lower than both of them for next season.
Put simply, the grading system is used to encourage the use of Danish riders and not see young Danes pushed out of a team place due to what could be considered an inflated average.

[GS550 449]

13 hours ago, HenryW said:

You only have to look at the way that Denmark grades riders to see how things can be worked to achieve a particular aim. 
For example, it doesn't matter how badly a foreign rider scores in the Danish league, you will never see them receiving a D grade.

Put simply, the grading system is used to encourage the use of Danish riders and not see young Danes pushed out of a team place due to what could be considered an inflated average.

Can do the self same thing with averages using minimums etc, and there is already a 2.5% reduction in place, no need to use letters and make things over complicated.  Lets bin the endless rule changing and tinkering.

Edited October 27, 2021 by GS550