Likes Likes:  247
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
ELITE ELITE:  0
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 79

Thread: Discussion on Team Points Cap and Non-regional Teams

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Falls Church, VA
    Posts
    943
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I think the reason why the team competition was not a spirited as we thought it would be with the mileage cap is that the wrong metric was used for attempting to achieve team balance. Everyday riding is much more important with the mileage cap than distance if you look at the standings. Team 7 had 7 everyday riders, Ice Ice Baby had 6, and License to Chill had 5. In addition to miles, we should ask "how many days did you ride during last year's FS?" Then you could do a 2-stage allocation, e.g., balance the >70-day riders among teams by mileage, then allocate everyone else balanced by mileage.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    677
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    I think the reason why the team competition was not a spirited as we thought it would be with the mileage cap is that the wrong metric was used for attempting to achieve team balance. Everyday riding is much more important with the mileage cap than distance if you look at the standings. Team 7 had 7 everyday riders, Ice Ice Baby had 6, and License to Chill had 5. In addition to miles, we should ask "how many days did you ride during last year's FS?" Then you could do a 2-stage allocation, e.g., balance the >70-day riders among teams by mileage, then allocate everyone else balanced by mileage.
    Agreed - both are important. And it's not just the number of everyday riders, but the overall level of riding frequency (where something like a multi-stage allocation makes sense). Team 7 had both the most ride days and the most miles that counted with the cap; Team 17 was second in each. Or, looking at it differently: Teams 8 and 20 had just about the same mileage, but were 9 spots apart in the standings because of ride days.
    Last edited by LhasaCM; 03-21-2019 at 11:41 AM. Reason: one too many justs

  3. Likes wheels&wings, Hancockbs liked this post
  4. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Penrose in Arlington, VA
    Posts
    610
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Yes, ride days are a BIG DEAL. I was a team captain last year and tried my best to motivate folks to ride every day (even if it was just a sleaze ride) because those first 10 points can make a big difference cumulative over time. The teams that are able to both do the most ride days and miles are always going to be the front runners. But just riding big miles (but not consistently) isn't necessarily going to make you a front runner.

    If we try to do something similar next year (maybe with a higher cap), ride days would also be part of the equation to try and create balance.

    BTW, I have to admit that I'm somewhat amused (or is it bemused ... or both?) about teams not being as social because they're not local to each other. I mean, I understand that it's easier to get together if everyone is in the same general vicinity. But we're talking about people who are supposed to be riding their bicycles. Yet it's too difficult to ride somewhere because it's not convenient?

    I think there has to be more to it than that. Maybe the people on the team just aren't that social to begin with. Maybe they don't have time to do extracurricular stuff. Maybe they want to do different riding than the kind of riding that's being offered up for a social event/ride. Maybe it's too hard to get everyone's schedule to mesh to be able to do something together.

    But if everyone thinks having teams where everyone is more local to one another will make FS more social, I'm all for that and it would make putting teams together a lot easier. I just wouldn't worry (or worry a lot less) about creating "balanced" teams. Do it by a combination of zip code and random assignment.

  5. Likes josh, Hancockbs liked this post
  6. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Penrose in Arlington, VA
    Posts
    610
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Also, if people are actually intentionally riding less because of FS mileage cap ... IMHO that sounds like a personal problem. I would like to think that we all ride our bikes because we like/love riding our bikes ... regardless of our reasons for riding or the kind of riding we do. And that we all ride as much as we can regardless. Whether it's less than 100 miles per week or more.

  7. Likes Steve O, awitt liked this post
  8. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Washington DC
    Posts
    677
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    BTW, I have to admit that I'm somewhat amused (or is it bemused ... or both?) about teams not being as social because they're not local to each other. I mean, I understand that it's easier to get together if everyone is in the same general vicinity. But we're talking about people who are supposed to be riding their bicycles. Yet it's too difficult to ride somewhere because it's not convenient?

    I think there has to be more to it than that. Maybe the people on the team just aren't that social to begin with. Maybe they don't have time to do extracurricular stuff. Maybe they want to do different riding than the kind of riding that's being offered up for a social event/ride. Maybe it's too hard to get everyone's schedule to mesh to be able to do something together.
    I think there's some of that - people are different, life circumstances vary, etc. But having a team of folks who live in south Arlington or north Alexandria, as an example, makes it easier to do more impromptu or smaller scale things - the "I'm heading down to New District this afternoon, who wants to join me?" type of event. Or meeting up for a happy hour after work - when everyone lives semi-close together, it's less of a production so easier to pull off. Trying to plan a workable date/time is hard enough with differing schedules...trying to then get the location (which then further constrains the date/time) can make it seem like too much work. The "open to all" broader theme-based events still happened and still were fun, but the smaller informal things seemed lacking from what I could tell.

    So really, it's not so much riding a bike is inconvenient, but getting multiple folks together in one spot at one time is. For me to make an impromptu or even planned gathering at New District, I'm looking at devoting at least 2 hours to get there and back from where I live in DC, plus the actual social part. Having at least some teammates closer together removes that barrier. Doesn't guarantee socialization, but it does help. (And yes, the antisocial people can still say they don't care about a localized team so can be matched up however.)

  9. Likes bentbike33, secstate, Steve O, Emm, Hancockbs, awitt liked this post
  10. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Penrose in Arlington, VA
    Posts
    610
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LhasaCM View Post
    (And yes, the antisocial people can still say they don't care about a localized team so can be matched up however.)
    We can make that part of the registration process and create #TeamAntiSocial.

  11. #17
    Steve O's Avatar
    Steve O is offline I spend all day thinking about bikes and talking to people on the internet about them.
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pentagon City in Arlington VA
    Posts
    4,662
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    amused (or is it bemused ... or both?)
    These two words are not synonyms, even though they are similar sounding. I was bemused, not amused.

  12. #18
    Steve O's Avatar
    Steve O is offline I spend all day thinking about bikes and talking to people on the internet about them.
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pentagon City in Arlington VA
    Posts
    4,662
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    I think the reason why the team competition was not a spirited as we thought it would be with the mileage cap is that the wrong metric was used for attempting to achieve team balance. Everyday riding is much more important with the mileage cap than distance if you look at the standings. Team 7 had 7 everyday riders, Ice Ice Baby had 6, and License to Chill had 5. In addition to miles, we should ask "how many days did you ride during last year's FS?" Then you could do a 2-stage allocation, e.g., balance the >70-day riders among teams by mileage, then allocate everyone else balanced by mileage.
    Perhaps, but people have been trying to balance teams for 7 years and have failed every time. I have no doubt that whoever takes it on next year (bentbike?) will similarly fail to create competitiveness. I do not know why this is.

    If we want more competitiveness we have to come up with a system that works even if the team balancing effort fails. Some sort of adjustable handicap or something. Or rebalancing during the competition. Or something else. If we rely solely on the assigner to create balanced teams, then it will not be competitive. I will bet a beer on it.

  13. Likes awitt liked this post
  14. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Falls Church, VA
    Posts
    943
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve O View Post
    Perhaps, but people have been trying to balance teams for 7 years and have failed every time. I have no doubt that whoever takes it on next year (bentbike?) will similarly fail to create competitiveness. I do not know why this is.

    If we want more competitiveness we have to come up with a system that works even if the team balancing effort fails. Some sort of adjustable handicap or something. Or rebalancing during the competition. Or something else. If we rely solely on the assigner to create balanced teams, then it will not be competitive. I will bet a beer on it.
    Past performance is not a predictor of future results.

  15. Likes consularrider, Sunyata, kwarkentien liked this post
  16. #20
    Steve O's Avatar
    Steve O is offline I spend all day thinking about bikes and talking to people on the internet about them.
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pentagon City in Arlington VA
    Posts
    4,662
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    Past performance is not a predictor of future results.
    No. But as mentioned, I'm willing to bet a beer on it.

    I think my point still stands, though. If we can create a system that makes the game competitive regardless of how poorly or well the assigner does, that will be an improvement. Currently, competitiveness is entirely dependent on a single individual's best efforts sometime in December before the game even begins. Past performance indicates that is an extremely difficult challenge.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •