Likes Likes:  235
Dislikes Dislikes:  2
ELITE ELITE:  0
Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 85

Thread: BAFS 2020 teams and rules discussion

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Penrose in Arlington, VA
    Posts
    620
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default BAFS 2020 teams and rules discussion

    Yeah, I know it's still summer weather but since it's now technically fall I thought this would be as good a time as any to open up a discussion thread so that whatever we decide to do for 2020 won't be a last minute discussion/decision.

    NOTE that this is a DISCUSSION thread, not a DECISION thread. Any and all discussion, criticism (constructive and polite), suggestions, etc. are welcome. But that doesn't mean that just because it's discussed that it means that's what we're going to do. What we end up doing will depend on a lot of different factors, including (but not necessarily limited to): willing and able volunteers, feasibility to implement, sensibility, understandability (is that even a word?), etc.

    So with that in mind ... Some things we'd like to hear from y'all about (but not limited to just these few things):

    1. What did you think of the mileage cap (for team points, not individual points)? Scrap? Keep? Keep but up the mileage?

    2. What do you think about trying to make the teams more "local," i.e., teammates from the same area? But still trying to "balance" the teams (based on past Freezing Saddles participation) so that no one team is "stacked" with high mileage riders?

    3. Conversely, we could just make team assignments totally random. I think Steve O has done some analysis to indicate that this doesn't necessarily change the results in terms of differences between teams.

    4. What do you think about smaller size teams? Last year we had 19 teams with 10 riders each. It's been suggested that Freezing Saddles is more competitive with smaller teams because every team member's miles (or lack thereof) count more. Is something like 6 riders too small for a team?

    5. Keep the current point system? 10 points for the first ride mile of the day (as an incentive to ride) but 1 point for every mile afterwards.

    Again, it's not going to be possible to do everything (or maybe even many of the things) that people suggest. But this is your chance to discuss and make suggestions for the above or anything else.

    THANX!

  2. Likes Steve O, obscurerichard, Boomer2U liked this post
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Silver Spring
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Just a couple of thoughts.

    I generally enjoyed the mileage cap and point system - thought it helped balance the teams.

    With regard to team selection and size. I've had both local and non-local teams. With local teams there are more opportunities for meet ups and rides but the non-local encouraged me to join other rides and ride with a different variety of folks. So no real preference.

    It might be fun to try random teams just to see if Steve O's calculations bear out.

    Smaller teams would be fine if we could drop non-performers. A team of six would be devastated if it has two folks who decided they would only ride when the weather was "nice." Teams of ten can better handle a couple fair weather riders.

  4. Likes drevil, Nadine, obscurerichard liked this post
  5. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    West McLean
    Posts
    916
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Raise the cap to 150, randomize teams, 10 riders per team, drop the lowest mileage rider for each team when calculating team points, otherwise keep the current points system, reject any and all of steveO's ideas.

  6. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beer Win Heights
    Posts
    914
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    1. What did you think of the mileage cap (for team points, not individual points)? Scrap? Keep? Keep but up the mileage?
    I like it, but I think it should be upped. Maybe 150?
    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    2. What do you think about trying to make the teams more "local," i.e., teammates from the same area? But still trying to "balance" the teams (based on past Freezing Saddles participation) so that no one team is "stacked" with high mileage riders?
    I like this also. From what I've seen doing this only the last 3 years, when teams are closer together, it's easier for them to do spur of the moment rides. It also makes it easier to hang out, because places are closer to them.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    3. Conversely, we could just make team assignments totally random. I think Steve O has done some analysis to indicate that this doesn't necessarily change the results in terms of differences between teams.
    Meh. This is for fun, mixed with a little competition. I do like the idea that was used in the past where people could opt to join a team that isn't local.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    4. What do you think about smaller size teams? Last year we had 19 teams with 10 riders each. It's been suggested that Freezing Saddles is more competitive with smaller teams because every team member's miles (or lack thereof) count more. Is something like 6 riders too small for a team?
    Six seems too small (in my current train of thought). But I don't think it should be bigger than 10. 8-10 maybe?
    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    5. Keep the current point system? 10 points for the first ride mile of the day (as an incentive to ride) but 1 point for every mile afterwards.
    This is good.
    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    Again, it's not going to be possible to do everything (or maybe even many of the things) that people suggest. But this is your chance to discuss and make suggestions for the above or anything else.

    THANX!
    One thing that seems like a good idea (at the moment, but can be convinced otherwise) is to have a two or three week reshuffle of those that are hardly participating. So if they can't get a minimum number of points at the end of this first period, then those folks get moved to a "casual" team, and those on the waitlist that have been meeting minimum points get moved onto the teams (randomly). I know folks that wanted to play competitively that ended up on teams with slackers, then they become indifferent to the game because their team isn't competitive any more.

    I realize feelings can get hurt, but if they aren't doing minimal points requirement, then maybe they're better on the casual team?

  7. Likes CBGanimal, Hancockbs liked this post
  8. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Penrose in Arlington, VA
    Posts
    620
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drevil View Post
    I realize feelings can get hurt, but if they aren't doing minimal points requirement, then maybe they're better on the casual team?
    The idea of a "casual" team(s) is an interesting one. How would you define a casual rider in terms of weekly rides/mileage?

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Penrose in Arlington, VA
    Posts
    620
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subby View Post
    reject any and all of steveO's ideas.
    This is a given. But I will amuse him by pretending to listen.

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beer Win Heights
    Posts
    914
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chuxtr View Post
    The idea of a "casual" team(s) is an interesting one. How would you define a casual rider in terms of weekly rides/mileage?
    At the very least, someone who doesn't get 55 points a week, i.e., someone who doesn't even ride a mile 5 days of the week.

    EDIT: I changed my mind to lower the threshold, because I realize not everyone can ride every single day.
    Last edited by drevil; 09-24-2019 at 09:48 AM.

  11. Likes Shepard, chuxtr, CBGanimal liked this post
  12. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Silver Spring
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    That seems like a good baseline.

  13. Likes CBGanimal liked this post
  14. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Penrose in Arlington, VA
    Posts
    620
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drevil View Post
    At the very least, someone who doesn't get 77 points a week, i.e., someone who doesn't even ride 1 mile a day.
    How soon would you start dropping riders from teams? After the first week? Two weeks? Would you drop a rider who has previously met the minimum but then doesn't in a subsequent week?

  15. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Silver Spring
    Posts
    16
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Maybe it's based on an average over the first 2 to 3 weeks. That way unusual weather events won't knock a bunch of folks off. Also, self-selection might work if we have both "competitive" and "casual" teams.

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
  •