|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 4, 2007 10:42:10 GMT 1
it's not been abandoned, why do you think so?
|
|
|
Post by cipt2001 on Feb 4, 2007 11:19:42 GMT 1
I was also prepared to say that you abandoned the grouping . How else could the following happened?
1. Credentino 4:51:45 0 0 Warriors 2. Tancredi 4:54:13 0 1 Warriors 3. Manara 4:54:19 0 1 OMC 4. Esposito 4:54:45 0 0 OMC 5. Di Luddi 4:54:59 0 0 Steel Team 6. Glas 4:55:19 0 0 Guardia 7. Fratta 4:55:52 0 0 Guardia 8. Perrone 4:56:39 0 0 paolo bettini fc 9. Strollo 4:56:49 0 0 paolo bettini fc 10. Milone 4:56:51 1 0 Steel Team
The difference between 2nd and 3rd is just 6 seconds and they aren't grouped. Also true for 3rd and 4th and so on...
NB: Results are from Italy 2.3, first stage of Tour of Romandie.
|
|
|
Post by ando on Feb 4, 2007 11:21:20 GMT 1
exactly! hasn't been done for yesterday's race!
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 4, 2007 11:37:56 GMT 1
fixed
|
|
|
Post by cipt2001 on Feb 4, 2007 12:29:13 GMT 1
The problem appeared just in some divisions or was something general?
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 4, 2007 12:40:47 GMT 1
something general (code wasn't updated to latest version
|
|
|
Post by Genomico on Feb 4, 2007 15:08:47 GMT 1
I see that the grouping thing also occured in the overal ranking. There the riders do not have to group when they are within 1 minute of each other.
|
|
mrpiet
Amateur Team
Posts: 134
|
Post by mrpiet on Feb 4, 2007 15:26:43 GMT 1
it looks like something like that happened but this looks really weird. It's in Belgium 3:8
first stage Bolhuis 4:51:17 Nijkamp 4:51:17
second stage Nijkamp 5:59:59 Bolhuis 6:01:15 standings after two stages Nijkamp 10:52:10 Bolhuis 10:52:10
Does it look like this because the real time (and not the time of the group they end in) is used to calculate the standings in the tour and after that they are grouped again?
|
|
|
Post by cipt2001 on Feb 4, 2007 18:21:58 GMT 1
Same problem here:
Tour de Romandie - 1st round
Di Luddi 4:54:13 Milone 4:56:39 Rindone 4:59:54
Tour de Romandie - 2nd round
Di Luddi 6:05:46 Milone 6:01:57 Rindone 6:00:51
Expected totals after 2nd round
Di Luddi 10:59:59 Milone 10:58:36 Rindone 11:00:45
Actual totals after 2nd round
Di Luddi 11:00:46 Milone 10:59:45 Rindone 11:00:46
What is wrong here? Looks like a second grouping is performed but, why their total time is bigger than it should be. Maybe mrpiet is right, and the total is calculated with the time before groping, and then another grouping is performed.
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 4, 2007 18:31:24 GMT 1
real time is used internally
|
|
|
Post by CableGuy on Feb 5, 2007 12:16:46 GMT 1
But why is your software code that deals with the (presentational) pelotons in tour race results, also submitted to the standings?
You have 2 options, I think: 1) Real time should be visible there, which allows everybody to calculate the real time of his cyclists after every stage by subtracting the new standings time with the previous standings time.
2) Add the (presentational) pelotons time displayed in the everyday results to get the standings. I favour this approach, since it would result in realistic standings, where some people are having the same time in the standings if they end up in the same pelotons in the stages. But I did understand you had problems to memorize which was the sort order of a peloton then (because real time was abandoned).
Anyhow, now it seems that you use a 3rd option to display the standings, in which there is no logic at all. If the result of the already passed individual stages makes your cyclist end within a minute after his predecessor, he will end up with the same presentational time as that one (non appropriate peleton grouping) ... and so on for all cyclists. This really makes no sense, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Schizm on Feb 5, 2007 12:30:45 GMT 1
I think he used it as a reaction to the complaints about the peloton-grouping, because if you use option 2 (the presentational times) this could result in a non-logical order if he will sort on the internal time, and if you use the presentational time for sorting the complaints of it being "not fair" stated here by some users would be ignored.
If he wants to take these complaints into account 1 is the best option for tours, but he could ignore them also and work with the presentational times (like option 2) and keep the internal times just for sorting cyclists with the same time.
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Feb 5, 2007 12:51:18 GMT 1
The only reason I did it was technical. I don't respond to all complaints, I'm no pansy The second option (CableGuy's post) was how it was. But like he said, this made it impossible to sort the order of groups and thus award jerseys, points, money, ... to the correct cyclist. Right now, all internal times are the real times (tours and races). The ones shown in the result are the grouped ones. This could give strange results in tours because the grouped times don't always add up correctly compared to the internal ones. But it's a bit of compromise we got to make here.
|
|
|
Post by cipt2001 on Feb 6, 2007 9:24:40 GMT 1
My opinion is that grouping cyclist this way is confusing, and I see 2 solutions: 1. give up the grouping for a while, maybe just in the tours 2. use the "after grouping" time to calculate time totals in the tours, and use the real time just to sort the cyclists in case of a tie (I understand it's hard to implement this right now, but this will be the right choice in the end)
|
|
|
Post by ando on Feb 6, 2007 13:14:41 GMT 1
so after all grouping is just for "dispaly" only? and why was grouping applied to TT too i think it's a mistake!
|
|