BAFS 2019 General Info Sticky

[rcannon100]

@Henry 182997 wrote:

****PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS THREAD. ****

[Henry]

@rcannon100 183421 wrote:

Bob, are you ok?

[cvcalhoun]

Hmm, I didn’t notice the rules change to cap points per individual. When and how did that happen? Not objecting, just wondering how I missed it.

And yes, I’m replying in defiance of the instructions. But last year, I think we had about three pages of replies in the first day. We’re being relatively restrained this year!

[chuxtr]

@cvcalhoun 183490 wrote:

Hmm, I didn’t notice the rules change to cap points per individual. When and how did that happen? Not objecting, just wondering how I missed it.

Gremlins!

[Henry]

@cvcalhoun 183490 wrote:

When and how did that happen?

Just posted yesterday. A group of us (importantly including the volunteers forming the teams and doing the the back-end coding this year) reviewed the lengthy thread about amending the rules to make the team competition more competitive, and concluded this cap would be the least disruptive way to try to tighten it up a little. Given there is no rules committee nor formal governing body, we made the change so it could be posted before registration went live (which is what everybody is waiting for). This was done with full knowledge that some people might be upset, and we will offer them full refunds on their entry fee if they want.

Henry

[cvcalhoun]

No problem. I am fully in accord with the rule that those who do the work make the rules. I was merely surprised. @Henry 183498 wrote:

Just posted yesterday. A group of us (importantly including the volunteers forming the teams and doing the the back-end coding this year) reviewed the lengthy thread about amending the rules to make the team competition more competitive, and concluded this cap would be the least disruptive way to try to tighten it up a little. Given there is no rules committee nor formal governing body, we made the change so it could be posted before registration went live (which is what everybody is waiting for). This was done with full knowledge that some people might be upset, and we will offer them full refunds on their entry fee if they want.

Henry

[rcannon100]

@Henry 183498 wrote:

Just posted yesterday. A group of us (importantly me, myself and I) ignored the lengthy thread about amending the rules to make the team competition more competitively competitive, and concluded we would just make a bunch of crap up. Given there is no rules committee nor formal governing body, we figured we could just do whatever we wanted and you couldn’t do anything about it. This was done specifically to upset some people, and we will offer them free vuvuzillas if they want. We control the root.

Henry

Damn. Give Henry a little bit of authority and he goes full Al Haig on us.

[IMG]https://consequenceofsound.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/henry-rollins-pissed-e1340822305474.jpeg?quality=80&w=336[/IMG]

[dbehrend]

@Henry 182997 wrote:

2019 Rules:

1) Scoring: Some slight changes were made to try to tighten up the Team Competition. These, of course, are again subject to change in future years!!!

• 10 points for each day of 1 mile+ (same as before)
• 1 point per mile (same as before)
• Team contribution per individual capped at 100 miles per week. A week is Monday-Sunday. Partial weeks at beginning and end also have 100 miles cap on team contribution.
• Individual rankings remain the same with no cap on the individual mileage on scoreboard.
So the max someone can contribute to their team is 170 points per week. If they miss a day but still ride 100 miles, they get 160 points.

It’ll be interesting to see how the cap on team contribution plays out. From the results last year, it looks like about 1/3 of riders would have regularly hit the weekly cap.

Not adding a cap on individual rankings seems like a reasonable compromise. At least that way, riders like Rod, Lynn, Alan, David, and other high-mile riders still get some deserved recognition, even if it doesn’t help their teams.

[ShawnoftheDread]

In the past rules have been established through discussion on the forum, not through someone from Bike Arlington deciding things on his own or with a few others. Is this an official Bike Arlington event now?

[Subby]

I get what you are trying to accomplish but 100 miles is really low. I could see capping it at 200 maybe but 100 discourages fun team long rides because now you’ve created a situation where team miles aren’t going to count in a lot of cases.

[hozn]

To be fair, I don’t think anything has ever actually been decided by people discussing on the forum. Someone just makes an executive decision and some people complain and then everyone moves on.

While I think this is a bold move, Im glad someone is taking the reins here. And I’m curious to see how this rule plays out. There are tons of pointless prizes that can reward miles in a cap-free way. This team contribution cap seems to strongly encourage daily riding. Seems to be in the spirit of the game.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@hozn 183561 wrote:

To be fair, I don’t think anything has ever actually been decided by people discussing on the forum. Someone just makes an executive decision and some people complain and then everyone moves on.

While I think this is a bold move, Im glad someone is taking the reins here. And I’m curious to see how this rule plays out. There are tons of pointless prizes that can reward miles in a cap-free way. This team contribution cap seems to strongly encourage daily riding. Seems to be in the spirit of the game.

It encourages daily riding by limiting many of us to three days of contribution a week? Interesting theory.

[hozn]

@ShawnoftheDread 183566 wrote:

It encourages daily riding by limiting many of us to three days of contribution a week? Interesting theory.

100 miles, but 10 points per day. It definitely encourages daily riding, yes.

In case this isn’t clear.

3 days, 100 miles = 130 points
7 days 100 miles = 170 points

[rcannon100]

@hozn 183561 wrote:

To be fair, I don’t think anything has ever actually been decided by people discussing on the forum. Someone just makes an executive decision and some people complain and then everyone moves on.

I attempted to establish consensus driven governance. Which I admit is hard, especially for people not used to it. In the beginning it did work. Some people screamed about all the varying opinions … but consensus could be identified and the discussion did move forward.

I do admit that it did devolve into bickering as sport. Part of that was because of some inexperience with consensus driven process. Consensus driven process – once it has momentum – has as part of the process that the decisions dont get changed unless there is consensus to do so. Certain people took to making shit up – which resulted in a lot of bickering – and degraded the process. Whatever.

One assumption was that this was an experience based on the community – that no one was in charge. This was both good – and a trick. If no one is in charge, no one can get sued. Of course, once someone asserts themselves as in charge….. and makes decisions…. well…. its just better to avoid being in charge and needing to consult your attorney to ensure that you are not at risk of liability.

As for the decision at issue, I will say – I think Subby is right.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@hozn 183568 wrote:

100 miles, but 10 points per day. It definitely encourages daily riding, yes.

In case this isn’t clear.

3 days, 100 miles = 130 points
7 days 100 miles = 170 points

Ah, by “encourages daily riding” you meant “encourages lots of sleaze rides.”

[Author]

Posts