Freezing Saddles 2018

[drevil]

For even distribution of the talent, make the top point-scorers of FS 2017 captains, then let them take turns picking the rest of us schlubs to be on their team.

[Judd]

@drevil 167639 wrote:

For even distribution of the talent, make the top point-scorers of FS 2017 captains, then let them take turns picking the rest of us schlubs to be on their team.

I’ve done a couple of Freezing Saddles Fantasy League drafts on long car rides with Komorebi and LSG. Most of our picks end up being based on people we like riding with the most, which is sometimes divorced from picks that would result in the most points.

[consularrider]

I’ve participated in BAFS every year, missed only one day of riding in all the competitions, was high point rider one year and on winning team another, have contributed a couple pointless prizes and won a couple others, have been to happy hours and team rides (ok enough bragging), but do not expect to be in the area again this year between 1/1/2018 and 3/19/2018. I am not concerned about being on a team, have been perfectly happy with the existing scoring system since it is neat and simple, and will defer to the preferences of the loudest.

[ian74]

@Judd 167645 wrote:

I’ve done a couple of Freezing Saddles Fantasy League drafts on long car rides with Komorebi and LSG. Most of our picks end up being based on people we like riding with the most, which is sometimes divorced from picks that would result in the most points.

Remind me to never go on a car ride with you three.

[cvcalhoun]

@Rod Smith 167634 wrote:

We had a ten rider team in the National Bike Challenge. Might be nice if we allowed that team to become a Freezing Saddles team. Because camaraderie, the spirit of Freezing Saddles, encouraging people to ride more, reindeer games, puppies and stuff like that.

But didn’t you pick the members of that team based on their riding the most? Allowing them to be a Freezing Saddles team doesn’t seem like it’s going to work.

[Subby]

@cvcalhoun 167427 wrote:

I would hate to see this, because it would mean the bottom two people would have no incentive to ride at all. If Freezing Saddles gets some guy to figure out that he really can ride every day all winter, I see that as a positive, even if every ride is a sleaze ride. But that guy might well be at the bottom of his team, and therefore lose motivation under this system.

Ok, sure but the motivational hit that comes with having one or two teammates that disappear or never show in the first place is pretty bad, too.

If you are last on your team and your points don’t count, what’s the solution? Basically the solution to many of life’s problems…ride more.

[vern]

@dplasters 167565 wrote:

As someone who put up a mediocre 1,173 points last year and is now going to be going in with a six month old – generally speaking – would anyone be excited to have me on their team? I can do any team meetup as long as its at Caboose off the W&O or any place in the Mosaic District. I’m super flexible. Swear.

Seriously – I’m looking for a general idea of if I’d meet the bar for “good teammate” or if it’s better for me to sit it out this year.

no, don’t sit out. You’re just like everyone else…you do what you can.

[Judd]

@ian74 167652 wrote:

Remind me to never go on a car ride with you three.

That’s it! You’re off Team Lumberjack!

[vern]

@Subby 167419 wrote:

Instead of having to track minimum participation, would it be easier if scores where just comprised of the points from the top X number of riders on each team? As an example, each team has 10 riders, you only take the top 8 scores, so teams that lost a rider or had someone flake out wouldn’t be penalized.

I like this a lot. A competition within the competition. Essentially, competing to be relevant. A primary component of this game is to encourage winter riding, and I support that. But I don’t think this game should be like so many kids activities are now where every participant gets a prize – there are no losers; we’re all winners! – because we must protect everyone’s precious self-esteem. Frankly, I’m not worried about protecting the self-esteem of someone who says they want to play the game and then takes 4 rides in 77 days. Maybe the competition within the competition would serve as an added, and different form of motivation to encourage more people to ride through the Winter.

[dkel]

@vern 167679 wrote:

I like this a lot. A competition within the competition. Essentially, competing to be relevant. A primary component of this game is to encourage winter riding, and I support that. But I don’t think this game should be like so many kids activities are now where every participant gets a prize – there are no losers; we’re all winners! – because we must protect everyone’s precious self-esteem. Frankly, I’m not worried about protecting the self-esteem of someone who says they want to play the game and then takes 4 rides in 77 days. Maybe the competition within the competition would serve as an added, and different form of motivation to encourage more people to ride through the Winter.

Each team could have its own lanterne rouge competition!

[hozn]

@vern 167679 wrote:

I like this a lot. A competition within the competition. Essentially, competing to be relevant. A primary component of this game is to encourage winter riding, and I support that. But I don’t think this game should be like so many kids activities are now where every participant gets a prize – there are no losers; we’re all winners! – because we must protect everyone’s precious self-esteem. Frankly, I’m not worried about protecting the self-esteem of someone who says they want to play the game and then takes 4 rides in 77 days. Maybe the competition within the competition would serve as an added, and different form of motivation to encourage more people to ride through the Winter.

I agree; I think this was a really great suggestion and solves a few problems. Just how the team time trials work!

[LhasaCM]

@hozn 167683 wrote:

I agree; I think this was a really great suggestion and solves a few problems. Just how the team time trials work!

Don’t team time trials work by taking the Nth place person on the team and having that time be the one that counts for the team?

To build a nice little straw man: we could go the other direction and only count the bottom 2 or 3 scores on a team…that way, the incentive is on the team to encourage/bribe/cajole/etc. those who have participated the least (where participate = ride outside) to participate more. It all gets back to what the whole purpose is/what to prioritize/etc.

[Emm]

@Judd 167645 wrote:

Most of our picks end up being based on people we like riding with the most, which is sometimes divorced from picks that would result in the most points.

This is my thought exactly. I’d rather be on a team with my friends who I like riding with vs people who ride the most (although there is definitely some overlap between the two groups), but then again I see FS more as a friendship building/encouragement to ride when it sucks out/advocacy tool than a cutthroat competition. Honestly, FS was a big motivator for me while healing from surgery last year, and most of what I loved about it was how I made a great group of friends, and received alot of encouragement to keep riding from the people I did group rides and happy hours with. Sure I didn’t ride every day because I still hurt, but it got me out riding 100% more than I would have ridden otherwise. And although I participated in the forum for a year or two before Freezing Saddles, I did not become a regular attendee at coffee clubs, group rides and happy hours until the competition.

What I would like to know is how prevalent is it that people sign up, and really don’t participate? Can someone run the numbers from a few of the prior years and show how many people per year were below a certain threshold (maybe however many points would equate to 3 shortish rides a week average or something?). If we’re just debating kicking off 5 out of 250 people a year, this doesn’t seem like a big enough issue to debate even if it’s something emotions run high over. But if it’s 20-30 people, I can see a reason to institute some minimum threshold.

[ian74]

@Judd 167677 wrote:

That’s it! You’re off Team Lumberjack!

I don’t want to belong to any team that would accept me as one of its members

[hozn]

@LhasaCM 167689 wrote:

Don’t team time trials work by taking the Nth place person on the team and having that time be the one that counts for the team?

To build a nice little straw man: we could go the other direction and only count the bottom 2 or 3 scores on a team…that way, the incentive is on the team to encourage/bribe/cajole/etc. those who have participated the least (where participate = ride outside) to participate more. It all gets back to what the whole purpose is/what to prioritize/etc.

Yeah, that’s true; I just meant the idea that you can “lose a few people” and it doesn’t affect the team’s score.

I liked this idea precisely because it takes the pressure/guilt off folks who need to miss some mileage for whatever reason. I think trying to get people to cajole people into participating is likely to just make it much less fun for everyone.

This is all being said as someone with absolutely no intent to participate. I learned my lesson year #1.

(@Subby, are you thinking of going back into the competition this year?)

[Author]

Posts