[Event] Winelands Cycle Race 2025

[MongooseMan]

Well seeding results from Winelands are out, and it’s been given a beta of 0.85.

I’ve stopped trying to understand how they determine these things, but I’m a bit mystified as to how 99er last year gets a 1.05 and this gets a 0.85.

Doesn’t make a lot of sense, but I’m also not affected, so 🤷

[bleedToWin]

13 minutes ago, MongooseMan said:

Well seeding results from Winelands are out, and it’s been given a beta of 0.85.

I’ve stopped trying to understand how they determine these things, but I’m a bit mystified as to how 99er last year gets a 1.05 and this gets a 0.85.

Doesn’t make a lot of sense, but I’m also not affected, so 🤷

Plot finish times and you'll see the bell curve is messed up. Do the same plot with the adjusted winner time and beta and it looks a little more normal.

[MongooseMan]

4 minutes ago, bleedToWin said:

Plot finish times and you'll see the bell curve is messed up. Do the same plot with the adjusted winner time and beta and it looks a little more normal.

That's fine, but then don't call beta

Quote

the difficulty of the conditions where more than 1 means windy or hilly and less than 1 means flat or calm

If it's purely fitting a bell-curve, that's fine, but the current reading on the page is misleading in that case, in my opinion.

[bleedToWin]

2 minutes ago, MongooseMan said:

If it's purely fitting a bell-curve, that's fine, but the current reading on the page is misleading in that case, in my opinion.

I think they are merely trying to explain what conditions would result in what kind of curve fitting adjustments so that it's more understandable.

A flat course on calm conditions will have too many riders doing fast times and will necessitate an adjustment for seeding. A-groupers starting in D will have the same affect. They still all got seedings around 12 though.

[MongooseMan]

3 minutes ago, bleedToWin said:

I think they are merely trying to explain what conditions would result in what kind of curve fitting adjustments so that it's more understandable.

A flat course on calm conditions will have too many riders doing fast times and will necessitate an adjustment for seeding. A-groupers starting in D will have the same affect. They still all got seedings around 12 though.

I seem to remember you and I have had similar discussions in the past.

I agree they need to fit a curve, and I agree that they're trying to suggest what beta "could" be representing. But, from numerous examples over the last few years, I can point out betas that do not correlate with this, hence me calling it potentially misleading and confusing.

 

Anyway, as I said, not affected, just having to explain to friends who did this race to improve their seeding why their 3 hours in the hot wind is not valued as much as 3hrs at 99er last year.

[ChrisF]

1 hour ago, MongooseMan said:

Well seeding results from Winelands are out, and it’s been given a beta of 0.85.

I’ve stopped trying to understand how they determine these things, but I’m a bit mystified as to how 99er last year gets a 1.05 and this gets a 0.85.

Doesn’t make a lot of sense, but I’m also not affected, so 🤷

 

Sorry, what does this practically mean ?

 

How does this impact seeding time for CTCT ?

[MongooseMan]

5 minutes ago, ChrisF said:

 

Sorry, what does this practically mean ?

 

How does this impact seeding time for CTCT ?

Higher beta generally means a lower seeding index (ie a better seeding for CTCT).

The index formula is: 

Quote

(YourTime/WinnerTime - 1) / Beta x 100 + Penalty

The WinnerTime can be adjusted (and often is, downwards).

But as you can see from the equation above, higher beta means the number on the bottom of the fraction gets bigger, which means the result gets smaller.

Worked example from Winelands:

If you did 3 hours, with the current winning time of 2h20m and beta of 0.85, you'd end up with an index of 33. If the beta was 1, the index would be 28, if it was 1.05, index would be 27.

Same worked example for 4 hours yields indexes of and 83, 71, and 67.

 

As @bleedToWin points out, setting the winning times and beta is largely a curve fitting exercise, which ironically lends credence to the whole "anti A groupers pulling D groupers to fast times" brigade, since that messes up the curve

 

Edited 23 hours ago by MongooseMan

[ChrisF]

1 minute ago, MongooseMan said:

Higher beta generally means a lower seeding index (ie a better seeding for CTCT).

The index formula is: 

The WinnerTime can be adjusted (and often is, downwards).

But as you can see from the equation above, higher beta means the number on the bottom of the fraction gets bigger, which means the result gets smaller.

Worked example from Winelands.

If you did 3 hours, with the current winning time of 2h20m and beta of 0.85, you'd end up with an index of 33. If the beta was 1, the index would be 28, if it was 1.05, index would 27.

Same worked example for 4 hours yields indexes of and 83, 71, and 67.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Durbie Dash was a good ride for me.  Then Lost 30 minutes to technicals ....

 

Did a personal best of 3:09 at Winelands.

 

let's see how 99er goes ....

 

Certainly not serious for me, as CTCT has a limit on how far up the grid the ebikes can start.  Just dont want a repeat of last year, fell back to start with a charity and got properly stuck in slow traffic ...

[Old school]

Anyone else notice how the race commissaire said they will have a neutral zone through town. Then on the first left he drops the flag and we have to bunny hop speed humps all the way through town. Pretty far from a safe start I'd say..

[NickGM]

1 hour ago, MongooseMan said:

Well seeding results from Winelands are out, and it’s been given a beta of 0.85.

I’ve stopped trying to understand how they determine these things, but I’m a bit mystified as to how 99er last year gets a 1.05 and this gets a 0.85.

Doesn’t make a lot of sense, but I’m also not affected, so 🤷

I was thinking of laughing off the 99er because the last time I did it the beta was 0.94, which I naively chalked up to the fact that it's just a flat, fast course and will never have a high beta. I had also sort of counted my chickens with this race and was just about bang on your 3hr worked example; expected 28, got 33.

But ok, I've actually bothered to read how they come up with that beta now, and its worth turning out for the 99er.

edit: corrected historical 99er beta.

Edited 23 hours ago by NickGM

[JeffK]

Silly me asked to be moved from B to A for this race (based on actual results) to chase a better seeding, bit of a waste...

[NickGM]

Side note: recent comments in this thread made my "engineer alert" radar start to ping.

[MongooseMan]

2 minutes ago, NickGM said:

Side note: recent comments in this thread made my "engineer alert" radar start to ping.

I may have a spreadsheet... 😉

[Dri]

Anyone have an idea if there will be pictures of the event? I dont remember seeing any photographers

Also what do you rate the time conversion is to ctct assuming similar conditions? A 3 hour time at winelands = 3 hour 15 ctct?

[ChrisF]

30 minutes ago, Dri said:

Anyone have an idea if there will be pictures of the event? I dont remember seeing any photographers

Also what do you rate the time conversion is to ctct assuming similar conditions? A 3 hour time at winelands = 3 hour 15 ctct?

 

Similar question - any guesses as to the CTCT starting time with a seeding of 30, 35, 40, etc ?

 

Hiehie, I dont even know the range of the seeding numbers ... 🫣

[bleedToWin]

2 hours ago, Dri said:

Also what do you rate the time conversion is to ctct assuming similar conditions? A 3 hour time at winelands = 3 hour 15 ctct?

Thereabouts yes