British Cycling Website .....................

proto

........................... is the worst website in the world. FACT!

They've made a couple of attempts to make the rider and club ranking work, but it's absolutely hopeless. Points allocated are correct on some pages but not others. The club and rider points totals don't add up. It's a real mess.

Also the search facility in Calendar is a disaster. Work your way through it to an individual event, but try and go back to another event in the same region and you have to start all over again.

Have they not heard of testing before going live.

In the real world someone would have been sacked for such incompetence, but hey ho, why worry, it's not their money they've wasted, it's ours. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

gattocattivo

I'm with you

Pross

Yep, they are trying to show way too much information without a decent structure. It needs to be completely re-built from scratch by someone who will be an end user and knows what is required.

amaferanga

Do they only show points for riders that are 3rd Cat or above? Is there even a way to search for a rider by name?

proto

Pross wrote:

It needs to be completely re-built from scratch by someone who will be an end user and knows what is required.

I'll re-phrase that for you:

It needs to be completely re-built from scratch by someone who knows what they are doing.

proto

amaferanga wrote:

Do they only show points for riders that are 3rd Cat or above? Is there even a way to search for a rider by name?

You can search by region and category, but the listings are inaccurate. For example, Southern Region, Cat 4 riding ranking shows my son on 1 point. However, look at his individual rider statistics and it shows him on 9 points, which is correct. The Club Ranking lists are equally useless.

sampurnell

the calendar function (or Lack thereof) is the reason i havent joined up yet.
to much money compared to ease of use seems to be there motto.

dulldave

proto wrote:

Pross wrote:

It needs to be completely re-built from scratch by someone who will be an end user and knows what is required.

I'll re-phrase that for you:

It needs to be completely re-built from scratch by someone who knows what they are doing.

I'll add a bit on for you:

It needs to be completely re-built from scratch by someone who knows what they are doing and then tested with people who are actually going to use it.

Pross

sampurnell wrote:

the calendar function (or Lack thereof) is the reason i havent joined up yet.
to much money compared to ease of use seems to be there motto.

The calendar function works OK once you suss it out. it's just finding anything that's the problem, the search facility is the worst I've come across.

ju5t1n

The case study on the integrator's website makes it sound quite good... http://www.dotfive.co.uk/portfolio/nati ... ice-system

I especially like this line...
“Without the involvement of Dotfive, this project would have failed...”

Dess1e

proto wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Do they only show points for riders that are 3rd Cat or above? Is there even a way to search for a rider by name?

You can search by region and category, but the listings are inaccurate. For example, Southern Region, Cat 4 riding ranking shows my son on 1 point. However, look at his individual rider statistics and it shows him on 9 points, which is correct. The Club Ranking lists are equally useless.

It would only show those points scored in your son's region for the club ranking (not sure about the regional ranking). Points scored outside the reion are not counted. A bit of a pain for riders in London and the SE who could be ridin in 3 differnet regions per week.

Tom Butcher

The whole regional/club points thing is just unnecessary - can't believe there was any demand for it and the fact you only score points in races in the region makes it meaningless. It's typical of the whole website - far too much stuff on it that nobody asked for or wants but they fail to get the basics right.

lyn1

Tom Butcher wrote:

The whole regional/club points thing is just unnecessary - can't believe there was any demand for it and the fact you only score points in races in the region makes it meaningless. It's typical of the whole website - far too much stuff on it that nobody asked for or wants but they fail to get the basics right.

True....And you can add the National Rankings and the Team Rankings to the unnecessary category. If the purpose is to rate riders and teams in order of ability then it doesnt do that. If thats not the purpose what is it?
There are serious flaws in the points allocated for various categories of race, which allow manipulation and results in riders appearing above others who they are consistently beaten by. The team results compilation has about half a dozen flaws that make it "pointless."

Thick Tester

Tom Butcher wrote:

The whole regional/club points thing is just unnecessary - can't believe there was any demand for it and the fact you only score points in races in the region makes it meaningless. It's typical of the whole website - far too much stuff on it that nobody asked for or wants but they fail to get the basics right.

There is plenty of demand for it and clubs do look at these.

1) It encourages clubs within a region to compete with that region and
2) Encourages clubs to promote events in that region in line with item 1.

I've long thought that there should be a season long regional competition for clubs.

Lyn1 wrote:

There are serious flaws in the points allocated for various categories of race, which allow manipulation and results in riders appearing above others who they are consistently beaten by

A practical example of this 'manipulation' being ?

Tom Butcher

I know when we finished second in the East Mids a couple of years ago I was the only person in the club (well of those that attended the AGM anyway) that knew - and I only knew because I was the road race secretary and had to give a quick report on who had done what that year.

It just doesn't allow you to compare success vs other clubs. Because we are close to the border of another region our own road race doesn't count towards points in our own region! I suppose we could have promoted a circuit race at Darley instead of a 70 miler on a challenging circuit and kept it in our own region.

If you have riders that ride Darley and Mallory week in week out you'll do well - if you have riders who travel and ride on the road (and in the East Mids you have to travel if you want to regular road races) then most of your rides wont count.

lyn1

Thick Tester wrote:

.

Lyn1 wrote:

There are serious flaws in the points allocated for various categories of race, which allow manipulation and results in riders appearing above others who they are consistently beaten by

A practical example of this 'manipulation' being ?

Refering more to the Elite and 1st cat ranking.
The system can be manipulated by anyone wanting to enhance their ranking or improve their license category. Others may just benefit innocently. An eg but there are many. One team did a Nat A rated Prem Calendar. Their best 8 riders rode 3 stages and picked up 8 ranking points between them in 3 days of racing.. 2 riders who didnt even make the team rode one 2nd tier Nat B race the same weekend (when the top riders were all elswhere) and picked up 113 ranking points between them. The Premiers attract anything from 50-100+ strong riders with only 100 points for a win whereas you can get 60 points for a win (= to 4th in a Premier) for winning Nat B events that often barely get a handful of strong riders. Places for finishing positions also reflect this problem. 21st in a Premier is a good ride but worth no ranking points..despite the fact you beat 50+ good riders yet If you beat a mere handful of good riders in a Nat B you will probably get 60 points.

Another eg. The Leases Newcastle crit offered 30 points for the win and attracted all the country's top teams and riders Endura, Rafa, Motorpoint etc. A rider who got no points (finishing outside the top 15) then did a local race a couple of days later and got 30 points for beating a group of 1st and 2nd cats.

The ratio of points between Nat A and B mean that riders who stick to Nat B and avoid riding against the best guys can pick up a shed load of relatively easy ranking points and end up significantly higher in the rankings than they should be if its supposed to be ability related. They may also move up a license category.
This translates to the team ranking, although there are several other issues with that which make direct comparisons between teams meaningless.

rjeffroy

There is plenty of demand for it and clubs do look at these.

1) It encourages clubs within a region to compete with that region and
2) Encourages clubs to promote events in that region in line with item 1.

I've long thought that there should be a season long regional competition for clubs.

The regional idea breaks down in London which is divided among 3 regions seemingly arbitrarily (has anyone ever seen a map of the regions?). My club has riders in all 3 regions making it hard to keep track of rankings among club members.

Pross

The regional rankings are a good idea I reckon. Not just because it allows my club to claim this year to be the no. 1 cycling club in Wales but as Thick Tester says it encourages participation in local events. We have someone who's always trying to get our riders to enter a local event now rather than travelling to one outside the area. It can be frustrating when other clubs pick up points due to weight of numbers in crits whilst we get a lot through 5 or 6 riders getting regular top three placings in longer road races but that's a sign it is doing what is presumably intended and getting people out competing.

jimmythecuckoo

I used to use Everdaycycling to log my miles and generally have a chit chat with other local riders.

The new site has absorbed that and not really done it much better from what I can see.

Thick Tester

lyn1 wrote:

Thick Tester wrote:

.

Lyn1 wrote:

There are serious flaws in the points allocated for various categories of race, which allow manipulation and results in riders appearing above others who they are consistently beaten by

A practical example of this 'manipulation' being ?

Refering more to the Elite and 1st cat ranking.
The system can be manipulated by anyone wanting to enhance their ranking or improve their license category. Others may just benefit innocently. An eg but there are many. One team did a Nat A rated Prem Calendar. Their best 8 riders rode 3 stages and picked up 8 ranking points between them in 3 days of racing.. 2 riders who didnt even make the team rode one 2nd tier Nat B race the same weekend (when the top riders were all elswhere) and picked up 113 ranking points between them. The Premiers attract anything from 50-100+ strong riders with only 100 points for a win whereas you can get 60 points for a win (= to 4th in a Premier) for winning Nat B events that often barely get a handful of strong riders. Places for finishing positions also reflect this problem. 21st in a Premier is a good ride but worth no ranking points..despite the fact you beat 50+ good riders yet If you beat a mere handful of good riders in a Nat B you will probably get 60 points.

Another eg. The Leases Newcastle crit offered 30 points for the win and attracted all the country's top teams and riders Endura, Rafa, Motorpoint etc. A rider who got no points (finishing outside the top 15) then did a local race a couple of days later and got 30 points for beating a group of 1st and 2nd cats.

The ratio of points between Nat A and B mean that riders who stick to Nat B and avoid riding against the best guys can pick up a shed load of relatively easy ranking points and end up significantly higher in the rankings than they should be if its supposed to be ability related. They may also move up a license category.
This translates to the team ranking, although there are several other issues with that which make direct comparisons between teams meaningless.

Thats not manipulation in the slightest. Prem Calendar is a competition in its own right. If riders don't get picked to ride them by their boss then bossman expects them to ride elsewhere to prove they a worthy of a place for the next one. The other issue is that the organiser may have had to exclude the two riders as riders from other teams had better results - there are strict selection critreria.

If theres a clash in a region between two Nat level events then thats an issue for the regional competition administrator.

what you are actually suggesting is that there should be more top end racing really ?

lyn1

You are quite right about the Prem. restrictions Tester, although I hadnt meant it quite so literally. The point I was making was that by not riding the Nat A' those riders picked up masses of points riding a Nat B that they would not have achieved racing at the higher level. Consequently, they appeared higher in the rankings than their ability suggests they should be and above much stronger riders from their own team and riders in other teams who focused on Nat A's. In their case it was not a deliberate strategy and no criticism is intended. However, it does leave the door open and results in an invalid ranking..if its supposed to measure relative ability.The balance between the points awarded for Nat A and Nat B are disproportionate to the quality of the riders in those races, which leads to distortion, depending where riders focus their program.

If you wanted to move more quickly to an Elite licence or appear better than you are in relative terms, you could play the system to achieve that, by focusing your season around Nat B races and mid week crits and avoiding Prems and the Elite Circuit Series.. Thats what I meant by the opportunity for manipulation. Because of this it doesnt measure what (presumably) its supposed to measure.

If you want further proof the system does not measure relative ability, check which team has more riders in the top 15 of the Nat Elite road ranking than any other. Then check where those 4 riders picked up their points. 3 of them have not a single point from Premier & Elite circuit Series level races (Nat A), so never made a top 20 (assuming they turned up) yet they are ranked above guys who are consistently winning and getting on the podium at that level. So what meaningful function does the ranking perform? What does it actually rank?

Pross

There's always been riders who have made it to 1st cat riding in local chippers but who wouldn't have stood a chance at national level, all this is doing is putting them in a list. It means nothing really at the end of the day. That said there could be a better spread of points based on level and distance of the race - that might get more people doing road races rather than just riding around motor racing circuits.