Retrobike Top Trumps - Nominations please...

Right,

nearly ready to go with the Top Trumps templates (apologies for slackness).

I have (sort of) decided on the following:

Two sets of cards (virtual or real - not sure yet, but I think it'd be good to get enough interest for a real set actually printed in a limited run etc).

1st Set: Components.

catagories:

1) Year (of manufacture) - earliest wins
2) Weight (in grammes) - lightest wins
3) Cost When New - highest wins
4 Rarity Value - out of 10 - highest wins
5) Anodising rating - (out of 10 - highest wins)


2nd Set: Bikes (though of frames, but bikes makes it more interesting as to choice of build etc).

catagories:

1) Year (of manufacture) - earliest wins
2) Weight - lowest wins
3) Material - (not that sure how to guage this so it's an option - might do authentic build rating instead)
4) Anodising Rating - out of 10 again
5 Rarity rating - out of 10 again


Any thoughts?


And I'll need to start getting nominations in the form of a picture of your pride and joy. I suppose we'll need 30 or forty for each game.Can't see the fun in getting stock pics, might as well get real Retrobike folk's gear.

Now, what email address to get all these pics...hmm, will decide.

Feedback?

Gus

May I suggest a small change in the "weight" category for set 1?

Rather than just weight in grammes, might it be more even to make it "% weight saving" against a "standard" component such as the equivalent Shimano XT component?

Nice, but ultimately I think that's going to be hard to call - as what's a std component? Everyone's going to think differently. I am trying to keep them as objective as poss, which flies in the face of all the anodising rating etc, but weight is straight down the line win or lose. Like an enzo against a veyron. you've got the enzo and you pick weight - you win. you pick speed - you lose.

I think numbers are good - hard to argue against and that's the luck of the game isnt it?

Trouble in Mind

Some dinnerlady thoughts...

Not as simple as earliest wins - suggest:

1. Year of Manufacture
1975 = 5*
1976 = 5*
1991 = 4* S 5*
1995 = 3* S3* FS 5*

etc.

Give a higher star rating for early technology through to peak of technology, then dowgrade as it becomes the norm.

2. Weight and Material - could be combined
Surely lightest steel beats, say magnesium or carbon?
Lightest titanium beats steel.

etc.

3. Rarity - is that global or just UK?


More anon.


Neil

I like the idea of the sliding scale for age and therefore rarity, but it's my little brain that's got to add all this up and I'm not sure I can do that much maths.

I don't think it's a prob that the game is simple though, all the best trumps games are so earliest design wins etc. (?)

I figure it's pretty hard to know when a component was built anyway, so probably a year of original release, so Ti Twisters might be '94 or whatever. And even a 2000 Twister would still count as that. (?)

Components

Shimano Deore XT thumbie
Ringle Bottle cage
XLite cam locks
Royce bottom bracket

Bike

Pace RC200
Orange Clockwork (how could something so popular not be included!)
Pink/Green/White Klein Attitude

Can't see anyone having a problem with that lot!

Raleigh Mustang
Overburys Pioneer
Muddy Fox Courier
(bit of bias here...) Mountain Cycle San Andreas

more to come...

you've got the enzo and you pick weight - you win.

Click to expand...

Stop Press: MG Midget beats Enzo!





I don't think there's much need to overcomplicate the categories etc, it doesn't have to be too accurate - just a bit of fun!

Stop Press: MG Midget beats Enzo!

Click to expand...

Is that because it's mainly made air due to the rust holes? (JOKE)

There's a failing though.

In Top Trumps, there's always a crap item can beat the most exotic item on a single category. Every card should have a chance to win.

Price should be lowest wins and then stick in a Raleigh Activator and a Marin Palisades Trail which would thrash the fanciest Fat or Merlin.