Motor doping thread

Page 100 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Moto-fraud: first rider caught

Valv.Piti said:
sniper, less than 2 weeks ago:

4. with Varjas it's really wait and see for me.
No reason yet to think it won't be interesting.
He said "Festina".
We'll soon know whether he's full of **** or not.
Some more or less reputed cycling folks seem to think he knows what he's talking about.
Ger Gilroy, Greg Lemond, Davide Cassani spring to mind.
Journalists also run to him and print what he says. Investigative journos usually do check their sources, so on the basis of that evidence it would seem that he does have credibility in certain circles.

But if the upcoming documentary doesn't deliver, Varjas will indeed be fully deserving of lables such as "quack" and/or "charlatan".


So where we at? Still no proofs of anything. I can understand that some are skeptical that a few riders have used/experimented with those, but beginning to speculate wildly about motors in bikes from late 90's turns me so much off. Are you serious? Seriously? Seriously?

To put it like sniper did, Varjas fully deserves the lables such as "quack and/or "charlatan". Did the documentary deliver, sniper? To me it was some weak ****. Nothing substantial as usual with those documentaries, wild speculations about some Team Sky bikes from 2015 when Froome rode his worst ITT in TdF and they lose to BMC. Congratz.
In that post you cited, I was too quick to make Varjas' reputation dependent on that documentary.
As e.g. Semper Fidelis and Pastronef have pointed out, the doc is possibly just the beginning, so it's (unfortunately) too early to make a judgement.

Varjas no doubt is a weird character, I wouldn't trust him to walk my dog and I wouldnt buy by a 2nd-hand car off him.
But all that doesn't really matter.
What matters is whether he's telling the truth about motors or not.
Whilst he might be lying about a trillion of things, at present I haven't yet seen any evidence that he's lying about motors.

And, importantly, as John (Scienceiscool) pointed out, we have to start realizing that the story is not really about Varjas.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
pastronef said:
MmeDesgrange said:
And Beaulieu sur mer is just a 40 minute spin along the coast from Cagnes sur mer ;)
Trek Star's n Bikes? Motoman's shop?
Who Froome and Porte used a locally based mechanic.
well, there are 2 versions today:

Cycles Camellini in Beaulieu is a Typhoon dealer, mr Camellini is friends with the local riders and even has a Froome jersey in the shop.
or Star's n Bikes who Porte and Froome used as a local shop before the Team Sky Monaco training base was set up in 2013
 
Aug 3, 2016
163
4
2,835
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
Tom the Engine said:
King Boonen said:
Yes, Beaulieu-Sur-Mer wasn't it?

The funny thing is if you look up Varjas' patents you'll find them registered to Typhoon Bikes Limited. They have a webpage. I decided to have a look at their dealer locations:
Yeah as per Tienus' post Varjas worked for Typhoon but left on bad terms after a dispute.
So when he mentioned Beaulieu-Sur-Mer in the documentary there's no way that he didn't know its relation to Typhoon. But he didn't say anything. I didn't know this while I was watching the documentary. But I was wondering why he explicitly mentioned a town that was nowhere near the start of the TdF (Netherlands) or the TTT (north-west of France).

Is this just a cheap-shot to make Typhoon look bad in an act of revenge? (Because people would find the connection between Beaulieu-Sur-Mer and Typhoon very soon anyway and draw some conclusions from it.)
Or does he indeed know that Typhoon is involved in technological fraud and this is his way of giving the hint (on where to start digging) without having to say it explicitly?
It would be pretty stupid from Typhoon to order material from Varjas (in a way such that he knows who the customer really is - like: please deliver it to Beaulieu-Sur-Mer) that they intend to use in the TdF after he has publicly sworn vengeance..

I don't know. But the one thing that I'm fairly convinced of is that it cannot be a sheer coincidence that Varjas claimed to have delievered bikes to the same small town where the dealer of a company he's in conflict with resides.
He was working with Typhoon when he delivered the bikes there, he was still emailing them during the Tour that year. He says he sold a bike to an unknown person through a middleman. That sounds exactly like a dealer taking an order and a supplier dropping it off. Deliver the bikes to a locked storage room, translation the dealers warehouse. It sounds like he's decided to try and spin a normal deal into something out of a mob movie.
Yes I got the timeline mixed up. Apologies for that and I retract everything from my last post as it's nonsense.
So basically this was an encoded and strange way of Varjas saying: "Somebody placed an order for some motorised bikes at the Typhoon dealer shortly before the TdF. But maybe the deal even went through somebody else than the Typhoon dealer who wanted the delivery to arrive in the same town for whatever reason. I don't really want to tell more and keep you guessing. And although I have no idea who the paying customer is I'm pretty sure that the delivered material was used in the TdF." Mhm.
 
sniper, its because you centuries ago have chosen which side you are on and no matter WHAT is presented, you'd still take that side. I have read the clinic a lot (without contributing) and no matter what, regardless of pretty much anything - exceptional circumstances - you watch, read and interpret what you want it to be since you have taken that decision prematurely, the decision that everything is rotten and corrupt. And sniper, not everything is, despite how much you want to see the cycling-world burn.

Rant over.
 
Re: Re:

Tom the Engine said:
King Boonen said:
Tom the Engine said:
King Boonen said:
Yes, Beaulieu-Sur-Mer wasn't it?

The funny thing is if you look up Varjas' patents you'll find them registered to Typhoon Bikes Limited. They have a webpage. I decided to have a look at their dealer locations:
Yeah as per Tienus' post Varjas worked for Typhoon but left on bad terms after a dispute.
So when he mentioned Beaulieu-Sur-Mer in the documentary there's no way that he didn't know its relation to Typhoon. But he didn't say anything. I didn't know this while I was watching the documentary. But I was wondering why he explicitly mentioned a town that was nowhere near the start of the TdF (Netherlands) or the TTT (north-west of France).

Is this just a cheap-shot to make Typhoon look bad in an act of revenge? (Because people would find the connection between Beaulieu-Sur-Mer and Typhoon very soon anyway and draw some conclusions from it.)
Or does he indeed know that Typhoon is involved in technological fraud and this is his way of giving the hint (on where to start digging) without having to say it explicitly?
It would be pretty stupid from Typhoon to order material from Varjas (in a way such that he knows who the customer really is - like: please deliver it to Beaulieu-Sur-Mer) that they intend to use in the TdF after he has publicly sworn vengeance..

I don't know. But the one thing that I'm fairly convinced of is that it cannot be a sheer coincidence that Varjas claimed to have delievered bikes to the same small town where the dealer of a company he's in conflict with resides.
He was working with Typhoon when he delivered the bikes there, he was still emailing them during the Tour that year. He says he sold a bike to an unknown person through a middleman. That sounds exactly like a dealer taking an order and a supplier dropping it off. Deliver the bikes to a locked storage room, translation the dealers warehouse. It sounds like he's decided to try and spin a normal deal into something out of a mob movie.
Yes I got the timeline mixed up. Apologies for that and I retract everything from my last post as it's nonsense.
So basically this was an encoded and strange way of saying: "Somebody placed an order for some motorised bikes at the Typhoon dealer shortly before the TdF."
No worries. Yes, that seems to be what happened. 60 minutes just gave him loads of free publicity, paid 12,000 dollars for the privilege and brought absolutely nothing new to the table.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re:

Valv.Piti said:
sniper, its because you centuries ago have chosen which side you are on and no matter WHAT is presented, you'd still take that side. I have read the clinic a lot (without contributing) and no matter what, regardless of pretty much anything - exceptional circumstances - you watch, read and interpret what you want it to be since you have taken that decision prematurely, the decision that everything is rotten and corrupt. And sniper, not everything is, despite how much you want to see the cycling-world burn.

Rant over.
It's a good rant.
I like good rants.

For the record i dont think everything is rotten and corrupt. For instance I've just praised Lemond extensively for his sticking his neck out. Maybe you missed that? I think he doped, sure, as did Floyd, as did Rasmussen, as did Jaksche. I still like those guys if/when they decide to do the right thing. It's not all about the dope. It's about doing the right thing.
 
Aug 3, 2016
163
4
2,835
Re:

Semper Fidelis said:
That's if you truly think they do not have a follow up story to this. I believe they do.
May I ask what makes you believe that they have more? Did they drop a hint somewhere that I didn't recognize?

My guess is: This documentary was their one-and-gone shot at the topic. As the US is not really as invested in the European cycling scene as a couple of years ago they can't afford to spend too much time on it. First they gently introduced the motors. Then they tried to somehow link it to Armstrong (which would interest American viewers the most I suppose) or to reveal a more recent big scandal. They didn't really succeed at both so they move on.

It would be a very pleasant surprise if they'd really come up with something better but I'm not holding my breath after this film.
 
Jan 20, 2010
713
0
0
Re:

Valv.Piti said:
sniper, its because you centuries ago have chosen which side you are on and no matter WHAT is presented, you'd still take that side. I have read the clinic a lot (without contributing) and no matter what, regardless of pretty much anything - exceptional circumstances - you watch, read and interpret what you want it to be since you have taken that decision prematurely, the decision that everything is rotten and corrupt. And sniper, not everything is, despite how much you want to see the cycling-world burn.

Rant over.
Motors aren't a black and white issue, I believe without any doubt that motors have been used. There are some pretty obvious examples since 2010.

But you can't just jump on every suggestion and accusation as if it is fact, look it all the rookies recently that were prepared to take Varjas at his word and now look like idiots.

FFS a simple google search would have turned up several quoted articles where he has flip flopped about even the basic facts. Was the first prototype 1998 or 2004? He's now on record saying both. Does he sell to pro-riders / teams directly or not? He's on record record now saying yes he does, and no there is always a middle man.

Then we get into the technical absurdities and the allegations with no substance.

And, Lemond. Just get the *** out of the way. You have turned this whole motor situation into a witch hunt about Lance. Get up to speed and get into the 2010-2016's FFS.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
i get the impression Lemond is not in it only because of armstrong.
But regardless, I'm not sure why you would discourage him.
If he wants to (help) blow the lid off, I'm all for.
 
Jan 20, 2010
713
0
0
Re:

sniper said:
i get the impression Lemond is not in it only because of armstrong.
But regardless, I'm not sure why you would discourage him.
If he wants to (help) blow the lid off, I'm all for.
I don't think he is either, but it's like he can't help himself. If he was prepared to let the Lance aspect go then he would definitely be of use.

He's put his trust in the wrong guy though (Varjas).
 
Lemond gets jealous whenever someone wins their third Tour. he was happy being a shill on Eurosport and taking car rides with Merckx and Indurain on the Champs. but whatever, if he manages blows the lid off this he'd be a hero.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Re:

Night Rider said:
sniper said:
i get the impression Lemond is not in it only because of armstrong.
But regardless, I'm not sure why you would discourage him.
If he wants to (help) blow the lid off, I'm all for.
I don't think he is either, but it's like he can't help himself. If he was prepared to let the Lance aspect go then he would definitely be of use.

He's put his trust in the wrong guy though (Varjas).
That's certainly fair enough.

But like semper fidelis and pastronef me too I don't think it's over just yet.
At the very least Lemond has played a big part in getting the ball rolling and I think he deserves credit for that.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Sky mechanic Gary Blem said the F8 was so light he had to put fishing weights in the BB!

Again when it comes to Sky things don't add up. And when that happens it points to cheating.
 
Aug 3, 2016
163
4
2,835
Re: Re:

sniper said:
At the very least Lemond has played a big part in getting the ball rolling (...)
Really? According to his own narrative he only was convinced of motors by his wife Kathy in 2013. The ball was already rolling back then.
I struggle to find contributions from him that don't just sound like a Varjas echo chamber.

Like:
“Now the pressure needs to be on the wheels,” said LeMond, who said he had real reasons for believing that this method of cheating had been used in professional competition.
He declined to elaborate further at this point in time, but is convinced of the issue.
 
Hm, didn't really learn anything new from that 60 Minutes program, other than that Tyler Hamilton is looking good & healthy.( As a guest speaker he looks very ill-at-ease, I end up feeling uncomfortable for him.)

The Varjas dude strikes me as a shady character, sort of like a drug dealer he doesn't seem to care where the money comes from as long as he gets paid. I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re:

Tricycle Rider said:
Hm, didn't really learn anything new from that 60 Minutes program, other than that Tyler Hamilton is looking good & healthy.( As a guest speaker he looks very ill-at-ease, I end up feeling uncomfortable for him.)

The Varjas dude strikes me as a shady character, sort of like a drug dealer he doesn't seem to care where the money comes from as long as he gets paid. I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.
He fits right in the world of professional sport then ;)
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
Tricycle Rider said:
Hm, didn't really learn anything new from that 60 Minutes program, other than that Tyler Hamilton is looking good & healthy.( As a guest speaker he looks very ill-at-ease, I end up feeling uncomfortable for him.)

The Varjas dude strikes me as a shady character, sort of like a drug dealer he doesn't seem to care where the money comes from as long as he gets paid. I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.
He fits right in the world of professional sport then ;)
I see what you're saying, and for the most part I would agree. (I do think you Clinic guys go a little bit over-the-top at times, though.)

I'm not naive to doping in pro sports, but seeing as I never competed as a pro (and tried to make my living that way) it just doesn't strike me so hard. I just take it for what it is - pro sports are a spectacle, much like a circus is.
 
Aug 17, 2016
56
0
0
Electromagnets in the wheels would only work if they had another magnet or a block of steel to attract them. Bikes are carbon fiber not steel so how could you possibly hide them from even the simplest check?

Also electromagnets being switched on & off in rapid sequence in a spinning disk would generate enormous static interference on any radio close by. You just couldn't use one without being found out. Not no how and no way.
The whole story is shite and still lapped up by the clinic drones.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
Tom the Engine said:
sniper said:
For what it's worth, a major kudos to Greg here.
It may or may not be about Lance for him, but to be honest I couldnt care less.
He has put himself in the cross fire here, when really he didn't need to.
He must be absolutely convinced and gutted by it. Hi involvement is very important, first because he's close to the peloton, second because his reputation is as impeccable as it gets and so it's not as easy to discredit him.
That's as nonsensical as it gets.
- It does matter whether it's mainly about a personal feud or not. Motivations and possible conflicts of interests matter.
- Conviction alone is nothing admirable (without presenting good arguments for it). Strong conviction without reason is dangerous in general.
- Relying on impeccable reputation is bollocks as is argument by authority to not get discredited.
- Closeness to the peloton requires to present stronger evidence than an outsider. Otherwise it's worthless.

I really wish that this will turn out well for Greg someday and he's proven right because I respect him a lot. But in this CBS documentary he looked awful. I felt bad for him.
Probably worth adding:

Citing someone's reputation after you've spent untold time and energy publicly trying to tarnish it with rumor and innuendo really looks bad as an argument.

To the 60 Minutes piece, I agree it's not a good look at all for Greg getting mixed up in this without anything concrete. Not sure what motivates him on these issues. Not worth speculating about.
Citing someone's reputation after you've spent untold time and energy publicly trying to tarnish it with rumor and innuendo really looks bad as an argument.
Well said Red ! It really puzzled me to read Sniper. His constant allegations against Greg were always so far out, reaching the ridiculous level at times, that I was convinced he was a relative of Armstrong :lol: .
 
May 25, 2009
76
0
0
Re:

zlev11 said:
Lemond gets jealous whenever someone wins their third Tour. he was happy being a shill on Eurosport and taking car rides with Merckx and Indurain on the Champs. but whatever, if he manages blows the lid off this he'd be a hero.
Greg already is a hero, bro. He was right about Lance and Postal and he paid a pretty significant price for that. He deserves a lot of slack if he thinks there is an issue here.

The piece was largely a puff piece, maybe a setup for a real story or something. I didn't take it as particularly "anti-Lance" so much as the key part of the story was a $2m retainer paid for exclusivity during Lance's run. There are only a few people in cycling that could make that kind of payment and presumably they won races with it, right? There are also only a few people won enough to really justify that kind of expense around that time too, Lance, Cippo, some classics and one day guys. I'll also ask, if Lance had this stuff, do you think he'd not use it? It just seems like basic journalism to look in to a potential link. Or maybe basic marketing to suggest one, the overall tone was that there is a contemporary target and they did throw some shade at Sky.

Honestly though, $2m is too expensive for cyclists.. Now Thom Wiesel or Bill Ackman? They fancy themselves competitive bike riders, in some capacity, and it seems cheap for them.
 
A motor would only need to supply ~50-100 watts for ~30 minutes to make a huge difference - surely this is not beyond the realms of technology.

Not sure why people are piling on Lance Armstrong when there is plenty of lower-hanging fruit (Cancellara in the 2010 Paris-Roubaix and Tour of Flanders, Chris Froome at Ventoux in 2013 and La Pierre St. Martin in 2015, Astana in the cobblestone stage in 2014, any number of Peter Sagan performance, etc.).
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS