Re: Re:
[
Well, if anybody can explain what happens at 0:47 of this clip when Riis has stopped pedaling, is about to put his right foot down when the bike takes off on him and he has to slam the front brake to get a lively rear wheel under control, and if that explanation does not involve an explanation that includes a motor, I am all ears.[/quote]
Wow, what imagination.
... a lively rear wheel ... It's called kinetic energy, just in case ...
[
Well, if anybody can explain what happens at 0:47 of this clip when Riis has stopped pedaling, is about to put his right foot down when the bike takes off on him and he has to slam the front brake to get a lively rear wheel under control, and if that explanation does not involve an explanation that includes a motor, I am all ears.[/quote]
Wow, what imagination.
... a lively rear wheel ... It's called kinetic energy, just in case ...
- Apr 16, 2009
- 16,120
- 4,067
- 28,180
- Apr 16, 2009
- 16,120
- 4,067
- 28,180
Riis is a complete cheater. That we all know. But I didn't see any evidence of a motor in that video.
Re:
What I dont understand is why he does not stay on his spare bike after starting on it. And then, like the commentators, I wonder why he did not take one of his two spare bikes.
During the prologue this bike did not pass the UCI check and he used another bike.
Me neither, the video quality is too poor anyway.Escarabajo said:
What I dont understand is why he does not stay on his spare bike after starting on it. And then, like the commentators, I wonder why he did not take one of his two spare bikes.
During the prologue this bike did not pass the UCI check and he used another bike.
Different kind of motordoper:
Look at Max who gained some weight in a couple of months:
https://youtu.be/7FFhmGyxOPU?t=3m15s
Look at Max who gained some weight in a couple of months:
https://youtu.be/7FFhmGyxOPU?t=3m15s
Re: Re:
For the record, I think it can, too, but I still have questions.
In the case of Froome and Wiggins it could have been a matter of adding AICAR to their program.
But still I wouldn't expect the subsequent transformation to be that radical, as I assume most of their competitors would have had access to aicar, too.
As motors are/were presumably rarer viz. harder to come by, motors could more readily explain their transformation relative to the competition.
And for Lance and Riis, it's even less obvious to me what kind of drug it was that made them transform.
I am quite confident both were already on EPO, HGH, testo and steroids prior to their transformation.
A motor could explain it.
That said, maybe it was just a matter of upping the dosages.
I think Rasmussen attributed his transformation to going from one to three blood bags. So it could be something like that for Riis and Lance, too.
well then be my guest.hrotha said:
For the record, I think it can, too, but I still have questions.
In the case of Froome and Wiggins it could have been a matter of adding AICAR to their program.
But still I wouldn't expect the subsequent transformation to be that radical, as I assume most of their competitors would have had access to aicar, too.
As motors are/were presumably rarer viz. harder to come by, motors could more readily explain their transformation relative to the competition.
And for Lance and Riis, it's even less obvious to me what kind of drug it was that made them transform.
I am quite confident both were already on EPO, HGH, testo and steroids prior to their transformation.
A motor could explain it.
That said, maybe it was just a matter of upping the dosages.
I think Rasmussen attributed his transformation to going from one to three blood bags. So it could be something like that for Riis and Lance, too.
- Jul 27, 2009
- 5,311
- 864
- 19,680
Lance simply changed his whole body structure after the chemotherapy just as much as he pumped himself up with drugs. That's alwayd forgotten in reference to his transformation.
Regarding Riis: I somehow doubt his rider would've risked their lives with perfluocrbon in order to win, if they'd access to a motor. Especially if RoboBasso got his great time trial from a motor rather than from PFC he simply would've kept that rhythm at least a bit during his comeback!
Plus, you saw what a proper dosage did for Berzin and Ugrumov in 1994! It's not out of the world Riis got even bigger benefits once he stepped up the game for 1996. He also visibly tuned down after the hematocrit value was introduced. One would expect a motor could've absorbed that shock a bit more.
Regarding Riis: I somehow doubt his rider would've risked their lives with perfluocrbon in order to win, if they'd access to a motor. Especially if RoboBasso got his great time trial from a motor rather than from PFC he simply would've kept that rhythm at least a bit during his comeback!
Plus, you saw what a proper dosage did for Berzin and Ugrumov in 1994! It's not out of the world Riis got even bigger benefits once he stepped up the game for 1996. He also visibly tuned down after the hematocrit value was introduced. One would expect a motor could've absorbed that shock a bit more.
- Jun 10, 2010
- 19,512
- 1,124
- 25,680
I find Riis and Armstrong's transformations to be the easiest, not the hardest, to explain via nothing but doping.
IIRC Riis claimed he only got on EPO in 1993, which is consistent with the massive improvement in his performance and results, and with the fact that EPO wasn't anywhere near universal in the peloton yet at the time. Consider also that he only moved to Ariostea in 1992, and that he was afterwards rumoured to keep an abnormally high hematocrit even by the era's standards. I don't see anything that doesn't fit here. The motor (20 years ago, no less) is an unnecessary, unlikely complication to this picture.
Armstrong was on EPO before his transformation, but he only worked with Ferrari starting in 1996. In light of his progression between that point and what we saw of his 1996 season, I think there was already a big leap forward there even in GT GC terms (or rather, potential). In other words, I see 1998 Vuelta Armstrong as roughly where 1996 Armstrong would have been without his cancer. As there were some important changes in anti-doping between 1996 and 1999 (blood tests, for one, but also the "longitudinal health controls"), I don't have difficulty believing that the power balance was altered between both dates, and that doping would have become a bit trickier and less of a simple brute force thing, thus increasing the benefit of having Ferrari.
IIRC Riis claimed he only got on EPO in 1993, which is consistent with the massive improvement in his performance and results, and with the fact that EPO wasn't anywhere near universal in the peloton yet at the time. Consider also that he only moved to Ariostea in 1992, and that he was afterwards rumoured to keep an abnormally high hematocrit even by the era's standards. I don't see anything that doesn't fit here. The motor (20 years ago, no less) is an unnecessary, unlikely complication to this picture.
Armstrong was on EPO before his transformation, but he only worked with Ferrari starting in 1996. In light of his progression between that point and what we saw of his 1996 season, I think there was already a big leap forward there even in GT GC terms (or rather, potential). In other words, I see 1998 Vuelta Armstrong as roughly where 1996 Armstrong would have been without his cancer. As there were some important changes in anti-doping between 1996 and 1999 (blood tests, for one, but also the "longitudinal health controls"), I don't have difficulty believing that the power balance was altered between both dates, and that doping would have become a bit trickier and less of a simple brute force thing, thus increasing the benefit of having Ferrari.
- Apr 16, 2009
- 16,120
- 4,067
- 28,180
I would also expect different results from being a renegade doper to let's say be on a program with Doc Ferrari. It was talked by some of his ex-team mates that the transformation took place after he went to his program.
- Jul 27, 2009
- 5,311
- 864
- 19,680
Armstrong's main problem also was recovery and his body frameset. Not his climbing skills. These were kinda decent already in the nineties. Only in the Tour DuPont of course. But there where tiny flashes of what would later emerge into masterclass. Thanks to “The Program“ of course.
Re: Re:
I thought it was weird at the time but you're really reaching right now. Why not use powertap hubs? pedal based PMs? If SRM is the only PM that makes any sense to you, I guess most teams and most amateurs in the world are motorized. Are the teams using SRM (BMC, orica etc) getting left in the dust because they don't have the 100w afterburners?
I don't even know why you think stages is bad besides the fact it's one-sided (as mentioned, not the case for sky). Powertap hubs have the reputation of being the most accurate, even SRM reps admitted as much to me at interbike.
ah yes the other part I forgot. Sky wanted an insane number of cranks and srm didn't want to provide them.Nicko. said:Yeah, for a team anal with analysis and marginal gains/turn every stone, it makes ZERO sense to drop the Shimano cranks by SRM and swap to the random generator Stages.proffate said:
... unless the purpose of the swap is to fit a ring gear to the crank axle (in line with where the pinion drive slides down).
I mean, SRM wouldn't sell it with a ring gear and they shure would raise an eyebrow if the powermeter came back for service with it on.
Maybe Team Sky needed the sponsor money from Stages?
I thought it was weird at the time but you're really reaching right now. Why not use powertap hubs? pedal based PMs? If SRM is the only PM that makes any sense to you, I guess most teams and most amateurs in the world are motorized. Are the teams using SRM (BMC, orica etc) getting left in the dust because they don't have the 100w afterburners?
I don't even know why you think stages is bad besides the fact it's one-sided (as mentioned, not the case for sky). Powertap hubs have the reputation of being the most accurate, even SRM reps admitted as much to me at interbike.
You can read this two ways:
1 Sky swapping from SRM to Stages is evidence they (and everyone else) put motors in their frames
2 Hypothesising that Sky put motors in their frames, swapping from SRM to Stages makes perfect sense
Which one do you think I'm going for? Seriously.
PS
Powertap hubs would be logistical nightmare for a Pro Tour team with all their wheel sets.
Garmin Vectors weren't even considered by Team Garmin Barracuda because of accuracy issues and time consuming installation procedure
1 Sky swapping from SRM to Stages is evidence they (and everyone else) put motors in their frames
2 Hypothesising that Sky put motors in their frames, swapping from SRM to Stages makes perfect sense
Which one do you think I'm going for? Seriously.
PS
Powertap hubs would be logistical nightmare for a Pro Tour team with all their wheel sets.
Garmin Vectors weren't even considered by Team Garmin Barracuda because of accuracy issues and time consuming installation procedure
Re: Moto-fraud: first rider caught
These guys must be wondering what on earth has happened to Chris Froome :lol: Best line he's ever said at 3:10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEx2T6YDb58
The bike may be a bit small but wow- its like he's reverted to form before the miraculous Vuelta
These guys must be wondering what on earth has happened to Chris Froome :lol: Best line he's ever said at 3:10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEx2T6YDb58
The bike may be a bit small but wow- its like he's reverted to form before the miraculous Vuelta
Re:
https://www.inverse.com/article/27094-60-minutes-hidden-bicycle-motor
In the same interview, Varjas also claimed that the UCI, professional cycling’s governing body, is not as clueless to the problem as it may seem. “They manipulate you,” he says. “If you ask me who uses engines, I answer you: go to the UCI. They know.”
Did I miss something or does the article in that tweet has more info from the CBS interview?Benotti69 said:
https://www.inverse.com/article/27094-60-minutes-hidden-bicycle-motor
In the same interview, Varjas also claimed that the UCI, professional cycling’s governing body, is not as clueless to the problem as it may seem. “They manipulate you,” he says. “If you ask me who uses engines, I answer you: go to the UCI. They know.”
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Doping kills people early on | The Clinic | 3 |
| Similar threads |
|---|
| Doping kills people early on |
TRENDING THREADS
-
Volta Ciclista a Catalunya 2023, March 20-26- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 2K
-
77th Dwars door Vlaanderen - A travers la Flandre ME (1.UWT): 29/3- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 235
-
Ronde van Vlaanderen - Tour des Flandres 2023, one day monument, April 2 (men's)- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 133
-
Gent - Wevelgem in Flanders Field 2023 March 26, 260.9 km (1.WT)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 415
-
E3 Saxo Classic 2023, one day classic, March 24- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 427
-
Milano - Sanremo 2023, one day monument, March 18- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 774
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram