• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Motor doping thread

Page 124 - 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

red_flanders said:
sniper said:
red_flanders said:
sniper said:
And "massive risk"? Not really.
Last time I checked there's about 0.001 percent chance of getting caught with a motor.

*Edited by King Boonen: Please don't imply that riders have been caught using motors when they haven't.

Please also don't imply you have any idea what the risk of getting caught with a motor is, or that it has much to do with my post. My post said it would be hard to imagine some dial on the brake hood, as part of a motor, would be massively risky since it would be obvious to anyone looking at the bike.
The risk of getting caught is negligible. If you have evidence to the contrary, do share it.

I didn't say having a motor was massively risky, if you read, you can see that I make the point about some obvious external dial. Seems fairly straightforward logic to follow if one is so inclined.

sniper said:
red_flanders said:
I'll wager whatever motors have existed in the peloton don't have any glaringly obvious controls.
that's you overestimating the respect pro-riders have for the average cycling fan.

No, it's me stating the obvious about other riders and race officials.

I'm just saying, even if something is glaringly obvious, in procycling it rarely leads to action let alone sanctions.

Froome glaringly obviously did not go from donkey to racehorse on marginal gains or grey area drugs.
He glaringly obviously did not have Bilharzia or asthma (let alone both at the same time).
He glaringly obviously faked the 2007 Fax.
He glaringly obviously used a motor on the Ventoux.

Now you sort of seem to be arguing that it cannot be a motor control he's using in that clip because it would be too obvious? That doesn't fly.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
why would it turn ANYONE into a winner?
if one is using it, others are now using it too.
that's the law of the peloton.

the fascinating question imo is how UCI, teams, and race organizers are/have been controlling the situation.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re:

ebandit said:
sniper said:
why would it turn ANYONE into a winner?
'cos even i would be 1st to the top of the biggest col.............heck! i would even have time
to stop at the road side for an ice cream......................
As Michelle would say, you're "not fully" understanding the issue. ;)
Let me spell it out:
If you are using a motor, but others are using one, too, then there is no guarantee that the motor will turn you into a winner.
 
Lots of strawman arguments floating around but here is my guess... motors are around, but in general they're good for ~50-100 watts for ~15-30 minutes. They may be capable of 200+ watt bursts but then you'll run out of juice much quicker.

Motor use beyond that is generally frowned upon as it will make the cyclist look like a motorcyclist (or Cancellara in the 2010 Paris-Roubaix and Tour of Flanders).
 
Re:

ebandit said:
'cos i seriously don't believe that motors are commonly used by any riders........let alone ALL

imagine? if 90% of the peloton had motors + 'current preparation'.........climbing times would

be completely recalibrated

Mark L

Well if you plotted on a graph that no one actually tests positive anymore and climbing times have remained relatively the same as the EPO era, what does at tell you?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
ebandit said:
'cos i seriously don't believe that motors are commonly used by any riders........let alone ALL

imagine? if 90% of the peloton had motors + 'current preparation'.........climbing times would

be completely recalibrated

Mark L

Well if you plotted on a graph that no one actually tests positive anymore and climbing times have remained relatively the same as the EPO era, what does at tell you?
That the "graph" lost weight.
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
4
0
Re: Re:

Semper Fidelis said:
thehog said:
ebandit said:
'cos i seriously don't believe that motors are commonly used by any riders........let alone ALL

imagine? if 90% of the peloton had motors + 'current preparation'.........climbing times would

be completely recalibrated

Mark L

Well if you plotted on a graph that no one actually tests positive anymore and climbing times have remained relatively the same as the EPO era, what does at tell you?
That the "graph" lost weight.

Pavement technology keeps improving. Today's asphalt is technically superior to anything available in the 90's.

John Swanson
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
Semper Fidelis said:
thehog said:
ebandit said:
'cos i seriously don't believe that motors are commonly used by any riders........let alone ALL

imagine? if 90% of the peloton had motors + 'current preparation'.........climbing times would

be completely recalibrated

Mark L

Well if you plotted on a graph that no one actually tests positive anymore and climbing times have remained relatively the same as the EPO era, what does at tell you?
That the "graph" lost weight.

Pavement technology keeps improving. Today's asphalt is technically superior to anything available in the 90's.

John Swanson
Is it recycled pavement? That technology adds significant weight to the climbing times.
 
Re: Re:

Semper Fidelis said:
thehog said:
ebandit said:
'cos i seriously don't believe that motors are commonly used by any riders........let alone ALL

imagine? if 90% of the peloton had motors + 'current preparation'.........climbing times would

be completely recalibrated

Mark L

Well if you plotted on a graph that no one actually tests positive anymore and climbing times have remained relatively the same as the EPO era, what does at tell you?
That the "graph" lost weight.


Yes, the engine was always there, they all just lost the fat.
 
Re: Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
Semper Fidelis said:
thehog said:
ebandit said:
'cos i seriously don't believe that motors are commonly used by any riders........let alone ALL

imagine? if 90% of the peloton had motors + 'current preparation'.........climbing times would

be completely recalibrated

Mark L

Well if you plotted on a graph that no one actually tests positive anymore and climbing times have remained relatively the same as the EPO era, what does at tell you?
That the "graph" lost weight.

Pavement technology keeps improving. Today's asphalt is technically superior to anything available in the 90's.

John Swanson


The pavement just needed to improve its bike handling skills.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Semper Fidelis said:
thehog said:
ebandit said:
'cos i seriously don't believe that motors are commonly used by any riders........let alone ALL

imagine? if 90% of the peloton had motors + 'current preparation'.........climbing times would

be completely recalibrated

Mark L

Well if you plotted on a graph that no one actually tests positive anymore and climbing times have remained relatively the same as the EPO era, what does at tell you?
That the "graph" lost weight.

Pavement technology keeps improving. Today's asphalt is technically superior to anything available in the 90's.

John Swanson


The pavement just needed to improve its bike handling skills.

The pavement just needed to lose some weight? Low-fat asphalt?! :)
 
Re:

DanielSong39 said:
The corollary is that motor use is best utilized in the time trial, where it can take you from performing at Contador/Nibali/Valverde level to smashing guys like Martin/Castroviejo/Dumoulin/Dennis.
This just makes me wonder about 2005/2006 Ivan Basso ... Don't know why he would have quit though.
 
The pavement is pervious? Ridiculous. Windy mountain was indeed caused by a special sky road construction project where a moving carpet was placed down, it looked exactly like the asphalt, but moved with Chris up the hill. Look at the video, see how he rides slightly to the left of everyone else.
 
I'm watching yesterday's racing this morning. Route du Sud, 17.4km remaining, on-board camera shows the camera-carrier constantly stroking/pressing something with his thumb. I would suggest that the explanation is innocent (no-one would volunteer to take on a camera if they intent pressing a switch within view of said camera).

Anything to be extrapolated from that to the Froome footage?
(Those who have already decided they mistrust Froome will say it is irrelevant, anyone minded to defend him will say this is clear evidence that such behaviour is totally normal)
 
Re:

Random Direction said:
The pavement is pervious? Ridiculous. Windy mountain was indeed caused by a special sky road construction project where a moving carpet was placed down, it looked exactly like the asphalt, but moved with Chris up the hill. Look at the video, see how he rides slightly to the left of everyone else.
Of course it's ridiculous, it was meant to be a joke. :rolleyes:
 
http://www.newstalk.com/I-was-a-complete-***--Lance-Armstrong-Off-The-Ball

About two thirds of the way into this interview with Lance, the interviewer stated that there was a big story about motors coming (bear in mind this was in October 2016. To my knowledge, no such story has ever broke so I wonder exactly what he was talking about or was he just trying to rile Armstrong.
 
The interviewer was about to interview Varjas a few days or weeks later. It was when Varjas, Betsy Andreu and the LeMonds were leaking info to the media that a very big story about motors was coming : Lance Armstrong was supposed to be exposed as the guy who paid 2 millions in 98 to have the exclusivity on Varjas motors for ten years. That's why Off the ball asked him so much about motors. He wanted Armstrong on record before the big revelation.
In his intervew, Varjas heavily implied that too. Promising that the story was going to be as big and as scandalous as the Festina affair.
All was supposed to be revealed in a 60 minutes episode in november/december.

Finaly the 60 minutes episode aired in late january and exposed close to nothing. Zero real proof. A demo with the 1999 Armstrong's bike with a 2016 motor in it rode by... Tyler Hamilton

Months later : nothing more from Varjas, not a single new interview (no idea if he refused them or if he just lost credibility and isn't asked anymore.) Betsy, after having clearly and repetitively implied Armstrong was going to get exposed is now denying having ever implied anything.