• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. 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 162 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results. But nothing is notably better than even 5 years ago. Of course Cancellara at Flanders looked suspect but the evidence is not overwhelming. The only way this could happen is if the UCI was deliberately looking the other way to avoid bad publicity.

Detecting such motors is very easy if you have the will do do anything about it - check the BBs, rims and hubs. No X-Ray needed just tools. Are the UCI worried that by implementing mandatory scrutineering of bikes post races (like Formula 1), that in itself brings bad publicity? In F1 they check for all kinds of stuff including electronic sensors in extremely complex race cars. Checking bikes is very very easy (and cheap) by comparison.

On the other side, since IMO it is very easy to check for motors why hasn't the UCI introduced mandatory scrutineering of bikes after races? Very very easy if you know what to look for and there is plenty of evidence even in this thread to know what to look for.
 
Re: Re:

Huapango said:
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results.

Froome. Ventoux. 2013. Now, imagine what his time would've been had he actually been "trying."

Detecting such motors is very easy if you

...want to find the motors.

Agreed on the bold bit. This sport does my head in sometimes run by chooks.
 
Re: Re:

Huapango said:
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results.

Froome. Ventoux. 2013. Now, imagine what his time would've been had he actually been "trying."

Detecting such motors is very easy if you

...want to find the motors.

Abosolutely. I'm still in the skeptical camp about motor use, but why not random scrutineering and impoundment? I can take apart a bike in 10 minutes -- at least pop off the seat and cranks/bb to eliminate that area. As for wheel magnets, take off the tire and rim tape and see what's there...
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
4
0
Visit site
Re:

Cookster15 said:
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results. But nothing is notably better than even 5 years ago. Of course Cancellara at Flanders looked suspect but the evidence is not overwhelming. The only way this could happen is if the UCI was deliberately looking the other way to avoid bad publicity.

Detecting such motors is very easy if you have the will do do anything about it - check the BBs, rims and hubs. No X-Ray needed just tools. Are the UCI worried that by implementing mandatory scrutineering of bikes post races (like Formula 1), that in itself brings bad publicity? In F1 they check for all kinds of stuff including electronic sensors in extremely complex race cars. Checking bikes is very very easy (and cheap) by comparison.

On the other side, since IMO it is very easy to check for motors why hasn't the UCI introduced mandatory scrutineering of bikes after races? Very very easy if you know what to look for and there is plenty of evidence even in this thread to know what to look for.

Let's say that between the number of riders and spares, there's roughly 300 bikes at any given race. If it takes 5 minutes to do a partial disassembly, inspection, and reassembly, that represents 1500 minutes of work. That's 25 hours of work to be done! To get this done in a reasonable amount of time, you would need a fleet of two dozen mechanics and their tools at every race. There's no way the UCI or the race organizers are going to pay for that. It's a similar situation with the X-Ray machines. Too much time and expense for absolutely no political gain. In that light, an iPad app is the perfect solution for Cookson.

John Swanson
 
Re: Re:

ScienceIsCool said:
Cookster15 said:
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results. But nothing is notably better than even 5 years ago. Of course Cancellara at Flanders looked suspect but the evidence is not overwhelming. The only way this could happen is if the UCI was deliberately looking the other way to avoid bad publicity.

Detecting such motors is very easy if you have the will do do anything about it - check the BBs, rims and hubs. No X-Ray needed just tools. Are the UCI worried that by implementing mandatory scrutineering of bikes post races (like Formula 1), that in itself brings bad publicity? In F1 they check for all kinds of stuff including electronic sensors in extremely complex race cars. Checking bikes is very very easy (and cheap) by comparison.

On the other side, since IMO it is very easy to check for motors why hasn't the UCI introduced mandatory scrutineering of bikes after races? Very very easy if you know what to look for and there is plenty of evidence even in this thread to know what to look for.

Let's say that between the number of riders and spares, there's roughly 300 bikes at any given race. If it takes 5 minutes to do a partial disassembly, inspection, and reassembly, that represents 1500 minutes of work. That's 25 hours of work to be done! To get this done in a reasonable amount of time, you would need a fleet of two dozen mechanics and their tools at every race. There's no way the UCI or the race organizers are going to pay for that. It's a similar situation with the X-Ray machines. Too much time and expense for absolutely no political gain. In that light, an iPad app is the perfect solution for Cookson.

John Swanson

Right, but I'm not suggesting every bike should be disassembled. What if it were, say, 10? (Top 3 plus 7 randoms?) That should represent 2 hours of work, more or less, for 2-3 mechanics. The "randoms" could be any bike, spare or otherwise.

The more I think about it, the more I like this idea.
 
Re: Re:

Bolder said:
ScienceIsCool said:
Cookster15 said:
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results. But nothing is notably better than even 5 years ago. Of course Cancellara at Flanders looked suspect but the evidence is not overwhelming. The only way this could happen is if the UCI was deliberately looking the other way to avoid bad publicity.

Detecting such motors is very easy if you have the will do do anything about it - check the BBs, rims and hubs. No X-Ray needed just tools. Are the UCI worried that by implementing mandatory scrutineering of bikes post races (like Formula 1), that in itself brings bad publicity? In F1 they check for all kinds of stuff including electronic sensors in extremely complex race cars. Checking bikes is very very easy (and cheap) by comparison.

On the other side, since IMO it is very easy to check for motors why hasn't the UCI introduced mandatory scrutineering of bikes after races? Very very easy if you know what to look for and there is plenty of evidence even in this thread to know what to look for.

Let's say that between the number of riders and spares, there's roughly 300 bikes at any given race. If it takes 5 minutes to do a partial disassembly, inspection, and reassembly, that represents 1500 minutes of work. That's 25 hours of work to be done! To get this done in a reasonable amount of time, you would need a fleet of two dozen mechanics and their tools at every race. There's no way the UCI or the race organizers are going to pay for that. It's a similar situation with the X-Ray machines. Too much time and expense for absolutely no political gain. In that light, an iPad app is the perfect solution for Cookson.

John Swanson

Right, but I'm not suggesting every bike should be disassembled. What if it were, say, 10? (Top 3 plus 7 randoms?) That should represent 2 hours of work, more or less, for 2-3 mechanics. The "randoms" could be any bike, spare or otherwise.

The more I think about it, the more I like this idea.
The problem is, the teams would only want their mechanics to work on their riders bikes. And rightfully so. Motors or not.
 
Re: Re:

veganrob said:
Cycle Chic said:
because the sport would NEVER recover from such a scandal / revelation.....no more sponsors , no more money NO MORE PRO CYCLING
That is exactly the reason there is nobody caught!!!
+1
Imagine say, 30% of the TdF sponsors taking the quickest exit and similar hits across the sport. All manner of its infrastructure would collapse and post the apocalyptical event there would not be recovery but a continued spiral of collapse. It might take a decade to bottom out.
 
Jun 26, 2017
394
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Marxten said:
Dumoulin at least used his sponsor's disc. Froome rode an unbranded wheel, which seems... odd.
Since they all use magic motors, one reason for choosing a Lightweight wheel could be that it is, well, light. But obviously not light enough to have any chance against the mighty Tom.
 
Aug 9, 2017
31
0
0
Visit site
Froome's only deviation from sponsor equipment are usually his O.Symmetric chainrings, he's not like Dennis or Contador who bring their own rear disc to time trials. As far as I can find this is his first time doing that.

(Although I don't know if Dennis was riding his Lightweight disc back in his Garmin days, he at least uses it regularly enough to be noticeable.)
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re:

Benotti69 said:
Why would the new UCI president say this,

Lappartient said that he'd ramp up fight against hidden motors.

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/07/interview-uci-presidential-candidate-lappartient-aims-ramp-fight-hidden-motors/

If motors are not in use, why is Lappartient talking about a fight against their use.....

Not that i believe Lappartient is going to change anything, but that he is talking about fighting motor use seems to indicate motors are being used, no?

Not necessarily because politicians (and heads of organisations like the UCI are politicians) will say anything when they're trying to court public opinion/convince people to vote for them.

Whats more they'll change what they say for their audience - all those votes he won do you think the delegates voted for him because he's the next saviour of cycling or because he promised them more perks than Cookson?

Talking about motors is just as likely to be him jumping on the bandwagon for a few votes than whether he knows anything definitively.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

wansteadimp said:
Benotti69 said:
Why would the new UCI president say this,

Lappartient said that he'd ramp up fight against hidden motors.

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/07/interview-uci-presidential-candidate-lappartient-aims-ramp-fight-hidden-motors/

If motors are not in use, why is Lappartient talking about a fight against their use.....

Not that i believe Lappartient is going to change anything, but that he is talking about fighting motor use seems to indicate motors are being used, no?

Not necessarily because politicians (and heads of organisations like the UCI are politicians) will say anything when they're trying to court public opinion/convince people to vote for them.

Whats more they'll change what they say for their audience - all those votes he won do you think the delegates voted for him because he's the next saviour of cycling or because he promised them more perks than Cookson?

Talking about motors is just as likely to be him jumping on the bandwagon for a few votes than whether he knows anything definitively.

I dont expect anything to change with Lappartient except that the carpet gets bigger and more stuff gets swept under. Also ASO gets more of the cake. Froome wins TdF#5. Sky win more monuments etc.....
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
wansteadimp said:
Benotti69 said:
Why would the new UCI president say this,

Lappartient said that he'd ramp up fight against hidden motors.

https://cyclingtips.com/2017/07/interview-uci-presidential-candidate-lappartient-aims-ramp-fight-hidden-motors/

If motors are not in use, why is Lappartient talking about a fight against their use.....

Not that i believe Lappartient is going to change anything, but that he is talking about fighting motor use seems to indicate motors are being used, no?

Not necessarily because politicians (and heads of organisations like the UCI are politicians) will say anything when they're trying to court public opinion/convince people to vote for them.

Whats more they'll change what they say for their audience - all those votes he won do you think the delegates voted for him because he's the next saviour of cycling or because he promised them more perks than Cookson?

Talking about motors is just as likely to be him jumping on the bandwagon for a few votes than whether he knows anything definitively.

I dont expect anything to change with Lappartient except that the carpet gets bigger and more stuff gets swept under. Also ASO gets more of the cake. Froome wins TdF#5. Sky win more monuments etc.....

I predict....Froome is DONE. Adios! No amount of dope is going to allow him to keep up with an elite cyclist without the added HP he's been using. I wonder if he'll stare at his stem anymore. I guess he'll have an opportunity to find out what his max heartrate is.
 
Jan 4, 2013
236
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Cookster15 said:
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results. But nothing is notably better than even 5 years ago. Of course Cancellara at Flanders looked suspect but the evidence is not overwhelming. The only way this could happen is if the UCI was deliberately looking the other way to avoid bad publicity.

Detecting such motors is very easy if you have the will do do anything about it - check the BBs, rims and hubs. No X-Ray needed just tools. Are the UCI worried that by implementing mandatory scrutineering of bikes post races (like Formula 1), that in itself brings bad publicity? In F1 they check for all kinds of stuff including electronic sensors in extremely complex race cars. Checking bikes is very very easy (and cheap) by comparison.

On the other side, since IMO it is very easy to check for motors why hasn't the UCI introduced mandatory scrutineering of bikes after races? Very very easy if you know what to look for and there is plenty of evidence even in this thread to know what to look for.

At one of the one day classics this year there was a post race check using spanners. 32 bikes completely stripped down. Nothing was found.
At the TDF last year all the TT bikes were X-rayed including the spares on the team cars. Nothing was found.
 
Re: Re:

adamfo said:
Cookster15 said:
I am very sceptical about hidden motors being used in the peloton. If this was going on we'd see interesting climbing times and incredible TT results. But nothing is notably better than even 5 years ago. Of course Cancellara at Flanders looked suspect but the evidence is not overwhelming. The only way this could happen is if the UCI was deliberately looking the other way to avoid bad publicity.

Detecting such motors is very easy if you have the will do do anything about it - check the BBs, rims and hubs. No X-Ray needed just tools. Are the UCI worried that by implementing mandatory scrutineering of bikes post races (like Formula 1), that in itself brings bad publicity? In F1 they check for all kinds of stuff including electronic sensors in extremely complex race cars. Checking bikes is very very easy (and cheap) by comparison.

On the other side, since IMO it is very easy to check for motors why hasn't the UCI introduced mandatory scrutineering of bikes after races? Very very easy if you know what to look for and there is plenty of evidence even in this thread to know what to look for.

At one of the one day classics this year there was a post race check using spanners. 32 bikes completely stripped down. Nothing was found.
At the TDF last year all the TT bikes were X-rayed including the spares on the team cars. Nothing was found.

^ case closed :D