Motor doping thread

Page 165 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
jmdirt said:
Anyway, when we were all analyzing the video, I said that it would require really high level editing equipment/software to make only one part of a video move differently than the rest, but I was wrong. So maybe someone manipulated that video to show that motors exist in the pro platoon, maybe its not manipulated and motors do exist, or maybe its not manipulated and motors don't exist.
I remember during that stage, a Dutch person asked on twitter if someone could make a GIF of the moment "Poels cruised up a near-vertical inner corner while reading a book and solving a crossword puzzle" or something to that extent. Seems quite obvious that was referring to that moment so it was on TV and not manipulated afterwards.
This is not directed at you Flo but at the people trying to explain away things in a rather remarkable way.

I watched the stage live on TV and unless they managed to manipulate the live broadcast on the spot, people are clutching at straws to explain away the footage of Poels on Angliru. Also the Sporza-commentators found it highly remarkable what was happening.
 
Re: Re:

GJB123 said:
LaFlorecita said:
jmdirt said:
Anyway, when we were all analyzing the video, I said that it would require really high level editing equipment/software to make only one part of a video move differently than the rest, but I was wrong. So maybe someone manipulated that video to show that motors exist in the pro platoon, maybe its not manipulated and motors do exist, or maybe its not manipulated and motors don't exist.
I remember during that stage, a Dutch person asked on twitter if someone could make a GIF of the moment "Poels cruised up a near-vertical inner corner while reading a book and solving a crossword puzzle" or something to that extent. Seems quite obvious that was referring to that moment so it was on TV and not manipulated afterwards.
This is not directed at you Flo but at the people trying to explain away things in a rather remarkable way.

I watched the stage live on TV and unless they managed to manipulate the live broadcast on the spot, people are clutching at straws to explain away the footage of Poels on Angliru. Also the Sporza-commentators found it highly remarkable what was happening.
I brought up the IT guy because my initial reaction on that day was that the video from Twitter had been manipulated. After I watch it several more times, I couldn't really see any manipulation, only WP seemed to speed up, the rest of the of the people don't seem to. I assumed then that it would require really expensive software/hardware to manipulate individual images within a video, but my assumption was wrong. I only posted to say as much, not to explain away what we all saw.
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
Nipple force field power! :D Uh, spoke nipples that is.

I still think that this old tech is the only raceable motor, but that's not to saw that there isn't something else ready for tomorrow.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
LaFlorecita said:
jmdirt said:
Anyway, when we were all analyzing the video, I said that it would require really high level editing equipment/software to make only one part of a video move differently than the rest, but I was wrong. So maybe someone manipulated that video to show that motors exist in the pro platoon, maybe its not manipulated and motors do exist, or maybe its not manipulated and motors don't exist.
I remember during that stage, a Dutch person asked on twitter if someone could make a GIF of the moment "Poels cruised up a near-vertical inner corner while reading a book and solving a crossword puzzle" or something to that extent. Seems quite obvious that was referring to that moment so it was on TV and not manipulated afterwards.
Could someone explain what stage is being discussed here? I thought the thermal video was from Italian races ...
WP on Angliru, not the Stade stuff.
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
Am I the only one that finds it strange that AFLD are targeting an unknown Amateur in a Vets races but turn a blind eye to the suspicions around motor use in the TDF each year given the powers they have under French Law?

Under French law, the rider could be prosecuted for sporting fraud, with French police keen to know how much prize money he had earned in recent races. If found guilty of mechanical doping he faces a lengthy ban from the sport.
A case of this for the Tour de France insofar as AFLD is concerned:
 
B_Ugli said:
Am I the only one that finds it strange that AFLD are targeting an unknown Amateur in a Vets races but turn a blind eye to the suspicions around motor use in the TDF each year given the powers they have under French Law?

Under French law, the rider could be prosecuted for sporting fraud, with French police keen to know how much prize money he had earned in recent races. If found guilty of mechanical doping he faces a lengthy ban from the sport.
A case of this for the Tour de France insofar as AFLD is concerned:
Huh? The UCI and ASO don't want the AFLD anywhere near the TDF after what happened in 2008...
 
42x16ss said:
B_Ugli said:
Am I the only one that finds it strange that AFLD are targeting an unknown Amateur in a Vets races but turn a blind eye to the suspicions around motor use in the TDF each year given the powers they have under French Law?

Under French law, the rider could be prosecuted for sporting fraud, with French police keen to know how much prize money he had earned in recent races. If found guilty of mechanical doping he faces a lengthy ban from the sport.
A case of this for the Tour de France insofar as AFLD is concerned:
Huh? The UCI and ASO don't want the AFLD anywhere near the TDF after what happened in 2008...

We can only hope that in 2018 they have full control. Although suspect will have Barfield will be leaking the new detection methods to Sky.
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
B_Ugli said:
1. No suggestion in my post that they shouldn't act
2. AFLD (who can bring criminal charges) are not ASO (a race organiser) or UCI (a governing body)

Suggest you read posts rather than misinterpreting Einstein.
I suggest you read articles too rather than misinterpreting french law : the police or the customs can ask for criminal charges to be brought, not the AFLD itself. As is very very very often the case in anti-doping, it's the police/customs and then judiciary machine that get things moving, not the sport authorities themselves.

What this example showed was rather how difficult it remains to catch motor doping with only but the crudest devices used in the most blatant ways raising enough suspicion. This is what is worrying rather than a conspiracy theory about the AFLD not acting on the Tour de France for such and such reason.
 
The AFLD have only had the legal power since March 2017 to inspect riders bikes for motors with French Police involvement I believe. The performances of this amateur rider when climbing are what raised the suspicion that meant the AFLD began investigating the rider and taking his bike apart to find the motor, although it sounds like Bassons identified the rider already perhaps?

This kind of relates back to UCI preventing AFLD/French Police taking Team Sky bikes apart in 2015 TT before this French law was passed in March. In 2015, AFLD didn't have any legal power to inspect bikes, now they do. I'm not sure if taking 6 months for AFLD to find a motor when you have the legal power to inspect is a sign of lack of resources or a lack of motors found. It would be interesting to know how many inspection AFLD have performed in the last 6 months since having the power to.

It was interesting that French Cycling Federation president Michel Callot thought they would find a growing problem in amateur racing because the technology is easily accessible and there are not the resources to check the bikes like in professional races.
 
Feb 24, 2014
516
0
0
samhocking said:
there are not the resources to check the bikes like in professional races.
Waving the magic iPad around a bike is proven not to work (see the French Documentary).
If you don't want to find it, you won't!!!
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
veji11 said:
B_Ugli said:
1. No suggestion in my post that they shouldn't act
2. AFLD (who can bring criminal charges) are not ASO (a race organiser) or UCI (a governing body)

Suggest you read posts rather than misinterpreting Einstein.
I suggest you read articles too rather than misinterpreting french law : the police or the customs can ask for criminal charges to be brought, not the AFLD itself. As is very very very often the case in anti-doping, it's the police/customs and then judiciary machine that get things moving, not the sport authorities themselves.

What this example showed was rather how difficult it remains to catch motor doping with only but the crudest devices used in the most blatant ways raising enough suspicion. This is what is worrying rather than a conspiracy theory about the AFLD not acting on the Tour de France for such and such reason.
Thanks for the AFLD explanation. I still assert that the French authorities whether AFLD or law enforcement have turned a blind eye to their flagship event in recent years.

Okay in the past they have gone after Cofidis/Dave Millar and Festina together with raids on hotels etc but in the aftermath of USADA/FBI investigation which revealed much law breaking (a lot of which was carried out on French soil in the month of July) they have been very quiet.

During and after the US investigation the silence from French authorities was deafening and as far as I am aware no one prosecuted in France. I would ask why??

No conspiracy theory but why would French authorities not want to pursue proven law breaking on French soil??
 
B_Ugli said:
veji11 said:
B_Ugli said:
1. No suggestion in my post that they shouldn't act
2. AFLD (who can bring criminal charges) are not ASO (a race organiser) or UCI (a governing body)

Suggest you read posts rather than misinterpreting Einstein.
I suggest you read articles too rather than misinterpreting french law : the police or the customs can ask for criminal charges to be brought, not the AFLD itself. As is very very very often the case in anti-doping, it's the police/customs and then judiciary machine that get things moving, not the sport authorities themselves.

What this example showed was rather how difficult it remains to catch motor doping with only but the crudest devices used in the most blatant ways raising enough suspicion. This is what is worrying rather than a conspiracy theory about the AFLD not acting on the Tour de France for such and such reason.
Thanks for the AFLD explanation. I still assert that the French authorities whether AFLD or law enforcement have turned a blind eye to their flagship event in recent years.

Okay in the past they have gone after Cofidis/Dave Millar and Festina together with raids on hotels etc but in the aftermath of USADA/FBI investigation which revealed much law breaking (a lot of which was carried out on French soil in the month of July) they have been very quiet.

During and after the US investigation the silence from French authorities was deafening and as far as I am aware no one prosecuted in France. I would ask why??

No conspiracy theory but why would French authorities not want to pursue proven law breaking on French soil??

The shift was in 2009 when Armstrong came back, Pierre Bordry then head of the AFLD was forced out. At that point unlike the 2008 edition of the the Tour anti-doping took a back seat and moved into line of the UCIs hand sitting.

The Festina raids never would occurred if Voet hadn’t been stopped by border patrol. At that point he French police had to act as it became drug trafficking over international borders. The Festina trials at the end of 2000 was France’s moment to let it all out. Since that point they haven’t really wanted to get involved again. Perhaps it was too painful. It played out on TV each day with many a tear shed by grown men.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
deeno1975 said:
samhocking said:
there are not the resources to check the bikes like in professional races.
Waving the magic iPad around a bike is proven not to work (see the French Documentary).
If you don't want to find it, you won't!!!
What BS.

Riders are allowed 1 bike per race*. It is left with Race organisers in parc firm to be check then labelled. The rider collects the bike and puts on an small ecletronic tag that matches the bike. If the 2 become seprated before the end of the race DQ'd. Wheel changes permitted again only wheels that have passed through a 'parc ferme' check and been labelled.

Might see the use of Titanium become the choice of frame for a rider.

But again the sport must want this, the riders, the teams, the UCI and race owners.

If the will is there, it will happen. I can not see this becoming the practice and motors are here to stay and the credibility of the sport will only worsen as more motors are found and the sport of professional cycling that the general public think of as PED fuelled will now also be known for cheating with motors.
 
Jul 19, 2009
949
0
0
B_Ugli said:
Thanks for the AFLD explanation. I still assert that the French authorities whether AFLD or law enforcement have turned a blind eye to their flagship event in recent years.

Okay in the past they have gone after Cofidis/Dave Millar and Festina together with raids on hotels etc but in the aftermath of USADA/FBI investigation which revealed much law breaking (a lot of which was carried out on French soil in the month of July) they have been very quiet.

During and after the US investigation the silence from French authorities was deafening and as far as I am aware no one prosecuted in France. I would ask why??

No conspiracy theory but why would French authorities not want to pursue proven law breaking on French soil??
Statute limitation perhaps?

That is because of the failing of UCI, that law enforcement should be be made to check bikes? Have we seen law to check car or motobike in other sports?
In the current case, law enforcement is linked to fraud.
 
deeno1975 said:
samhocking said:
there are not the resources to check the bikes like in professional races.
Waving the magic iPad around a bike is proven not to work (see the French Documentary).
If you don't want to find it, you won't!!!
The ipad is just the ad-hoc random testing around start and finish lines. As above, in the major races I have attended, what seems to happen is top 3 across the line and race leader if a stage race get tagged to identify the bike. The tag can't be removed without destroying it and if that's the case the rider is DQd from the race, no different that refusing anti-doping call.

From that point, the rider warms down with his bike and mechanic from the team called to disassemble cranks and seatpost after the bike is weighed and various other UCI paramters confirmed to be legal like saddle angle etc etc etc. Bike and wheels are then scanned with ipad, mechanic removes cranks and seapost and an endoscope is then inserted into the bottom bracket area and down the seatpost and records photos/video to file during that process. Mechanic then re-assembles the cleared bike while rider is doing podium ceremony.

From what I gather UCI are now going to re-introduce the X-Ray inspections they trialled last couple of years to the inspection steps above for top 3 finishers and 1 random rider and Thermal Imaging used in the race itself from camera motorbikes.
 
Jul 20, 2015
109
0
0
Just a reminder that I posted detailed pictures of a Carrera with a seat tube motor last year. I still cant believe that someone would actually try to race with one of these things, but then I must be a bit naive. *shrugs*
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
.Froomestrong. said:
Just a reminder that I posted detailed pictures of a Carrera with a seat tube motor last year. I still cant believe that someone would actually try to race with one of these things, but then I must be a bit naive. *shrugs*
Can you re-post them? I'd like to see them and don't have time to search.

TIA :)
 
samhocking said:
It was interesting that French Cycling Federation president Michel Callot thought they would find a growing problem in amateur racing because the technology is easily accessible and there are not the resources to check the bikes like in professional races.
Certainly. In amateur racing, anything goes, and always has. My first car had a smaller motor than this guy's.

I still say -- and may be last man standing on this! -- that motors aren't currently being used in WT races. As per Madiot: “In those [amateur] categories, there have surely been other cases. In the pros, too – though I don’t think anymore,” he said. “There was a blurry period where no one believed in the existence of it – and it was therefore easier to use it. From the moment there were doubts, as if by coincidence we saw fewer and fewer bike changes.”
 
Feb 24, 2014
516
0
0
samhocking said:
The ipad is just the ad-hoc random testing around start and finish lines. As above, in the major races I have attended, what seems to happen is top 3 across the line and race leader if a stage race get tagged to identify the bike. The tag can't be removed without destroying it and if that's the case the rider is DQd from the race, no different that refusing anti-doping call.

From that point, the rider warms down with his bike and mechanic from the team called to disassemble cranks and seatpost after the bike is weighed and various other UCI paramters confirmed to be legal like saddle angle etc etc etc. Bike and wheels are then scanned with ipad, mechanic removes cranks and seapost and an endoscope is then inserted into the bottom bracket area and down the seatpost and records photos/video to file during that process. Mechanic then re-assembles the cleared bike while rider is doing podium ceremony.

From what I gather UCI are now going to re-introduce the X-Ray inspections they trialled last couple of years to the inspection steps above for top 3 finishers and 1 random rider and Thermal Imaging used in the race itself from camera motorbikes.
I didn't know that the bikes were tagged and these "strip down" tests are being carried out. Not disputing that but have you evidence of such tests being carried out or evidence that these tests are being done.

The nature of the tests you stated seems at variance with an article in CycleTips website which talks about weighing the rear wheel being time consuming!!

Another an allegation against UCI testers was that they refused a request by the French police to weigh wheels rather than complete bikes. A senior source with links to the police confirmed to CyclingTips in June 2016 that this was indeed the case.

“We know the normal weight of a bike. With the motor of the Hungarian engineer, the weight of the back wheel is heavier,” the source stated then.

“We asked the UCI to verify, to check. They told us that it is too difficult to take off the wheel. That was very funny, because it only takes five seconds to take off the wheel. That is all.”
https://cyclingtips.com/2017/07/interview-uci-presidential-candidate-lappartient-aims-ramp-fight-hidden-motors/

I'm a bit confused, it is not time consuming to strip the bottom bracket and have a look around with a endoscope but it is time consuming to weigh the back wheel???
 
Feb 24, 2014
516
0
0
Bolder said:
samhocking said:
I still say -- and may be last man standing on this! -- that motors aren't currently being used in WT races. As per Madiot: “In those [amateur] categories, there have surely been other cases. In the pros, too – though I don’t think anymore,” he said. “There was a blurry period where no one believed in the existence of it – and it was therefore easier to use it. From the moment there were doubts, as if by coincidence we saw fewer and fewer bike changes.”
If there is no motor doping , then why ask for increased testing???

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/madiot-lappartient-must-follow-through-on-mechanical-doping-promises/
 
B_Ugli said:
veji11 said:
B_Ugli said:
1. No suggestion in my post that they shouldn't act
2. AFLD (who can bring criminal charges) are not ASO (a race organiser) or UCI (a governing body)

Suggest you read posts rather than misinterpreting Einstein.
I suggest you read articles too rather than misinterpreting french law : the police or the customs can ask for criminal charges to be brought, not the AFLD itself. As is very very very often the case in anti-doping, it's the police/customs and then judiciary machine that get things moving, not the sport authorities themselves.

What this example showed was rather how difficult it remains to catch motor doping with only but the crudest devices used in the most blatant ways raising enough suspicion. This is what is worrying rather than a conspiracy theory about the AFLD not acting on the Tour de France for such and such reason.
Thanks for the AFLD explanation. I still assert that the French authorities whether AFLD or law enforcement have turned a blind eye to their flagship event in recent years.

Okay in the past they have gone after Cofidis/Dave Millar and Festina together with raids on hotels etc but in the aftermath of USADA/FBI investigation which revealed much law breaking (a lot of which was carried out on French soil in the month of July) they have been very quiet.

During and after the US investigation the silence from French authorities was deafening and as far as I am aware no one prosecuted in France. I would ask why??

No conspiracy theory but why would French authorities not want to pursue proven law breaking on French soil??
Because police have limited resources and target those likely to provide results - I would be upset as a French citizen if police are wasting resources looking into mechanical doping in cycling - I suggest there are more pressing criminal matters in France - Finally it appears that the three confirmed cases of mechanical doping all involve tip offs.
 
yaco said:
Because police have limited resources and target those likely to provide results - I would be upset as a French citizen if police are wasting resources looking into mechanical doping in cycling - I suggest there are more pressing criminal matters in France - Finally it appears that the three confirmed cases of mechanical doping all involve tip offs.
Two observations: 1) It would seem that some think there are some laws that should not be enforced; 2) It would seem that some think officers of the law should pick and choose what information on illegal activity they act on, ignoring some.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY