Motor doping thread

Page 191 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

HelmutRoole said:
Escarabajo said:
thehog said:
hazaran said:
Thats some wimpy motor given it didn't move at all after he put the back down..
Noted the same. If it was a motor the bike would have moved forward when the wheel hit he ground. This one is fake news.
It is still hard to believe it can move that way. What is the explanation?
He hand cranked his chain onto the ring, swings the bike to the pavement, wheel still spinning and drops it. Pretty common.
Oh. Ok. I guess I've done it but not like that. But I understand now.

La Flor those videos are always block in my computer. I wonder if there is another source somewhere else.
 
Mar 18, 2009
324
0
0
Re: Re:

Escarabajo said:
HelmutRoole said:
Escarabajo said:
thehog said:
hazaran said:
Thats some wimpy motor given it didn't move at all after he put the back down..
Noted the same. If it was a motor the bike would have moved forward when the wheel hit he ground. This one is fake news.
It is still hard to believe it can move that way. What is the explanation?
He hand cranked his chain onto the ring, swings the bike to the pavement, wheel still spinning and drops it. Pretty common.
Oh. Ok. I guess I've done it but not like that. But I understand now.
Not say there’s no motor doping. Riders have been caught so there is; how pervasive is the question.
 
Nov 29, 2010
2,326
0
0
Just goes to show how badly people want there to be motor doping to highlight something with an incredibly obvious explanation.

What was even more bizzare was Armstrong on his podcast couldn't make sense that someone would lift their bike up when they put the chain on and spin the cranks. He was baffled. :rolleyes:
 
Jul 29, 2016
634
0
0
My mistake, you are clearly correct guys.

deValtos:

You can trust me, that I really do not want motor in the race since it would mean destruction of my loved sport. On the other hand there is no explanation for some performances ... .
 
deValtos said:
Just goes to show how badly people want there to be motor doping to highlight something with an incredibly obvious explanation.

What was even more bizzare was Armstrong on his podcast couldn't make sense that someone would lift their bike up when they put the chain on and spin the cranks. He was baffled. :rolleyes:
I thought that was lame on LA's part -- he clearly knows it wasn't a motor but was just trying to stir sh** up

LA should stick to race tactics on his podcast and avoid discussing anything to do with doping, pharmacological or otherwise. His credibility is permanently compromised.
 
Bolder said:
deValtos said:
Just goes to show how badly people want there to be motor doping to highlight something with an incredibly obvious explanation.

What was even more bizzare was Armstrong on his podcast couldn't make sense that someone would lift their bike up when they put the chain on and spin the cranks. He was baffled. :rolleyes:
I thought that was lame on LA's part -- he clearly knows it wasn't a motor but was just trying to stir sh** up

LA should stick to race tactics on his podcast and avoid discussing anything to do with doping, pharmacological or otherwise. His credibility is permanently compromised.
He kinda acknowledged his error in yesterday's podcast though... So it seems he really couldn't explain it initially.
 
JosephK said:
Thank goodness the UCI have looked closely at the issue of tech fraud and finally put it to rest:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-finds-no-evidence-of-mechanical-doping-at-the-tour-de-france/

Lots of increased trust in the cleanness of cycling promoted by the UCI and WADA this year. It's all about transparency, figuratively and literally. :D
'The objective is to eliminate suspicion' says Lappartient
as opposed to, you know, catch cheaters...
 
proffate said:
JosephK said:
Thank goodness the UCI have looked closely at the issue of tech fraud and finally put it to rest:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-finds-no-evidence-of-mechanical-doping-at-the-tour-de-france/

Lots of increased trust in the cleanness of cycling promoted by the UCI and WADA this year. It's all about transparency, figuratively and literally. :D
'The objective is to eliminate suspicion' says Lappartient
as opposed to, you know, catch cheaters...
Lappartient has figured out that in this race they were not being used. I don't believe he ever thought that at this level they were. In those circumstances what else can he say?

I can't figure out why on this forum many are willing to give him a free pass. He screwed up about the Froome inhaler case just before the Tour and may have been implicated earlier in the leak. He stirred up public opinion and nearly caused a crisis. Now he's spent a fortune on Xray equipment that would find motors if there were any but the usual brigade are not impressed, so what was the point?
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Tafi.

If Tafi wanting to ride Paris Roubaix as a competitor at 52 doesn't tell you motors are commonplace then nothing will!
 
Benotti69 said:
Tafi.

If Tafi wanting to ride Paris Roubaix as a competitor at 52 doesn't tell you motors are commonplace then nothing will!
I guess I'll have to take nothing. Oh, hang on a moment, the moon's just come out, wow, that's it, that's proof that motors are commonplace. I'm a believer!
 
Benotti69 said:
Tafi.

If Tafi wanting to ride Paris Roubaix as a competitor at 52 doesn't tell you motors are commonplace then nothing will!
Absolutely. And if me wanting to win the Black Reels best actor award despite not being black or an actor tells you nothing about racism in Hollywood then nothing will.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY