Motor doping thread

[ChewbaccaDefense]

I don’t need to look into it. I’ve seen enough on this subject.

Motors have been used to a far greater extent than some U23 Belgian in 2016.

I'll note that before that, there was a resounding harumph from many that batteries were not strong enough, and small motors were not strong enough, and small motors wouldn't do enough. If one cares to look, one can find significant evidence that the technology has always been ahead of what we believed existed.

 

[Cookster15]

Motors have been used to a far greater extent than some U23 Belgian in 2016.

I'll note that before that, there was a resounding harumph from many that batteries were not strong enough, and small motors were not strong enough, and small motors wouldn't do enough. If one cares to look, one can find significant evidence that the technology has always been ahead of what we believed existed.

People said this about car theft, then new car technology effectively stopped it. As I mentioned 40 watts would be enough to make a big difference. The motors don’t need to be large. But they do need to connect to the drive train and be concealable - including the battery.

I still don’t believe it is an issue in the professional peloton. This thread has been running a while. In that time awareness of a possible issue has risen and some cases in MTB, and perhaps Belgium U23, hence the UCI introduced bike checks. I assume Vinge and Pog’s bikes were checked at the last two TdFs?

You are saying if a trained mechanic takes a close look at a bike they can’t tell if there might be a motor supplementing the drive train? I don’t believe that. And I also used some simple logic and reason to debunk that Visma, when someone suggested might have been using motors last year but were warned, can’t have been using motors.

There is no convincing evidence to confirm motors are used in the peloton. If any of this flimsy evidence was presented in court it wouldn’t last long. I’d say the evidence to convict many more riders of blood manipulation is way stronger. That’s where the effort and attention needs to be. This is a distraction from the main game.

 

[Nomad]

View: https://youtu.be/vKgJ_Uhwfno?si=Hy6UcpDz-tNcR_6a

"250 watts...good for 30 minutes."

I've heard some people say the UCI has covered up some PED usage with certain riders/teams over the years - so why not with motors? And as the technology gets better, maybe they'll be difficult to detect?

With the current sophistication of drug testing & the more modules on the ABP (e.g. hematological, steroidal, hormonal, etc), it's next to impossible to industrial-strength & macro-dope. IMO, micro-dosing to circumvent the tests & ABP isn't going to produce the crazy performances we've seen with the climbing times of macro-dopers from the 90s being shattered by minutes.

I think mechanical enhancement is the new frontier of professional cycling.

 

[zlev11]

My feeling is this is the usual conspiracy theory nonsense. People just love to believe this stuff.

Motors are very easy to detect for any trained person and also very easy to get caught using for the same reason. Why would any team (or sponsor) risk this? Or are we suggesting low power motors which are smaller and easier to hide but the boost is still significant (<40 watts)? I suppose there is always the chance of extraterrestrial intervention 😀

As for Visma, listen to the audio on stage 15 of the Tour - talking to Vingegaard before he attacked. The team didn’t sound like it was suffering any self doubts about not having motors on the race radio on PdB? In fact they seemed rather overconfident on Pogacar’s true level. There would massive doubts at Visma if they had used motors last year and this year they were warned against it. In fact I think they would go to great lengths to downplay his chances this year rather than talk him up.

just completely burying your head in the sand and ignoring the smoke and claiming "no way motors were used, never" is way worse than thinking up "conspiracy theories" (i really hate the CIA for inventing that term).

 

[zlev11]

I've heard some people say the UCI has covered up some PED usage with certain riders/teams over the years - so why not with motors? And as the technology gets better, maybe they'll be difficult to detect?

yes exactly, i've always said that if a motor was found it would be quickly covered up by the UCI. it would make way too much of a mess. it's kinda like a "too big to fail" situation.

 

[veganrob]

yes exactly, i've always said that if a motor was found it would be quickly covered up by the UCI. it would make way too much of a mess. it's kinda like a "too big to fail" situation.

It's bad enough the UCI has lost the war on drugs. If a motor was somehow "discovered", it would be the end of professional cycling.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

People said this about car theft, then new car technology effectively stopped it. As I mentioned 40 watts would be enough to make a big difference. The motors don’t need to be large. But they do need to connect to the drive train and be concealable - including the battery.

I still don’t believe it is an issue in the professional peloton. This thread has been running a while. In that time awareness of a possible issue has risen and some cases in MTB, and perhaps Belgium U23, hence the UCI introduced bike checks. I assume Vinge and Pog’s bikes were checked at the last two TdFs?

You are saying if a trained mechanic takes a close look at a bike they can’t tell if there might be a motor supplementing the drive train? I don’t believe that. And I also used some simple logic and reason to debunk that Visma, when someone suggested might have been using motors last year but were warned, can’t have been using motors.

There is no convincing evidence to confirm motors are used in the peloton. If any of this flimsy evidence was presented in court it wouldn’t last long. I’d say the evidence to convict many more riders of blood manipulation is way stronger. That’s where the effort and attention needs to be. This is a distraction from the main game.

Again, listen and see if you are not persuaded that it is much more plausible than you currently believe. https://stak.london/shows/ghost-in-the-machine/

There appears to be technology that involves wheels and magnets, so it is not all motors. Again, this isn't coming from me, it is coming from this podcast and the people he interviews.

And the reason I suspect Visma, is that I've seen Wout's CX bikes do some suspicious things in his 2016 campaign. A couple of those videos are really strange.

And you will never convince me that Cancellara didn't use motors in 2010. He absolutely was riding a bike with a motor at P-R and RVV.

 

[Cookster15]

just completely burying your head in the sand and ignoring the smoke and claiming "no way motors were used, never" is way worse than thinking up "conspiracy theories" (i really hate the CIA for inventing that term).

I am just trying to apply a modicum of known facts, logic and reason. But what I am seeing in this thread is groupthink which is unhelpful - the kind of thing social media has become infamous for.

Unthread I used logic and reason to doubt the claim Visma used motors and were warned against that by the UCI for the 2024 Tour. No replies.

Dare anyone be sceptical - you are talking about the potential end of competitive cycling. When I get time I will look at Chewbacca’s video. Even on Chancellara, if that could not be explained by anything other than motors then the sport would already be destroyed - journalism can be ruthless. In the meantime I am entitled to be sceptical and should not be accused of ignorance. Everyone is ignorant to some degree.

 

[ontheroad]

Cancellara at RVV and Froome on Ventoux were 2 of the most visually blatant attacks relating to possible motor usage in recent times. The thing about motors is that once you get the bike in and out of there after the stage, then there are no longer any receipts unlike chemical doping where at least samples are retained afterwards. So that is the most obvious upside to the use of motors. That plus the fact that the UCI do not really want to uncover a scandal that would help destroy the sport so it is not in their interest to have a world tour rider found guilty of using a motor. The best they can hope for is to try and keep a lid on it.

Go back a lot further than that though and with Varjas claiming he received $2m in 1998 for a 10 year exclusive agreement and with the subsequent comments of the head of French anti doping it's not that hard to put 2 and 2 together.

 

[Raest]

The motor-doping argument is solely based on the assumption that UCI knows and looks the other way. If that's the case then any type of doping is possible. Doesn't have to be motors. Magnetic fields can be detected relatively easily and cheaply, all it takes is someone with a gauge and a press-clearance and you are busted.

Edit: I am not saying that it hasn't been used in the pro-peloton. But I side with G. Lemond that it's unlikely to have been used since UCI started looking for it.

 

[pastronef]

Cancellara at RVV and Froome on Ventoux were 2 of the most visually blatant attacks relating to possible motor usage in recent times. The thing about motors is that once you get the bike in and out of there after the stage, then there are no longer any receipts unlike chemical doping where at least samples are retained afterwards. So that is the most obvious upside to the use of motors. That plus the fact that the UCI do not really want to uncover a scandal that would help destroy the sport so it is not in their interest to have a world tour rider found guilty of using a motor. The best they can hope for is to try and keep a lid on it.

Go back a lot further than that though and with Varjas claiming he received $2m in 1998 for a 10 year exclusive agreement and with the subsequent comments of the head of French anti doping it's not that hard to put 2 and 2 together.

Varjas. does anyone believe Varjas? ffs. FFS. a scammer. he conned some desperate French journos into believing him.
ps. even Lenny Martinez and Superman Lopez did beat Froome's time on Ventoux

 

[ontheroad]

Varjas. does anyone believe Varjas? ffs. FFS. a scammer. he conned some desperate French journos into believing him.
ps. even Lenny Martinez and Superman Lopez did beat Froome's time on Ventoux

It's very easy to dismiss using smear tactics. Best to deal with the points he raised rather than attack the individual delivering a statement that you simply don't want to hear.

Plus it's very obvious that the level of doping in the peloton has been ramped up significantly in the last few years so the Martinez and Superman times are not comparable to the Sky era. The Froome performance is only comparable to the level of the opposition during that particular era. And nobody has ever offered up a rational explanation for his heart rate remaining stable during that Ventoux washing machine attack.

 

[hrotha]

No it's absolutely ok to dismiss Varjas using smear tactics, dude has earned it

 

[E_F_]

Magnetic fields can be detected relatively easily and cheaply, all it takes is someone with a gauge and a press-clearance and you are busted.

They're shielded by carbon.

 

[veganrob]

It's very easy to dismiss using smear tactics. Best to deal with the points he raised rather than attack the individual delivering a statement that you simply don't want to hear.

Plus it's very obvious that the level of doping in the peloton has been ramped up significantly in the last few years so the Martinez and Superman times are not comparable to the Sky era. The Froome performance is only comparable to the level of the opposition during that particular era. And nobody has ever offered up a rational explanation for his heart rate remaining stable during that Ventoux washing machine attack.

Sky did not offer up any explanation for the ridiculous attack nor the HR remaining unchanged. They only slammed the leak of the info.

 

[Cookster15]

Again, listen and see if you are not persuaded that it is much more plausible than you currently believe. https://stak.london/shows/ghost-in-the-machine/

There appears to be technology that involves wheels and magnets, so it is not all motors. Again, this isn't coming from me, it is coming from this podcast and the people he interviews.

And the reason I suspect Visma, is that I've seen Wout's CX bikes do some suspicious things in his 2016 campaign. A couple of those videos are really strange.

And you will never convince me that Cancellara didn't use motors in 2010. He absolutely was riding a bike with a motor at P-R and RVV.

Apologies for the length of this post. Listened to the first video. It seems a little sensationalized by the young narrator ["training wheels when Armstrong won his first tour"] obviously to increase the impact but the main evidence seems Femke Van den Driessche in 2016. But its good he says this could destroy the sport - he is right.

As far as Visma are concerned, can we look at more recent evidence than WvA's CX bikes in 2016? At the 2023 Tour I found the UCI conducted 837 tests before Tour de France stages and 160 at the end of stages, none of which showed a rider using a bike with a hidden motor.
UCI carried out 997 checks for motor doping at 2023 Tour de France

Then I also found this story posted before the 2024 Tour:

Professional cyclist says motor doping "impossible" at top level, reacts to "crazy story" from French race as cycling film actor denies cheating at amateur event

Mystery professional rider believes there will have been motor cheats in the past but the UCI introducing strict and frequent testing has likely ended any chance of getting away with it

road.cc

Lots of nice quotes in this story, such as this one from the anonymous pro mentioned ...

I honestly think that it will be impossible to ride around with a motorcycle in 2024

Below is Cancellara's attack on the Koppenberg in RVV 2010. Its not a long effort - less than 2 minutes which is anaerobic. We know Cancellara was a monster who could produce huge watts for shortish durations. Boonan can be seen grimacing before the attack so was already at his limits so I am not as convinced as you seem to be:

Fabian Cancellara attack 2010 Ronde van Vlaanderen

So I remain unswayed. I will believe there is substance to motor doping in the peloton when it is a major story to dwarf that when Armstrong was busted. There needs to be a lot more than Cancellara and an obscure Belgian CX woman who was caught and banned in 2016.

 

[Cookster15]

Cancellara at RVV and Froome on Ventoux were 2 of the most visually blatant attacks relating to possible motor usage in recent times.

Blatant and possible - how can those attacks be both?

Often we see what we want to see. Did Pogacar use a motor because what he did at the Tour would have destroyed even 2013 Froome?

 

[proffate]

I don't understand why Cancellara's kapelmuur attack is supposed to be "proof" of motor doping. Because he looked a lot more comfortable than Boonen? I mean that is just how it is when someone gets dropped. Remco was also seated when he dropped Kueng and co at OGRR. Do you think that standing up means you shouldn't be dropped? I'm pretty sure any pro would still drop me even if I stood on the pedals and grimaced.

 

[ontheroad]

Blatant and possible - how can those attacks be both?

Often we see what we want to see. Did Pogacar use a motor because what he did at the Tour would have destroyed even 2013 Froome?

I used the word possible because unless a motor was actually detected on the day it can never be proved definitively unlike chemical doping where the receipts are retained in the form of samples. Visually to my eye anyway, both those cases looked to have all the hallmarks of a motor assisted effort and when you put all of the anecdotal evidence together you have to form your own judgement. But I accept that it can never be proved.

Clearly the testing for motors has been ramped up in recent years due to mounting speculation over their use within the peloton pre 2016 and as a result there have been fewer cases where you could (at least visually) claim motor use. I think Froome would have struggled to finish top 10 in this years Tour so it’s clear that doping levels have been ramped up considerably since then. But I’d be more inclined to say that its due to oxygen vector doping now rather than the use of motors.

 

[Cookster15]

I used the word possible because unless a motor was actually detected on the day it can never be proved definitively unlike chemical doping where the receipts are retained in the form of samples. Visually to my eye anyway, both those cases looked to have all the hallmarks of a motor assisted effort and when you put all of the anecdotal evidence together you have to form your own judgement. But I accept that it can never be proved.

Clearly the testing for motors has been ramped up in recent years due to mounting speculation over their use within the peloton pre 2016 and as a result there have been fewer cases where you could (at least visually) claim motor use. I think Froome would have struggled to finish top 10 in this years Tour so it’s clear that doping levels have been ramped up considerably since then. But I’d be more inclined to say that it’s due to oxygen vector doping now rather than the use of motors.

Thanks. Froome is explained by the likelihood he isn’t doping after his crash or at least to a much less sophisticated level than when he rode for Ineos. Agree with the rest.

 

[repoman]

They're shielded by carbon.

I take it you've never built a bike before with internal routing...

This thread is flat earth tier.

 

[veganrob]

I don't understand why Cancellara's kapelmuur attack is supposed to be "proof" of motor doping. Because he looked a lot more comfortable than Boonen? I mean that is just how it is when someone gets dropped. Remco was also seated when he dropped Kueng and co at OGRR. Do you think that standing up means you shouldn't be dropped? I'm pretty sure any pro would still drop me even if I stood on the pedals and grimaced.

Cancellara and Boonen were very equal riders at the peak of their careers. Remco and Keung not so much

 

[proffate]

Cancellara and Boonen were very equal riders at the peak of their careers. Remco and Keung not so much

soooo if veganrob judges two riders to be equals and one gets dropped then the other definitely had a motor

makes sense.

 

[veganrob]

soooo if veganrob judges two riders to be equals and one gets dropped then the other definitely had a motor

makes sense.

No, it's the way it was done. Boonen was dropped like a rock. Are you saying those two aren't equal? Be real man.

 

[Cookster15]

I don't understand why Cancellara's kapelmuur attack is supposed to be "proof" of motor doping. Because he looked a lot more comfortable than Boonen? I mean that is just how it is when someone gets dropped. Remco was also seated when he dropped Kueng and co at OGRR. Do you think that standing up means you shouldn't be dropped? I'm pretty sure any pro would still drop me even if I stood on the pedals and grimaced.

I think maybe because it was a seated attack? I just think Fabian was super strong that day, even for him, and less fatigued than Boonan at the same point in that race. I haven’t seen the full race so don’t know how much work both riders had done at that point of the race.

Like you said, that is just how it is when a rider gets dropped?

I also recall Pogacar did a seated attack in the 2021 Tour.