Motor doping thread

[Libertine Seguros]

I think that your use of the term 'a deer in the headlights' actually says a lot about the relatively sympathetic way you see her and would like others to. I can't imagine that if she had been a similarly aged male rider you would be putting forward an identical argument, or appealing to the same imagery.

Anyhow, I was not really responding to what you have said, most of which is balanced and fair. Rather we have had a lot of people on here who have seemed to be very ready to play down the degree of responsibility that Van den Driessche, sorry, 'Femke' carries for her actions, pretty much on the basis that she is not just 19, but a 19 year-old female.

...

Overall, an awful lot of sympathy for a blatant cheat, much more than I have ever seen for any young guy who got busted for doping, which everybody seems to agree would have been a much lesser offence.

For example, I have tried to look for some similarly sympathetic comments relating to Gabriel Evans, the junior British TT champion busted for Epo use and couldn't find one. No one seemed to even suggest that anyone other then the rider could be held responsible for him being caught doping, or that he must have been influenced or aided by some other person, such as his father.

It also amazes me the way it seems acceptable to call a 19 year-old woman 'stupid', effectively not much more than a child, clearly unable to make her own choices, and so on. In any other situation there would be an outcry if she was described in such a way, but here it seems fine to do so as it allows her to be, at least partially, excused for what she has done. Double standards or what?

Anyhow, all this is just a side issue compared to the significance of the 'sport' acknowledging that electrical engineers are now as important to a team as its doping doctors!

I think it's fair to say that I have a relatively sympathetic outlook towards her, and that I don't think this is her idea alone. If it was her idea, somebody should have realised just how bad a fall would be and stopped her, if it wasn't then, you know, she's the one that's paying the biggest price and seeing her downfall played out over a much bigger stage than her success ever would have been, and while she had to have gone along with it for it to have reached this stage, this is one of the few times in the history of cycling cheating where the risk actually DOES outstrip the reward. Anyway, I can't speak for everybody, but while perhaps, yes, it comes across as more sympathetic and perhaps even affectionate than a more official use of the surname, "Femke" is much easier to type than "van den Driessche", especially in a situation where several of the people referenced share that surname, and personally I found "FVDD" to be a bit cumbersome.

Some of the posts you use there aren't all that sympathetic. Some are selective quotes, and the ones that suggest she's stupid aren't exactly sympathetic, just not condemning her in the same way. As to your point on the Gabriel Evans case, personally I don't know much about that case so I can't comment about it. With this one happening at a World Championships and being for a completely new type of doping it's become a much bigger story; maybe if she'd just been busted for EPO it would have been a different factor, if anybody had bothered to comment at all. But one of the biggest factors in this case that has factored into the relatively sympathetic view of [Femke] van den Driessche is how directly unsympathetic Daddy van den Driessche has come across from the word go (exacerbated after the Actual Criminal Activity came to light), and also how much of a central figure in the story he has been.

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

I think it's more a matter of people wanting to finally put the emphasis on those who hide in the shadows while the individual athlete gets hung out to dry. It Femke takes the brunt of the punishment herself, then we're right back to where we started. Everyone in the chain of events needs to be removed from any participation in the sport whatsoever (including even attending as a "fan").

OK, fair enough, I look forward to the wave of sympathy for the next pro busted for doping, and the demands that the back-room enablers be brought to account instead!

Who knows what might be next, perhaps a retrospective rehabilitation of all the forum's doping demons of the past, from Armstrong to Millar!

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2016/02/news/cancellara-says-motors-in-bikes-are-an-old-story_394476

“If it’s true or not, I have no idea,” he said

Yeah, I wonder if it's true? I wonder if maybe the UCI didn't actually find a motor inside a frame at a World Championship race. Maybe they were unsure about it but decided to release an official statement confirming the discovery just for the fun of it. Or maybe they did it just to incite Luca Guercilena. Or maybe it didn't happen at all. Maybe the UCI just released the official statement confirming the find to give the media something to talk about.

"If it's true or not..."

Cancellara road out of his boots in the 2009 or 2010 Worlds in Mondrisio...

I remember the Worlds that Evans won in Switzerland at Mondrisio and the best riders were Kolobnev, Ballan, Garmin's Stephen Cozza but the MVP was Cancellara... but, the only measure prolly should be, the final 1km, not the MVP animator of the race... cos only one thing counts, the final line, not mid-race attacks that dont stick. The anti-leipheimer... v, the one measure, the race results, the levi leipheimer wheelsucker measure

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Or maybe her story is true.

Okay, it sounds too convenient. But if it is true, I'd hate for a young girl (okay, young woman) to have her life ruined by an absurd mistake.

I think, hope, the investigation will be taken very seriously. First motor doping case and all that. The panel (right term?) will hopefully take sworn testimony from everyone - mechanics, friend, other people in the area. Examine photos from other races. Examine records from the motor's maker and seller, shipping records, credit card records. I'd like to think they'll fingerprint the motor but that may be asking too much.

She should get a ban and fine even if her story is 100% true. The regulation is strict liability. But I wouldn't give her a lifetime ban or a several year ban, if the bike genuinely got there as she claims it did.

As said above, even if she only gets a six month ban, it will be years before she can get a sponsor, a real team, respect from other racers. Probably won't be able to ride around a CX race without having beer and batteries thrown at her.

Setting aside the remarkable sequence of events that would have to happen for this to be an innocent mistake, the key thing their stories do not address is that even without the UCI publishing any photos it is safe to assume that this was a concealed motor / battery / power switch. In other words it was supposed to look and sound like a normal bike - in fact their stories depend on that for the "mix-up" to occur. I can't think of any reason to go to the trouble of that concealment if its use was only recreational - the only reason is if it was going to be used in competition. And who is the competitor ?

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re: Re:

OK, fair enough, I look forward to the wave of sympathy for the next pro busted for doping, and the demands that the back-room enablers be brought to account instead!

You're in luck then. No need to wait!

That's been the stated position of many fans and media for some time now. Links will be easy to provide is necessary. But they shouldn't be.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

I describe Femke as a "deer in the headlights" in that interview not because she's female, but because how completely unequipped she seemed for dealing with the sudden burst of negative attention.

I think that your use of the term 'a deer in the headlights' actually says a lot about the relatively sympathetic way you see her and would like others to. I can't imagine that if she had been a similarly aged male rider you would be putting forward an identical argument, or appealing to the same imagery.

Anyhow, I was not really responding to what you have said, most of which is balanced and fair. Rather we have had a lot of people on here who have seemed to be very ready to play down the degree of responsibility that Van den Driessche, sorry, 'Femke' carries for her actions, pretty much on the basis that she is not just 19, but a 19 year-old female. For example,

She is "A 19-year old girl for crying out loud",

"it is the parent that deserves to take the biggest fall",

"I've dealt with such fathers. Somehow they are never banned, only their kids",

"Poor girl such mixed messages going to her",

"As for the young lady this is not her brain that's implemented this but a small network",

"She is not the brightest cookie",

"she doesn't come across as an intelligent girl at all...I honestly believe her influence in all this is rather small",

"I hope the girl will be ok and receive psychological help after this. She's young and i think she doesn't deserve a life ban if she says it all. All the people around her deserve though",

"Father seems like one of those super pushy parents that probably never did any sports or did, but was never good at it, and now is trying to live through his kids and any success they get...Depending on how far the cheating went with the girl, I'd say don't ban her for life."

"Seeing some of her interviews its obvious the girl is as dumb as a ton of bricks, id be surprised if her IQ crossed the 70 mark. Its all the dad's fault."

"Life-long ban is way too much. I'm not saying the two situations are the same, but I can't help but think of Genevieve Jeanson and her coach."

"like the delgados said, this is Genevieve Jeanson all over again. It just aint her boyfriend/husband/coach, its her dad...This is a child abuse just like Marc Dutroux",

"Father to me is a total disgrace...the possibility of a power over situation here seems all too real. Without excusing Femke, I do feel sad for her"

"The father just seems so super smug. Like a mafia member... At 19, she's more than old enough to realize what has transpired and the consequences, but not sure if she was capable of saying no to the pressure of cheating by her father."

"At 19, she's old enough to have understood the gravity of what she was doing and to face the consequences now, but it's only natural to pity someone when you see them like this"

"She shouldn't be left off the hook, but this is clearly not solely her idea. It requires a thorough investigation and her age should be a reason to go slightly easier on her."

"Its not just her dad, its her mechanic, brothers etc. She also grew up in an environment where her team, the Belgium national team and even the UCI seem not to concerned about cheating, as long as you dont get caught."

"They (meaning riders/ds/teams) will simply dismiss it as an isolated incident - some young girl cheating because of the pressure her father put on her."

"it is definitely child abuse. just not the corporeal kind, its psychological."

"I'd hate for a young girl (okay, young woman) to have her life ruined by an absurd mistake."

Overall, an awful lot of sympathy for a blatant cheat, much more than I have ever seen for any young guy who got busted for doping, which everybody seems to agree would have been a much lesser offence.

For example, I have tried to look for some similarly sympathetic comments relating to Gabriel Evans, the junior British TT champion busted for Epo use and couldn't find one. No one seemed to even suggest that anyone other then the rider could be held responsible for him being caught doping, or that he must have been influenced or aided by some other person, such as his father.

It also amazes me the way it seems acceptable to call a 19 year-old woman 'stupid', effectively not much more than a child, clearly unable to make her own choices, and so on. In any other situation there would be an outcry if she was described in such a way, but here it seems fine to do so as it allows her to be, at least partially, excused for what she has done. Double standards or what?

Anyhow, all this is just a side issue compared to the significance of the 'sport' acknowledging that electrical engineers are now as important to a team as its doping doctors!

yeah, I think it was child abuse.

I also think she would be better off with a life outside of cycling. This sh!t just seems par for the course.

 

[Cloxxki]

If you can't have EPO vials in the team van, you can't have a fraudulent bike there.
You can't have the vials in a bag in the pits, you can't have the bike anywhere near a venue.

Much as we Dutch love our Belgian jokes, No-one is that stupid. And if you hve EPO and thieves in the family, where is any reason for reasonable doubt to come from? People have gotten 2 years for less.
The Belgian coach put on a brave face, but IMO the team should bear responsibility. If the dad of the doped brother is allowed to be part of the sport, the daughter cannot apparently do her own bidding, the Belgian team has been an utter failure. It's on them. Not just the rider's sponsor team. If there were indeed rumors among riders, then the Belgian team failed in picking up on it in time. Like hearing of vials circulating inside the team and not emptying (having police/DA do it, of course) their bags during a group training session.
A friend of the family to be the fall guy? Seems like a great way to cash the value of the potential fine, a few times over.

 

[carton]

Re:

The Belgian coach put on a brave face, but IMO the team should bear responsibility. If the dad of the doped brother is allowed to be part of the sport, the daughter cannot apparently do her own bidding, the Belgian team has been an utter failure. It's on them.

Agree completely. The manager is ultimately responsable for his team, particularly on race day. You can't leave team members, particularly those you don't work with often, apparently shady characters to boot, completely unsupervised. And if the mechanic wasn't in on it then he might as well be the love child of Leslie Nielsen and Rowan Atkinson. The teams should definitely be under way more heat.

BTW, as much as I want cheaters to get theirs, I'll join the chorus of those that can't help but feel for the girl. I mean, if she hailed from pretty much anywhere else she'd get home and no one would bat an eyelash. If for instance, she was American, she'd change her name and nobody would likely remember about her in a year, tops. Maybe once a year someone recognizes her on the streets. She could probably follow most bike races from the barriers unabated. Heck she could probably even compete in smaller cross races fairly incognito. But in Belgium? You might as well leave the country.

 

[Archibald]

Re: Re:

You could conceal as much battery as you'd ever want in the downtube of a modern bike. Use individual cells or LiPo packs, wire them together, feed into the downtube through the bottom bracket (just need to get battery through a 42 mm hole), secure with expanding foam or glue or some other method.

A 4.5 watt-hour LiPo pack costs $10, weighs 25 g, and is about 35 mm x 60 mm x 5 mm. There are differently shaped packs if you need that. 11 of those weighs 275 g, gives 50 watt-hour or 200 watts for 15 minutes. I believe, from what we've read about the motor systems available, that 200 watts supplied to the motor will deliver 100 watts to the crank.

so is this how you use less w/kg to beat someone using more by a minute and a half? you know, at a crazy seated cadence?

 

[Spawn of e]

Can we close the power estimates for climbing thread now?

 

[Anaconda]

I have already brought up the name Jeanson in a previous post so suffice it to say I feel like the age/family situation of the woman should be considered not so much for the sporting penalty, but the wrath of the public. She was not in this alone, that much is certain.

I agree with the leak theory. She was a sacrificial lamb (and she/support team not very smart to get caught). Events in sports past have left me very cynical and small fishes only getting caught always makes me a bit uneasy.

In the case of Hesjedal's weird spinning bike the UCI waited until the day after to look at the bike. Declaring it cleared means nothing.

On the subject of the leak I also wonder how the information was leaked. Interesting at the Giro they took bikes into a closed tent to inspect. Respected privacy. Where was Femkes bike checked. How many saw the inspection. Was it the same protocol as used for the pro WT men?

If you are caught for chemical doping there is usually protection of the name until the sanction is confirmed.

If the UCI found a motor in a WT mens bike would they have blurted it to the media like this?

She was not given the chance to give her story and allow for a proper investigation before public exposure.

Femke has been publicly humiliated and shamed 1st, investigation 2nd.

She was not caught on the bike. There missing information. eg was the battery charged?

The UCI has a rule now in the books, but it seems more suited to WT Pros and teams. The financial penalty is probably out of reach for a 19 y/o woman in CX discipline. I am going to be interested in how the UCI investigation is conducted and reported.

Cheating is cheating and I don't feel any more strongly disappointed by motor or chemical doping. I seems to be in the minority. People are numb to doping now, but to me its just as big a threat to the authenticity of sport and probably easier to conceal than mechanical cheating. Often difficult to prosecute and very costly to try to police. Checking bikes for motors at an event is not nearly as expensive as running a bio passport program.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Latest press release. A non-story really. It's all been covered so far in this thread.

Van den Driessche’s friend claims ownership of motorized bike

“It’s my bike,” Van Muylder told Het Nieuwsblad. “All I can say is it’s my bike.”

And that's literally all he said in that article.


To the broader issues being touched on:
If there is any sympathy for Femke Van den Driessche, some of it must stem from the fact that she is clearly not the first one to be involved in mechanical doping, and therefore shouldn't necessarily be crucified as if she is. Lifetime ban? Quite possibly. But that tends to ignore the fact the UCI themselves, and at least three former TdF winners have expressed legitimate concerns themselves over such things already taking place within the ranks of the Elite Men on the road.

It has happened before, but without public exposure. The burden should not be her's to carry alone.

 

[jyl]

Re: Re:

You could conceal as much battery as you'd ever want in the downtube of a modern bike. Use individual cells or LiPo packs, wire them together, feed into the downtube through the bottom bracket (just need to get battery through a 42 mm hole), secure with expanding foam or glue or some other method.

A 4.5 watt-hour LiPo pack costs $10, weighs 25 g, and is about 35 mm x 60 mm x 5 mm. There are differently shaped packs if you need that. 11 of those weighs 275 g, gives 50 watt-hour or 200 watts for 15 minutes. I believe, from what we've read about the motor systems available, that 200 watts supplied to the motor will deliver 100 watts to the crank.

so is this how you use less w/kg to beat someone using more by a minute and a half? you know, at a crazy seated cadence?

Sorry, I don't understand your question.

Are you asking, how would you use such a motor system?

On a MTF, for the last 15 min you ride with 500 watts (400 you + 100 motor) while the others ride with 400 watts.

In a CX, every lap you ride the climb with 550 watts (450 you + 100 motor) while the others ride with 450 watts.

Or maybe you pace your GC rider up the first 30 min of the final climb at 450 watts (400 you + 50 motor at half power), then finish quietly in the pack.

 

[jyl]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Hope this wasn't already posted, but after I saw the crappy drawing from Gazetta I had the idea of searching around for linear motors. Anyhow, this guy (from 2010 already) has a really nice little motor where the "rotor" coils are on the fork and the "stator" is ?some sort of magnets? on the front wheel.
http://www.juicedbikes.com/updates/2010/10/19/diy-linear-motor-wheel-could-become-the-worlds-lightest-e-bi.html
Power approx for 50W for what looks like a fairly rough and ready home made device. Enough to take him down the road and back.There are three videos ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSDlcrAKrWQ

See how close the coils are to the rim: couple of mm. And how much angular coverage there is (coil assembly looks about 10-15 cm long). If there is a WT race bike with stays 10 cm wide, that are placed just a couple mm from the rim, then maybe a stealth rim drive can be installed. Can't think of any.

 

[turtle420]

Re:

She was not caught on the bike. There missing information. eg was the battery charged?

there was a guy once who rode for discovery, liquigas, csc, fassa bortolo, tinkov... you might have heard of him, his name is ivan basso!

 

[Archibald]

Re: Re:

You could conceal as much battery as you'd ever want in the downtube of a modern bike. Use individual cells or LiPo packs, wire them together, feed into the downtube through the bottom bracket (just need to get battery through a 42 mm hole), secure with expanding foam or glue or some other method.

A 4.5 watt-hour LiPo pack costs $10, weighs 25 g, and is about 35 mm x 60 mm x 5 mm. There are differently shaped packs if you need that. 11 of those weighs 275 g, gives 50 watt-hour or 200 watts for 15 minutes. I believe, from what we've read about the motor systems available, that 200 watts supplied to the motor will deliver 100 watts to the crank.

so is this how you use less w/kg to beat someone using more by a minute and a half? you know, at a crazy seated cadence?

Sorry, I don't understand your question.

Are you asking, how would you use such a motor system?

On a MTF, for the last 15 min you ride with 500 watts (400 you + 100 motor) while the others ride with 400 watts.

In a CX, every lap you ride the climb with 550 watts (450 you + 100 motor) while the others ride with 450 watts.

Or maybe you pace your GC rider up the first 30 min of the final climb at 450 watts (400 you + 50 motor at half power), then finish quietly in the pack.

tongue in cheek jibe at the froome tdf data when he had a lower w/kg than gesink and beat him by a minute and a half...

 

[Maxiton]

Re:

Can we close the power estimates for climbing thread now?

Seems a bit quaint now, doesn't it? Great post, BTW. Might take it for my new sig if you don't mind.

 

[BikeCentric]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Another good one from Business Insider, details on the motors being used:
http://www.businessinsider.com/vivax-motor-bike-doping

 

[soslow]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Questions to answer:
Did she actually ride the motorized bike or was it a spare in the pit?
Is she the same size as the friend? If I jumped on my friend's bike my knees would hit me in the chin.
If I sell a friend one of my bikes and he puts about a 1000 or more $s, pounds, euros into getting a motor retrofit into it wouldn't he brag about it?
If you go on rides with this friend and suddenly you can't keep up even tho you are on the national team would you start to wonder?
To me it is weird this was found in cyclocross where the pedals need to nuanced to keep the back wheel from spinning out and half the time you are carrying the bike, so a motor is just extra weight.
I always figured it would be more likely to be found in a steady power race like a time trial or on one of the big sprinter dude's bike on a mountain stage where he is just trying to make the time cut and isn't really a factor in the race so doesn't need to worry about a bike inspection.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

Can we close the power estimates for climbing thread now?

Seems a bit quaint now, doesn't it? Great post, BTW. Might take it for my new sig if you don't mind.

Actually, though (and before someone else points it out), the thread is more relevant than ever: just as too-high w/kg sustained for too long is indicative of doping, too low w/kg to explain your result could indicate a motor. So never mind then.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Another good one from Business Insider, details on the motors being used:
http://www.businessinsider.com/vivax-motor-bike-doping

404 - Not found

 

[Maxiton]

Re:

Allow me to play the devil's advocate and defend the UCI for a bit.

I don't think the UCI actually covertly approves of (mechanical) doping, I mere think the UCI realised they stand no chance whatsoever against the financial means of the teams/riders and are held prisoner by the lack of anti-doping portrayed by other international sporting federations (athletics, tennis, football/soccer). So, even while trying to set boundaries, while trying to keep it a bit real (e.g., no Tour of Turkey Ducatis), they know they can't keep up with the most devious of employed doping tactics and they can't be the only sport to be highlighted repeatedly by scandal spotlight or they risk losing all of their sponsors.

So what do they do? They set boundaries, but not by secretly starting to enforce them, but by announcing them. If they do have to make a sacrifice, then they make sure they bust a small fish. Want to demonstrate that you can now detect SARMs and related products (GW-50156)? Announce the introduction of the tests and bust a couple of Pro-Conti no ones. Give the signal: We have the test now, we have to perform it, so change your MO. The UCI can now say they do implement new testing regimes and keep up appearances, while carefully avoiding potential scandals of positive World Tour riders.

It's the same with this case. Sure, the motor is a big scandal, but it's a foolish 19 old girl riding the U23 cyclocross WC, not Froome in yellow in July. Moreover, they announced the tests, the girl failed her IQ-test and could be sacrificed to show boundaries yet again have to shift and new methods to cheat should again be found (if not found already...). If they truly were interested in keeping it clean, then they should have impounded the bike, but kept quiet about the case in public (and test again the next day, without additional warning, at the men's event). They were probably compelled by rumours do something against motorized doping and probably saw no way of avoiding the implementation of these new tests. (Whether they really wanted to bust someone I doubt, as they did announce checks. The girl and her team probably just failed the IQ-test.)

So, why would the UCI employ this tactic? It's actually quite simple. Just look at the enormous budgets that the teams spend on "technological innovation" of bikes (take Sky for example). There's no way the UCI can keep up, just as there is no way to keep up with the pharmaceutical developments. There's just no budget on the policing side of business. Even if they would want to do it, that is really trying to ban doping from the sports, then it's probably nearly impossible to do it consistently enough to truly do so. Ergo, they might catch some dopers, but they would certainly still miss most of them. And catching only a few will not make the sport clean, but it will make it go bankrupt, as other sports competing for sponsorships have no scandals (as they also don't actually want to catch stars and have scandals.)

So, what's left for the UCI? Well, they slowly push the boundaries of doping, announcing their advancements every step of the way while protecting the main riders. In doing so, they actually propel doping innovations, as methods need to be in continuous development. However, if you look deep into the desires of the UCI, I think most officials, maybe even including Crookson, would want to see doping gone. They just know that they can't do it and that the sport will probably go bankrupt if they try to do it with the insufficient means they have. So keep up the show, implement new tests but always make sure everyone gets a heads-up. If you fail to heed that, then, well, you're doomed, but most seem to pass the IQ-test and if you're important enough, they might even help you with that (e.g., Froome won't test positive.)

Because if the UCI was really serious about banning cheaters, Thomas Dekker would not have been one of the only riders caught by retroactive testing. (We now know that most of the riders of that era would have produced dirty samples with today's testing methods, so the best way to avoid scandals is just to not apply retroactive tests, even though they are still relevant as some riders are still active to this very day.)

A fair-minded assessment. But its credibility would be greatly enhanced had Verdruggem and Pat proven themselves to be honest brokers trying to do what's best for the sport. Alas, the opposite was the case, as we now know. They were merely trying to enrich themselves and their cronies. The latter of the pair is gone now but the former is apparently still at work behind the scenes - can't be got rid of - and the vast web of cronies is still in place.

Anyway, even granting for a moment that they were doing the best they could with the limited resources they had, this approach of attenuated risk management, you could call it, has proven a complete failure. They have almost a decade's worth of empty winner's slot for their major GT, a legacy of sporting disgrace, ridiculous, non-credible performances from equally ridiculous, non-credible actors (Froome), talk of motors in the bikes, and a professional sport that has become increasingly to the world at large a complete joke.

I personally don't think it would be improbable to, not eliminate but greatly minimize, use of doping. Doing so, making the effort, would help the sport more than hurt it. And eliminating motors in the bikes could be done overnight, given the right policies and practices. Instead, though, we have this complete joke and the ever increasing irrelevance of what was once the great sport of pro cycling.

UCI, or whatever organization governs the sport, needs to take itself out of the entertainment business and put itself squarely back into that of sport. That's really, in my view, the crux of the matter.

|Edited for clarity|

 

[Eshnar]

Re:

Allow me to play the devil's advocate and defend the UCI for a bit.

....

That's pretty much exactly my view on all this. I'll add that, if I were the head of the UCI and I had a new, reliable, method to detect the newest doping available, I would announce it repeatedly... months in advance. The risk that more than half the peloton tests positive is simply too large imo. And if that happens the whole sport (and, don't forget, the business around it) goes down the drain. It doesn't really matter if you care about the sport or the money. You just don't want it to happen at all costs.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

Allow me to play the devil's advocate and defend the UCI for a bit.

....

That's pretty much exactly my view on all this. I'll add that, if I were the head of the UCI and I had a new, reliable, method to detect the newest doping available, I would announce it repeatedly... months in advance. The risk that more than half the peloton tests positive is simply too large imo. And if that happens the whole sport (and, don't forget, the business around it) goes down the drain. It doesn't really matter if you care about the sport or the money. You just don't want it to happen at all costs.

Well, that's the thing. If they were serious - if they really cared about eliminating the motors and greatly minimizing the doping - they would announce it months in advance, and make sure the teams knew they meant it. But they haven't done that, and it doesn't look like they will.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Another good one from Business Insider, details on the motors being used:
http://www.businessinsider.com/vivax-motor-bike-doping

404 - Not found

Here's the new link:

http://www.businessinsider.com/vivax-motor-bike-doping-scandal-2016-2