Motor doping thread

Page 59 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Re:

Tienus said:
The UCI is making sure that no one else is being caught by explaining in detail how they test the bikes.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-reveals-technology-used-to-detect-mechanical-doping/

True. I believe the point missed is that the UCI motor checkers don’t actually need to detect a motor with 100% accuracy. What is needed is the ability to find a “potential mechanical” device within the frame. Once they have a certain level of suspicion the bike should be impounded whereby it will be then dismantled.

The biggest issue is similar to dope testing. Because only a very few are ever checked the likelihood of getting caught is immensely small.

The other method is whereby similar to F1 the cars are impounded prior to the race and inspected. It would mean creating a triathlon styled bike lock up prior and at the end of each race/stage. Not insurmountable but would take coordination.

Then you have the issue of bike changes during a stage/race/ITT. Not sure how that one will be handled.
 
Re:

carolina said:
Very few bikes are checked?!

If I remember correctly, they checked every bike at paris-roubaix.
They did?

Cyclingnews understands that the teams checked before the start of Paris-Roubaix were Orica-GreenEdge, Lampre-Merida, Wanty-Groupe Gobert, Direct Energie, Cannondale, Movistar, Ag2r-La Mondiale and Delko-Marseille
They forgot to test Sky and concentrated on teams unlikely to factor :rolleyes:
 
Re:

carolina said:
My mistake, although, they did end up checking the bike of the winner ;) It was in tirreno adriatico time trial (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-checks-all-tirreno-adriatico-time-trial-bikes-for-mechanical-doping/)

Either way, they checked every bike from 8 teams. In most races they've been checking 8 to 10 teams.

Also, has you already know, the fact that someone is unlikely to be a factor in a race, doesn't mean they're racing clean.

The most important part is the device cannot check during a race. So once tested pre-race you're good to swap your bike out for one with a motor.
 
Yes, I realize that. Even if the UCI checked every bike before and after the race, if a cyclist wishes to use a motor, he certainly could. It's just impossible to control every km of a race for every rider/team.

I was just disagreeing with your comment about the UCI not checking many bikes.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Tao Geoghegan Hart ‏@taogeoghegan 3h3 hours ago

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted Cycling Weekly

This is an utter embarrassment @cyclingweekly. You've truly lost it. What is the need for this? Pathetic.
Nope Tao, this is embarrassing

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted
axelmerckx ‏@axelmerckx Apr 21
Liege , la plus belle des classiques. On la respecte et on l'admire grace aux supporters le long de la route. #LBL
Tao 'new generation' retweeting dopers......go figure...
 
Re:

Benotti69 said:
Tao Geoghegan Hart ‏@taogeoghegan 3h3 hours ago

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted Cycling Weekly

This is an utter embarrassment @cyclingweekly. You've truly lost it. What is the need for this? Pathetic.
Nope Tao, this is embarrassing

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted
axelmerckx ‏@axelmerckx Apr 21
Liege , la plus belle des classiques. On la respecte et on l'admire grace aux supporters le long de la route. #LBL
Tao 'new generation' retweeting dopers......go figure...
Why bother testing when you can just tell who's doping from their twitter :rolleyes:
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
Benotti69 said:
Tao Geoghegan Hart ‏@taogeoghegan 3h3 hours ago

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted Cycling Weekly

This is an utter embarrassment @cyclingweekly. You've truly lost it. What is the need for this? Pathetic.
Nope Tao, this is embarrassing

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted
axelmerckx ‏@axelmerckx Apr 21
Liege , la plus belle des classiques. On la respecte et on l'admire grace aux supporters le long de la route. #LBL
Tao 'new generation' retweeting dopers......go figure...
Why bother testing when you can just tell who's doping from their twitter :rolleyes:
The levels of hypocrisy from pros is just staggering. They absolutely hate it when someone shines a light at cheating and voice it, some have to delete it quickly, but others just continue with their stupidity or think the fans are stupid.

TGH case in hand. Another one was Gaimon taking a pop at Di Luca, but quite happy to ride with Dave Millar, Ryder, Zabriskie, CVdV on JV's team.
 
Re:

Benotti69 said:
Tao Geoghegan Hart ‏@taogeoghegan 3h3 hours ago

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted Cycling Weekly

This is an utter embarrassment @cyclingweekly. You've truly lost it. What is the need for this? Pathetic.
Nope Tao, this is embarrassing

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted
axelmerckx ‏@axelmerckx Apr 21
Liege , la plus belle des classiques. On la respecte et on l'admire grace aux supporters le long de la route. #LBL
Tao 'new generation' retweeting dopers......go figure...
Axel, has been Tao's DS for years.

I dont know how you still haven't understood that the innercircle of cycling does not think as the twitter and clinic members
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
Re: Re:

pastronef said:
Benotti69 said:
Tao Geoghegan Hart ‏@taogeoghegan 3h3 hours ago

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted Cycling Weekly

This is an utter embarrassment @cyclingweekly. You've truly lost it. What is the need for this? Pathetic.
Nope Tao, this is embarrassing

Tao Geoghegan Hart Retweeted
axelmerckx ‏@axelmerckx Apr 21
Liege , la plus belle des classiques. On la respecte et on l'admire grace aux supporters le long de la route. #LBL
Tao 'new generation' retweeting dopers......go figure...
Axel, has been Tao's DS for years.

I don't know how you still haven't understood that the innercircle of cycling does not think as the twitter and clinic members
I think i understand how the inner circle works. Don't spit in the soup comes to mind. Omertà not far behind.

No doubt Axel is passing on all he learnt as a pro and the things his Daddy taught him.
 
Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

BullsFan22 said:
If you just glance at the video, it looks odd, but if you watch closely, when the pedal touches it moves the crank which moves the wheel. Anyone who rides a lot has done this many times. The speed of the wheel is too slow to indicate a motor (unless the battery is almost dead).

DISCLAIMER: I have no idea if he used a motor or not.
 

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

jmdirt said:
BullsFan22 said:
If you just glance at the video, it looks odd, but if you watch closely, when the pedal touches it moves the crank which moves the wheel. Anyone who rides a lot has done this many times. The speed of the wheel is too slow to indicate a motor (unless the battery is almost dead).

DISCLAIMER: I have no idea if he used a motor or not.
He laid his bike down on the pedal and caused the wheel to rotate.

That's it, that's all that happened.

Anyone trying to attribute that particular video to a motor is clearly not a cyclist, otherwise they would know the difference.
 
Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

Irondan said:
jmdirt said:
BullsFan22 said:
If you just glance at the video, it looks odd, but if you watch closely, when the pedal touches it moves the crank which moves the wheel. Anyone who rides a lot has done this many times. The speed of the wheel is too slow to indicate a motor (unless the battery is almost dead).

DISCLAIMER: I have no idea if he used a motor or not.
He laid his bike down on the pedal and caused the wheel to rotate.

That's it, that's all that happened.

Anyone trying to attribute that particular video to a motor is clearly not a cyclist, otherwise they would know the difference.

Agreed.

The only suspect thing is he picks up the bike very quickly when the back wheel starts to turn but I think this is a case of chasing shadows.
 
Re: Mechanical doping: first rider caught

thehog said:
Irondan said:
jmdirt said:
BullsFan22 said:
If you just glance at the video, it looks odd, but if you watch closely, when the pedal touches it moves the crank which moves the wheel. Anyone who rides a lot has done this many times. The speed of the wheel is too slow to indicate a motor (unless the battery is almost dead).

DISCLAIMER: I have no idea if he used a motor or not.
He laid his bike down on the pedal and caused the wheel to rotate.

That's it, that's all that happened.

Anyone trying to attribute that particular video to a motor is clearly not a cyclist, otherwise they would know the difference.

Agreed.

The only suspect thing is he picks up the bike very quickly when the back wheel starts to turn but I think this is a case of chasing shadows.
I would argue even that's not suspect. No pro wouldn't have heard of the storm when Hesjedal's wheels were spinning on the ground, and so why bring attention to yourself for suspected cheating.

Most cyclists know that it's perfectly normal for the wheels to spin when you lay your bike down like that
 
Re:

saganftw said:
i dont know how smooth the friction in pro bikes is,but i can safely say my bike would do couple of revolutions even if slightly touched as well
I think when compared to Froome's Ventoux its no where near suspect. But when you watch Dawg going ape on Ventoux whilst seated it doesn't take much to put 1 and 1 together.
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
I am I the only one who thinks the following article recently posted on CN smells a bit like the old Armstrong Days? Specifically in terms of the bloke involved in developing the test kit and language used by the UCI to rubbish the wheel claims.........

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-carry-out-10000-bike-checks-for-mechanical-doping-during-the-2016-season/

The testing procedure was developed with the Typhoon brand of e-bikes created by former Oakley representative Harry Gibbings.

Not Stephanie McIlvain this time around.......

Barfield described the wheels as 'mystical' saying: "As far as we're aware they're a theoretical model only. Nobody has presented a working pair to us. They're based on electromagnetism and so we can detect that."

'mystical' - Isn't this the line old Hein Vergruggen and McQuid used to trot out about anyone looking to discredit wonderboy's performances??
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Re:

B_Ugli said:
I am I the only one who thinks the following article recently posted on CN smells a bit like the old Armstrong Days? Specifically in terms of the bloke involved in developing the test kit and language used by the UCI to rubbish the wheel claims.........

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-carry-out-10000-bike-checks-for-mechanical-doping-during-the-2016-season/

The testing procedure was developed with the Typhoon brand of e-bikes created by former Oakley representative Harry Gibbings.

Not Stephanie McIlvain this time around.......

Barfield described the wheels as 'mystical' saying: "As far as we're aware they're a theoretical model only. Nobody has presented a working pair to us. They're based on electromagnetism and so we can detect that."

'mystical' - Isn't this the line old Hein Vergruggen and McQuid used to trot out about anyone looking to discredit wonderboy's performances??
Well the `evidence' for the wheel claims appears to consist of a vague drawing in an Italian newspaper, possibly based on an idea put forward by a Hungarian engineer, who has said they can be purchased for varying sums of money (I think 200,000 Euros was mentioned at one point). There was then a French `indepth' TV investigation, in which the same engineer showed a journalist a wheel with 20+ holes cut in the rim and hopefully suggested you could stuff 20+ magnets in it. The engineer appeared to say he'd never supplied one. I don't think there was any discussion as to how the wheel might actually work in reality. At another point in the documentary there was a computer generated piece of footage suggesting that rear hub drives might be being used, however again there was no detail of how one might actually work given the tight confines of a rear hub and cassette unit.

So the person, who might be the main source of the motorised wheel story, can't actually produce one to show us, so I suppose `mythical' is an accurate term to use at the moment.
 
Re: Re:

Hawkwood said:
B_Ugli said:
I am I the only one who thinks the following article recently posted on CN smells a bit like the old Armstrong Days? Specifically in terms of the bloke involved in developing the test kit and language used by the UCI to rubbish the wheel claims.........

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-to-carry-out-10000-bike-checks-for-mechanical-doping-during-the-2016-season/

The testing procedure was developed with the Typhoon brand of e-bikes created by former Oakley representative Harry Gibbings.

Not Stephanie McIlvain this time around.......

Barfield described the wheels as 'mystical' saying: "As far as we're aware they're a theoretical model only. Nobody has presented a working pair to us. They're based on electromagnetism and so we can detect that."

'mystical' - Isn't this the line old Hein Vergruggen and McQuid used to trot out about anyone looking to discredit wonderboy's performances??
Well the `evidence' for the wheel claims appears to consist of a vague drawing in an Italian newspaper, possibly based on an idea put forward by a Hungarian engineer, who has said they can be purchased for varying sums of money (I think 200,000 Euros was mentioned at one point). There was then a French `indepth' TV investigation, in which the same engineer showed a journalist a wheel with 20+ holes cut in the rim and hopefully suggested you could stuff 20+ magnets in it. The engineer appeared to say he'd never supplied one. I don't think there was any discussion as to how the wheel might actually work in reality. At another point in the documentary there was a computer generated piece of footage suggesting that rear hub drives might be being used, however again there was no detail of how one might actually work given the tight confines of a rear hub and cassette unit.

So the person, who might be the main source of the motorised wheel story, can't actually produce one to show us, so I suppose `mythical' is an accurate term to use at the moment.
"Mythical" probably is fair enough. Nobody has seen a real one in the professional peloton. The word said to have been used, however, was "mystical" with its overtones of spirituality, which pushes the argument too far or demonstrates a lack of understanding of the meaning of words -
Barfield described the wheels as 'mystical' saying: "As far as we're aware they're a theoretical model only. Nobody has presented a working pair to us. They're based on electromagnetism and so we can detect that."
I don't see the need to get excited about his description though, but on the other hand why not, if it pleases, I suppose.
 
Where is the evidence the "wheel" version has ever been sold? I'm not saying this guy should out his customers, but sounds like some guy trying to sell something that may/may not really exist or work. Sounds mythical and vaporware...kind of like the garmin power meter pedals that kept getting delayed and we thought they never would exist, or did. Finally they showed up....then I think they stopped production, then back again...round and round.

I mean, I realize he demo'd the wheel version supposedly. But has anybody actually bought/used it in competition? The heat seeker tool never showed any wheel version, just some supposed downtube version, which could just be Di2 batteries. Guess my bike would show up as being juiced since I have my Di2 internal battery at the bottom of my seat tube/BB area...haha

UCI laid our their case, and test every bike of every team during recent races, and obviously with pressure from the media/public. They have stepped up their game from the scrutiny.

Oh, and why don't we just have some media guys again go out and use the heat meter during the Giro and see what shows up and broadcast it?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY