Motor doping thread

[wansteadimp]

Re:

I rewatched the descent and used a stopwatch and landmarks. In aero tuck without pedalling in not too steep parts with a headwind Froome was about 10% faster than Valverde in aero tuck.

Valverde wasn't flat out though, he was having to nurse Quintana down. He would have closed the gap down if he was just thinking of himself.

 

[Tienus]

Valverde wasn't flat out though, he was having to nurse Quintana down. He would have closed the gap down if he was just thinking of himself.

It was not a technical descent and Quintana was keeping up easy just drafting behind Valverde. One sector I timed Valverde was in full aero tuck without pedalling just like Froome. Just before that there was a corner, I think the speed difference was strange.

 

[StryderHells]

Re: Re:

Some of the guys claimed 120-130kph instead of the 80-90kph. Does this change anything for you/

How much time did he gain on the descent? If he was going those speeds then what speeds would the group behind topped out at to keep the gap respectful (genuine question)? Bardet didn't top out faster than 85 kph https://www.strava.com/activities/635522202 I really do have my doubts Froome would of gone any faster than 100 kph on that descent.
By the way I'm not defending Froome in regards to him doping/moto doping, I just like understanding both side of the discussion

 

[simoni]

Re: Re:

Some of the guys claimed 120-130kph instead of the 80-90kph. Does this change anything for you/

How much time did he gain on the descent? If he was going those speeds then what speeds would the group behind topped out at to keep the gap respectful (genuine question)? Bardet didn't top out faster than 85 kph https://www.strava.com/activities/635522202 I really do have my doubts Froome would of gone any faster than 100 kph on that descent.
By the way I'm not defending Froome in regards to him doping/moto doping, I just like understanding both side of the discussion

Any idea how reliable bardets speed is? My GPS unit and strava max speed reports would normally be different (e.g. by about 8 kph on my ride on Sunday). I don't use a specific speed sensor, it comes from the GPS and strava seems to analyse differently.

 

[kwikki]

Just wondering... if Froome had a motor on his winning stage last week, why did he not use it on the uphill when he tried and failed to drop everyone else?

 

[sniper]

thermal scanners could have easily spotted the motor going uphill.
downhill not a chance.

 

[BYOP88]

Re:

Just wondering... if Froome had a motor on his winning stage last week, why did he not use it on the uphill when he tried and failed to drop everyone else?

Only works in hot weather, natch!

 

[mister2]

Re: Moto-fraud: first rider caught

This is a bit daft, even by the Clinic's standards (and yes, I registered to make this post). CdA dominates on a descent, not power - the power required to go faster when you're already travelling fast increases exponentially. So if he had a 500W motor handy you'd think he might have destroyed the climb instead.

There might be other evidence of motors being used, but a) known TTer on b) team that uses wind tunnels c) throwing himself into corners on a descent like a maniac really isn't it :lol:

 

[Tienus]

This is a bit daft, even by the Clinic's standards

Good to see you have some self knowledge.

Did you actually read the previous comments?
Offcourse the drag coefficient is most important, thats why both Froome and Valverde are in full aero tuck.

Since you seem to understand the science behind this so well could you explain us what the difference in speed approximately would be when both riders have the same cda. Lets take a speed of around 75kmh when one rider has lets say 40w or 80w or even 250w extra.

 

[Mr.38%]

Re:

This is a bit daft, even by the Clinic's standards

Good to see you have some self knowledge.

Did you actually read the previous comments?
Offcourse the drag coefficient is most important, thats why both Froome and Valverde are in full aero tuck.

Since you seem to understand the science behind this so well could you explain us what the difference in speed approximately would be when both riders have the same cda. Lets take a speed of around 75kmh when one rider has lets say 40w or 80w or even 250w extra.

Maybe like 3km/h according to Kreuzotter (-10%, 400 vs. 600W).

 

[sniper]

Re: Moto-fraud: first rider caught

This is a bit daft, even by the Clinic's standards (and yes, I registered to make this post). CdA dominates on a descent, not power - the power required to go faster when you're already travelling fast increases exponentially. So if he had a 500W motor handy you'd think he might have destroyed the climb instead.

There might be other evidence of motors being used, but a) known TTer on b) team that uses wind tunnels c) throwing himself into corners on a descent like a maniac really isn't it :lol:

(a) he wasn't a known tt-er until 2011. That's when motors had already arrived in the peloton (RvV 2010 is a safe terminus post quem). Unfortunately, owing to the half-baked way in which UCI have 'dealt' with the problem, none of Froome's post-2010 TT's are beyond suspicion. If you think that's daft, take it up with the UCI and Cookson, who've done *** all to tackle the problem. Btw, Froome's 2015 ITT was additionally suspicious due to an unexplained bike change.

(b) Don't Movistar do windtunnel testing, too? This connects to Tienus' point: how do you explain the difference with Valverde who was going all out, too.

(c) Someone else said he was taking the corners rather averagely, and was gaining time on the straights.

 

[Nick C.]

Re:

Just wondering... if Froome had a motor on his winning stage last week, why did he not use it on the uphill when he tried and failed to drop everyone else?

He did have the energy to put on what appeared to be a full on sprint once he crested the top.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Just wondering... if Froome had a motor on his winning stage last week, why did he not use it on the uphill when he tried and failed to drop everyone else?

He did have the energy to put on what appeared to be a full on sprint once he crested the top.

true story.

it's a sad state of affairs where nothing can be excluded, owing to the fact that the UCI, and not some independent body, are 'policing' the problem. Again, hell will freeze over before UCI will catch and expose a pro road racer.
Best hope is fans and investigative journalists doing some real digging and thermal scanning. Power to the people, so to say.
However, Even thermal scanning is turning out to be rather pointless, at least if Varjas is right when he says there are motor devices that cannot be spotted by a thermal scanner (which seems likely to me, tbh).

 

[veganrob]

Re: Re:

Just wondering... if Froome had a motor on his winning stage last week, why did he not use it on the uphill when he tried and failed to drop everyone else?

He did have the energy to put on what appeared to be a full on sprint once he crested the top.

true story.

it's a sad state of affairs where nothing can be excluded, owing to the fact that the UCI, and not some independent body, are 'policing' the problem. Again, hell will freeze over before UCI will catch and expose a pro road racer.
Best hope is fans and investigative journalists doing some real digging and thermal scanning. Power to the people, so to say.
However, Even thermal scanning is turning out to be rather pointless, at least if Varjas is right when he says there are motor devices that cannot be spotted by a thermal scanner (which seems likely to me, tbh).

if I am not mistaken, Froome's bike was not checked after this stage.

 

[LeindersGains]

I'd like to see the thermal cameras for this stage. Why don't they show them to the public?

 

[LeindersGains]

Do any of you guys have a thermal camera on your smartphone? You can be your own moto-buster as a spectator.

 

[mister2]

Re:

Easy, have a play yourself:

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

On the drops position (0.34 CdA), -10* slope (for argument's sake, leaving all the rest as defaults)

360w = 77.4kmh
400w = 78.1kmh
600w = 81.3kmh

360w with triathlon position (0.28 CdA) = 84.3kmh

The point is, that when you're going so fast, CdA dominates - so a downhill is pretty well the last place you would use a motor to gain time as more power really doesn't help that much (or you need motorbike levels of power). Uphill is far more likely a place to see motors used if they are, because then speed is closer to p/w.

If you've done any time trialling yourself you figure this out

This is a bit daft, even by the Clinic's standards

Good to see you have some self knowledge.

Did you actually read the previous comments?
Offcourse the drag coefficient is most important, thats why both Froome and Valverde are in full aero tuck.

Since you seem to understand the science behind this so well could you explain us what the difference in speed approximately would be when both riders have the same cda. Lets take a speed of around 75kmh when one rider has lets say 40w or 80w or even 250w extra.

 

[Tienus]

Uphill is far more likely a place to see motors

We all know its most beneficial uphill or in a TT. It is posible he does not want to do that due to thermal cameras or people calculating his W/kg over the climbs.

The average grade of that descent will be a lot less than 10%. On the shallower parts the advantage will be much bigger. Lets take a difference of 2-3 kmh over 10k. Include the advantage of accellerating like he did over the top and after sharp turns and you will come close to the 25 seconds he gained.

Again I do not claim he used a motor but it sure is plausible.

 

[kielbasa]

Re:

Uphill is far more likely a place to see motors

We all know its most beneficial uphill or in a TT. It is posible he does not want to do that due to thermal cameras or people calculating his W/kg over the climbs.

The average grade of that descent will be a lot less than 10%. On the shallower parts the advantage will be much bigger. Lets take a difference of 2-3 kmh over 10k. Include the advantage of accellerating like he did over the top and after sharp turns and you will come close to the 25 seconds he gained.

Again I do not claim he used a motor but it sure is plausible.

A 60-tooth chainring would help a lot, but they don't use it. Could it have something to do with the fact that there's less actual pedaling done and more tuck position and proper cornering? Riders are either good or bad descenders and it has very little to do with power.

 

[sniper]

(in reference to an earlier post)
The "Sky do windtunnel testing, hence Froome is a great descender" argument is hilarious at best.
Wiggins will go into history as the poorest descender ever to have won the TdF.

 

[sniper]

weird footage emerging.
why did froome try to run with his broken bike? whynot just drop it?
https://twitter.com/Jonet_H/status/753699924278214656

 

[simoni]

Re:

weird footage emerging.
why did froome try to run with his broken bike? whynot just drop it?
https://twitter.com/Jonet_H/status/753699924278214656

As ever I'll preface my comments with my usual Froome/Sky disclaimer: I'm British but have my eyes open enough to know that their are questions that should be answered.

He said himself he knew the team car was blocked behind so he was effectively on his own.

I can't remember a rider ever walking on with a completely unrideable bike in the event of a mechanical before but given the situation with the team car a plausible gut reaction is to carry on with it.

After a bit he probably processed what had happened and thought "sod it" and dropped it on the basis that time gaps would probably be reset.

I really don't know what you're trying to insinuate. It was an unprecendented situation and people do odd things under stress.

(with regard to motors, if that's the angle you're pursuing, his broken bike was retrieved and checked after the stage (as per Moore on cycling podcast)).

No angle - just unbiased personal opinion and verifiable fact.

 

[adamfo]

Re: Re:

Just wondering... if Froome had a motor on his winning stage last week, why did he not use it on the uphill when he tried and failed to drop everyone else?

He did have the energy to put on what appeared to be a full on sprint once he crested the top.

true story.

it's a sad state of affairs where nothing can be excluded, owing to the fact that the UCI, and not some independent body, are 'policing' the problem. Again, hell will freeze over before UCI will catch and expose a pro road racer.
Best hope is fans and investigative journalists doing some real digging and thermal scanning. Power to the people, so to say.
However, Even thermal scanning is turning out to be rather pointless, at least if Varjas is right when he says there are motor devices that cannot be spotted by a thermal scanner (which seems likely to me, tbh).

if I am not mistaken, Froome's bike was not checked after this stage.

It was put into the x-ray booth.

 

[vedrafjord]

TG4 commentators talking live on air during today's stage about the leaked UCI email tipping off the motor guys to the possible French police investigation, and also mentioning the rumours about Cancellara a few years ago, and not in a dismissive way. I can't see Phil + Paul or Carlton + Sean or Ned + David ever doing that. If you're watching in Ireland and want commentary without cheerleading then maybe tráchtaireacht as Gaeilge is the way to go

 

[Cannibal72]

Re:

TG4 commentators talking live on air during today's stage about the leaked UCI email tipping off the motor guys to the possible French police investigation, and also mentioning the rumours about Cancellara a few years ago, and not in a dismissive way. I can't see Phil + Paul or Carlton + Sean or Ned + David ever doing that. If you're watching in Ireland and want commentary without cheerleading then maybe tráchtaireacht as Gaeilge is the way to go

Reminds me: does anyone know why P/P are off ITV4 now? The obnoxious Armstrong cheerleading/vested interests/lies are all in the past now...