Motor doping thread

[Eyeballs Out]

Re: Re:

The key headline number here is 3773. When it comes to negative tests it's the quantity that's important, as we all know. 3773 smashes 500 right out of the park.

My math is woeful but 3,773 tests across 21 stages averages what, 180 bikes a day? Allow two bikes per riders and that's half the bikes everyday, or somesuch. Not quite up there with dropping dynamite into a barrel of fish, but not entirely without effect.

Maybe they took one bike on one stage and tested it 3773 times

 

[Tienus]

I do love the level playing field argument

That is not my argument. My argument is that the press release is a pr document.

Full comes down to two examples

If we disregard the brown nosing from Cooksen there are only three short paragraphs. I can point out another lie in the third one but wont bore you with that unless you insist.

one of which suggests an inability to understand the difference between allegations and a proven case?

Which one? I would be more than happy to point you to the evidence.

 

[Ramon Koran]

Why are people still going on about this did no one read my link, here it is again : http://www.lenouvelliste.ch/articles/sports/cyclisme/tour-de-france-1500-velos-passes-a-la-camera-thermique-et-pas-un-moteur-decouvert-559347
"Plus de 1500 vélos sont passés devant la caméra thermique haute définition mise au point par les ingénieurs du Commissariat à l'énergie atomique (CEA)" Note that there the CEA not the UCI, so your cover up stories don't work.
"Les contrôles ont été faits de façon inopinée, sans qu'on sache quand et où. Il y en a eu six jusqu'à présent, le septième aujourd'hui (vendredi) et, à ce jour, tous ont été négatifs" Random testing in random places without any noledge before hand by any one.
"S'il y avait de l'aluminium pour cacher une technologie motorisée, cela serait détecté par la caméra fournie par le CEA. Il faudrait sinon que l'ensemble du vélo soit 'alumanisé' There's no way you can hide the motor without it being detected.
"s'il y avait eu une technologie pour calfeutrer un moteur, elle aurait été détectée" End of story no mechanical doping happened in the tour. Of course in the past it most likely did but we can now safely say it is impossible to get away with mechanical doping. The UCI can't cover you up, you can't hide the motor... Time to stop all these conspiracy's and get back to proper facts and evidence, not what some one made up in there head without anything to back up what they are stating.

 

[Tienus]

You got replies to your post earlier

Note that there the CEA not the UCI

The engineers are from CEA, they are being hired and instructed by another party.

Will the alloy detector find a mini motor in alloy parts like a bracket or a hub?

 

[adamfo]

Re:

As I said nothing would surprise me, but I would be surprised if everyone is protected from a failed motor test.

The only case where a rider got caught indicates that the UCI does not want to catch anyone.
The stade 2 investigations indicates the same.
The email from Mark Barfield indicates the same.

So far I have not seen anything indicating that the UCI is trying to catch cheaters.

See if you can spot the type of fallacy in your first sentence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

Is this "renewed reputation of cycling" for real? Is cycling's reputation clean/good these days?

Generally, in the media, in which LA is the alpha and omega of doping, cycling's reputation has been renewed.

To wit, when was the last time anyone (with a name you'd recognize) got popped for doping? Been quite a drop off under Cookson. Guess that means things are clean these days...

John Swanson

 

[adamfo]

Re: Moto-fraud: first rider caught

All the bikes were tested before the stage, some during the stage and the leaders by x-ray after. Some of the damaged bikes were also physically taken apart as per last years procedure.
Can I sell you a bridge ?

Can you direct me to a link, of a written report/visual, I don't mind which, of the all the bikes being tested before the stage?

They may have given the leaders bikes an x-ray, but what's the point if the bikes weren't taken the moment they crossed the line?

Not really into starting a bridge collection at this time, but can I interest you in another unicorn to add to your collection?

It was on a eurosport behind the scenes video report. All the bikes (entered to be ridden that day) were scanned with the tablet to detect magnetic fields.
Numerous times during the tour we saw the bloke on the back of the motorbike using the IR gun. Remember when Cummings won with his long range attack, there was a clear shot of that process in action. Both sides of the bike checked at different times.

 

[Tienus]

See if you can spot the type of fallacy in your first sentence

Its only a fallacy if you make the wrong assumption that it was the UCI who caught her.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

The key headline number here is 3773. When it comes to negative tests it's the quantity that's important, as we all know. 3773 smashes 500 right out of the park.

My math is woeful but 3,773 tests across 21 stages averages what, 180 bikes a day? Allow two bikes per riders and that's half the bikes everyday, or somesuch. Not quite up there with dropping dynamite into a barrel of fish, but not entirely without effect.

I guess Cookson wasn't as excited about the €1.5m blackhole he managed to rack up last year.... :lol:

The International Cycling Union (UCI) have reported an increased annual loss of CHF1.22 million (£874,000/$1.2 million/€1.1 million) for 2015.

 

[Night Rider]

Re:

As I said nothing would surprise me, but I would be surprised if everyone is protected from a failed motor test.

The only case where a rider got caught indicates that the UCI does not want to catch anyone.
The stade 2 investigations indicates the same.
The email from Mark Barfield indicates the same.

So far I have not seen anything indicating that the UCI is trying to catch cheaters.

Can you explain the first line further? The UCI catching a cheat shows they don't want to catch a cheat? Don't quite follow that argumment.

On the next sentences, well the first Stade 2 program was a farce, in the second Stade 2 the emails from Barfield during last years tour were definitely concerning and shouldn't have happened. He should have been sacked.

I come back to my point though, 3700 tests this year, virtually nothing and no interest in previous years. Risk was higher this year.

 

[Tienus]

Can you explain the first line further?

Since the Koppenbergcross (first of November) there where suspicions about her bike and pictures where sent to the Belgium federation and the UCI. This has been confirmed by multiple riders, you will find plenty of interviews both video and written in this tread around February. In a documentary about the WC race organiser Koen Monu confirms this as he is talking about it on the morning after the incident, I mentioned it in this post:
viewtopic.php?p=1863810#p1863810
The video has been taken offline but can still be watched here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20160307214926/http://sporza.be/cm/sporza/videozone/sporten/2.25755/VeldrijdenWK/1.2567063
Koen is first seen chatting with UCI coordinater Peter van den Abeele who anounced the mechanical doping news with Brian here:
http://media.vrtnieuws.net/2016/01/1210160131188681621/0025.jpg
He then chats with someone about the incident. His last remark of that conversation: "The one question is if she has been riding that bike. They have to figure that out for themself. They have had plenty of opportunity to confiscate that bike."

The days just prior to the incident other riders where showing eachother suspiscious pictures of her bike. It is a non existent Willier frame, probably her old Bianchi which was adapted by her dad.
viewtopic.php?p=1864291#p1864291
This would have ended up in the public for sure so the UCI had no choice but to catch her if she would use the suspiscious bike. That is exactly what she did until she broke her chain in the penultimate lap. After crossing the line running with her bike the bike disappaered near the UCI headquarters.
viewtopic.php?p=1861440#p1861440

Next thing we know is the UCI making a statement how they used their special device to check for motors and found one in a spare bike.

 

[Tienus]

On the next sentences, well the first Stade 2 program was a farce

They made Brian aware of their specific suspiscions and he did nothing.

 

[Tienus]

When the anouncement of the six year ban came out Cookson was dodging the difficult questions whit the reply: "Lets wait a couple of weeks for the full reasoned decision"
Even though a couple of months have past I was going to wait a bit longer for the promised publication, without holding my breath obviously. I was looking forward to this document as any fotographic evidence included would probably confirm my thought that the UCI confiscated the bike she was riding during the race.

Anyway since we are talking again on how Femke was caught lets analyse what is being said by Koen Monu. I dont know if done on purpose but the video is already removed from the sporza website and it wont be long before it totally disappears from the internet.
http://web.archive.org/web/20160307214926/http://sporza.be/cm/sporza/videozone/sporten/2.25755/VeldrijdenWK/1.2567063
Its not an interview, the camera man is following Koen and films a conversation at 5:55. This is what I make of it, please correct me if I understood something wrong.

ja maar dat sanne direct fotos is gaan toesturen naar de uci
met de traagheid van de bond want daar kwam het op neer
fotos van op de kopenberg fotos van....
dat sanne dat al op zoveel crossen heeft gezien dat ze al op zoveel crossen weet van verdikke die rijd wel heel sterk omhoog
en sanne is die fotos niet moeten gaan zoeken he

Dat was gisteren groot nieuws maar voor ons klein nieuws

de ene vraag is of ze met die fiets gereden heeft maar dat moeten ze zelf maar uitzoeken. Ze hebben zoveel kans gehad om die fiets opzij te zetten.


Translated:
Sanne has send the pictures directly to the UCI
Because the federation was too slow
Pictures of the koppenberg cross, pictures of...
Sanne has seen it at so many races and knows that she is very strong climbing
Sanne did not have to search for those fotos

Yesterday this was big news but for us it was small news

The one question is if she was riding this bike but they have to decide for themselves. They have had plenty of opportunity to confiscate that bike.


From interviews with other riders I know that the pictures where send from her own team. I suspect it was from Sanne Cant who was with her in the Belgium team.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

What you quote there would heavily imply Cant. The only other Sanne in the sport of sufficient recognition for the first name terms would be van Paassen, and she isn't Belgian (although in the aftermath of the actual incident it was two Dutch women - Kaptheijns and Stultiens - who were the most clear on what they thought, suspected and knew about it) nor would it make sense for her to approach the Belgian national federation instead of the UCI, and the article explicitly names Sanne.

 

[winkybiker]

Re:

On the next sentences, well the first Stade 2 program was a farce

They made Brian aware of their specific suspiscions and he did nothing.

Does your tinfoil hat get hot? Why on earth would the UCI want to condone or cover-up motorised-cheat cycling? What's in it for Cookson? Catching motorised bike-cheats is trivially easy. There's nowhere to hide. The motors (even wheel mounted ones) are dead easy to detect (even without Lemond's "large arches"). They're going well above what is required in my view. The number of tests is more than adequate. I have no idea how you can still be convinced that the fix is in; that there is some huge conspiracy. There just isn't. Not everyone is lying to you.....

 

[Benotti69]

It took a long time for UCI to introduce motor testing. It was a long time since the accusations were bandied about, RAI presented a bike during the Giro a few years ago and it is only this year that UCI have 'made a show' of testing for motors.

Not hard to think the UCI dont give a fig, they continually prove they dont give a fig.

Best not to accuse people of tin hat wearing when calling out the UCI, one might look silly

 

[ScienceIsCool]

I still don't get that iPad thingy. If your bike has electronic shifting then it has batteries and magnets near both the bottom bracket and rear hub (in the linear actuators). So if the iPad doesn't flag every bike with electronic shifting then the system de facto doesn't work. And if it does flag every bike with electronic shifting? What then? Just wave them through, or what? I don't see them disassembling all of the bikes with electronic shifting...

Pro tip: If you want to get away with using a motor, make sure you're running Di2

John Swanson

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

On the next sentences, well the first Stade 2 program was a farce

They made Brian aware of their specific suspiscions and he did nothing.

Does your tinfoil hat get hot? Why on earth would the UCI want to condone or cover-up motorised-cheat cycling? What's in it for Cookson? Catching motorised bike-cheats is trivially easy. There's nowhere to hide. The motors (even wheel mounted ones) are dead easy to detect (even without Lemond's "large arches"). They're going well above what is required in my view. The number of tests is more than adequate. I have no idea how you can still be convinced that the fix is in; that there is some huge conspiracy. There just isn't. Not everyone is lying to you.....

the UCI would cover it up because Pros need to be faster than everyone else...Pros need to both amaze the lay public and the enthusiastic amateur...however they need to keep the wages up of the club and so the peloton is treated differently (insider/outsider)....be it PEDs or motors there is an intrinsic incentive for the UCI to keep pros faster and stronger..........otherwise they are just guys who do a lot of miles

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

On the next sentences, well the first Stade 2 program was a farce

They made Brian aware of their specific suspiscions and he did nothing.

Does your tinfoil hat get hot? Why on earth would the UCI want to condone or cover-up motorised-cheat cycling? What's in it for Cookson? Catching motorised bike-cheats is trivially easy. There's nowhere to hide. The motors (even wheel mounted ones) are dead easy to detect (even without Lemond's "large arches"). They're going well above what is required in my view. The number of tests is more than adequate. I have no idea how you can still be convinced that the fix is in; that there is some huge conspiracy. There just isn't. Not everyone is lying to you.....

Of course they don't want to condone it, but at the same time, there was a lot of coverage for Femke and her motorized bike in places that sure as hell wouldn't normally cover your average doping story (only if it was somebody of the Lance/Alberto kind of status). And as you point out, it's immediately obvious. If Femke had done things the "traditional" way and mainlined EPO, the test result would have come out a month after the Worlds, Paris-Nice and Tirreno-Adriatico would be going on, and a women's U23 cyclocross rider testing positive would be forgotten about in the time it takes the average non-Dutch-speaker to pronounce her surname, whereas this blew up into news stories way bigger than any result she ever achieved at Zolder could have done. What's more, for years (long preceding Cookson) we'd seen deflection of talk of motorized doping as something nobody would do or would get away with, and now all of a sudden those performances that had seemed suspect in the past would fall back under the microscope because it was proven once and for all that motorized bikes were not a fanciful conspiracy theory but something that was legitimately happening, to the extent that it had trickled down to U23 cyclocross riders making a pittance. Although the counter-argument could then come, well, actually it wasn't all that subtle in her case, so maybe doing something like that and making it hard to detect would be difficult.

With the knowledge that the UCI announced their new testing for motorized bikes would be debuted at Zolder and that riders from both within the Belgian team and other competitors had raised red flags about Femke's performance, it isn't that much of a stretch to believe that the UCI would want to be rid of her, or at least 'that' bike, without having to bust her publicly, similar to the multitude of "tap on the shoulder" theories about various riders' performance drops.

If there was an era of motor-doping you could argue that potentially Femke was the start of bringing that to an end; moto fraud is not something that you can delay the finding on for months and pick the time to bury the bad news, nor is it something you can fight and fight on technicalities.

 

[adamfo]

Re:

It took a long time for UCI to introduce motor testing. It was a long time since the accusations were bandied about, RAI presented a bike during the Giro a few years ago and it is only this year that UCI have 'made a show'

Last years testing at the tour was pretty robust. Taking the bottom bracket out and using the human eyeball mk1.
In out of reach places an endoscope was used. The leaders bikes were taken apart numerous times much to the chagrin of the mechanics who had to but the bits back together again.
It's a non-story being pushed by those with an interest in selling such technology, by those trying to keep up their media profile like LeMonde and those in the conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

It took a long time for UCI to introduce motor testing. It was a long time since the accusations were bandied about, RAI presented a bike during the Giro a few years ago and it is only this year that UCI have 'made a show'

Last years testing at the tour was pretty robust. Taking the bottom bracket out and using the human eyeball mk1.
In out of reach places an endoscope was used. The leaders bikes were taken apart numerous times much to the chagrin of the mechanics who had to but the bits back together again.
It's a non-story being pushed by those with an interest in selling such technology, by those trying to keep up their media profile like LeMonde and those in the conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp

Then why does the UCI use an iPad that either doesn't work or gives a false positive for *every* bike with electronic shifting?

John Swanson

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

It took a long time for UCI to introduce motor testing. It was a long time since the accusations were bandied about, RAI presented a bike during the Giro a few years ago and it is only this year that UCI have 'made a show'

Last years testing at the tour was pretty robust. Taking the bottom bracket out and using the human eyeball mk1.
In out of reach places an endoscope was used. The leaders bikes were taken apart numerous times much to the chagrin of the mechanics who had to but the bits back together again.
It's a non-story being pushed by those with an interest in selling such technology, by those trying to keep up their media profile like LeMonde and those in the conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp

Good to see the UCI obey the wishes of conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp

But then they found a motor in a bike at a UCI world championships, so the conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp are correct, but then you know this and ignore it, instead attacking people as being conspiracy/moon hoax nutters.

Motor doping was reported in 2010, but in 2015 UCI started looking in frames! :lol:

 

[adamfo]

Re: Re:

It took a long time for UCI to introduce motor testing. It was a long time since the accusations were bandied about, RAI presented a bike during the Giro a few years ago and it is only this year that UCI have 'made a show'

Last years testing at the tour was pretty robust. Taking the bottom bracket out and using the human eyeball mk1.
In out of reach places an endoscope was used. The leaders bikes were taken apart numerous times much to the chagrin of the mechanics who had to but the bits back together again.
It's a non-story being pushed by those with an interest in selling such technology, by those trying to keep up their media profile like LeMonde and those in the conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp

Good to see the UCI obey the wishes of conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp

But then they found a motor in a bike at a UCI world championships, so the conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp are correct, but then you know this and ignore it, instead attacking people as being conspiracy/moon hoax nutters.

Motor doping was reported in 2010, but in 2015 UCI started looking in frames! :lol:

My post was clearly about last years and this years Tdf. The nutters are clearly wrong

 

[adamfo]

Re: Re:

It took a long time for UCI to introduce motor testing. It was a long time since the accusations were bandied about, RAI presented a bike during the Giro a few years ago and it is only this year that UCI have 'made a show'

Last years testing at the tour was pretty robust. Taking the bottom bracket out and using the human eyeball mk1.
In out of reach places an endoscope was used. The leaders bikes were taken apart numerous times much to the chagrin of the mechanics who had to but the bits back together again.
It's a non-story being pushed by those with an interest in selling such technology, by those trying to keep up their media profile like LeMonde and those in the conspiracy/moon hoax nutters camp

Then why does the UCI use an iPad that either doesn't work or gives a false positive for *every* bike with electronic shifting?

John Swanson

I've no idea what they are using in the tablets or it's accuracy. Do you ?

The x-ray images we've seen are pretty detailed and the Italian video of the IR images on the move look clear too. Hub and seat tube heat signatures.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

I've no idea what they are using in the tablets or it's accuracy. Do you ?

The x-ray images we've seen are pretty detailed and the Italian video of the IR images on the move look clear too. Hub and seat tube heat signatures.

Well, it's not going to be anywhere as good as purpose-built Gauss meter. http://www.magsys.de/index.php/en/products-and-services/hand-gaussmeter

If the front derailleur has a solenoid with a magnet having B = 0.1 T at 1 cm, then you would need better than 500 uT resolution to register the magnet at 5 cm. To discriminate between that magnet and a motor in close proximity, you'd need an accuracy and resolution of ~1 uT. <--- All back of the envelope calculations, so only good to an order of magnitude. This part is doable with an iPad. Now discriminating between two dipoles that are only a couple centimeters from one another? ehhhh. I don't think so. Now you need a sensor array to measure the direction of the flux density and not just the magnitude.

Think of it this way. You can use a wet finger to check if the wind is blowing. The wet finger method doesn't work so well if you want to tell if there's one fan, or two fans blowing. You need something like a weather vane to show which way the wind is blowing and then try to use that to discriminate between one fan or two.

So yeah. Either every bike with e-shifting gives a false positive or the iPads don't work. Either way, they can't tell whether a bike with e-shifting has a motor unless they use a different method.

John Swanson