Motor doping thread

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Drug testing is pointless as long as its done by the governing body.
Same for motor testing.

The big threat is of course that sponsors will run away.

That's all the motivation you need for UCI to try and frustrate any kind of truth finding process.
Which is exactly what we see them doing.

Drug testing is not pointless, it serves a very good purpose. It ensures that administrations can effectively control the outcome of most events and curate the medal tables at the Olympics. Additionally "anti-doping" has created an industry within itself; from WADA to NADOs to the Millars and Vaughters, there is good money to be made from "anti-doping". A little like America's "war on drugs", there are now more drugs and more users since the 'war' began.

Moto-doping can curate the winners and losers much more precisely than doping. Doping can be a little hit and miss at times.

Too true.

It was funny to see, when Fancybears lifted the curtain, how the whole "antidoping" artillery was mobilized to counter those Russian trolls.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

..
I think thats wishful thinking for a cynic like you.

No way Armstrong used motors 99-05.

I wished it wasn't about Lance in the first place.
I'm really gonna hate watching Betsy and Greg do another round of interviews blaming it all on Lance.

But let's be positive. If we're really lucky the story is gonna have some interesting ramifications for instance in regards to the position of Cookson who I think has been complicit in covering up motoruse. That's my wishful thinking.

 

[Tienus]

Re: Re:

Drug testing is pointless as long as its done by the governing body.
Same for motor testing.

The big threat is of course that sponsors will run away.

That's all the motivation you need for UCI to try and frustrate any kind of truth finding process.
Which is exactly what we see them doing.

Drug testing is not pointless, it serves a very good purpose. It ensures that administrations can effectively control the outcome of most events and curate the medal tables at the Olympics. Additionally "anti-doping" has created an industry within itself; from WADA to NADOs to the Millars and Vaughters, there is good money to be made from "anti-doping". A little like America's "war on drugs", there are now more drugs and more users since the 'war' began.

Moto-doping can curate the winners and losers much more precisely than doping. Doping can be a little hit and miss at times.

Too true.

It was funny to see, when Fancybears lifted the curtain, how the whole "antidoping" artillery was mobilized to counter those Russian trolls.

Maybe thats why the police was tipped off about typhoon and Varjas. Teams with motors from a company that had protection from the UCI might have been too much for omerta.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Fact is, if the evidence for Lance using a motor already in the late 90s or early 2000s is compelling, then things are gonna get really really messy in the aftermath. It will have major ramifications for cycling history.
It will mean that not a single top performance from 2000-ish onwards is beyond motor-suspicion.
Accusations are gonna be thrown around, with very little possibilities to prove anything either way.

I think thats wishful thinking for a cynic like you.

No way Armstrong used motors 99-05.

How would we have known?

Armstrong only cared about winning and a motor in his bike would be a no no? Yeah sure.

Sniper and others are entitled to be a cynics after the way the sport lied and continues to lie to fans. Get a grip!

 

[DamianoMachiavelli]

Re: Re:

Fact is, if the evidence for Lance using a motor already in the late 90s or early 2000s is compelling, then things are gonna get really really messy in the aftermath. It will have major ramifications for cycling history.
It will mean that not a single top performance from 2000-ish onwards is beyond motor-suspicion.
Accusations are gonna be thrown around, with very little possibilities to prove anything either way.

I think thats wishful thinking for a cynic like you.

No way Armstrong used motors 99-05.

How would we have known?

Armstrong only cared about winning and a motor in his bike would be a no no? Yeah sure.

Sniper and others are entitled to be a cynics after the way the sport lied and continues to lie to fans. Get a grip!

Battery tech has taken a huge leap over the last decade. E-bikes did not come about because no one had thought to put an electric motor on a bike; they came about because the related tech only made them possible in the last few years.

Varjas is a charlatan. His dog and pony show with supposedly partially constructed wheel motors was similar to the salted ore a stock fraudster would show prospective investors in a bogus mine. While it might have impressed a gullible journalist looking for a story, the physics don't work.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Fact is, if the evidence for Lance using a motor already in the late 90s or early 2000s is compelling, then things are gonna get really really messy in the aftermath. It will have major ramifications for cycling history.
It will mean that not a single top performance from 2000-ish onwards is beyond motor-suspicion.
Accusations are gonna be thrown around, with very little possibilities to prove anything either way.

I think thats wishful thinking for a cynic like you.

No way Armstrong used motors 99-05.

How would we have known?

Armstrong only cared about winning and a motor in his bike would be a no no? Yeah sure.

Sniper and others are entitled to be a cynics after the way the sport lied and continues to lie to fans. Get a grip!

Battery tech has taken a huge leap over the last decade. E-bikes did not come about because no one had thought to put an electric motor on a bike; they came about because the related tech only made them possible in the last few years.

Varjas is a charlatan. His dog and pony show with supposedly partially constructed wheel motors was similar to the salted ore a stock fraudster would show prospective investors in a bogus mine. While it might have impressed a gullible journalist looking for a story, the physics don't work.

It would not surprise me if Varjas was not the real deal and that someone else was the real tech wiz on motors.

motors in bikes are imo real. Too many performances look motorised.

 

[sniper]

He's a charlatan without a shadow of a doubt.

However, and I could be wrong, I don't remember he claimed selling those wheels himself. He did claim they are being used, which doesn't sound farfetched to me. If you have shitloads of money to spend and sports institutes like Loughborough working around the clock for you, I'm not quite sure if the physics don't work.

And although he's a charlatan, he does seem to know where bodies are burried.
So I wouldn't worry to much about him being a quack yes or no. More interesting is to see if his stories check out.

 

[sniper]

Matt Hayman using a motorized rearwheel to win Paris Roubaix? Naaaaah. Nooo way. Would neeeeever risk that.

https://twitter.com/letouzet/status/814611302710702081

 

[Mr.38%]

I read it on twitter, must be true. Nothing suspicious during the race, man that's compelling evidence. Spotting motors from two pics, :genius:

Edit: I'll ask Lars about it, either during training or a local race; he's with Sunweb next season so watch for V8 cylinders there.

 

[sniper]

What does twitter have to do with anything.
You have eyes don't you?
A newspaper certainly isn't going to publish them, so of course stuff like this is, if at all, only going to come to us through a medium like twitter.
Social media sucks don't it.

The rest of your post contains a few awful strawmen.

Great, ask Lars. He'll tell you no doubt. :lol:

 

[Mr.38%]

Re:

What does twitter have to do with anything.
You have eyes don't you?
A newspaper certainly isn't going to publish them, so of course stuff like this is, if at all, only going to come to us through a medium like twitter.
Social media sucks don't it.

The rest of your post contains a few awful strawmen.

Great, ask Lars. He'll tell you no doubt. :lol:

Great thing about twitter is, it's free, no education needed and no editor. Bad thing: free, no education needed and no editor. It's what you make of it.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

What does twitter have to do with anything.
You have eyes don't you?
A newspaper certainly isn't going to publish them, so of course stuff like this is, if at all, only going to come to us through a medium like twitter.
Social media sucks don't it.

The rest of your post contains a few awful strawmen.

Great, ask Lars. He'll tell you no doubt. :lol:

Great thing about twitter is, it's free, no education needed and no editor. Bad thing: free, no education needed and no editor. It's what you make of it.

agreed.
Therefore only a fool would unquestioningly take every single thing from twitter as fact.
Do you see anybody diong that? Cuz I sure as hell don't.


I merely posted a tweet that has visual evidence of Hayman changing his rear wheel for no apparent reason, and even seemingly lying about it when talking about his "dirty" bike. (did you read the other tweets?)
It's suspicious. Not more, not less. Nobody claims it's proof of anything.

For some odd reason you dismiss the whole thing as nonsense because the photos are posted on twitter?

You might as well stop asking any kind of questions about anything you see on television or on the internet.
Take the Sunday Times as Gospel. Great idea.

 

[yaco]

Re:

Matt Hayman using a motorized rearwheel to win Paris Roubaix? Naaaaah. Nooo way. Would neeeeever risk that.

https://twitter.com/letouzet/status/814611302710702081

Hayman is so dumb - Wins his second career race in Paris Roubais - Been using the wrong equipment - And I though moto's were for leaders, not for domestiques.

 

[Mr.38%]

Re: Re:

What does twitter have to do with anything.
You have eyes don't you?
A newspaper certainly isn't going to publish them, so of course stuff like this is, if at all, only going to come to us through a medium like twitter.
Social media sucks don't it.

The rest of your post contains a few awful strawmen.

Great, ask Lars. He'll tell you no doubt. :lol:

Great thing about twitter is, it's free, no education needed and no editor. Bad thing: free, no education needed and no editor. It's what you make of it.

agreed.
Therefore only a fool would unquestioningly take every single thing from twitter as fact.
Do you see anybody diong that? Cuz I sure as hell don't.


I merely posted a tweet that has visual evidence of Hayman changing his rear wheel for no apparent reason, and even seemingly lying about it when talking about his "dirty" bike. (did you read the other tweets?)
It's suspicious. Not more, not less. Nobody claims it's proof of anything.

For some odd reason you dismiss the whole thing as nonsense because the photos are posted on twitter?

You might as well stop asking any kind of questions about anything you see on television or on the internet.
Take the Sunday Times as Gospel. Great idea.

I would consider it if it was put into context. But no context, no story, no witnesses, no backup, no proof, not even evidence, no additional footage (the stuff that has been provided for the Cancellara case) is provided, just ridiculous assumptions, posted by somebody who is maybe bored or something. It is suspicious if you wear a tinfoil hat because everything is suspicious and connected if you only look closely enough. And you will surely find people to retweet, acknowlege and upvote.

There is a hell of a difference between asking valid questions and posting utter bs. And if the decision was between the old, regular press and twitter, I'd take the Spiegel, Sueddeutsche and "real" journalists for sure.

 

[sniper]

you sound like you're running for UCI president.
play ball not man.
and stop whining about social media. ignore it if you don't like it.

 

[Tienus]

Armstrong used a downtube shifter for the front derailleur on the mountain stages in every tour he won.

A quick google tells me that Beloki and possibly Ullrich did too.

In 2006 number one and three of the vuelta had the same setup.
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21071

Maybe they use the left brake lever as a switch. There is already an electrical wire going from the SRM computer to the bottom bracket.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Armstrong used a downtube shifter for the front derailleur on the mountain stages in every tour he won.

A quick google tells me that Beloki and possibly Ullrich did too.

In 2006 number one and three of the vuelta had the same setup.
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21071

Maybe they use the left brake lever as a switch. There is already an electrical wire going from the SRM computer to the bottom bracket.

great finds.

the search for a switch is a difficult one.
for instance, on campagnolo bikes there is (/was) a button on the break lever that loosens the cable to the brakes. Not sure but maybe Cance's finger-clicking can be explained this way.

according to cyclingtips,

A simple button to start and stop the motor is then mounted on the underside of the handlebars and routed to the control unit in the seat post.

https://cyclingtips.com/2015/04/hidden-motors-for-road-bikes-exist-heres-how-they-work/
It reminds me of how Froome, shortly before he accellerates and drops Contador like a stone on the Ventoux, changes the position of his hands on the handlebars. Quickly from outward to inward, then outward again, and off he goes. Seated.

 

[pastronef]

Re: Re:

Armstrong used a downtube shifter for the front derailleur on the mountain stages in every tour he won.

A quick google tells me that Beloki and possibly Ullrich did too.

In 2006 number one and three of the vuelta had the same setup.
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21071

Maybe they use the left brake lever as a switch. There is already an electrical wire going from the SRM computer to the bottom bracket.

great finds.

the search for a switch is a difficult one.
for instance, on campagnolo bikes there is (/was) a button on the break lever that loosens the cable to the brakes. Not sure but maybe Cance's finger-clicking can be explained this way.

according to cyclingtips,

A simple button to start and stop the motor is then mounted on the underside of the handlebars and routed to the control unit in the seat post.

https://cyclingtips.com/2015/04/hidden-motors-for-road-bikes-exist-heres-how-they-work/
It reminds me of how Froome, shortly before he accellerates and drops Contador like a stone on the Ventoux, changes the position of his hands on the handlebars. Quickly from outward to inward, then outward again, and off he goes. Seated.

it´s not easy to use that, you need 2 hands.
Cancellara was with Sram in 2010, he could have a button under the rubber of the brake hoods

 

[Tienus]

he could have a button under the rubber of the brake hoods

From the videos it looks like Cancellara and Femke are having a button there. It is a bluetooth button which you can put anywhere you like even in your shorts or pocket. I think Boom might have hidden a button in his skinsuit and pushes it just after finishing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4FkKofQohs

The older model motors might have worked only with an electric wire.

 

[Tienus]

It reminds me of how Froome, shortly before he accellerates and drops Contador like a stone on the Ventoux, changes the position of his hands on the handlebars. Quickly from outward to inward, then outward again, and off he goes. Seated.

He also changed the position of his hands before raising them as he crossed the finish line.

 

[thehog]

Re:

It reminds me of how Froome, shortly before he accellerates and drops Contador like a stone on the Ventoux, changes the position of his hands on the handlebars. Quickly from outward to inward, then outward again, and off he goes. Seated.

He also changed the position of his hands before raising them as he crossed the finish line.

Gear lever also but anyone who attacks up a 12% grade after 11km of climbing will keep their hand on the hoods. I've climbed Ventoux twice and even though I'm clearly not a Pro, doing what Froome did is almost impossible. Well, it is impossible seated.

 

[Mr.38%]

Re:

you sound like you're running for UCI president.
play ball not man.
and stop whining about social media. ignore it if you don't like it.

Maybe you understand it with a simple formula: You should probably question the questions as well.

There was no compelling evidence in that Sagan power file, yet you were the first to shout "smoking gun". And you wonder why only a few people take legit critique serious? And there are so many claims that are just ridiculous and no, ignorance or the ignore list is not the answer. This forum has so much more fluimucil than the jiffy bag...

 

[Mr.38%]

Re:

Armstrong used a downtube shifter for the front derailleur on the mountain stages in every tour he won.

A quick google tells me that Beloki and possibly Ullrich did too.

In 2006 number one and three of the vuelta had the same setup.
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21071

Maybe they use the left brake lever as a switch. There is already an electrical wire going from the SRM computer to the bottom bracket.

And what - according to your opinion - moves the front derailleur??

 

[Tienus]

Re: Re:

Armstrong used a downtube shifter for the front derailleur on the mountain stages in every tour he won.

A quick google tells me that Beloki and possibly Ullrich did too.

In 2006 number one and three of the vuelta had the same setup.
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21071

Maybe they use the left brake lever as a switch. There is already an electrical wire going from the SRM computer to the bottom bracket.

And what - according to your opinion - moves the front derailleur??

I made it bold for you.
I would say its a fact rather than my opinion.

 

[Mr.38%]

Re: Re:

Armstrong used a downtube shifter for the front derailleur on the mountain stages in every tour he won.

A quick google tells me that Beloki and possibly Ullrich did too.

In 2006 number one and three of the vuelta had the same setup.
http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21071

Maybe they use the left brake lever as a switch. There is already an electrical wire going from the SRM computer to the bottom bracket.

And what - according to your opinion - moves the front derailleur??

I made it bold for you.
I would say its a fact rather than my opinion.

DA-ST7700 (-> STI) even had the buttons for flightdeck on board which would have made them an even more obvious solution, no?