Ryders crash -motor?

[Granville57]

Is my world upside down where a $400,000 payment to a Doctor is considered normal but a $100 electronic device is space station theory?

This gets directly to the point that I was going to follow up on in regards to my remarks about Phil Gaimon's comments.

First off, I have enjoyed everything that Phil Gaimon has had to offer cycling fans, and have even enjoyed some online direct interactions with him myself. So it is not my intention to target this at him, but rather to use what I consider him being smug towards the conspiracy theorists as a launching point for a little rant of my own.

As Kicker661 has alluded to above, for many pro cyclists, and those who employ them or work for them, reality has become so smeared over time that all sane and rational perspective has been lost.

Let's consider doping for a moment.
It is an act that most normal people would never in a lifetime find themselves engaged in. When we're talking about self-adminstering blood bags, from procedures that took place under questionable and usually risky environments—that's not even close to normal. If we can step back for a moment, for most people, such an act would be considered to be ghoulish and absurd. But in the world of pro sports and cycling? Oh, yeah. Nothing at all unusual.

How about injecting mysterious concoctions of god-knows-what, prepared by god-knows-who, into one's own body? By a normal person's standards, such an act would be considered grotesque, vile and beyond idiotic. But in pro cycling? Oh, yeah. Par for the course. As routine as putting on a jersey.

All rational perspective has been lost. Even to most of us fans. Such stories have become so commonplace that they don't even raise an eyebrow. "Nothing's shocking," to coin a phrase. We've become numb to the absolute insanity of it all.

Let's put aside the New Generation and all that for a moment. Plenty of the people now mocking the "cynics" were part and parcel of that distorted culture themselves, or are certainly well aware of the details of it all. Blood, chemical cocktails, home-brewed Frankenstein projects of their own making. That is the legacy of pro cycling. It was such a part of the fabric, and so routine, that even my pointing it out here feels pathetically redundant.


BUT SECRETLY ALTERING THE MECHANICAL WORKINGS OF A BICYCLE?

THAT'S CRAZY TALK!

Yeah. We're the lunatic fringe.
They're the sane ones.

Whether or not I personal believe that Ryder Hesjedal was riding a mechanically doped bike in that video is inconsequential to the larger debate. The fact is, for decades upon decades this sport has been rife with liars and cheaters who willingly engaged in acts that would be abhorrent to most normal people. But when questioning something that, at first, seems somewhat out of the ordinary, these "normal" people are then painted with the brush of contempt bordering on disgust.

Pro Cycling: A sport where genetic freaks ride their bicycles as fast as they can. Not to deliver medicine to those desperately in need; not to bring food to the hungry. No, they ride their bicycles as fast as they can in order to beat some other genetic freak to the finish line.

Yay for them.

Get some friggin' perspective before casting aspersions upon those who dare question the sanctity of the tiny, little world that you occupy.

Newsflash: To most people on the street, your entire sport is a complete joke. Not just those funny moments where bikes seem to take on a life of their own. So get used to it. And spare us the indignation.

 

[MarkvW]

A bike motor that can generate more power than the power the cyclist needs to move it over the course of a race! That's an awesome invention, for sure! But most amazing are (1) that the inventors kept it secret for so long; and (2) that the inventors have kept their potential multimillion dollar invention away from the buying public.

We are fortunate that this was discovered by the Clinic!

 

[kielbasa]

A bike motor that can generate more power than the power the cyclist needs to move it over the course of a race! That's an awesome invention, for sure! But most amazing are (1) that the inventors kept it secret for so long; and (2) that the inventors have kept their potential multimillion dollar invention away from the buying public.

We are fortunate that this was discovered by the Clinic!

Actually, unbeknownst to the buying public the inventors have been secretly working with WADA on a way of secretly triggering the motor at the most inopportune moment of going downhill, during a breakaway so as not to crash the whole field (hey, those people do have a heart), and right in front of a motorbike cameraman. That makes it pretty safe to the casual cyclist, but will crash and expose the cheaters. Brilliant!

 

[observer]

Just gotta say. love this thread.

its great.

thanks everyone for participating.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Just gotta say. love this thread.

its great.

thanks everyone for participating.

What happened? Is it still about the non existing motor, or some else absurd clinic stories?
I thought this thread would get max 5 posts and then Feierabend...

 

[D-Queued]

A bike motor that can generate more power than the power the cyclist needs to move it over the course of a race! That's an awesome invention, for sure! But most amazing are (1) that the inventors kept it secret for so long; and (2) that the inventors have kept their potential multimillion dollar invention away from the buying public.

We are fortunate that this was discovered by the Clinic!

This is a spin-off of drone technology, and helps explain why Amazon has jumped into the drone-a-thon as they can see where this will propel them (get it?). Just freakin' amazon how this thread drones on...

Like most start-ups, though, the people with the propellers on their caps needed a technology demonstrator to appease potential investors and provide some proof to their prospective strategic customers.

Their real goal is to levitate the bike, to give a whole new lift to the bicycle courier delivery system, and they are allegedly just beside themselves with how close they came. Maybe if they can imbed the technology in a HED3 trispoke they will get that critical lift.

DuPont never should have sold that wheel technology. Like many Fortune 500's, they just let the future slip away from their grasp and couldn't see the real potential of what they had.

Dave.

 

[GJB123]

we agree for the most part.
but stop the math already. it's slighlty inappropriate, since we lack the relevant data to do any reliable calculations of this sort.
i.e. we don't have any clue how much Ryder's reerwheel did or didn't slow down due to the contact with the road and Ryder's unclipping.
all we know with certainty is that plenty of observers with a sane pair of eyes seem to think his reer wheel slowed down considerably before it turned ryder's bike into a merry go round.
your math is irrelevant here. besides the point. etc.
hardly any of these observers is "confident", btw, as you put it. suspicious yes, confident no.

Yes, let's throw the math and physics out of the window. Who needs it anyway when you have a good pair of eyes, half a functioning brain and a gut feeling?

 

[nomapnocompass]

Yes let's throw the math and physics out of the window. Who needs it anyway when you have a good pair of eyes, half a functioning brain and a gut feeling.

Couldn't have put it better myself!

 

[Avoriaz]

Punctures.

That's why you don't put the motor in. The hub. A rider gets through far fewer frames than wheels.

Is the Cannondale motor better than the Cervelo one and is this why they are changing suppliers?

 

[lllludo]

RYDER crash etc...

Ryders's bike movement reminds me a lot of the problems of complex movements, momentum, cynetic energy we had to solve during the mechanics classes at university. So imo you can probably observe/reproduce this trajectory without a motor on the bike ...

...but who is the bike's owner ? Ryder is a former employee of Phonak and USPS, accused by Rasmussen of doping while a mountain biker, who confessed 10 yrs after to the authorities and gave no other explanations.
When he was doping he was average Joe. After turning clean he went top 5 in the Tour and then won the Giro in front of Rodriguez, Basso & Scarponi. Ryder is still based in Girona like Lance used to be.
Conclusion: Ryder Hesjedal is a controversial character. No wonder why the motor controversy started.
If De Marchi had crashed and his bike had described the same movement you wouldn't have had half that controversy.

 

[Granville57]

Punctures.

That's why you don't put the motor in. The hub. A rider gets through far fewer frames than wheels.

Is the Cannondale motor better than the Cervelo one and is this why they are changing suppliers?

That's a good observation, but I don't think you're taking this seriously enough.

You know that old saying: If you want to catch a Canadian, you need to think like a Canadian.

Having a motor in the hub would have several advantages when subterfuge is paramount to one's success. A ryder changing frames will always draw more attention and scrutiny than merely changing a wheel.

Big hill up ahead? "Puncture."

Word that the UCI may be examining your bike at the finish in search of a motor? "Puncture."

Magnetic gyroscope not working as planned due to Sky radio interference? "Puncture."

 

[Granville57]

Looks like someone just discovered the Internet.

‏@millarmind
For all those who believed @ryder_hesjedal had a motor on his bike, watch @AlexRazi do science: http://instagram.com/p/sh0fSPirPW/

3:38 AM - 5 Sep 2014
https://twitter.com/millarmind/status/507810094051229696

Quick, someone get David a job at BBC news!

 

[Benotti69]

Looks like someone just discovered the Internet.



Quick, someone get David a job at BBC news!

Alex Rasmussen, aint he the guy who couldn't properly fill put his whereabout forms for OOC testing and we are to let him teach us about science! Pro peloton really is a circus.

 

[Benotti69]

I suppose Vaughters MBA will take all the publicity he can get

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/sep/04/ryder-hesjedal-motorised-bike-vuelta-espana

hardly matters to a team owned by ex- dopers and full of (ex) dopers.

 

[sniper]

Ryders's bike movement reminds me a lot of the problems of complex movements, momentum, cynetic energy we had to solve during the mechanics classes at university. So imo you can probably observe/reproduce this trajectory without a motor on the bike ...

...but who is the bike's owner ? Ryder is a former employee of Phonak and USPS, accused by Rasmussen of doping while a mountain biker, who confessed 10 yrs after to the authorities and gave no other explanations.
When he was doping he was average Joe. After turning clean he went top 5 in the Tour and then won the Giro in front of Rodriguez, Basso & Scarponi. Ryder is still based in Girona like Lance used to be.
Conclusion: Ryder Hesjedal is a controversial character. No wonder why the motor controversy started.
If De Marchi had crashed and his bike had described the same movement you wouldn't have had half that controversy.

good post from top to bottom.

(Off topic: his off-season Hawaii residence is similarly dodgy if you ask me, the doc he's working with over there, forgot his name, is ex-USPS and an HGH specialist. Go figure.)

 

[sniper]

Alex Rasmussen, aint he the guy who couldn't properly fill put his whereabout forms for OOC testing and we are to let him teach us about science! Pro peloton really is a circus.

according to RR, yes.


RR on twitter together with Phil Gaimon and others busy enforcing motorization-omerta by ridiculing the topic also makes me wonder.
What's the point?
If anybody thinks Hesjedal is an unfair victim, fair enough. But are they in total denial of any possibility of motorization in the propeloton?
If not, then why ridicule the topic? Why not be glad it's being addressed so that any chances of it occurring will be minimized?
Some people really only care about PEDs...

 

[GoodTimes]

A little scenario for you as i find your posts pretty awesome.

It's not clear what your question is... I think you're asking me to determine what the initial crash speed would have to be for the remaining wheel energy to be sufficient?

Oops, spake to soon. Looks like people are already on it.

So, I think it's important to point out what the objective of any wheel energy retention analysis would be. As with my previous posts, I don't think we can prove that the wheel would have retained sufficient energy. I do think we can do some useful analysis, and show that in theory, given reasonable assumptions, it is possible (or perhaps probable).

I was thinking about this problem last night. In my mind, it's a bit complicated to come up with anything useful since the rate of energy loss to pavement will decrease with time (since the angular velocity of the wheel decreases with time).

I want to avoid getting into any calculus or differential equations, etc etc. However, an iterative approach should yield a useful result. The method that I've come up with is as follows:

1. From video, determine amount of time that rear wheel is in contact with pavement between t_0 (when Ryder begins his crash), and t_1 (when Ryder unclips his foot).
2. Assume an average force between wheel and road for the above duration. This can be based on assumptions of ryder and bike mass, some angles / geometry, and a healthy dose of engineering liberty
3. Assume a reasonable value for the friction between wheel and road. This should not be the most controversial part, as there are documented ranges fo values for this.
4. Use an iterative, analytically, approach to track how the wheel energy is lost over, say, 10 discrete (linearized) steps between t_0 and t_1.

The calculations will done with an excel spreadsheet. They will be no more complicated than the calculations done on post 266, however it will be more lengthy.

The above, though, is not a trivial effort, and I got plenty else to do. If people are interested, then I might go for it, since it is an interesting topic. But, if theres no interest, I won't bother.

 

[Bluenote]

according to RR, yes.


RR on twitter together with Phil Gaimon and others busy enforcing motorization-omerta by ridiculing the topic also makes me wonder.
What's the point?
If anybody thinks Hesjedal is an unfair victim, fair enough. But are they in total denial of any possibility of motorization in the propeloton?
If not, then why ridicule the topic? Why not be glad it's being addressed so that any chances of it occurring will be minimized?
Some people really only care about PEDs...

Are people ridiculing the topic of motors in the peloton?
Or are they ridiculing this instance - saying this incomplete video is proof of a motor?
Or getting a laugh out of some of the posts 'stop your math, math is inappropriate?'

It's a strawman / conspiracy theory argument to say 'oh, the doubters here just want to shut down any talk of motors in the peloton!'

Really? The doubters here seem varied. Some find the vid inconclusive. Others think there are alternate explanations for what happened. Others ask why a rider with a motor would suck so bad. Etc...

 

[sniper]

...
I was thinking about this problem last night
...snipped...

that's actually quite a good brainstorm.
go for it if you find the time.
it addresses the central issue, and i'll revise my 'cut the math' comment.

 

[GoodTimes]

Are people ridiculing the topic of motors in the peloton?
Or are they ridiculing this instance - saying this incomplete video is proof of a motor?
Or getting a laugh out of some of the posts 'stop your math, math is inappropriate?'

It's a strawman / conspiracy theory argument to say 'oh, the doubters here just want to shut down any talk of motors in the peloton!'

Really? The doubters here seem varied. Some find the vid inconclusive. Others think there are alternate explanations for what happened. Others ask why a rider with a motor would suck so bad. Etc...

Ya, agreed with the above. My position is that the video in question is not relevant to the discussion, however that doesn't mean that the discussion is a relevant discussion to have.

 

[Red Lobster]

"I just got back from Red Lobster."

 

[IzzyStradlin]

(Off topic: his off-season Hawaii residence is similarly dodgy if you ask me, the doc he's working with over there, forgot his name, is ex-USPS and an HGH specialist. Go figure.)

William Pettis

 

[Granville57]

If anybody thinks Hesjedal is an unfair victim, fair enough. But are they in total denial of any possibility of motorization in the pro peloton? If not, then why ridicule the topic?

Because only losers who have never ridden a bike and have no experience in professional sports would ever raise the issue.

Ya' know, guys like this:
Chris Boardman warned the UCI of risks of bike doping

 

[MacRoadie]

Because only losers who have never ridden a bike and have no experience in professional sports would ever raise the issue.

Ya' know, guys like this:
Chris Boardman warned the UCI of risks of bike doping

And, of course, there's likely been little to no technological advancements in the intervening four years since that article...

 

[Granville57]

And, of course, there's likely been little to no technological advancements in the intervening four years since that article...

Well, based on the shades and helmet in this photo, you may actually be correct.