Sagan Clean?

[Tienus]

Altough I do not think it is relevant for the point you are trying to make, but how can you tell that there was no number on the bike Sagan changed from 69.7 km to go? Unless there is any better view at another time, at the moment of change it is very difficult to see due to passing cars but I think at one moment in which Sagan lifts the bike the number is visible:

yes you are right. Only the new bike has no number. I mixed it up with 2013.
https://youtu.be/_yHGMnynGoo?t=1h11m30s
At 1:11:30
No apparent defect and the team car was ready.
This time both bikes have no number on it.

And I was also curious about this claim so I checked and found out rather quickly that in his both best races in Richmond and RVV '16 he finished with a number on his bike, whatever that may mean for whether he finished on his starting bike.

I didnt look at those. I should not have posted that as I really didnt google much.

 

[sniper]

Re:

...
https://youtu.be/_yHGMnynGoo?t=1h11m30s
At 1:11:30
No apparent defect and the team car was ready.
This time both bikes have no number on it.

nice one.

Cancellara comfortable to the win though.
Big engine.

 

[PeterB]

Re: Re:

...
https://youtu.be/_yHGMnynGoo?t=1h11m30s
At 1:11:30
No apparent defect and the team car was ready.
This time both bikes have no number on it.

nice one.

Cancellara comfortable to the win though.
Big engine.

Big LOL guys you are comedy gold, really. I am sorry to laugh at you publicly but you must admit it is better than getting angry at you, isn't it (plus you deserve it).

So you see no number here?

I know it is a bit unusual place but how about looking below the top tube?

 

[sniper]

i think the important point is that there is no number on the spare bike.

Sagan sure loves to change bikes for no apparent reason.

I'm sure the glowing of his bike caught by the Stade 2 heat camera was a fluke though.
Camera calibration error.

And yes, people who dare question your hero deserve to be laughed at. Fair point.
Do keep laughing. Healthy

 

[PeterB]

Re:

i think the important point is that there is no number on the spare bike.

So how is no number on a spare bike important? Not even mentioning that this is definitely not the point Tienus was trying to make and for which you praised him for his find.

Sagan sure loves to change bikes for no apparent reason.

When did he change bike for no apparent reason enabling you to use "sure" in your claim? In this 2013 edition, he was on someone else's bike for about 30kms before and you can see during 5 minutes before this change how he repeatedly looked down on his gears or chain or something as uphill accelerations started, clearly having some techincal problems disabling him from following group of riders escaping from the peloton at that moment.

I'm sure the glowing of his bike caught by the Stade 2 heat camera was a fluke though.
Camera calibration error.

Oh yes, the legendary glowing of his bike that we are yet to see but which you apparently saw reflecting in Cookson's glasses in your dreams.

And yes, people who dare question your hero deserve to be laughed at. Fair point.
Do keep laughing. Healthy

I am really not going to comment on this non-sense.

 

[Tienus]

So you see no number here?

I see it now. Its not his number so probably Marangonis bike.

When did he change bike for no apparent reason enabling you to use "sure" in your claim? In this 2013 edition, he was on someone else's bike for about 30kms before and you can see during 5 minutes before this change how he repeatedly looked down on his gears or chain or something as uphill accelerations started, clearly having some techincal problems disabling him from following group of riders escaping from the peloton at that moment.

In the 5 minutes before his change I dont see him having technical problems. Neither does the commentator as he mentions that he is not sure what is wrong with his bike. The Belgium commentator also point this out.
http://sporza.be/cm/sporza/matchcenter/mc_wielrennen/2.26812/1.1574452
in Flemish at 16:05 in the timeline.
As he was not riding his own bike I expect the excuse to be changing back to his own bike rather than having a tech problem. His timing was good as usual, there was a wide flat road and he got back in the peloton before the next climb.

Sniper is right that he changed bike for no apparent reason. He did it in the tour and lied about it being a climbing bike. He probably had to come up with a different excuse that time as the camera was filming his bike looking for a defect before he stopped. I think thats why Sagan was kicking at the camera and shouting at him. Can you give me a good explanation why he changed his bike with only 37km to go on a stage he could win?
He was actually the fastest in the sprint but had to come from too far to win as you can see from the aerial view at the end of this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3TBw2WMl74

I also think his mechanic is not telling the truth. He made up an excuse that the car was two minutes behind and the peloton was split in three groups.
https://youtu.be/XXJVYYhhYi8?t=3m8s
The live footage start with 86 km to go and there is still a big peloton with all cars behind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9GkNLaGjy0
Nothing about a split up peloton in the cyclingnews report
http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/e3-harelbeke-2014/results/
The most spectacular feats were the bike changes for Peter Sagan, a double flat tyre for Sep Vanmarcke

 

[PeterB]

Re:

Tienus, I must say I am not sure what is your point of posting all this analysis. I can only assume that you try to find evidence of moto doping, but you do not mention anything in that regard in your posts. So maybe you just try to earn acknowledgment from the clinic regulars. Do as you wish. In any case, please treat my response as just another correction of your claims or warning if your reasoning is logically flawed.
E3 '13 - so now we have agreed that he was on Marangoni's bike after earlier mechanical and changed to his spare bike
E3 '14 - again swapped bike with Marangoni after crash and changed later to his spare one. But still you think the mechanic lied about not being able to give spare bike to Sagan immediately due to being too far behind, because at 86km to go you do not see any splits in the peloton. In this respect, I feel the need of pointing you to the following:
1) The crash happened at 100 kms from start, i.e. 113 kms to go. What you see on the screen at 86 kms to go is irrelevant for race situation at 113 kms to go
2) The cyclingnews race report contains also link to live report http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/e3-harelbeke-2014/live-report/ where you can read

12:34:44 GMT A crash has caused panic in the peloton.
12:36:39 GMT Several went down and were delayed, including Oscar Gatto (Cannondale).

Please take this into account when deciding whether mechanic's claim about split in the peloton following the crash and "panic" is plausible.
3) What reason for mechanic's lying would there be anyway? Apparently Marangoni's bike was fine for Sagan. Do you blame them for not changing him to his spare bike early enough or what?

TDF '15 stage 15 "bottle throwing" bike change - I can think of tens of reasons why changing bikes 37kms before finish but I have no idea which one is right. But I have no problem with explanation given that he used one bike for the first part of the stage with climbs, knowing he would go into breakaway, and another one for the sprint. You noted he was lying in interview - well I find it quite hard to imagine that he would be able to make up a lie like that in his broken english so quickly. You noted that none of the bikes was climbing one; the first one could however have different gears or whatever which favoured it for climbs but not sprint, no? But if you wish to stick with your own explanation, do as you please.

And finally, this is not related to cycling but logic. Can you tell the difference between

Sagan sure loves to change bikes for no apparent reason.

and

Sniper is right that he changed bike for no apparent reason.

Probably not, otherwise you would not agree with him.
What sniper wrote suggest that there is a tendency or habit of changing bikes for no apparent reason, which spans for and exhibits during a certain period of time. So one such occurrence for which you do not believe in reason given does not validate sniper's statement.

 

[Tienus]

Tienus, I must say I am not sure what is your point of posting all this analysis. I can only assume that you try to find evidence of moto doping, but you do not mention anything in that regard in your posts. So maybe you just try to earn acknowledgment from the clinic regulars. Do as you wish. In any case, please treat my response as just another correction of your claims or warning if your reasoning is logically flawed.

I do think Sagan is motordoping and I dont need acknowledgement from anyone. I am curious so I look a bit deeper when I have time, its more interesting than watching tv. I also like if you or others scrutinize my posts.

Probably not, otherwise you would not agree with him.

I do agree with sniper so I should have written bikes.

Please take this into account when deciding whether mechanic's claim about split in the peloton following the crash and "panic" is plausible.

The mechanic talks about the peloton split in 3 groups with the team car 2 minutes behind. I did read several race reports and did not see a big split mentioned anywhere. What I did read was this:
The most spectacular feats were the bike changes for Peter Sagan
Which is plural which I'm sure you've noticed.

What reason for mechanic's lying would there be anyway? Apparently Marangoni's bike was fine for Sagan. Do you blame them for not changing him to his spare bike early enough or what?

I think the team have got something to hide. A swap with another rider which might not have happened gives Sagan an excuse to change bikes again.

Since I cant find footage from before 86km I cant prove that team Cannondale is lying. Fortunately in the Paris Roubaix 2014 I found 3 bike changes for no apparent reason from Sagan. This time both Sagan and Marangoni are lying about it.
You have posted Marangoni blog before:
http://www.thepelotonbrief.com/alan-marangoni-paris-roubaix/
This is an interview with Sagan:
http://www.ad.nl/wielrennen/sagan-nu-genieten-van-een-poosje-verlof~ad32cb40/

"Just before the famous passage to the Wallers-Arenberg forest I had been dropped to make a bike change because my gear machine was broken. Then I had to deal with a flat tire, so I had to sit on the bike of my team-mate Alan Marangoni. I would lose too much time with another wheel change. Twenty kilometers further on I was able to again take my own bike. "

Here is the race video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjxt_odjJjs&t=1848s
21:35 Sagan is at the front of the peloton
21:45 crash peloton wich apparantly damages sagan's derailleur. There seem to be no Cannondale riders involved though. Marangoni's blog story does not match the situation.
22:56 Sagan is at the back of the peloton probably to swap bikes but there is a split due to the crash and the car is too far.
25:05 Sagan is waving for the team car who is almost at the front and Sagan swaps bikes. Why is his team mate holding a wheel? I would not be surpised if he was also swapping bikes.

Although it is possible it does not look like Sagan used Marangoni's bike at any stage. Marangoni describes in his blog where this should have happened.

1:18:00 Sagan has another swap with a bike from the team car
1:18:41 Sagan bike has his nr 101
1:52:55 Sagan has another swap with a bike from the team car
1:59:22 Sagan puts on the turbo
2:05:55 Sagan bike has his nr 101

So 3 bike changes with the team car as you can see. You are free to belief team Cannondale but I think they are lying.

TDF '15 stage 15 "bottle throwing" bike change - I can think of tens of reasons why changing bikes 37kms before finish but I have no idea which one is right. But I have no problem with explanation given that he used one bike for the first part of the stage with climbs, knowing he would go into breakaway, and another one for the sprint. You noted he was lying in interview - well I find it quite hard to imagine that he would be able to make up a lie like that in his broken english so quickly. You noted that none of the bikes was climbing one; the first one could however have different gears or whatever which favoured it for climbs but not sprint, no? But if you wish to stick with your own explanation, do as you please.

http://www.nbcsports.com/video/peter-sagan-explains-bike-change-stage-15

Sagan claims it was a lighter climbing bike. I did prove that was a lie.

 

[sniper]

Absolutely brilliant Tienus.

I don't have much to contribute much right now.
But I do want to highlight this bit:

A swap with another rider which might not have happened gives Sagan an excuse to change bikes again.

It's another awesome observation.
Reminds me of Cancellara 2010 RvV, changing bikes, which, according to Jacky Durand, most likely served the purpose of changing the battery.



@Peter B: as Tienus points out, your scrutiny is most welcome; that's what a fruitful discussion and exhcnage of thoughts is all about. Perhaps, and I hope it's not too much to ask, could you leave the pedantic meta-commentary aside? It would be great if you'd stick to playing ball, not man.

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

I have posted this in the motordope topic before.
In the stade 2 doc it sounds like the journalist is telling Cooksen that Sagan used a motor midrace in the Strade Bianchi but at the finish his bike was no longer glowing. Brian confirmed his bike was checked after the race.
starting at 11:15
https://youtu.be/15kIyBhsX8o?t=11m14s

Just a point of clarification because this keeps coming up and spoken about as fact, that is that Stade 2 is telling Cookson that Sagan used a motor.

When you say "it sounds like", what do you mean? I can't make out the French. "It sounds like" sounds somewhat vague. I think I can hear the words "finished 4th" in English in the background. Is that what you mean? Are you fluent in French and if so can you provide a short transcript of the conversation? Just the short relevant bits if you can. I think it would add a lot of clarity.

I also maintain that the heat bloom in the bottom bracket which they show is very weak evidence. It is nothing like the obvious motor they show with their own rider.

I'm just looking for some clarity, not trying to argue. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if he were motor-doping, but I did not arrive at any kind of definitive conclusion from what I saw of the Stade 2 documentary–with my limited understanding. I think we can likely say that Stade 2 believe the rider in 4th was possibly using a motor. I did not see them present any kind of compelling evidence in the show, and really wonder why. I am suspicious for sure but I hardly found their presentation definitive.

Further, if the bike was indeed checked, and I grant it's possible or even likely this is BS, this would implicate the UCI directly in a cover-up if there were definitive evidence of actual motor-doping by Sagan. Why is no one running with the story? The World Champion implicated in motor-doping? Sounds wildly click-worthy and news-worthy. But no one is running with it? It's confusing.

Thanks for any clarification.

 

[sniper]

We discussed the heatbloom at length previously.
A motor seemed the most plausible explanation.
In fact, people weren't able to give another explanation. (WHICH doesn't mean there isn t one. Just that, as it stands, its fair to assume the heatbloom indicates a motor.)

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

This is still far removed from being "proof", but...
We discussed the heatbloom at length previously.
And there was broad agreement that a motor is the most plausible explanation.
In fact, people weren't able to give another explanation.

Friction? I don't know. it's minor and I have no idea how they calibrate the machine or the color schema. This really matters when looking at heat visualizations. Are they showing a 1 degree difference? 10 degrees? We have no idea. I don't really expect them to get into all that, but most disappointing, they didn't compare the heat bloom to another rider's bike visually. We have no idea what a "non-motorized" bb looks like with this camera. Is this the only bike that has such a heat bloom? We don't know. Is there another explanation? Seems quite possible. Seems quite possible they're right. Why not do a comparison?

There are for example heat blooms (again, minor ones) on several riders' rear cassettes. They imply this is a motor (possibly) for one rider but don't explain why others have similar blooms, nor do they compare a "motorized" rear cassette visually to a "non-motorized" cassette side by side. Leaves questions.

I made these points before, yes, it was discussed. No one had any answers for these questions.

I grant that Stade 2 thinks some riders are doping, and I grant that this has some weight. I maintain they did a very poor job of convincing me they have the definitive evidence. Yet people are acting like it's an established fact. Too many questions remaining for that conclusion. "Most plausible"? Maybe. Certainly different than stating as fact that Sagan was pegged in the Stade 2 investigation.

I'm interested in Tienus' answers to my specific questions above. I'm sure he/she can add clarity.

 

[sniper]

the comparison was done, and it indicated a motor.
i'll try to dig up the old discussion.

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

the comparison was done, and it indicated a motor.
i'll try to dig up the old discussion.

Maybe just point me to the point in the video where they did a comparison. I recall being struck that they didn't and thinking that was odd. I could be wrong.

 

[sniper]

You say you don't speak French, but it's actually in English, quite audible despite the French voice-over.
And there is a strictly English version, too, thats been posted in multople places.

Before asking somebody to translate, maybe you can do a minor bit of research yourself?

 

[sniper]

Anyway, it's as Tienus says: the guy is showing Cookson a glowing hub, says that it looks like a motor ('suspicious' of a motor), then adds that it's the guy who finished fourth [in Strade Biachni, which is clear from previous context, ed.].
There's not much more to it.

So "it sounds as if" is fairly well formulated.
Nothing more, nothing less.

The comparison was not only done in the program, but also here in the Clinic. I'll see if I can find the discussion.

 

[red_flanders]

This is their own rider. This is obvious: https://youtu.be/15kIyBhsX8o?t=5m30s

This is where they show the heat bloom in the rear cassette: https://youtu.be/15kIyBhsX8o?t=9m02s This is not in any way convincing to me. Interesting, but as you watch the bike move away, many, many parts of the bike (notably the tires) are much hotter. The cranks, pedals, etc. I'm not in any way convinced.

Here https://youtu.be/15kIyBhsX8o?t=10m10s they show one bike passing (no heat bloom in bb) and then a second with a heat bloom in the bb. You are quite correct they do compare it to one bike, so my apologies there. But if you look at that same bike at exactly frame https://youtu.be/15kIyBhsX8o?t=10m20s you will see the rear cassette lit up much hotter than the bb. Why? I assume friction from the chain. So this leaves me wondering what we're really seeing in the video.

It IS interesting. It is NOT definitive. To me, anyway. Again, I would not be remotely surprised to find out Sagan is motor-doping. I'm much more inclined to believe he's doping just like everyone else unless there is something more convincing than a minor heat bloom on one short segment.

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

The comparison was not done in the program, but here in the Clinic. As I said, I'll see if I can find the discussion.

Thanks, but I've followed the discussion. I still have the specific questions for Tienus above. Appreciate the effort.

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

Anyway, it's as Tienus says: the guy is showing Cookson a glowing hub, says that it looks like a motor ('suspicious' of a motor), then adds that it's the guy who finished fourth [in Strade Biachni, which is clear from previous context, ed.].
There's not much more to it.

Odd because the visual they show directly before and after the Cookson segment is of a bottom bracket.

 

[sniper]

indeed it's not definitive.

unless there is something more convincing than a minor heat bloom on one short segment

I don't think you should be hoping for anything *more* convincing. As always it's about the sum of evidence. Not about individual pieces.
There are other signs (posted by Tienus, e.g. his high cadence accelleration in one of those video links, his multiple bike switches without proper explanation, the lie(s) from the mechanics), which, if you add them up, provide a quite suspicious picture. Compelling in my view, but I understand others being more cuatious.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Anyway, it's as Tienus says: the guy is showing Cookson a glowing hub, says that it looks like a motor ('suspicious' of a motor), then adds that it's the guy who finished fourth [in Strade Biachni, which is clear from previous context, ed.].
There's not much more to it.

Odd because the visual they show directly before and after the Cookson segment is of a bottom bracket.

my bad. I meant a heat bloom. Not hub.
I think it's not clear from the vid where the bloom is.

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

indeed it's not definitive.

unless there is something more convincing than a minor heat bloom on one short segment

I don't think you should be hoping for anything *more* convincing. As always it's about the sum of evidence. Not about individual pieces.
There are other signs (posted by Tienus, e.g. his high cadence accelleration in one of those video links, his multiple bike switches without proper explanation, the lie(s) from the mechanics), which, if you add them up, provide a quite suspicious picture. Compelling in my view, but I understand others being more cuatious.

My current inquiry is not about trying to form a picture of whether Sagan is motor-doping from all of the evidence. I would agree there is suspicion there. I'm trying to understand the specific questions I have about the Stade 2 documentary as they apply to Sagan.

If anyone can translate the segments in question (paraphrasing is fine of course) or add clarity to my specific questions, that would be great.

 

[sniper]

For the heat bloom discussion, see especially this thread (only five pages):
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=30858&start=80&hilit=heat+stade
In that thread too, Tienus was having some great posts mainly wrt Roglic.
Worth having a look.

 

[Tienus]

My French spelling is horrible but this is what I make of the french translator voice:

Cookson:
Peut etre il y a une explication tous simple. Cést peut etre de friction.
Maybe there is a simple explanation. Maybe its friction.

Journalist:
on peux pas dire il y a un moteur dans velo. On peux avoir une suspision. I'l est controle apres la course
We cant say there is a motor in the bike. We can have a suspission. It has been checked after the race.
absolutement
il est finish quatrieme mais a la fin yl ni a plus de lumiere dans les pedalier
Hij finished fourth but he was no longer glowing.

c:
interessant


Stade 2 filmed at strade Bianchi and at a grand fondo. Bikes where only checked at strade and not at the grand fondo iirc.

I have no knowledge of motor technologie or heat cameras so I cant give a valuable judgement on the thermal images

Further, if the bike was indeed checked, and I grant it's possible or even likely this is BS, this would implicate the UCI directly in a cover-up if there were definitive evidence of actual motor-doping by Sagan. Why is no one running with the story? The World Champion implicated in motor-doping? Sounds wildly click-worthy and news-worthy. But no one is running with it? It's confusing.

Femke and the Barfield emails implicate the UCi also directly.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

Anyway, it's as Tienus says: the guy is showing Cookson a glowing hub, says that it looks like a motor ('suspicious' of a motor), then adds that it's the guy who finished fourth [in Strade Biachni, which is clear from previous context, ed.].
There's not much more to it.

Odd because the visual they show directly before and after the Cookson segment is of a bottom bracket.

my bad. I meant a heat bloom. Not hub.
I think it's not clear from the vid where the bloom is.

I see. But is it obvious? The rear cassette reads much, much hotter than the bb in that brief segment. So clearly the bb is less hot than an area with (presumably) some friction. Then a moment later, same bike, no heat bloom from the rear cassette. Was this on a downhill? Doesn't look like it. Could the bb heat also be friction? Maybe. Doesn't look like a motor to me.

I find it all very inconsistent what has a minor heat bloom and what doesn't in these videos. It is really hard to accept this as any kind of evidence of a motor. For me.