Kokoso said:
Nomad said:
Tienus said:
Just for fun a link to what I think are three riders with motors battling.
At 3:30 Cancellara is doing his seated attack and Sagan follows. For me it doesnt look right if i focus only on the legs of Sagan.
https://youtu.be/kzw-96RkfL8?t=3m30s
I remember watchng that stage live...exciting finish! I watched the video you posted several times, and a family member looked at it a couple times also...so what isn't suppose to appear right with either Sagan or Spartacus? I see two very big guys producing big time power up a short, steep climb that flattens out near the finish...nothing out of the norm there. Look at the quads on these guys and their muscularity; those physical attributes can produce big-time power on short bursts. Furthermore, Spartacus is seriously grimacing in pain on the climb...if he's using a motor why would he be grimacing that much? Wouldn't he be able to give less effort and keep his tempo going with a motor? Also, when the course flattens out both he & Sagan let up continuously looking back - why not keep charging if you're using a motor for that extra power? (they both look little toasted at that point...trying to stay clear of the charging peloton). IMO, Sagan just out-kicks an older Cancellara for the win...nothing too overwhelming there.
Maybe Mr. Froome should be the center of attention on this issue. Here's a very dimuinitive, frail, anorexic-looking rider doing his best Cancellara impression by crushing TTs with massive amount of power. Lol. Doesn’t that sound like the possibility of a motor involved? (the guy never demonstrated TT ability before the Miracle transformation of 2011). But he's Britain's "holier-than-thou" hero, so instead people are suspicious of big, muscular talented riders that can generate big-time power. Don't know what I'm missing on the video, other than seeing two very talented Clydesdales duking it out on one heck of a finish up a short, steep incline.
Good laugh on this post. So you've had your family member couple of times looking at it? Then everything is all rght for sure. Everybody knows family members are well known to be cycling experts. Hard evidence there.
And when you think things can't get more ridiculous...
Furthermore, Spartacus is seriously grimacing in pain on the climb...if he's using a motor why would he be grimacing that much? Wouldn't he be able to give less effort and keep his tempo going with a motor?
If I was cheating, using motor in such situation, certainly I would give it my best to look as fresh as daisy. Because everybody would say themselves "look at him, he looks fresh as daisy, he certainly isn't cheating", right?
Why are you trying to shift attention to Froome from Mr. Sagan here? Froome has his own thread where he was questioned for his TTing many times over the yers, by much, much more people than who question Sagan here.
Actually TTing ability was only ability Froome showed some glimpses of before 2011 "miraculous transformation". Froome has lower body fat than Sagan as you point out but that in fact could be advantage even in TTing. But he is not diminutive, he's tall actually, taller than Sagan or Cancellara. More importantly long TTs aren't only about power, they are about aerobic ability too so if Froome is superior in that regard to Cancellara or Sagan (as can be expected due to his smaller muscularity) he can compete with heavier, more muscular riders. In conformity with that he never was that good in shorter TT's or prologues which are more about power. And, not least importantly, he isn't tht dominant TTs which is how your opinion looks like according to your statement. There are better.
I am not saying Sagan or Cancellara is using motor there. I am just pointing out that your argumentation is faulty. Trying to shift focus to Froome is incomprehensible thus it raises some suspection why are you doing that.
C'mon...man (as they say on "Monday Night football")...you ARE saying that Spartacus & Sagan are using a motor, or you wouldn't have ridiculed me for arguing that they aren’t. Who are you trying to fool?...simple common sense there based on the tone of your post.
No one, I really don't think that video proves Sagan using a motor. You've began with ridiculing with your post, I've just carried onin that tone. Saying that some arguments are faulty means claiming contrary? Come on.
And you speak of "hard evidence." Realistically, hard evidence in any of the motor argument is going to have to be tangible physical evidence such as a mechanically altered bike confiscated that's linked to a high-profile rider or team, along with video evidence, realiable witness statements, recorded conversations, etc. The kind of evidence you would need to prove a case beyond any doubt. Everything else here is just pure speculation, congecture & biased opinions.
Agreed, especially the last part. That's including you. Problem is, you fail to recognize that.
Some here have said that the UCI isn't interested in catching riders/teams with mechanically altered bikes. Maybe that's true, however, that doesn't preclude an aggressive investigative reporter(s) from obtaining sufficient evidence and wanting to make a name for themselves by going public with the information.
True, that's exactly what journalists in the other video are doing. But I don't see how you imagine journalist catching suspected rider: pushing him of the bike in the middle of race? Or do you think that any team or rider using bike with motor would go, present that bike to journalist and say "it's all yours to investigate". I can imagine it can be really hard, if not impossible for such journalist to obtain that bike, so probably impossible to obtain sufficient evidence.
There's no magical transformation with Sagan from dud to winner. He's been a talented rider since entering WT competition.
Most importantly you know nothing about his talent. Anyway, do you know that story when young Sagan goes and beats all in Slovakian MTB cup on his sister's borrowed *** bike? And that was in 2007, back than he was 17 years old. Speaking of miraculous stories, this sounds as miraculous as miraculous transformation of Froome. You don't have 17 years old rider beating pro's on borrowed bike, have you? I can hear argument "but he's insanly talented, duh"
So Froome was talented but began to train really hard or he become really talented in later age and that's it
By the way, isn't fact that Sagan began to beat the best from point zero in very young age suspect story, too? I don't know
He wins a lot on courses that suits his riding style and body type. He's got a VO2max of 83 (up there with Froome), and legs built like pistons. He packs a powerful punch with that muscularity. A big, powerful athlete than can produce those impressive watts that some think are unachievable without a motor. Maybe because of the mere fact that he is very successful is evidence of biological doping in the eyes of many on the Clinic. Perhaps a possibility with low-octane PEDs, or at the least TUE drugs and non-banned substances...though I wouldn't really know (who would?). However, he doesn't look any more suspicious than others, and certainly doesn't come anywhere close to the egregious suspicion surrounding your hero, Froome
Nice adoration. We know you have soft spot for Sagan (same way you could say Froome wins on courses that suit him and that's it). Of course others have legs of mud, low VO2 max and *** punch. Certainly Sagan doesn't look as suspicious as others, all others are winning bunch of races too, aren't they? Sprinting with best, TTing, climbing with best (with such impressive muscularity) on occasion and so on. Absolutely nothing suspicous there. Why is suspicious Froome to you, anyway? He wins races which suit him, so what's the problem? If he was pack fodder, THEN he would become suspicious, or not?
Froome is not my hero (how have you come to such conlusion? Your wits begans to betray you
Froome is one of the most suspect out there, as is Sagan.
It's clear who your hero is though. If it's about Sagan, your rationality leaves you. Nevertheless I find it useful.