Should Wiggins lose his hour record due to cheating?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re: Re:

cellardoor said:
argyllflyer said:
There were a few versions of Dowsett's bike, and one will be sold for a silly price. He got one and another will be raffled off.
If the rules say the bike has to be commercially available and only 2 or 3 are produced and sold, then to my mind that is gaming the system.
I agree, it is gaming the system. But the system leaves itself open to just this, so it doesn't make it 'cheating'. It's the old 'spirit of the rule' vs 'letter of the law'.

As for moulded to Wiggins arms…well, sell a couple of bikes with the handlebars exactly the same as Wiggins needs and it's 'commercially available'.
 
Alex Dowsett ‏@alexdowsett Jun 7

Congratulations to Bradley on beating my record, great for the UK cycling scene to have had 2 British record holders.

Alex Dowsett ‏@alexdowsett Jun 7

British record holders recently I meant to say. Apologies
 
Re: Re:

cellardoor said:
argyllflyer said:
There were a few versions of Dowsett's bike, and one will be sold for a silly price. He got one and another will be raffled off.
If the rules say the bike has to be commercially available and only 2 or 3 are produced and sold, then to my mind that is gaming the system.
Is the whole bike with customized equipment or just the frame that's supposed to be commercially available?
 
Nov 16, 2011
426
0
0
They just need to create more 3d printed handlebars and attach them to the "Wiggins special" bike model and it will sell like crazy. No matter it's custom shaped just for him, it will still sell wildly. Not like any of these bikes are going to be ridden by the buyer, nor do they have to. They go to collector's to place onto a wall. No difficulties in the production or selling process. Don't know why anyone would question this.
 
The UCI approved his bike BEFORE he broke the record therefore he did not cheat. Had they gigged his bike, his team would have made adjustments and resubmitted it for approval. Who thinks that he just showed up at the track with the bike and rode it without officials checking everything?!
 
Just for clarity, Pro Cycling mag says the following about Dowsett's bike:

6 produced by Canyon. Dowsett gets one, Movistar another. One will be auctioned for charity and another one will be put up for sale, per UCI rules which says one must be available to buy. They may produce more if there's greater demand.
 
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re:

argyllflyer said:
Just for clarity, Pro Cycling mag says the following about Dowsett's bike:

6 produced by Canyon. Dowsett gets one, Movistar another. One will be auctioned for charity and another one will be put up for sale, per UCI rules which says one must be available to buy. They may produce more if there's greater demand.
I have to say, that is by no definition I recognise, 'commercially available'. However, rules is rules.
 
Sep 30, 2014
359
2
4,285
Re:

FoxxyBrown1111 said:
Jonhard tell us all where clinic stuff is mentioned. I don´t see it. :confused:
It was a semi-tongue in cheek comment… the facts of the matter seemed to disappear into a whirlpool of non-verifiable allegations, such as suggestions that if the UCI had approved the bike it could only because of some innate corruption. I’m not saying the UCI is perfect but in a discussion about rule breaches the UCI position is relevant, indeed determinative.

Dowsett has distanced himself from the comments, which were not made by his coach as reported. Wiggins is clickbait, especially in the UK.
 
Mar 31, 2015
278
0
0
Re: Re:

Electress said:
argyllflyer said:
Just for clarity, Pro Cycling mag says the following about Dowsett's bike:

6 produced by Canyon. Dowsett gets one, Movistar another. One will be auctioned for charity and another one will be put up for sale, per UCI rules which says one must be available to buy. They may produce more if there's greater demand.
I have to say, that is by no definition I recognise, 'commercially available'. However, rules is rules.
You can buy it with money, commercially available. I think there is a similar rule with rally cars but they have a minimum number that need to go on sale.
 
Re:

happytramp said:
I thought all the horse Sh** was supposed to be confined to 'the Clinic'?
Good troll. "The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures." Hour record equipment does not fall into that category nor does horse sh**. Your assumption is not correct. You would be better off arguing that track event discussions do not belong in the Professional Road Racing category.

EDIT: I started a thread in the TRACK category for this discussion.
 
I apologise if this is deemed off-topic, but does anyone know
where one could purchase a set of the Campagnolo wheels
like those Mr. Dowsett used in his Hour Record ride? I think
they'd look (and perform) excellent on my Pinarello but I've
not been able to source them anywhere.
 
May 3, 2011
1,791
0
0
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
happytramp said:
I thought all the horse Sh** was supposed to be confined to 'the Clinic'?
Good troll. "The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures." Hour record equipment does not fall into that category nor does horse sh**. Your assumption is not correct. You would be better off arguing that track event discussions do not belong in the Professional Road Racing category.

EDIT: I started a thread in the TRACK category for this discussion.
And you managed to completely miss the meaning behind his post.
 
Re: Re:

Richeypen said:
jmdirt said:
happytramp said:
I thought all the horse Sh** was supposed to be confined to 'the Clinic'?
Good troll. "The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures." Hour record equipment does not fall into that category nor does horse sh**. Your assumption is not correct. You would be better off arguing that track event discussions do not belong in the Professional Road Racing category.

EDIT: I started a thread in the TRACK category for this discussion.
And you managed to completely miss the meaning behind his post.
Another good troll! I responded to happy's post at face value. I also read it three other ways but did not respond to those alternative interpretations because I don't know what meaning happy was going for. You however know what ht meant...impressive. Could you interpret some poetry for me later?
 
May 3, 2011
1,791
0
0
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
Richeypen said:
jmdirt said:
happytramp said:
I thought all the horse Sh** was supposed to be confined to 'the Clinic'?
Good troll. "The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures." Hour record equipment does not fall into that category nor does horse sh**. Your assumption is not correct. You would be better off arguing that track event discussions do not belong in the Professional Road Racing category.

EDIT: I started a thread in the TRACK category for this discussion.
And you managed to completely miss the meaning behind his post.
Another good troll! I responded to happy's post at face value. I also read it three other ways but did not respond to those alternative interpretations because I don't know what meaning happy was going for. You however know what ht meant...impressive. Could you interpret some poetry for me later?
And onto the ignore list you go :)
 
Re: Re:

Richeypen said:
jmdirt said:
Richeypen said:
jmdirt said:
happytramp said:
I thought all the horse Sh** was supposed to be confined to 'the Clinic'?
Good troll. "The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures." Hour record equipment does not fall into that category nor does horse sh**. Your assumption is not correct. You would be better off arguing that track event discussions do not belong in the Professional Road Racing category.

EDIT: I started a thread in the TRACK category for this discussion.
And you managed to completely miss the meaning behind his post.
Another good troll! I responded to happy's post at face value. I also read it three other ways but did not respond to those alternative interpretations because I don't know what meaning happy was going for. You however know what ht meant...impressive. Could you interpret some poetry for me later?
And onto the ignore list you go :)
Oh, the irony! :eek:
 
May 11, 2009
1,301
0
0
Apr 15, 2014
6
0
0
No, no no you are all missing the point of this rule!

The bike has to be manufactured by a commercial outfit.

Otherwise someone might make a shoddy old bike out of washing machine parts for the record. How's that going to encourage you too buy a new bike each year?

I saw this happen in a movie once
 
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
The coach of the rider whose record was just broken might have a teensy bit of a conflict of interest on this particular topic.
This is actually irrelevant in this case is, because what was denounced is actual a fact. The UCI clearly states that no custum-fit production of any part of the bike for the purpose of improving performance is allowed (and that the bike has to be commercially on the market at the time, which it was not). This boils down, therefore, to a techincal consideration and the rule governing it (and, yes, in this sense Wiggins definitely brook the rule). Obviously the UCI has every business-political motivation to not bring him to task, but as Flo stated, if the rule isn't being applied because he is Bradly Wiggins (and the only rational conclusion is that, yes, this is the case), then the denouncing coach and his rider's performance have been defrauded and "justice" has not behaved impartially.

What happens now? Well either the UCI has to change the rule, which would be tacit admission of their guilt, or not change the rule and be forced to turn a blind eye to everyone else who has parts custom manufactured as Wiggins did to improve performance. This is still an admission, though, that it did not apply the rule in Bradley's case.
 
Re: Re:

rhubroma said:
djpbaltimore said:
The coach of the rider whose record was just broken might have a teensy bit of a conflict of interest on this particular topic.
This is actually irrelevant in this case is, because what was denounced is actual a fact. The UCI clearly states that no custum-fit production of any part of the bike for the purpose of improving performance is allowed (and that the bike has to be commercially on the market at the time, which it was not). This boils down, therefore, to a techincal consideration and the rule governing it (and, yes, in this sense Wiggins definitely brook the rule). Obviously the UCI has every business-political motivation to not bring him to task, but as Flo stated, if the rule isn't being applied because he is Bradly Wiggins (and the only rational conclusion is that, yes, this is the case), then the denouncing coach and his rider's performance have been defrauded and "justice" has not behaved impartially.

What happens now? Well either the UCI has to change the rule, which would be tacit admission of their guilt, or not change the rule and be forced to turn a blind eye to everyone else who has parts custom manufactured as Wiggins did to improve performance. This is still an admission, though, that it did not apply the rule in Bradley's case.

If you argue with someone you really should look up the rules beforehand:

"Article 1.3.007 of the UCI regulations state that a bike “designed especially for the attainment of a particular performance (record or other) shall be not authorised.” According to the UCI’s rules, the bike must become commercially available within nine months of Wiggins’ attempt."

I'm guessing you can also custom order some 3D printed bars if you want. I agree with you and think there is an issue with the part in italics with the titanium bars, although it could be argued either way.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS