The doped bike exists (video of pro version)!

[ray j willings]

Moose I had another look, I think you have a point.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

On both occasions the bike rotates around the handlebars with the rear wheel touching the ground, I don't see the difference?

In the Rasmussen video, he is holding on to the handlebars.

Yes, I saw that, but I don't think it makes a difference? I might be wrong.

If it doesn't make a difference why is he holding on to them? Wouldn't it be natural to run the experiment replicating the conditions that originally existed?

If I were trying to prove innocence, I'd run the exact same experiment in the exact same place.

Just for you https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN7HjwZI-k0

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Re: Re:

That is certainly a more convincing demonstration, I agree.

 

[ray j willings]

Ryder's bike sort of accelerates, the one in the vid does not,

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Not sort of. The bike has stopped sliding and the wheel has touched the ground and then it starts accelerating! Back when this came out I did a quick model and used the kinetic energy in the wheel (assuming 70 km/hr) to see if it was possible to set the bike spinning the way it did. The answer is that there is *barely* enough energy if it's transferred at 100% efficiency. The other problem is how des the energy get transferred? The obvious is that the rear wheel makes contact with the ground. However, if it did then the maximum acceleration (i.e., jerk) would happen at the moment of contact and reduce as the wheel lost speed. The video shows the bike begin to rotate with constant acceleration...

John Swanson

 

[LaFlorecita]

The bike starts moving once Ryder unclips his shoe. That should be obvious...

 

[ray j willings]

Oh SH55 climbers are motor doping. Come on, That is Fu55ed up ....I can live with Fab pulling away "novelty bike style" but a mountain top battles with king Bertie , Froome ,Nibs etc comes down to engines Fu%% Me,,,, If that's the case.

might as well call it F1 Who ever has the fastest car wins.....

How do you get your head round that and carry on watching cycling. This is a big F$$king issue.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Exactly, and why the UCI must take it seriously.

If motorised bikes do enter the pro-ranks then its game over as any sort of credible sport.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Not sort of. The bike has stopped sliding and the wheel has touched the ground and then it starts accelerating! Back when this came out I did a quick model and used the kinetic energy in the wheel (assuming 70 km/hr) to see if it was possible to set the bike spinning the way it did. The answer is that there is *barely* enough energy if it's transferred at 100% efficiency. The other problem is how des the energy get transferred? The obvious is that the rear wheel makes contact with the ground. However, if it did then the maximum acceleration (i.e., jerk) would happen at the moment of contact and reduce as the wheel lost speed. The video shows the bike begin to rotate with constant acceleration...

John Swanson

all of this.


Even if the footage is not proof of a motor, Rasmussen's rebuttal is idiotic. Who is he kidding?
Ryder's front wheel stops spinning because of the impact. His rear wheel drags over the asphalt longer and with more impact than his front wheel. But yeah, let's ignore all that.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Re: Re:

Not sort of. The bike has stopped sliding and the wheel has touched the ground and then it starts accelerating! Back when this came out I did a quick model and used the kinetic energy in the wheel (assuming 70 km/hr) to see if it was possible to set the bike spinning the way it did. The answer is that there is *barely* enough energy if it's transferred at 100% efficiency. The other problem is how des the energy get transferred? The obvious is that the rear wheel makes contact with the ground. However, if it did then the maximum acceleration (i.e., jerk) would happen at the moment of contact and reduce as the wheel lost speed. The video shows the bike begin to rotate with constant acceleration...

John Swanson

all of this.


Even if the footage is not proof of a motor, Rasmussen's rebuttal is idiotic. Who is he kidding?
Ryder's front wheel stops spinning because of the impact. His rear wheel drags over the asphalt longer and with more impact than his front wheel. But yeah, let's ignore all that.

Yep. I was even more suspicious after I saw that crap Rasmussen tried to sell.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

Just for you https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN7HjwZI-k0

Wow. A picture is like a thousand words and a video is worth a thousand posts.

 

[MarkvW]

Where be the supposed motor in Hesjedal's bike?

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Bottom of a lake somewhere in Switzerland is my guess.

John Swanson

 

[Night Rider]

Re:

Where be the supposed motor in Hesjedal's bike?

There are only two possible places the motors and drive can be put, seat tube or down tube, both driving into the crank axle. If you saw and heard any of the currently manufactured units and batteries and stuff you would rofl all of these crack pots posting here. It would be so obvious if anyone were using, or trying to use a motor.

Have a look at that video Flo posted, add in the off camber that Ryder's bike slid down. Nothing more to see there.

Cookson and Circ got trolled.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

Where be the supposed motor in Hesjedal's bike?

There are only two possible places the motors and drive can be put, seat tube or down tube, both driving into the crank axle. If you saw and heard any of the currently manufactured units and batteries and stuff you would rofl all of these crack pots posting here. It would be so obvious if anyone were using, or trying to use a motor.

Have a look at that video Flo posted, add in the off camber that Ryder's bike slid down. Nothing more to see there.

Cookson and Circ got trolled.

Just a sec here guys.

Almost ready.

Just another little adjustment or two.

Ok, there.

Now I'm ready to join this dialog again and load on all the conspiracy theory stuff you want.

Dave.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Just a sec here guys.
Almost ready.
Just another little adjustment or two.
Ok, there.

Now I'm ready to join this dialog again and load on all the conspiracy theory stuff you want.
Dave.

not bad.
But do explain why CIRC, UCI and l'Equipe attach so much value to the conspiracy.

Where be the supposed motor in Hesjedal's bike?

There are only two possible places the motors and drive can be put, seat tube or down tube, both driving into the crank axle. If you saw and heard any of the currently manufactured units and batteries and stuff you would rofl all of these crack pots posting here. It would be so obvious if anyone were using, or trying to use a motor.

Have a look at that video Flo posted, add in the off camber that Ryder's bike slid down. Nothing more to see there.

Cookson and Circ got trolled.

i think you got trolled by Rasmussen and that 10 year old kid.

question for you to make it easier to comprehend how you got trolled: why was hesjedal's front wheel not spinning?

(edit: it also shows Mark and you are jumping into the discussion without actually having read the actual discussion. I noticed this is happening a lot in this thread. Posters too credulous to entertain the thought of motorization coming up with bogus arguments. Go through Ryder's thread or the previous pages of this thread, you'll see Rasmussen's vid (which is the same as the boy's vid) has already been discussed plenty of times. )

 

[LaFlorecita]

Where the hell do you see an acceleration in the Ryder clip. The bike spins at a pretty constant speed once Ryder unclips.
And. Ryder's front wheel is spinning.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Where the hell do you see an acceleration in the Ryder clip. The bike spins at a pretty constant speed once Ryder unclips.
And. Ryder's front wheel is spinning.

wow. anybody else see that?

LaFlo, I'll repeat what's been said a number of times already:
The rear wheel makes an impact on, and drags over, the asphalt, more and longer than the front wheel, which stops spinning almost completely. But forget the front wheel if you wish. Here's the key bit:
Even if the Ryder vid isn't proof of a motor, how do Rasmussen's video and the 10-year old's video do anything to rebuke it if they don't (and obviously can't) imitate the impact of the rear wheel on the asphalt and the results of that impact?
Plus, Ryder is keeping the entire bike from moving/spinning while he's clipped in. That's extra counterspin that neither Rasmussen nor the boy take into account.
It's a ridiculous bit of trolling.

 

[red_flanders]

It is possible to accept that motorized bike technology exists and has likely been used to cheat, and at the same time, see from the video that this could happen the way it did and that RH's bike does in fact only start moving once he unclips.

Both things can be true. There is nothing convincing to me about this particular incident.

Besides, if he did have a motor, why on earth would he have it on during a downhill. There's limited battery and power for sure.

 

[sniper]

Re:

It is possible to accept that motorized bike technology exists and has likely been used to cheat, and at the same time, see from the video that this could happen the way it did and that RH's bike does in fact only start moving once he unclips.

Both things can be true. There is nothing convincing to me about this particular incident.

Besides, if he did have a motor, why on earth would he have it on during a downhill. There's limited battery and power for sure.

agree the vid isn't proof of anything.
the point under discussion is that those two rebuttals by Rasmussen and the boy are plain stupid as they don't take the impact of the rear wheel into account nor the fact that Ryder was clipped in causing extra counterspin.

As for your question (why motor during downhill?), it's a very legitimate question of course, but has been asked (and answered) several times before (both here and in the Ryder thread). Imo there are two options:

1. Look at the Cassani vid again which shows you where the motor's activation button is, and look at the Cancellara slowmo vid again (where you see him clicking a button on his steering wheel shortly before accellerating). Now look at how Ryder's steering wheel hits the asphalt.

2. He accidentally switched on the motor during the descend, which may explain why he fell in the first place. When he noticed the accelleration, he decided to let himself fall. (Do you see any other reason why he may have fallen there the way he did?)

 

[Chipist]

Has anyone tried looking at that Ryder video frame by frame to see if you can see the spokes slowing down? Need to be careful with regards to aliasing mind.

 

[hrotha]

Who's the 10 year old boy you keep talking about?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

Who's the 10 year old boy you keep talking about?

Sniper thinks the lad in the video I posted is a 10 year old.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Who's the 10 year old boy you keep talking about?

Sniper thinks the lad in the video I posted is a 10 year old.

the two of you seem to be deflecting.
sad sniper.
"keep talking about"? i said that once. (eyebrowraising smiley)
I made a couple of points regarding those two rebuttals (from the kid and from A. Rasmussen), but if you don't want to discuss it, no worries.


p.s. don't know how to insert Smilies no more.

 

[hrotha]

Deflecting? I'm not even participating in the discussion.
You called him a boy a couple of times. I was curious. That's all.