The doped bike exists (video of pro version)!

[sniper]

Just as the Hitch suggested above, you may want to broaden the possibilities that you are considering.

1. Giving a response to a baseless accusation gives it substance. So nothing to win there.

So Hesjedal must not have been too happy with A. Rasmussen's 'support' video.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Video says SRAM?

indeed Saxo were using SRAM that year.
So could that account for the clicking?

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

For me, it's simply a matter of too many coincidences. A well-known rider like Cancellara has never been seen (well, at least I've never seen) to put in a huge seated attack like that in a major race before. In fact, I've never seen anyone put in that kind of seated attack before. There was also a premeditated bike change at a fixed location re: having your mechanic stand at a specific spot with a new bike - never seen that before especially in a flat race. And of course, all this happens right at the time when the technology improves to the point that a hidden motor, controller and battery all become feasible (I listed off the shelf components that could give ~200 Watts several posts back). Not only that, you immediately get several commentators from within the sport talking about motorized doping complete with videos of actual bikes.

Never seen before seated attack. Super big race. Premeditated bike change. Right when bike doping becomes feasible. Actual bikes shown.

It's a case of circumstantial evidence and Cancellara is lucky that Hitch and Merckx are more likely to be on the jury than I am. Who's correct? I doubt we'll ever know.

John Swanson

Lance was doing far stranger things, and he was a donkey.

Lance's high cadence and extended standing would arguably provided better 'coincidences' than Spartacus accelerating like a trackie (i.e. seated).

Now, wrt to Cancellera, I've never seen him attack standing. But, seated? Lots of times.

Here is the 2013 Tour of Flanders.

Three seated attacks inside of 7 minutes. Each puts in huge time on the competition until he finally walks away from Sagan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs0rQWKvkOs

2m57
4m39
10m

All seated. All vicious.

You should watch more bike races John.

Dave.

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

For me, it's simply a matter of too many coincidences. A well-known rider like Cancellara has never been seen (well, at least I've never seen) to put in a huge seated attack like that in a major race before. In fact, I've never seen anyone put in that kind of seated attack before. There was also a premeditated bike change at a fixed location re: having your mechanic stand at a specific spot with a new bike - never seen that before especially in a flat race. And of course, all this happens right at the time when the technology improves to the point that a hidden motor, controller and battery all become feasible (I listed off the shelf components that could give ~200 Watts several posts back). Not only that, you immediately get several commentators from within the sport talking about motorized doping complete with videos of actual bikes.

Never seen before seated attack. Super big race. Premeditated bike change. Right when bike doping becomes feasible. Actual bikes shown.

It's a case of circumstantial evidence and Cancellara is lucky that Hitch and Merckx are more likely to be on the jury than I am. Who's correct? I doubt we'll ever know.

John Swanson

Lance was doing far stranger things, and he was a donkey.

Lance's high cadence and extended standing would arguably provided better 'coincidences' than Spartacus accelerating like a trackie (i.e. seated).

Now, wrt to Cancellera, I've never seen him attack standing. But, seated? Lots of times.

Here is the 2013 Tour of Flanders.

Three seated attacks inside of 7 minutes. Each puts in huge time on the competition until he finally walks away from Sagan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs0rQWKvkOs

2m57
4m39
10m

All seated. All vicious.

You should watch more bike races John.

Dave.

I should *totally* watch more racing. But I did in fact watch that particular Flanders (Pauwel Kwak in hand - yes at 6am). Cancellara was exciting to watch and animated the race with his attacks. Solo win after annihilating Sagan was impressive. However, it really looked like he was working for it. He was missing that... extra 150 Watts at some points?

John Swanson

 

[sniper]

Re: I had to register for this one

OK his accelerations definitely look a bit weird. I don't know what to make of it but most of us mortals when we accelerate hard on a hill there is some body language that suggest effort. Look at Boonen trying to stay with him. FC almost looks like he takes a breather and just goes.

good post heythorp

Cancellara does indeed fiddle around with his fingers but he doesn't change gears, no way. So what was that all about

good post wattage

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Yeah the hill pass when he drops Boonen freaks me out. Is there really clear video of it? Coz it looks like at the top he's still breathing through his nose.

 

[Arrowfarm]

Re: Re:

For me, it's simply a matter of too many coincidences. A well-known rider like Cancellara has never been seen (well, at least I've never seen) to put in a huge seated attack like that in a major race before. In fact, I've never seen anyone put in that kind of seated attack before. There was also a premeditated bike change at a fixed location re: having your mechanic stand at a specific spot with a new bike - never seen that before especially in a flat race. And of course, all this happens right at the time when the technology improves to the point that a hidden motor, controller and battery all become feasible (I listed off the shelf components that could give ~200 Watts several posts back). Not only that, you immediately get several commentators from within the sport talking about motorized doping complete with videos of actual bikes.

Never seen before seated attack. Super big race. Premeditated bike change. Right when bike doping becomes feasible. Actual bikes shown.

It's a case of circumstantial evidence and Cancellara is lucky that Hitch and Merckx are more likely to be on the jury than I am. Who's correct? I doubt we'll ever know.

John Swanson

Lance was doing far stranger things, and he was a donkey.

Lance's high cadence and extended standing would arguably provided better 'coincidences' than Spartacus accelerating like a trackie (i.e. seated).

Now, wrt to Cancellera, I've never seen him attack standing. But, seated? Lots of times.

Here is the 2013 Tour of Flanders.

Three seated attacks inside of 7 minutes. Each puts in huge time on the competition until he finally walks away from Sagan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs0rQWKvkOs

2m57
4m39
10m

All seated. All vicious.

You should watch more bike races John.

Dave.

I think we have to make a distinction here, between accelerations on cobbles and accelerations on flat road.

On cobbles seated is the way to go, imo, but on flat road standing accelerations is the way to go.

Plenty of seated accelerations on cobbles, but on flat road?

In the original doped bike video from P-R, Cancellara is standing up to match an acceleration made by someone else.
When he matches the speed of the group, he sits down and then, completely without further effort, he makes a seated acceletation that leaves the group in the dust. He even looks over his shoulder while he is still accelerating. That seems really odd to me. It looks as if he is somewhat surprised of his own speed at that moment.

Just my 2 cents.

Edit: I wrote vlaanders. the correct race was P-R

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

[quote=". And of course, all this happens right at the time when the technology improves to the point that a hidden motor, controller and battery all become feasible.[/quote]

Do you have some new information on precisely when the motor became feasible in cycling?

Because from what I have seen there is like a 10 year window for when the motor became feasible.

The comments on motorized doping have referred to the possibility of it already existing / being available in the future.

There are hundreds of performance that you could argue came " right at the time that technology improves to the point that a hidden... become feasible".

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

I think we have to make a distinction here, between accelerations on cobbles and accelerations on flat road.

On cobbles seated is the way to go, imo, but on flat road standing accelerations is the way to go.

Plenty of seated accelerations on cobbles, but on flat road?

In the original doped bike video from P-R, Cancellara is standing up to match an acceleration made by someone else.
When he matches the speed of the group, he sits down and then, completely without further effort, he makes a seated acceletation that leaves the group in the dust. He even looks over his shoulder while he is still accelerating. That seems really odd to me. It looks as if he is somewhat surprised of his own speed at that moment.

Just my 2 cents.

Edit: I wrote vlaanders. the correct race was P-R

good post,
it's not just your two cents. it's the two cents of numerous of posters ever since this thread was opened in 2010.
Sure, 2013 Vlaanderen was a mightily impressive display from Fab, but it underlines that, even if you dope massively, your upper body will actually move when you accelerate without a motor.

 

[sniper]

Re:

http://www.eurosport.fr/les-comment...'a-pas-tout-dit_post101262/blogpostfull.shtml

Check the video
Basically they say he changed bike twice prior to the Mollenberg. They show him making the first change. Then they show Breschel trying to change his bike, but there is no mechanic in the back of the car! They show also that Cancellara's bike isn't on the rack. So where are they? Apparently the mechanic has run across the neck of a loop the course takes, and catches up with Cancellara on the other side, where he again changes bike, as shown by an amateur video. The question is, what did the mechanic do to the bike, since apparently he took off without any tools. What did he repair? On the other hand, I guess what isn't being said in the video, it's easy to change the bidon where the battery is supposedly concealed...

They also comment on how late in the race the bike changes occurred, so it couldn't have been about having different tyre pressures or anything like that.

Jacky Duran finishes by saying Cancellara will be under heavy scrutiny of course now, so he should go ahead and prove his innocence by winning the Tour of Switzerland.

Pretty amazing video. I think Breschel was very surprised to look in the car and see no mechanic. Strange that neither the mechanic not Cancellara's bike were there.

good link plus english summary from blackcat.

 

[sniper]

Re:

everyone talking about the body language, and the effort in the attacks, seeming not there. I will repost this, from the start of the thread

Contrast your reference with this from 2:10 on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7xjsPqHg3o

He stands up just before this to go with the attack, and then sits down and takes off with no evidence of greater effort. It looks like what Helmut said, like he is going downhill.

good post Chewbaccad , but time to start watching more cycling.

 

[sniper]

Re:

apologies, last bit of Clinic timetraveling for today:

What I really meant to say is that cadence doesn't seem to increase until after the speed increases.....which would make sense if he changed to a bigger gear and was stomping in order to accelerate.....but usually it is possible to see the stomping.....it just looks weird

Agree. The whole drama with the bike changes and that massive acceleration with seemingly no extra effort is bloody suspicious. The more I look at it if I had to take a guess, I'd say he did it.

these guys should definitely watch more cycling.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Yeah the hill pass when he drops Boonen freaks me out. Is there really clear video of it? Coz it looks like at the top he's still breathing through his nose.

here for instance. English Eurosport commentary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i8DSbgsqC8
Camera can't follow, completely looses track of Cancellara.
Commentators can't believe the distance Cancellara puts on Boonen.
Creates a ca. 250 meters gap in less than a minute.
That means, iinm, Fab was going ca. 15kph faster than Boonen on that stretch.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Yeah I was watching the race live and it was aaaaages before they located him again. He was gone. I remember thinking wtf!?

 

[sniper]

Re:

Yeah I was watching the race live and it was aaaaages before they located him again. He was gone. I remember thinking wtf!?

the Dutch commentators are completely baffled.
From 2:40 onwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vygkaL1uEo8
Don't forget that the Muur was the steepest climb of the Ronde and the part where Fab jumps in turn is the steepest part of the Muur (de Kapelmuur).
Commentator and ex-pro Maarten Ducrot is looking for superlatives. Says twice that he's never before seen a seated attack like that on the Muur.
(He then jokes about Cancellara having a motor built in his legs.)

edit:
Spanish commentary, Muur starting at 4:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxH8vGqLVM0
1st commentator: "20%, ey, nunca lo he visto"
2nd commentator: "nunca, nunca"

 

[sniper]

Anybody who speaks French, OBLIGATORY watching (link courtesy of blackcat 2010). I'll try to briefly summarize it.
My French sucks so do correct me if I misinterpreted anything.

It's Jacky Durand COMPLETELY picking apart Cancellara's bike changes at the Ronde, and in such a detailed way that one is really really hard-pressed to discard motorization after seeing this video.

http://archives-lepost.huffingtonpost.fr/article/2010/06/15/2114704_cyclisme-le-velo-a-moteur-de-cancellara-refait-du-bruit.html

Great link. Only now I completely understand what (probably) went down.
Reason of the bike switches: to recharge the battery which is presumably located in the bidon. All the scenes suddenly make sense.
The Breschel bike switch ***-up (where's the mechanic? hilarious), Fab's bike missing on top of the car, Fab then driving around on a bike without bidon shortly before the final of the Ronde, then the famous premeditated bike change with mechanic standing amid the crowd, and Fab suddenly back on his old bike, indeed with bidon. LOL.

It's friggin Fabulous!

 

[sniper]

a package like this very nicely fits Jacky Durand's take on things:

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/04/hidden-motors-for-road-bikes-exist-heres-how-they-work/

Making it invisible

For an extra €499 (roughly AUD $700) the Invisible Performance Package allows you to “invisibly transform your racing bike into an e-racing cycle”.

The saddlebag battery is replaced by a “bottle battery” lasting 60 minutes and presumably connected to the motor via the seatpost bidon-cage mounting holes. The wired, start-stop button is replaced by a wireless option which can be positioned at the end of the handlebar drops or, according to the product literature, “anywhere you like”. Warren suggested mounting it under the saddle to keep it hidden.

in the Durand vid you get a picture of Cance's bike with the button right there on the handle bar.
As Fab said, "it was funny at first, but now it's not so funny anymore..."

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

[quote=". And of course, all this happens right at the time when the technology improves to the point that a hidden motor, controller and battery all become feasible.

Do you have some new information on precisely when the motor became feasible in cycling?

Because from what I have seen there is like a 10 year window for when the motor became feasible.

The comments on motorized doping have referred to the possibility of it already existing / being available in the future.

There are hundreds of performance that you could argue came " right at the time that technology improves to the point that a hidden... become feasible".[/quote]

No, but like most things you can bracket it pretty well. After I left Moli Energy, I stayed in touch with a few people and one of those was working on power applications like cordless power tools. I can safely say that the battery technology was good to go circa 2005. Motor controllers and their miniaturization/improved efficiency really took off circa 2008. I believe the motors have been feasible for a long time, but weren't engineered or built until roughly the same time frame in order to take advantage of the high-end power tool market. Of course, NiMH batteries were available for power tools circa 2000, but they wouldn't have made a feasible bike doping technology. Likewise, embedded controllers(the brains) have been available since 1995 in the form of a PIC, but the required computing horsepower (sans custom ASIC - the problem is interrupt speed and the ability to process external inputs in < 1 ms) wasn't really available for cheap until 2005-2007 (example, Arduino boards were expensive, had limited I/O interfaces, were power hungry and slow in 2005 but were capable and cheap ~2010).

So as a bracket, I'd say the type of motorized doping we're talking about probably wasn't feasible until 2008. This coincides very nicely with practical applications showing up in 2010.

John Swanson

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

...

I think we have to make a distinction here, between accelerations on cobbles and accelerations on flat road.

On cobbles seated is the way to go, imo, but on flat road standing accelerations is the way to go.

Plenty of seated accelerations on cobbles, but on flat road?

In the original doped bike video from P-R, Cancellara is standing up to match an acceleration made by someone else.
When he matches the speed of the group, he sits down and then, completely without further effort, he makes a seated acceletation that leaves the group in the dust. He even looks over his shoulder while he is still accelerating. That seems really odd to me. It looks as if he is somewhat surprised of his own speed at that moment.

Just my 2 cents.

Edit: I wrote vlaanders. the correct race was P-R

In the video in dispute, while he did briefly get out of the saddle to join the guys that had just moved to the front, Cancellera took advantage of a group that was not organized at that point and was slowing down and looking around. Bad tactics on their part.

Independent of cobbles or smooth pavement, he would logically have been looking to take advantage of the element of surprise and capitalize on momentum from joining them and then to slingshot through them.

Thus, seated is the ONLY way to go in that case. Stealth mode.

This is akin to folks moving up the line to launch an attack or prepare themselves for a final sprint. NOBODY (in their right mind) does that standing. Unless they are trying to cause a crash, completely telegraph their intent or has absolutely no other option.

Dave.

 

[D-Queued]

Re: Re:

...

I should *totally* watch more racing. But I did in fact watch that particular Flanders (Pauwel Kwak in hand - yes at 6am). Cancellara was exciting to watch and animated the race with his attacks. Solo win after annihilating Sagan was impressive. However, it really looked like he was working for it. He was missing that... extra 150 Watts at some points?

John Swanson

If Cancellera was missing 150 watts, then Sagan must have been missing over 300.

Dave.

 

[sniper]

Dave, you've made some great points as to why you think the 2010 jumps are feasible without motor.
But you're disregarding a lot of professional, cycling commentators' and fans' views with regard to those 2010 jumps from Cancellara when you claim that the 2010 jumps in PR and away from Boonen on the Mur weren't uniquely suspect.
Jacky Durand and Anthony Roux are on the record taking motorization as a plausible explanation for those jumps. Must be those bitter French riders again.
And I only just posted the live commentary to Fab's Mur performance from four different sources (English, Spanish, Dutch, Belgian). In each case the commentary is along the lines of 'unbelievable' and 'never ever seen this before'. At least two of those (the Dutch and the Belgians) were in the middle of praising Boonen as the favorite just before Fab drops him like a stone.
That 2013 RvV footage was a massive effort from Fab indeed, but very few would claim it is comparable to 2010 PR and RvV in terms of how unnatural it looks. For all I know he was using a motor in 2013 too, just saying that the 2010 footage shows by far the most unreal cycling jumps I have ever seen (followed very shortly by Froome Ventoux 2013 away from Contador).

Btw, I'd be interested to hear your view on Durand's view.

 

[D-Queued]

Re:

Dave, you've made some great points as to why you think the 2010 jumps are feasible without motor.
But you're disregarding a lot of professional, cycling commentators' and fans' views with regard to those 2010 jumps from Cancellara when you claim that the 2010 jumps in PR and away from Boonen on the Mur weren't uniquely suspect.
Jacky Durand and Anthony Roux are on the record taking motorization as a plausible explanation for those jumps. Must be those bitter French riders again.
And I only just posted the live commentary to Fab's Mur performance from four different sources (English, Spanish, Dutch, Belgian). In each case the commentary is along the lines of 'unbelievable' and 'never ever seen this before'. At least two of those (the Dutch and the Belgians) were in the middle of praising Boonen as the favorite just before Fab drops him like a stone.
That 2013 RvV footage was a massive effort from Fab indeed, but very few would claim it is comparable to 2010 PR and RvV in terms of how unnatural it looks. For all I know he was using a motor in 2013 too, just saying that the 2010 footage shows by far the most unreal cycling jumps I have ever seen (followed very shortly by Froome Ventoux 2013 away from Contador).

Btw, I'd be interested to hear your view on Durand's view.

Unlike the professional commentators, I don't need to try and create a story. I'm just some anonymous dude on a cycling forum.

Why?

1. There are simply far more likely explanations than using a motor. Doping comes to mind. In fact, since discussing doping is something the commentators don't do, then discussion of a motor appears to be a BS excuse to avoid the real subject. It is arguably a twist on Omerta. Did any commentator even suggest that rather than a motor, there is a possibility, however remote, of Cancellera simply doping?

Oddly, doping has been confirmed as the core reason for virtually every other "alien" or "impossible" or "unbelievable" or "never been seen before" performance, ever.

2. Independent of what others have suggested, battery and motor technology hasn't had any marvelous breakthroughs. Especially not breakthroughs that are secret. Providing an inventor with the funds that would be required to create the uncreated would be far better spent with far greater leverage on simply doping.

3. Even with a motor, there are so many things that could go wrong, and so many implementation issues that #2 is much, much harder than it might appear.

4. Maybe I am alone, but in my minimal and sheltered experience, I have seen far too many folks do to me what Cancellera has done to others in these videos. This is the beauty of the element of surprise and of drafting in cycling.

Suggestions that it is easier to accelerate out of the saddle on rough road, like cobblestones, is folly.

ON cobbles and rough road, you want to stay seated for bike control reasons. Out of the saddle your bike is far more likely to bounce all over the place, minimizing or even undermining the additional effort.

Moreover, if you plan on an extended solo effort post acceleration you are far better off if you can pull the acceleration off while seated. Your heart rate will be lower, and you will recover faster, from the acceleration effort and you will be more likely to succeed and actually stay away. Particularly so if you are a heavier than average rider. This is Cancellera's primary strategy and strength, and he has fine-tuned it to an art.

Note that I would be quite happy if #2 were not the case, but it is.

Finally, I am ok with you not agreeing with me. I am not likely to change my opinion unless I see hard proof of a viable motor that really works. The videos provided don't demonstrate that.

Dave.

 

[blackcat]

so could motor be code for 1998 Armstrong in July? a full *** doping success. Like Froome in 2013

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Moreover, if you plan on an extended solo effort post acceleration you are far better off if you can pull the acceleration off while seated. Your heart rate will be lower, and you will recover faster, from the acceleration effort and you will be more likely to succeed and actually stay away. Particularly so if you are a heavier than average rider. This is Cancellera's primary strategy and strength, and he has fine-tuned it to an art.

the attack is late, perhaps it was tactical like you suggest, his objective was always to make a gap stick and go away that is why he left it lat on muur and kept the hammer down when it flattened out.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

snipped...
Dave.

agree with the bike control on cobbles argument.

imo, however, the crucial (yet to be clarified) point is still whether Fab accelerates, or whether he just gradually ups the pace whilst Boonen cramps up.
Somebody more skilled with video analysis sh/could put some trackers on him to find out. After all, none, and I mean NONE, of the alien accelerations uphill posted in the other thread I opened yesterday were performed in the saddle. Those were epically doped performances, hence my argument that doping alone cannot explain the Muur. Apparently even when you're doped to the eyeballs, there is no advantage in staying seated whilst accelerating uphill with a ca. 20% gradient.
So that Fab jump on the Muur is still 1 out of a million, provided it was in fact an acceleration.
If a video/time/speed analysis would show that Fab wasn't spectacularly accelerating but just driving fast at a more constant speed, I will concede that him staying seated was a plausible choice, especially on cobbles.

Yes, I also agree to disagree, but not until you've seen Durand's vid and tell me what you think
The whole bike changing issues require an explanation (as the vid will make abundantly clear), and you don't seem to have one.

p.s. anybody with French skills: what is Durand saying in that vid about the button on Fab's handlebar? Is he suggesting it is indeed dodgy in light of a motorization hypothesis, or rather the opposite? I'm in doubt.