Some very valid points, admittedly.
Let me try and break it down in different points:
1. as e.g. hrotha and other posters have (rightly, imo) argued, within the peloton using a motor would probably be considered the lowest possible form of cheating. What JV claims about dopers (namely that these days they "get ousted by the peloton", lol) that might actually apply to motorization cheats. Imo it seems fair to assume that if motorization occurs, those who use it will stay 100% quiet about it and not let anybody in on the secret. I know I wouldn't. So to sum up, I don't think that motorization really compares with PED doping in terms of omerta, or in terms of guys spilling beans on each other, blowing the whistle, etc. This form of cheating would simply not be accepted throughout the peloton. Unlike old school doping, which is just part of 'being professional', 'desire to win', etc.
2. If you have time you should go back into the thread to where the interview with Anthony Roux is linked. Roux explains in unambiguous terms that there has been rumors within the peloton about Cancellara and motorization. Roux clearly was not amused and indeed he suggests that many others in the peloton were not amused either.
3. Provided Fab used a motor, the advantages weren't small (check out the footage posted upthread). And was it noticed by his competitors? Yes it was. Go back into the thread, and you'll see the amount of talk and rumors that were created by Fab's Paris Roubaix and RvVlaanderen jumps. Many (including e.g. Lefevere, Boonens coach, and Boonen himself according to another poster, Durand, and many other observers)
4. you seem to ask, if Cance used it, why didn't it become more widespread afterwards? Well, we don't know how widespread it has become, but indeed I'm not assuming it has become widespread. Reasons could be different. First, all the talk that emerged in the wake of the Fab footage and Cassani tv broadcast, well it could definitely have scared people off. Not unimportantly, it also triggered the UCI to start testing for motorized bikes (only a few weeks after Cance's RvV!!) with scanners. So that too may have scared people off. Then there's the fact, already mentioned, that motorization is probably much much less (if at all) 'tolerated'/accepted within the peloton. If Fab's jump caused such a stirr within the peloton, that'd be another deterrent.
5. You ask for other suspicious jumps: I've seen VERY few(if any) jumps similar to the seated jumps from Fab in 2010 Paris Roubaix and RvV. The only one I could think of is perhaps Froome's Mont Ventoux jump in 2013 away from Contador.
Would be interested in hearing your view on those two Fab jumps, whether you think they look real in terms of accelleration and cadence, and whether that's feasible without a motor.
Let me try and break it down in different points:
1. as e.g. hrotha and other posters have (rightly, imo) argued, within the peloton using a motor would probably be considered the lowest possible form of cheating. What JV claims about dopers (namely that these days they "get ousted by the peloton", lol) that might actually apply to motorization cheats. Imo it seems fair to assume that if motorization occurs, those who use it will stay 100% quiet about it and not let anybody in on the secret. I know I wouldn't. So to sum up, I don't think that motorization really compares with PED doping in terms of omerta, or in terms of guys spilling beans on each other, blowing the whistle, etc. This form of cheating would simply not be accepted throughout the peloton. Unlike old school doping, which is just part of 'being professional', 'desire to win', etc.
2. If you have time you should go back into the thread to where the interview with Anthony Roux is linked. Roux explains in unambiguous terms that there has been rumors within the peloton about Cancellara and motorization. Roux clearly was not amused and indeed he suggests that many others in the peloton were not amused either.
3. Provided Fab used a motor, the advantages weren't small (check out the footage posted upthread). And was it noticed by his competitors? Yes it was. Go back into the thread, and you'll see the amount of talk and rumors that were created by Fab's Paris Roubaix and RvVlaanderen jumps. Many (including e.g. Lefevere, Boonens coach, and Boonen himself according to another poster, Durand, and many other observers)
4. you seem to ask, if Cance used it, why didn't it become more widespread afterwards? Well, we don't know how widespread it has become, but indeed I'm not assuming it has become widespread. Reasons could be different. First, all the talk that emerged in the wake of the Fab footage and Cassani tv broadcast, well it could definitely have scared people off. Not unimportantly, it also triggered the UCI to start testing for motorized bikes (only a few weeks after Cance's RvV!!) with scanners. So that too may have scared people off. Then there's the fact, already mentioned, that motorization is probably much much less (if at all) 'tolerated'/accepted within the peloton. If Fab's jump caused such a stirr within the peloton, that'd be another deterrent.
5. You ask for other suspicious jumps: I've seen VERY few(if any) jumps similar to the seated jumps from Fab in 2010 Paris Roubaix and RvV. The only one I could think of is perhaps Froome's Mont Ventoux jump in 2013 away from Contador.
Would be interested in hearing your view on those two Fab jumps, whether you think they look real in terms of accelleration and cadence, and whether that's feasible without a motor.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram