First Hidden Electric Motor In Cycling World Championship (cxmagazine.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Hidden Electric Motor In Cycling World Championship (cxmagazine.com)

Posted by timothy on Sunday January 31, 2016 @08:32AM from the thumb-on-the-scale dept.

An anonymous reader writes with the story that the world championship cyclocross competition this weekend in Zolder (Belgium) was scandalized by the first case of "mechanical doping." European champion Femke Van Den Driessche was caught with a bicycle with a hidden electric motor. From the article: The Union Cycliste Internationale said in a statement âoethat pursuant to the UCIâ(TM)s Regulations on technological fraud a bike has been detained for further investigation following checks at the Womenâ(TM)s Under 23 race of the 2016 UCI Cyclo-cross World Championships. This does not concern any of the riders on the podium. Further details will be shared in due course.â

The Belgian media outlet Sporza reported that the Belgian Cycling Federation had confirmed that the detained bike belonged to Van den Driessche. Ironically, Van den Driessche had abandoned the race due to a mechanical issue shortly before the bike was scrutinised. Van den Driesscheâ(TM)s name did not feature in the official results on the UCI website on Saturday evening. Cyclocross Magazine adds some details.

190 of 262 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 08:57 · Score: 5, Interesting

Why does cycling attract so much cheating?
Is it just more publicized than that in other sports? I mean, you don't hear about cheating nearly as much in other "sports" where they depend upon mechanical equipment... Nascar, F1, MotoGP, etc...
You'd think that Bill Belichick were the coach...
1. Re: What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  Cycling has lower barriers to entry, you don't need to spend millions on engineering, manufacturing and maintenance.
2. Re:What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 09:05 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  it's one sport where physical attributes correlates almost 1:1 with performance. Like a wide receiver could dope in order to run faster but if he still can't catch the ball, what good does that do
3. Re:What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 09:20 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I mean, you don't hear about cheating nearly as much in other "sports" where they depend upon mechanical equipment... Nascar
  Good thing you quoted it if you will mention nascar. If you can do it with a beer belly and 30kg extra weight around the midriff it is not a sport! The reason you see this in cycling is that it is a sport: your athletic ability is a key determinant of your success.
4. Re: What's the deal... by MasterOfGoingFaster · 2016-01-31 09:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Because a tiny increase in power makes a huge difference in results. In F1, a 1 HP difference is not noticeable. In cycling, 1 HP makes you faster than a fully dopped Lance Armstrong in his prime.
  
  --
  Place nail here >+
5. Re:What's the deal... by linforcer · 2016-01-31 09:38 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  She. Not only does summary mention that this is the "Women's under 23", amusingly her first name is Femke which literally means "girl" or "little woman" (see French "femme")
6. Re: What's the deal... by George_Ou · 2016-01-31 09:46 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  A pro competitor at Tour de France averages 450 watts. Casual fit rider averages 220. That means having a mere half a horse power would let the casual rider win the Tour de France though you likely wouldn't be able to put in that much battery capacity for the entire ride unless you swapped the battery along the way. For competitive riders, just having a 100 watt motor that can turn on 10 minutes is enough to go from last place to first.
7. Re: What's the deal... by Type44Q · 2016-01-31 10:08 · Score: 2
  
  You really couldn't come up with a better thought-out response than that??
8. Re:What's the deal... by goarilla · 2016-01-31 10:10 · Score: 2
  
  amusingly her first name is Femke which literally means "girl" or "little woman" (see French "femme")
  
  It's a very common dutch name in Flanders.
  And in 2002 it was the 6th most used female babyname, coincidentally in that same year a new character named Femke appeared on a popular local tv soap.
9. Re:What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 10:21 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Cyclist racer here. It's because the checks are stricter than any other sport. The doping controls are stricter and less excuses are accepted
  Dont fool yourself, the level of cheating is probably worse in just about any other pro sport. It's more cycling after a few dead riders got more serious about catching em.
10. Re:What's the deal... by Etherwalk · 2016-01-31 10:22 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect they're more honest about it in the world of cycling ... less money on the line. If our current theories of economics are true, then you can expect that the incentive to cheat in other sports is greater than it is in bicycling.
  You're assuming the culture of a sport doesn't make a difference. It's not just about the money, it's about access (increases with money), screening (increases with money in a sport), and culture (varies a lot depending on sport and peer group). For cycling, the rumor is that everyone who does well is doping, that if you know a professional cyclist (at least one who practices with others on a team) that they are doping, and that the pressure to dope is tremendous.
11. Re:What's the deal... by lgw · 2016-01-31 10:26 · Score: 2
  
  And in 2002 it was the 6th most used female babyname, coincidentally in that same year a new character named Femke appeared on a popular local tv soap.
  The name "Teagan" or "Tegan" for girls appeared from nowhere in the 80s when a companion with that name showed up in Dr Who (4th and 5th Doctors). It was a very rare name before the 80s, but suddenly in the late 80s became a minor trend, peaking in 2010 (at 243rd in popularity by the random site I found - and occasionaly used for boys as well). The show didn't invent the name, but it might as well have.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
12. Re: What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 10:30 · Score: 1
  
  Every sport has cheating, especially if there's money involved.
13. Re:What's the deal... by MightyMartian · 2016-01-31 10:39 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Motorized curling, perhaps.
  I'd actually get up at 3am to watch curling with jet fuel powered stones.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
14. Re:What's the deal... by ancientt · 2016-01-31 10:50 · Score: 2
  
  I didn't realize until now what I was missing from my life.
  
  --
  B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
15. Re: What's the deal... by Dahamma · 2016-01-31 10:53 · Score: 1
  
  Regenerate it on the downhills/flat pedaling. Of course you'd need a more complex motor (you wouldn't want to drain 100W to charge it, you'd want to charge slowly then use it when you most need it, i.e. to accelerate or go uphill).
16. Re:What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 11:10 · Score: 1
  
  If you can do it with a beer belly and 30kg extra weight around the midriff it is not a sport!
  I don't know about that: I ride a lot, and I can tell you there are staggering numbers of MAMILS* out there who fit this description perfectly. Not a pretty sight but heh, there are worse ways to spend your mid-life crisis, and it doesn't look nearly as sad as a short angry bald man in a small red peni... I mean, sports-car.
  *middle-aged men in lycra
17. Re: What's the deal... by George_Ou · 2016-01-31 11:19 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Regen on flat pedaling is stupid and goes along the lines of a perpetual motion machine. Much of the energy you pedal into the motor is lost in the form of heat and you won't get out what you put in. Reg on downhill would work and you don't need a more complex motor. All Brushless DC motors can regen when they're being forced to turn.
18. Re: What's the deal... by AK+Marc · 2016-01-31 11:42 · Score: 2
  
  Aside from being easily caught when people weigh your competition bike and find it weight 3x everyone else's, it'd be easy to hide a motor where an inspection wouldn't find it. Put it in the frame, by the bottom bracket, and have the electric motor directly drive the crank. Fill every spare section of space in the frame with batteries. You'd be able to get 100W for the uphills for even long races.
  
  If you want it to be undetectable, you need to hide the batteries in the water bottle, or on your body, with connections to the motor hidden (or possibly wireless). Easy to do, but nobody cares.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
19. Re: What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 11:43 · Score: 1
  
  George is correct about the size of motor required to make the difference between a win and an also ran, the rider does not require full load from the motor just assistance, 100 watts is probably the maximum you would go for, I suspect a smaller motor would also provide the "winning edge".
  Cyclocross riders swap out their bike to be cleaned by the mechanics every few laps depending on the conditions, so I imagine the doped bike would have been designed to give a short burst - then thrown in the back of the team truck so it couldn't be inspected by race officials. The only reason she got caught was because see had a mechanical and couldn't get back to the pits in time to swap out the bike.
  All they have to do is run a magnet down the frame to find these things the amount of steel on a high end bike is minuscule, carbon frame and aluminium components anything magnetic is completely out of place.
20. Re: What's the deal... by Grishnakh · 2016-01-31 11:47 · Score: 1
  
  Brushless DC motors *are* complex motors. The motor itself isn't that complex (though for high power density you need very expensive magnets), but the controller is. And a bicycle doesn't give you much room to fit some complex electronic circuitry, *especially* if you're trying to hide it from the judges!
21. Re:What's the deal... by surd1618 · 2016-01-31 11:55 · Score: 1
  
  This is mostly true, but there is some training that involves dexterity and practice. E.G. if you as ask a novice to ride fast they will sway back and forth as they push, and this wastes a decent amount of energy. It takes a fair bit of focused practice to learn to ride in a really straight line. That being said, it's true that basically the person whose body is running most like a racehorse's is likely going to win.
22. Re: What's the deal... by kheldan · 2016-01-31 11:55 · Score: 2
  
  Hmm, yes and no. While the athleticism is absolutely necessary, the athleticism is actually the easy part of being a bike racer. Learning to race effectively and race smart is the harder part. A casual 'fit' rider, suddenly given a hundred or so watt mechanical advantage, would not win the TdF. They also wouldn't even come close to winning a finishing sprint.
  
  Of course what we're talking about here are Pro Cat-1 riders on the UCI world tour, literally the creme-de-la-creme of competitive cycling. They've all been riding/competing since they were young teens, and have worked their way up from the literal beginners' amateur category to the very top category, and this is now their day-job. They spend 30-35 hours a week training, have top-tier racing skills, and an entire team backing them up. It's so highly competitive that any small advantage they can get (shaving grams of weight off their bikes or off their own bodies, or in this case gaining a handful of extra watts of power, even if it's for a short period of time) can literally make or break their entire career.
  
  --
  Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
23. Re: What's the deal... by George_Ou · 2016-01-31 12:05 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  If they can fit battery, brushless controllers, and BLDC motors in a tiny 4 oz RC/Drone, they sure as hell can hide it inside a bike. A 100 watt ESP (Electronic Speed Control) can be extremely tiny and cheap. Do a quick search on Google or Hobbyking.
24. Re:What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 12:20 · Score: 1
  
  Why does cycling attract so much cheating?
  ...
  Because they're the only ones actually looking - and even then they don't look too hard unless they're playing Sir Bedevere.
  Sure Lance Armstrong got busted and banned for life. But he never failed a drug test while racing. Alberto Contador did get busted - during the Tour de France no less - and he raced ON THE SAME FUCKING TEAM as Armstrong with the same doctors and teammates that were so "dirty" for Armstrong.
  Armstrong - never caught during his career gets a lifetime ban and all his accomplishments wiped out.
  Contador - on the same team using the same doctors with the same teammates - only gets a short ban and that one race wiped out.
25. Re:What's the deal... by physicsphairy · 2016-01-31 12:23 · Score: 2
  
  Cycling is a bit special as a longer endurance sport. There's more to be gained from marginal benefits. That said, cheating is very wide spread. It's a constant race between athletes and analysts. You often can't detect a new strategy of cheating until someone is physically caught and then you can develop an analytical method to do so. Lance Armstrong was caught not by the technology of the time but by revisiting blood samples which had been stored. Athletes may content themselves with microdoping where they use very small doses of drugs or reserved blood to evade detection limits. It obviously is less effective, but they're looking for whatever edge they can get. With small alterations it becomes difficult to distinguish between artificial enhancement and genetic anomalies. If you don't hear about people cheating I think it has a lot to do with them getting very good at it.
  
  --
  When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
26. Re: What's the deal... by George_Ou · 2016-01-31 13:24 · Score: 1
  
  Don't need 100W for the entire race. Even a short 10 minute boost of 100W assistance from a small 26650 Lithium Ion cell is enough to push a competitor from back of the pack to the front of the pack.
27. Re:What's the deal... by DeathElk · 2016-01-31 13:27 · Score: 2
  
  There is no more cheating in cycling than any other sport. For example, see the two major Australian football codes, which are using media and promotional ties to effectively sweep endemic drug cheating under the carpet. Or international athletics, of which the tip of the cheating iceberg has recently surfaced. The difference is that cycling is actively trying to eradicate cheating, thus the invasive scrutinising and drug tests.
28. Re:What's the deal... by afgam28 · 2016-01-31 13:42 · Score: 1
  
  Just wondering if you think baseball is a sport?
29. Re:What's the deal... by stephanruby · 2016-01-31 14:02 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Is it just more publicized than that in other sports?
  Yes, it is. As a semi-professional swimmer, I am thankful no one has caught on my methane powered propulsion system yet.
30. Re:What's the deal... by stephanruby · 2016-01-31 14:08 · Score: 2
  
  Why does cycling attract so much cheating?
  It's the low barrier to entry.
  If I was the manufacturer of such a motor, I'd get in the race myself.
  The cost of entry is very low and the potential upside in free publicity (once caught) is super high.
31. Re:What's the deal... by theendlessnow · 2016-01-31 14:09 · Score: 1
  
  Why does cycling attract so much cheating?
  You'd think that Bill Belichick were the coach...
  If Bill were coach, you'd cheat and win though... wouldn't you?
32. Re: What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 14:33 · Score: 1
  
  Baseball is the most exciting 5 minutes of sport, crammed into a 3 hour game.
33. Re:What's the deal... by Firethorn · 2016-01-31 15:00 · Score: 1
  
  Is it just more publicized than that in other sports?
  I think it really is more publicized. Consider that doping scandals have hit nearly every professional sport - including golf. Even baseball has had it's share with things like 'cored' bats.
  Bicycling is just the one sport where a motor would be both useful and could be implemented in a way that would be 'hard' to spot.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
34. Re:What's the deal... by quantaman · 2016-01-31 16:24 · Score: 1
  
  curling is an Olympic sport, and I've seen plenty of guys with 30kg spare tires in the Olympics in that sport. As such, I request proof of your assertion.
  Only the skip who's holding the broom, the guys doing the sweeping are generally in pretty good shape, particularly the first two who do the majority of the sweeping.
  I've actually played against some top teams, they're not Olympic athletes, but they were fairly big athletic guys.
  
  --
  I stole this Sig
35. Re:What's the deal... by quantaman · 2016-01-31 16:29 · Score: 1
  
  Why does cycling attract so much cheating?
  Is it just more publicized than that in other sports? I mean, you don't hear about cheating nearly as much in other "sports" where they depend upon mechanical equipment... Nascar, F1, MotoGP, etc...
  You'd think that Bill Belichick were the coach...
  When's the last time you watched a Hockey, Basketball, or Football game (of either kind) without seeing a penalty? Those guys cheat constantly.
  The difference is how they cheat. In skill sports gaining a slight athletic edge doesn't help as much so the cheating is done at game time, and because it's detectable and so common the rules are pretty mild.
  In track or cycling it's all about fitness, so the only way to cheat is through doping or in this case hidden motors.
  
  --
  I stole this Sig
36. Re:What's the deal... by camperdave · 2016-01-31 16:34 · Score: 1
  
  Just because it's in the Olympics, doesn't mean it's a sport. Take rhythmic gymnastics for example, or any of the other competitions that are based on "artistic merit" (figure skating, diving, parallel bars, etc.). Sport requires objectively measurable performance; who is fastest, highest, strongest.
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
37. Re: What's the deal... by unrtst · 2016-01-31 16:46 · Score: 2
  
  Aside from being easily caught when people weigh your competition bike and find it weight 3x everyone else's...
  On a story a few months back, there was talk about standardized sports equipment, and bicycling came up.
  The bikes they use have a minimum weight requirement. Off the shelf bikes of somewhat decent quality (ballpark of $4000) can EASILY weight in at less than the pro weights.
  I'm not sure how much you can get away with hiding, but they could definitely shave off a few pounds. If it's engineered well, the batteries and such could even contribute some to the structural integrity. You could easily spread out the battery load throughout the frame, so balance wouldn't be an issue.
  People have also kept referring to the drive hub (where the crank goes) as a good place for the motor. Personally, I'd favor the rear wheel. There's plenty of room inside the hub of the rear wheel (internally geared hubs have shown us that). The crank hub has to endure significant stress from pedaling. Lastly, it's a whole lot easier to "lose" the rear wheel (just get a flat and change it out on the way).
38. Re: What's the deal... by camperdave · 2016-01-31 16:53 · Score: 1
  
  Brushless DC motors have electronic circuits to energize the coils in the proper sequence. Trying to run such a motor as a generator will not work. To use such a motor as a generator, you have to replace the drive circuitry with rectifiers. Now, you could combine both circuits and switch between them, but it is not something that all brushless motors can do out of the box. Brushed motors are a different story. They CAN run as generators without modification.
  
  ...that is, assuming the motors in question are permanent magnet motors to begin with.
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
39. Re: What's the deal... by Dahamma · 2016-01-31 17:33 · Score: 1
  
  Lastly, it's a whole lot easier to "lose" the rear wheel (just get a flat and change it out on the way).
  Good point. That would be a decent strategy - use the motor to conserve energy, fake/cause a flat when convenient, swap out the wheel and destroy the evidence...
40. Re: What's the deal... by Dahamma · 2016-01-31 17:47 · Score: 2
  
  Regen on flat pedaling is stupid and goes along the lines of a perpetual motion machine. Much of the energy you pedal into the motor is lost in the form of heat and you won't get out what you put in.
  You are thinking solely in terms of mechanics and not biology. Siphoning off a few watts on a flat pedal to recharge when cyclists are normally conserving energy for the next climb anyway and then applying it when needed most can spread out the energy expended to make things more efficient.
  Try running a 5k sprinting until you can't run any more, and then walking until you recover and can sprint again vs just running at your maximum steady pace. I guarantee you the latter strategy gets you a better time.
  Losses from inefficiencies of the motor could make things less ideal, though that depends on the motor and considering it certainly isn't "stupid".
41. Re: What's the deal... by Grishnakh · 2016-01-31 17:56 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, no. The motor needed to provide useful assist to a human rider on a bicycle is going to be much larger than something for a 4oz drone. Correspondingly, the motor controller is going to be much larger too: power transistors for high-current applications are much bigger than for low-power ones. And finally, drones don't need to do regeneration; there's no reason for that in the air. We're talking about regen here. And regen requires 1) an even more complicated controller, and 2) a storage device (battery). I guess you could get some Li-ion AA-size batteries like Tesla uses and stick them inside one or two bike tubes, but that's still not that much capacity. Don't forget you still need room inside those tubes for the shifting and brake cables (you can't move them outside the tubes because that'll make it obvious to the judges).
42. Re: What's the deal... by rtb61 · 2016-01-31 18:02 · Score: 1
  
  So make a hollow tube battery you can slide in the frame, use parts of the frame itself as induction rails to either pick up a rotational field or create a preferred direction current and magnetic field and then use special tyres with embedded directional magnetic elements to be either accelerated by the field or to charge the battery by the motion of the tyre. Control gear can go anywhere. Not a lot of output but it could run the whole race, either charging or discharging depending upon break settings.
  
  --
  Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
43. Re:What's the deal... by epine · 2016-01-31 18:08 · Score: 1
  
  When's the last time you watched a Hockey, Basketball, or Football game (of either kind) without seeing a penalty? Those guys cheat constantly.
  Penalties and cheating in the NHL have a small area of overlap.
  Puck over glass is a penalty. No-one thinks of this as cheating. It's more like a fumble under the current rules.
  Most obstruction penalties are simply accepted as the defensive measure of last resort.
  Using an illegal stick is actual cheating. Maybe a player or two a year gets busted for his.
  I personally consider diving or dropping your stick to draw a holding penalty when the opposing player barely touched it as 90% cheating.
  The spectrum of offences concerning miscalibrated aggression levels are part of the sport. It simply couldn't be the same sport if this was handled differently.
  So, no, they don't cheat constantly. Not even close.
44. Re: What's the deal... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 18:14 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Forgot link. 930W at 3.4 oz or 96 grams, 100W obviously smaller. Don't know why you're arguing this can't be done since it already happened. One 26550 with 15 watt hours is enough to drive a 100W motor 9 minutes which is a massive advantage.
  http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__24433__NTM_Rotor_Drive_450_Series_1700KV_930W.html
45. Re:What's the deal... by Zanadou · 2016-01-31 18:18 · Score: 1
  
  Hemingway said it best : "Motor racing, mountain climbing, and bull fighting are sports, all the rest are games".
  Just as an aside, Hemingway probably didn't "say" that.
46. Re:What's the deal... by CaptQuark · 2016-01-31 19:22 · Score: 1
  
  Let's see. How about Discus throw, Shot put, Hammer throw, Sumo wrestling, Weightlifting, Rugby, Shooting, Archery, American football, or bowling.
  
  All of those are either enhanced by extra weight or at least beer-gut neutral.
  
  --
47. Re: What's the deal... by Solandri · 2016-01-31 19:43 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  A pro competitor at Tour de France averages 450 watts. Casual fit rider averages 220. That means having a mere half a horse power would let the casual rider win the Tour de France
  For those weak at the unit conversion, there's a nice rhyme for remembering it.
  
  In fourteen-hundred and ninety-two,
  Columbus sailed the ocean blue,
  Divide the year of his voyage by two,
  And you get the number of Watts in a horsepower.
48. Re: What's the deal... by George_Ou · 2016-01-31 20:35 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Again, using human power to turn a generator to fill a battery is a fool's errand. You're better off doing opportunistic regeneration on downhill and letting the person rest. Forcing a rider to output an extra 50 watts so that you can collect 30 watts in the battery is just idiotic. But the point was that even without regeneration, a single 26550 battery @ 98 gram and a 100 watt motor @ 50 grams is more than enough to win a race.
49. Re:What's the deal... by dunkelfalke · 2016-01-31 21:09 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, cycling works just fine with a beer belly and 30 kg extra weight around the midriff. It is just more exertive, that's all.
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
50. Re:What's the deal... by David_Hart · 2016-01-31 21:44 · Score: 1
  
  Why does cycling attract so much cheating?
  You'd think that Bill Belichick were the coach...
  If Bill were coach, you'd cheat and win though... wouldn't you?
  Belichick is an intelligent coach who toes the line as the rules are written. People hate it when others are better than them. So, they call him a cheater. Did he get caught breaking a rule in one game? Yes. Has he been caught breaking any other rules. No...
  Spygate was more about whether the NFL front office can change rules carte blanche (competition committee is supposed to do that) changing the video taping rule (taping from the sidelines vs a designated area) than about Belichick breaking them. This was a political fight which Belichick lost.
  The whole eligible receiver thing wasn't against the rules, even though a couple of teams made a stink about it. Even the NFL admitted to this. Was this toeing the line, yes. But he never crossed it.
  Deflategate: The science of air pressure changes with the environment shows that there were no deflation of footballs. Just do a quick search of the science of Deflategate.
51. Re:What's the deal... by MrL0G1C · 2016-01-31 21:54 · Score: 1
  
  In football they cheat every game, the ref shows the player a yellow or red card if he catches them.
  
  --
  Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
52. Re: What's the deal... by jabuzz · 2016-01-31 23:02 · Score: 1
  
  Why bother with just the wheel, it is not uncommon to throw the entire bike away
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
53. Re:What's the deal... by wienerschnizzel · 2016-02-01 00:02 · Score: 1
  
  Cycling is the best payed endurance sport in the world. By far. A lot of money means more motivation for cheating and also more sophisticated means. The problem is that in contrast to other high doping sports (like Baseball) you need to be doped up during the race, not just during training and regeneration. This increases the likelyhood of discovery.
54. Re:What's the deal... by dcw3 · 2016-02-01 00:44 · Score: 1
  
  I mean, you don't hear about cheating nearly as much in other "sports" where they depend upon mechanical equipment... Nascar
  Good thing you quoted it if you will mention nascar. If you can do it with a beer belly and 30kg extra weight around the midriff it is not a sport! The reason you see this in cycling is that it is a sport: your athletic ability is a key determinant of your success.
  Yeah, you see a lot of those, don't you.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
55. Re: What's the deal... by KGIII · 2016-02-01 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  Well, err... They didn't want a tickle, after all.
  (And no, if you don't get that reference you are dead to me, dead to me!!!)
  (Well, I guess you could learn but there's a whole lot more than a song to learn.)
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
56. Re:What's the deal... by KGIII · 2016-02-01 05:06 · Score: 1
  
  It is also remarkably more enjoyable than it looks like. It's not that exciting to watch if you're unfamiliar with the complexities involved and what the mechanisms are. However, if you're a player then it's kind of exciting to watch. There's also an assload of physics involved and to be considered. It's rather interesting, in my experience.
  That said, I don't really watch TV so I can only speculate, more or less, but I'd watch curling before I'd watch many, many other things that are much more popular. I generally only watch documentaries - to the point where everything else is not an option in the vast, vast majority of cases. I don't actually have television except it turns out that I have cable down in Florida. I have no idea how long I've had cable for as this is only my fourth time at this house even though I own it.
  At any rate, I've gone curling. I've gone a bit often, actually. Yes, yes I did pick it up in Canada. I have Canadian citizenship (by grace of heritage) and family.
  It should be noted that my enjoyment of the sport was greatly reduced when I quit drinking. I'd speculate that's an internal thing and not intrinsic to the enjoyment of the sport/game. It is fair to add that I've not played nor watched for a while now and that I've never been curling while sober - using a strict definition of sober. Of course, there are lots of things that I've not done much/often while sober, using a strict definition.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
57. Re:What's the deal... by KGIII · 2016-02-01 05:17 · Score: 1
  
  As I recall, they're called the Olympic Games and not the Olympic Sports. I do believe there are actual expectations in at least a couple of those. Thus, there's an objective. In the skating, for example, you have to do certain things in order to even have your work count. They include things like basics such as a Double Lutz and even a Figure 8. All of them will do them because they're a requirement - they must be a part of their show or the penalties will be so high that they don't qualify.
  I only know about skating and a bit about gymnastics from a relative and because I wanted to be able to represent Rwanda at the Olympics as a skater. No, I can't skate or anything. In fact, I wanted to get out there and stomp up and down, fucking the ice all up - for days, to AC/DC. Alas, it turns out that they have minimal standards. It would have required more effort than stomping around which meant that I was not only not qualified, I was unwilling to learn.
  Oh, I can probably do a Double Lutz. I just can't do it on purpose or with grace.
  But, if you've ever wondered why everyone does a Figure 8 in their routine, that's it. Failing to do so will result in disqualification by rules. It turns out, you actually have to have some talent. You can't just ask to represent Rwanda in the Winter Games and expect they'll let you "dance the Dance of the Palooga" on their ice, while getting international attention, and cranking out AC/DC's Hell's Bells on the sound system for your own amusement. Err... If you ever had that question, I've found out the answer.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
58. Re: What's the deal... by liquid_schwartz · 2016-02-01 05:19 · Score: 1
  
  Try running a 5k sprinting until you can't run any more, and then walking until you recover and can sprint again vs just running at your maximum steady pace. I guarantee you the latter strategy gets you a better time.
  Interestingly for software development it seems the sprints are preferred.
59. Re:What's the deal... by clodney · 2016-02-01 05:50 · Score: 1
  
  When's the last time you watched a Hockey, Basketball, or Football game (of either kind) without seeing a penalty? Those guys cheat constantly.
  That is not the level of cheating we are talking about. Routine fouls in sports (even when intentional) compared to doping or motorized bikes are like parking tickets vs. felonies.
  Cycling does have the equivalent of fouls - you can get a time penalty for drafting off a team car, or be "relegated" to the back of the pack when shoving someone out of the way during a final sprint.
60. Re:What's the deal... by david_thornley · 2016-02-01 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  So, you can cheat in a way that you think won't be detected, or you can refrain from cheating, lose, and hope that everybody ahead of you will eventually have their titles stripped for cheating and it'll finally get to you. This is not a healthy situation.
  
  --
  "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
61. Re:What's the deal... by mjwx · 2016-02-01 12:57 · Score: 1
  
  Why does cycling attract so much cheating?
  Is it just more publicized than that in other sports? I mean, you don't hear about cheating nearly as much in other "sports" where they depend upon mechanical equipment... Nascar, F1, MotoGP, etc...
  You'd think that Bill Belichick were the coach...
  Little man syndrome.
  
  You see people who go into cycling races do so because they aren't good or rich enough to go into motorsports. Much the same as the MAMIL (Middle Aged Man In Lycra) who cycles is bitter because he doesn't earn enough money and has too many kids to buy an MX-5. So he rides and pretends that he's superior to the guy who does have enough money to afford a separate Mazda roadster for his commute to work whilst swerving all over the road in an attempt to hold up any of his peers in sporty autos. This kind of inadequacy is even worse in the world of professional cycling where not winning means literally having to admit you're a loser.
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
62. Re:What's the deal... by mjwx · 2016-02-01 13:02 · Score: 1
  
  Motorized curling, perhaps.
  I'd actually get up at 3am to watch curling with jet fuel powered stones.
  How do you propose to accelerate the sweepers ahead of the curling stone?
  
  Seriously inquiring minds would like to know (and possibly subscribe to any publication you may produce).
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
63. Re: What's the deal... by mjwx · 2016-02-01 13:08 · Score: 1
  
  A pro competitor at Tour de France averages 450 watts. Casual fit rider averages 220. That means having a mere half a horse power would let the casual rider win the Tour de France
  For those weak at the unit conversion, there's a nice rhyme for remembering it.
  
  In fourteen-hundred and ninety-two,
  Columbus sailed the ocean blue,
  Divide the year of his voyage by two,
  And you get the number of Watts in a horsepower.
  Your poem fails on the last line. But those of us in Australia have an easier way.
  
  Just times a Watt by 1000, then you have a KiloWatt (also 1 HP is 0.75 KW for those still using archaic measurement systems).
  
  --
  Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
64. Re:What's the deal... by quantaman · 2016-02-01 15:16 · Score: 1
  
  It is also remarkably more enjoyable than it looks like. It's not that exciting to watch if you're unfamiliar with the complexities involved and what the mechanisms are. However, if you're a player then it's kind of exciting to watch. There's also an assload of physics involved and to be considered. It's rather interesting, in my experience.
  I actually think it's fairly comparable to golf, a skill based sport where fitness can help at the margins. The big difference is that curling has a lot more strategy and a team component, while golf has nice scenery.
  
  That said, I don't really watch TV so I can only speculate, more or less, but I'd watch curling before I'd watch many, many other things that are much more popular.
  Curling televises surprisingly well because it does have a lot of strategic and tactical drama. Unfortunately the viewer needs an understanding of the game to appreciate it. Also if a team does build a large lead things can get dull quickly.
  
  --
  I stole this Sig
65. Re:What's the deal... by KGIII · 2016-02-01 15:55 · Score: 1
  
  Oddly, that comparison to golf is not lost on me. It sometimes makes people wonder why I, who doesn't really even play much golf, watch golf. It's also capable of being made into a fine video game, or was in the past. I haven't played games in years. :/
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
66. Re:What's the deal... by MightyMartian · 2016-02-02 02:26 · Score: 1
  
  Why rocket shoes, of course! Curling could seriously improve if it was played at Mach 1! It would be like quiddich, only with more swearing.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
67. Re: What's the deal... by dingleberrie · 2016-02-02 04:27 · Score: 1
  
  As a student, I found it helpful to remember that my home was filled with 0.1 HP light bulbs.
68. Re:What's the deal... by HornWumpus · 2016-02-02 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  The fact they left one ball inflated for the kicker is proof that they were cheating.
  'Science of deflategate' is just fans being fans and twisting the world to suit their beliefs.
  Nobody has a reasonable explanation for the kickers ball being at pressure except 'they're cheaters'.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
69. Re:What's the deal... by HornWumpus · 2016-02-02 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  What? If he has kids (and is presumably straight) he wouldn't drive a Miata anyhow.
  There is a difference between 'sporty' and 'sports' cars.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
70. Re:What's the deal... by ChrisMaple · 2016-02-02 12:05 · Score: 1
  
  For a winter Olympic sport, nothing beats the heptathluge. Sleds and machine guns.
  
  --
  Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
71. Re: What's the deal... by ChrisMaple · 2016-02-02 12:19 · Score: 1
  
  Low voltage power FETs are astoundingly effective. A chip the size of a thumbnail could switch the power for a car's starter motor.
  
  --
  Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
72. Re: What's the deal... by Grishnakh · 2016-02-02 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  Not by itself. While there are FETs that size with very low Rdson values and peak current ratings well over 100A, those are really meant for switching circuits (like SMPSs), and still you have to account for heat dissipation. So you have to add some hefty heatsinks, depending on how much current they'll pass and for how long. So for a starter motor, when you take into account the peak expected operating temperature (150F+), how long you might be cranking worst-case (perhaps 30-60s for some idiot who won't give up), derating for reliability, etc., you're probably looking at an array of such FETs and a big-ass heatsink on top of them.
  But for an assist motor for a bike, you're right, you can use FETs like that. But there's still more to the motor control circuit than that (remember, we want regen here), and it'll take up some space, and the circuit will certainly have to be custom since it's unlikely anyone has made a handy ASIC to do this job. It's doable though; it'd help if you got one of those bikes that has the really thick hollow aerodynamic tubes, rather than the regular old circular steel tubes that were an inch wide or less.
73. Re: What's the deal... by Jack+Griffin · 2016-02-02 16:20 · Score: 1
  
  Personally, I'd favor the rear wheel. There's plenty of room inside the hub of the rear wheel (internally geared hubs have shown us that). The crank hub has to endure significant stress from pedaling. Lastly, it's a whole lot easier to "lose" the rear wheel (just get a flat and change it out on the way).
  I'm no expert but having looked into ebikes in the past, the consensus seemed to be that hub motors are worse because they affect handling too much (heavy wheels). It's a similar reason to why electric cars moved away from hub motors I believe, too much of an impact on handling.
74. Re: What's the deal... by Jack+Griffin · 2016-02-02 16:22 · Score: 1
  
  Dunno, have you ever seen a horse riding a bike?
75. Re:What's the deal... by Jack+Griffin · 2016-02-02 16:24 · Score: 1
  
  There is no more cheating in cycling than any other sport. For example, see the two major Australian football codes, which are using media and promotional ties to effectively sweep endemic drug cheating under the carpet. Or international athletics, of which the tip of the cheating iceberg has recently surfaced. The difference is that cycling is actively trying to eradicate cheating, thus the invasive scrutinising and drug tests.
  But I've never seen a football player try to take the field in a car...
Any pictures? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 09:06 · Score: 1, Interesting

Or, is this story not true since Van den Driessche is like the Hillary Clinton of woman's bike racing. People keep attacking her and accusing her of things with no proof. With no proof.
1. Re:Any pictures? by sumdumass · 2016-01-31 09:38 · Score: 2
  
  There is a video on one of the sites linked to from the summery which shows what appears to be someone activating a switch under the weather guard on the left handlebar which spins the rear tire by itself.
2. Re:Any pictures? by Richard_at_work · 2016-01-31 10:14 · Score: 2
  
  The UCI have confirmed that a motor has been found, while Driessche is saying the bike is identical to her own, but actually owned by a friend who cycled the course before the event, and the bike just accidentally happened to be cleaned and tuned for her own use due to a mix up by a mechanic...
  http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cyc...
3. Re:Any pictures? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 10:27 · Score: 1
  
  There is also video from the Tour of Spain where, after a fall, the riderless bike behaves in a manner that is *only* explainable if the rear wheel was still receiving driving force. The hapless rider wanted to get back on but really wanted the bike to stop moving without him. But it's all on camera, including the very heavy support moto that changes direction in order to run over the bike's rear triangle. Puts a stop to that nonsense. =8^)
4. Re:Any pictures? by MightyMartian · 2016-01-31 10:44 · Score: 1
  
  My client merely found these drugs and was on the police station to turn them in when he was arrested!
  We had the Chewbacca Defense. Now we have the Ashley Roachclip Defense!
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
5. Re:Any pictures? by Trongy · 2016-01-31 11:09 · Score: 2
  
  The CX Magazine article said it best:
  "As to why someone would bring an obviously illegal bike into the pits, even if not to be used, is inexplicable. It’s not much different than inviting an EPO user to bring vials over to your trailer that you don’t plan to use."
6. Re:Any pictures? by JoeMerchant · 2016-01-31 13:07 · Score: 1
  
  sumdum - summer is a season, articles have summaries.
7. Re:Any pictures? by sumdumass · 2016-01-31 14:00 · Score: 1
  
  Tell that to spell checker. Evidently
8. Re:Any pictures? by AchilleTalon · 2016-01-31 14:45 · Score: 1
  
  Give us a link to the video. Tell us about the amount of energy stored in the batteries. Tell us about the torque of the motor, etc.
  
  --
  Achille Talon
  Hop!
9. Re:Any pictures? by sumdumass · 2016-01-31 20:55 · Score: 1
  
  The link is in the article submission As i said. If you want to see more, you are going to have to at least click on the links in the summary.
  I have no clue about the motor or battery. The video is in a foreign language and I more or less read the actions of the people and watched what they pointed to and came to a conclusion. This is why I said "appears".
10. Re:Any pictures? by AchilleTalon · 2016-02-01 01:38 · Score: 1
  
  So far, this video doesn't show anything. Any of these "perpetual motion" video on Youtube is showing about the same kind of stuff. Now, since the seized the bike and didn't show the mechanism in public it began to be really suspicious.
  
  --
  Achille Talon
  Hop!
11. Re:Any pictures? by Ogive17 · 2016-02-01 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  Reminds me of the time Sammy Sosa (major league baseball) was caught using a corked bat. He claimed he used the corked bats only during warm ups and accidentally grabbed one during a game.
  
  --
  "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
12. Re:Any pictures? by Drathos · 2016-02-01 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  That's not of her bike. That's from almost 6 years ago at the Giro d'Italia. I don't understand Italian, but this could be related to the stink Davide Cassani raised claiming Fabian Cancellara was using a motor in his Classics wins - a claim which held no water..
  
  --
  End of line..
13. Re:Any pictures? by sumdumass · 2016-02-01 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  The one i saw showed them pressing on the weather guard on the left handle bar and the rear tire spinning indicating there was a switch .
  Nobody is saying it is perpetual motion. Just that a motor was hidden.
14. Re: Any pictures? by HornWumpus · 2016-02-02 06:27 · Score: 1
  
  Which is why this election is more dangerous than most.
  Hillary ether wins or goes to prison. She'd already be under arrest if their were honest people running the justice department.
  
  --
  John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
More details... by bluescrn · 2016-01-31 09:13 · Score: 5, Informative

There's some pics here showing how such a motor can be concealed surprisingly well:

http://cyclingtips.com/2015/04...
1. Re:More details... by AchilleTalon · 2016-01-31 09:23 · Score: 1
  
  And the battery? How much power can you store? Does it worth it? Consider the additional weight in the equation.
  
  --
  Achille Talon
  Hop!
2. Re:More details... by Shinobi · 2016-01-31 09:42 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Read the fucking article he linked. It's clearly stated. As for the worth of it, that would depend on the stage. 110W, as referenced in that article, equates to about 0.148 horsepower and would definitely make up for the addition of a bit of extra weight on a stage with a lot of climbing.
3. Re:More details... by Vegan+Cyclist · 2016-01-31 10:03 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  To give the power (wattage) a little more context: typical pros can average 400-500w over an hour. If someone could add 110w to that, it's a massive gain. It can turn someone with mediocre fitness into a 'champion'. It can make the difference for a successful breakaway for sure. And at the very least, it will save a ton of energy. A famous cycling quote goes along the lines of 'it's not who's fastest who wins, it's who has the most energy at the end who wins'. It's pretty significant. (Also worth noting: the average person can average 100-150w over an hour.)
4. Re:More details... by Shinobi · 2016-01-31 10:14 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, the benefit is huge.
  Cassani stated, after testing a bike kitted out with a motor like that , that even at age 50, he could win a Giro stage with it.
5. Re:More details... by hondo77 · 2016-01-31 14:01 · Score: 1
  
  If by "surprisingly well" you mean "with the battery in a ginormous saddle bag that no pro would be caught dead with", then yeah.
  
  --
  I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
6. Re:More details... by AchilleTalon · 2016-01-31 14:47 · Score: 1
  
  How long the battery can deliver 110W? 110W for 1 sec doesn't provide a significant advantage given the extra weight, friction from the motor, etc.
  
  --
  Achille Talon
  Hop!
7. Re:More details... by klui · 2016-01-31 20:39 · Score: 1
  
  It's in the article.
8. Re:More details... by AbRASiON · 2016-01-31 22:56 · Score: 1
  
  Can I just say, thank you to slashdot / members of slashdot, specifically you.
  I'm INCREDIBLY FUCKING SICK of seeing articles on the internet about something unique, interesting, bad, good, whatever - where you'd expect some more information / pictures but there's nothing goddamn provided.
  Fuck the internet is filled with copy and paste lazy bullshit, thanks for digging up some actual info.
9. Re:More details... by wienerschnizzel · 2016-02-01 00:12 · Score: 1
  
  Just a correction - the 400-500W is the sustained peak value, not the average. An olympic winner track cyclist can get to 700 Watts for about 2 minutes (and be completely exhausted afterwards) - that's about the highest output any human can do. Averaged over the whole Tour de France the champion does maybe 150 Watts.
10. Re:More details... by AchilleTalon · 2016-02-01 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  It is not. I read both articles from the OP and nothing about the 110W and nothing about the amount of energy.
  
  --
  Achille Talon
  Hop!
11. Re:More details... by Vegan+Cyclist · 2016-02-01 05:26 · Score: 1
  
  You're right but wrong - sure, 700 watts for 2 minutes, but I'm talking about average over an hour, which is 400-500w. You can average out any length of time, and common points we track are 1sec, 5sec, 10sec, 30sec, 1min, 2min, 10min, 20min, 30min & 60min. Also, track cyclists are a whole other beast - a sprinter like the one in the video trains VERY differently from a Tour de France or cyclocross racer. What they do in 2min is irrelevant...it's what they can do in 10 - 60min ranges that matters. (And the reason the tour winner has lower watts is because they're 'protected' for the vast majority of the race, being drafted by teammates, which saves 30-40% of their energy/aka watts. These guys shine in time trials and climbing, which are longer periods.)
12. Re:More details... by Jack+Griffin · 2016-02-02 16:33 · Score: 1
  
  which saves 30-40% of their energy/aka watts.
  Ok I have to pick you out on this, because of where you are.
  Energy is measured in Joules, Power is measured in Watts.
  /pedantry
13. Re:More details... by Vegan+Cyclist · 2016-02-04 04:44 · Score: 1
  
  hahah - sure... But drafting results in both a savings in energy AND power. =)
Unfortunately there's no information by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2016-01-31 09:14 · Score: 2, Informative

Let me sum it up for you - here's the sum total of facts, all details included, from the article.
"A motor was found"
That's pretty much it.

--
#DeleteChrome
1. Re:Unfortunately there's no information by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 09:51 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Some more facts were published meanwhile. The bike in which the motor was found was not the bike she used in the race. But they found it in her supply tent. There are claims that a person from her entourage put the bike there after cleaning it, because he thought it was her bike, but in reality it was one of hers that she sold to a friend some time ago.
2. Re:Unfortunately there's no information by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2016-01-31 12:10 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I'm not sure why anyone even pays attention to that "sport" at this point in time.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
Re: News for nerds? by WarJolt · 2016-01-31 09:22 · Score: 1

Just because mechanical engineers aren't real scientist doesn't mean they aren't nerds. We got to throw them a bone every once in a while. Clearly mechanical doping is for them.
nascar has If you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin' by Joe_Dragon · 2016-01-31 09:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

nascar has a saying If you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'.
Same things happens in lot's of other sports if you give some one 5 inches they will try to push it to 10 when the ref is not looking.
Nitpicking by Knightman · 2016-01-31 09:32 · Score: 1

If you are going to quote the original article by cut'n'paste a blurb, FFS make sure you fix the encoded entities. It looks so frigging amateurish when you don't.

--
--- Reality doesn't care about your opinions, it happens anyway and if you are in the way you'll get squished.
1. Re:Nitpicking by Black+Parrot · 2016-01-31 09:35 · Score: 2
  
  Do you seriously hope to shame the editors with charges of amateurism?
  
  --
  Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
2. Re:Nitpicking by Dr.+Spork · 2016-01-31 09:48 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I remember plenty of Slashdot blurbs that consisted of several sentences lifted directly from the article, but giving no credit to TFA. Where I teach, that would be considered a case of representing someone else's words as yours, which is straightforward plagiarism, and gets you an unpleasant appointment with an assistant dean. So even though this execution isn't flawless, at least it clearly distinguishes the words of the blurb author and the article author. I consider that a huge step forward for Slashdot.
3. Re:Nitpicking by rudy_wayne · 2016-01-31 09:53 · Score: 1
  
  If you are going to quote the original article by cut'n'paste a blurb, FFS make sure you fix the encoded entities. It looks so frigging amateurish when you don't.
  You must be new here. The refusal to support unicode is a sacred tradition at Slashdot. So is looking amateurish.
Re:Could be very interesting technology by ickleberry · 2016-01-31 09:34 · Score: 2

I think the market for electric bikes that sacrifice much performance for not looking like an electric bike from the outside is quite small. This thing is only 50-100w whereas you'd want at least 400w for a proper electric bike.
Re:First? by whoever57 · 2016-01-31 09:40 · Score: 3, Informative

Different rider, but look what happens to the bike after the fall. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

--
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Re:News for nerds? by ShaunC · 2016-01-31 09:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

ItÃ(TM)s a good story to demonstrate SlashdotÃ(TM)s lack of Unicode support. ThatÃ(TM)s a nerdy issue!

--
Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
How much would it help? by ebonum · 2016-01-31 09:56 · Score: 1

How many watts can this thing deliver to the chain/rear wheel and for how long? These bikes are really light. About 15 lbs. The whole battery+motor can't weigh more than 4-5 lbs. If someone had a 20 lbs bike at a race, it would feel like it was made of lead to anyone who piked it up. (trust me on this one) I don't see how you could get meaningful power out of something so light. Plus, bikes are generally made of carbon fiber. You can't weld in mounting brackets or make a lot of changes to the inside of the tubes. There isn't much room to work with inside the downtube. If the bottom bracket was the motor, this eliminates the need for a gear box to transfer the power from the motor spindle to the crankset, but this a lot of work. Look at how a modern crank set/bottom bracket is designed: ( http://g03.a.alicdn.com/kf/HTB... ) ( http://mywheelsandmore.com/Ima... ).
So how much does thing really help? Let's say you got something working that put out 100 watts for 8-10 minutes using some 18650 batteries. ( On the flats when cruising, racers are putting down 2-300 watts, they hit 1,000 watts in the sprints ) That isn't enough to win the race, but an extra 100 watts would help. What about the 4-5 hours during the race when this motor isn't on? These races aren't 20 minutes. How much drag does the motor producing? On average, I'm guessing the drag from the motor when it is off would hurt you more than the boost from the motor running would help you. Perhaps there is some form of clutch to disengage the motor? Then you have to lug all that extra weight around for 4-5 hours. It wouldn't matter much on a flat race, but it would add up in the mountains.
1. Re:How much would it help? by AmazingRuss · 2016-01-31 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  If you use it to get up the hills, you enjoy a gravity boost from the mass heading back down. Braking and wind resistance is where you actually lose your energy.
2. Re:How much would it help? by Vegan+Cyclist · 2016-01-31 10:09 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The bikes are about 16-18lbs. Even with the motor, just FYI. This technology already exists and you can read about it here: http://cyclingtips.com/2015/04/hidden-motors-for-road-bikes-exist-heres-how-they-work/
  
  This thing can put out 110w over an hour. And it would help over an hour, for sure. The average pro can put out 400-500w over an hour. Add 110w to that? It's HUGE. It could put mediocre pros on the podium.
  
  It's worth reading the article, there's a lot more to it too...her brother was also caught doping EPO. And claims it was her 'friends' bike...that just happened to get brought into the race. All pretty shady stuff.
3. Re:How much would it help? by Shinobi · 2016-01-31 10:11 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  One system mentioned has an effect of about 110W, with either 60 or 90 minute battery, total package weight with 60 minute battery is 1,8kg, with battery and motor all hidden away, wireless activation button etc.And yes, it can be disengaged.
  Ironically, it's on the mountain stages it'd really help. 0.148hp for a total of 60 minutes during a stage can help you build a massive lead spread over a few climbs.
  Also, look at some suspected motorized cheating like Fabian Cancellara in Roubaix-Flaanderen for example.
  Links:
  http://cyclingtips.com/2015/04...
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
4. Re:How much would it help? by Goonie · 2016-01-31 10:38 · Score: 2
  
  Short version - heaps.
  Longer version: 100 watts for 10 minutes in the context of an hour-long cyclocross race is enough to turn an also-ran into a winner. It would be decisive in most road races other than out-and-out bunch sprints as well.
  As far as drag goes, that's negligible by all reports. Avoiding drag when a power source is not providing propulsion is a very well-studied problem.
  
  --
  
  Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
  --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
5. Re:How much would it help? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  According to TFA, the device delivers an effective 110 watts of assist power to the crank (the motor is rated at 220, but heat loss, efficiency of conversion from electrical to mechanical and gearing reduce the amount of useful work that can be gained from the system) for a total duration of 10 minutes or so. That might not sound like much, but consider that bike races often include sections where a temporary boost would be a very decisive advantage. For example, on cobbled streets within a mile or two of the finish line where screaming fans would make it very difficult to detect motor noise and other riders are hampered by the cobbles or perhaps on a steep hill climb to assist an attack out of the peloton to establish or reinforce a break-away from the main group of riders.
6. Re:How much would it help? by Shinobi · 2016-01-31 11:33 · Score: 1
  
  An interesting thing in the race: She had a crash in a downhill section, and her comment about it was that she just couldn't stop. So possibly the motor got stuck in the On position
7. Re:How much would it help? by nojayuk · 2016-01-31 11:50 · Score: 1
  
  There were reports of Tour de France riders being handed fake water bottles filled with lead at the top of a mountain stage to help them on the descent. When bottles filled with solid materials were banned they switched to mercury.
8. Re: How much would it help? by nojayuk · 2016-01-31 12:23 · Score: 1
  
  If it got them down the mountain a second faster than the other person quite a few of them would drink mercury. Consider the doping and blood transfusions and all the other efforts to gain an edge on the competition while accepting that everyone else are pulling the same tricks in pretty much every sport. Cyclists have died at the roadside from the effects of doping and it didn't even cause a blip in the efforts of the rest of the field to gain that podium place by better chemistry.
  At that level winning is everything -- "Winning isn't a matter of life and death, it's more important than that" is a famous quote by a football manager.
9. Re:How much would it help? by wvmarle · 2016-01-31 13:54 · Score: 1
  
  Those motors allegedly do about 100 watts. The amount of energy a normal bicycle brake can handle to slow you down is easily 1000 W - my bike can stop in a fraction of the distance it takes me to accelerate - and these pro bikers have for sure much better brakes than my city bike.
  That she couldn't stop is not likely caused by such a puny motor. It's more likely good old brake failure, or a surface that was more slippery than she anticipated.
10. Re:How much would it help? by Vegan+Cyclist · 2016-01-31 15:06 · Score: 2
  
  FYI, she actually didn't race the bike, she was found to have it as a spare in the pits. (If you're not familiar, in cyclocross racers will often have a spare bike...or five..in the pits. You can actually swap out a bike pretty fast, taking only an extra second or two for well-trained racers.)
11. Re:How much would it help? by Catbeller · 2016-01-31 17:29 · Score: 1
  
  Why, thank you. That was refreshingly informative. She wasn't riding it in the race?
12. Re:How much would it help? by Vegan+Cyclist · 2016-01-31 18:53 · Score: 1
  
  Nope, if you read the CX Mag link in the OP, she was caught with the bike, but raced on her regular bike. So mechanical doping has been found, but not utilized....
13. Re:How much would it help? by dunkelfalke · 2016-01-31 21:21 · Score: 1
  
  Not necessarily. Road bike brakes aren't that strong and the very narrow tyres haven't a lot of stopping power. Cyclocross bikes have somewhat wider tyres, but they often use cantilever brakes which suck donkey balls when it comes to stopping power even compared to v-brakes - basically the lowest brake version for cheap city bikes. Better ones use hydraulic disc brakes - which are allowed on cyclocross nowadays but not many riders use them yet.
  
  --
  "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
14. Re:How much would it help? by wvmarle · 2016-01-31 22:29 · Score: 1
  
  Well, with my puny cantilever brakes and cheap brake pads I can't move my rear wheel when applying full force. My power output should be towards 300 W (average 220W I've seen, and I'm quite sure I'm above average, though far from the 500W these athletes can do). It takes less distance to stop than to accelerate even using just the rear brake, and the front brake has more stopping power. So my brakes are certainly stronger than me, and I'm certainly stronger than whatever motor they can build into those bikes.
  Now I know I am mixing up torque and power, but more available power generally translates into higher available torque, so the two are somewhat linked.
15. Re:How much would it help? by dcw3 · 2016-02-01 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  and I'm quite sure I'm above average
  "Welcome to Lake Wobegon, where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the children are above average." - Garrison Keillor
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
16. Re:How much would it help? by wvmarle · 2016-02-01 11:37 · Score: 1
  
  LOL. My claim is based on a bit more mundane observation that on my whacky bike I leave most of the locals on their fancy road bikes in my wake. And I'm not even trying.
Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-01-31 10:17 · Score: 1

A simple solution that would be 100% effective at catching cheaters with hidden motors: x-ray the bikes just before the start of the race, and immediately after they pass the finish line.

--
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
1. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by Richard_at_work · 2016-01-31 10:39 · Score: 1
  
  That would require trained professionals who could interpret the images, and simply lead to an arms race between cheaters trying to make a concealment look normal and an inspector trying to work out what actually is normal.
  A real solution would be stock bikes handed out randomly at the start of a race. You would still need to ensure no collusion in the issuing system, and no ability to tamper between issuing and race start, but it would be easier than the alternatives...
2. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by Goonie · 2016-01-31 10:59 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The insides of a bike frame are extremely simple - they're just tubes - and the mechanical components in the frame (the "bottom bracket") comes in only a few standard designs. Any plausible motor and battery is going to be big enough to stick out like a sore thumb. So X-Raying would work, as would pointing an IR camera at the bike detect the motor in operation. You can't hide that much waste heat in that small an area. As for stock bikes, nice idea, but not practical. At the elite level (and even at the serious recreational level) riders often spend a lot of time and money customizing the fit of their bikes. Furthermore, much of the sport's funding comes from equipment manufacturers who would be more than a little peeved if athletes weren't using their expensive gear.
  
  --
  
  Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
  --Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
3. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by M8e · 2016-01-31 11:19 · Score: 1
  
  They could supply the cyclists with a standard bicycle. Make everyone ride bikes that's are exactly the same, and weigh exactly the same. Give them 5-15minutes before the start to adjust the bike.
4. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-01-31 11:28 · Score: 1
  
  That would require trained professionals who could interpret the images,
  I'm not sure you'd need trained professionals, looking at an x-ray image and spotting anomalies isn't exactly rocket science.
  But even if you did, so what? As someone else pointed out, it would be very hard to conceal batteries and a motor from an x-ray image.
  Seriously, it'd be damn hard to hide components of a battery and a motor so they couldn't be recognized If anything unusual is spotted, the bike is taken apart and examined. I doubt you could build a motor and power supply into a bike such that it couldn't be found.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
5. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-01-31 11:33 · Score: 1
  
  They could supply the cyclists with a standard bicycle. Make everyone ride bikes that's are exactly the same, and weigh exactly the same. Give them 5-15minutes before the start to adjust the bike.
  They could do that too, but a simple x-ray would catch them cold, no two ways about it. Even if you managed to build/mold the battery into the composite frame somehow, you still need a motor and the drive mechanism...and those will show up on an x-ray.
  If there's any doubt, any doubt at all, take the bike apart and strip it completely down to its component parts. I believe they do this in some motor sports after the race to make sure there haven't been any illegal mods to the engine, so they could certainly do it to a bike.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
6. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by Trongy · 2016-01-31 11:42 · Score: 1
  
  Riders normally have their bikes customised to to suit their preference. Wheels, stem, handlebar, saddle, chainrings and cassette are all set up by team mechanics.
7. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by Tony+Isaac · 2016-01-31 11:53 · Score: 1
  
  Kind of like how the NFL checked the pressure of footballs just before the Super Bowl.
  No matter what system is used to try to catch cheaters, cheaters will find a weakness in the system and exploit it.
8. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-01-31 13:03 · Score: 1
  
  No matter what system is used to try to catch cheaters, cheaters will find a weakness in the system and exploit it.
  Good luck defeating an x-ray, and good luck defeating the process of disassembling a bike into its component parts for examination.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
9. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by tepples · 2016-01-31 13:24 · Score: 1
  
  Furthermore, much of the sport's funding comes from equipment manufacturers who would be more than a little peeved if athletes weren't using their expensive gear.
  Then have Team Shimano and Team SRAM provide the stock bikes as a condition of sponsoring the event.
10. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by Tony+Isaac · 2016-01-31 13:55 · Score: 1
  
  You are not thinking like a cheater. Of course, it's unlikely to defeat the x-ray itself. So you do what any cheater does: find holes in the process.
  For example, it's unlikely that all bikes could be x-rayed at the same time, in the seconds just before the race. The process takes time. That means that bikes will be sitting somewhere--theoretically in a secure area--for some period of time after the x-ray. This leaves open an opportunity to bribe someone, or breach security in some other way, to make the desired modifications after inspection.
  Another possibility is to find a way to swap out a look-alike cheater model, for the duly inspected version. In any long bike race, it's unlikely that every foot of the course is under the watchful eye of officials, leaving room for a secret exchange. Or even if every foot is being watched, there's still the possibility of paying someone off to look the other way.
  So yes, your x-ray itself would be hard to defeat. But that does not make the method foolproof.
11. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by wvmarle · 2016-01-31 13:59 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt you could build a motor and power supply into a bike such that it couldn't be found.
  That part I agree, but it's not about being unable to be found. It's about getting away with it, and that means making sure it's not visible or at the very least not obvious from the outside. That is a much simpler problem to solve and I can imagine it can be done. No, it's not cheap, but money isn't a big issue in a cycling. There's a lot of it, especially for the winner, so the potential payout is huge.
12. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by wvmarle · 2016-01-31 14:02 · Score: 1
  
  Or do it like doping tests: random through the field, and the winners. Same for the bikes. Have the winner hand in their bike for inspection after the race, and do random checks before or after the race of the others.
  TFA mentions the organisation has equipment to test for this, without going into detail on how. I'm curious how they test these bikes, what this equipment looks for really.
13. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-01-31 14:22 · Score: 1
  
  That means that bikes will be sitting somewhere--theoretically in a secure area--for some period of time after the x-ray.
  
  Everything you mention is just a matter of logistics. With even rudimentary security this wouldn't be an issue. Bies get confiscated after the race and are locked up, no tampering.
  -
  
  In any long bike race, it's unlikely that every foot of the course is under the watchful eye of officials, leaving room for a secret exchange.
  
  Actually, every foot of almost every race is filmed both by track cams and chase cars.
  -
  
  But that does not make the method foolproof.
  With a modest effort, it could be made so foolproof as to be virtually unbeatable.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
14. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-01-31 15:59 · Score: 1
  
  That part I agree, but it's not about being unable to be found. It's about getting away with it,
  You'd only get away with it until the bike was x-rayed or disassembled. After that, it's all over. No way you can hide a motor and the drive components from being found. And then you lose the race, the sponsorships, and all that goes with it.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
15. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-01-31 16:00 · Score: 1
  
  Same for the bikes. Have the winner hand in their bike for inspection after the race,
  
  Have all the bikes inspected. 2nd place is worth cheating for too, I'm sure.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
16. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by wvmarle · 2016-01-31 16:19 · Score: 1
  
  In many sports (including cycling) it's already the top-3 or top-something that's tested for doping. Not just the #1. I didn't write it up properly.
17. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by Catbeller · 2016-01-31 17:26 · Score: 1
  
  That motor has rare-earth magnets in it. Very strong ones. Easy to detect.
18. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by Catbeller · 2016-01-31 17:33 · Score: 1
  
  A small magnet on a wand would find that motor instantly. It has to be located in the seat tube, linked to a ring gear by a conical gear. The magnets in that motor are rare earth, and damned strong. Iron filings could find it. A stud-finder too. It would be ridiculous to even try.
19. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by michelcolman · 2016-02-01 00:44 · Score: 1
  
  Better x-ray the riders too. Maybe not today, but it won't be long...
20. Re:Simple solution, 100% effective by JustAnotherOldGuy · 2016-02-01 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  Better x-ray the riders too. Maybe not today, but it won't be long...
  Yeah, we laugh now, but in the future? Yes, they would probably go so far as to implant stuff if they thought they could get away with it.
  
  --
  Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Re:First? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 10:22 · Score: 1

This look just like angular momentum of the rotating wheel giving the spin though the partial friction, look for instance on this.
Two reasins:
a) look at the pedals, they are not rotating... All practical solutions would use drive coupled to crank axis bolt / crank wheel, it woul be very difficult to coulpe the drive directly to back wheel...
b) They were going down with nearly no push required (they are not pedaling), it would be stupid to switch the drive on in such situation
Re:Belgeuse by PopeRatzo · 2016-01-31 10:37 · Score: 1

go fuck yourself
You Flems have dirty mouths.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:First? by Shinobi · 2016-01-31 10:40 · Score: 3, Interesting

Yeah, a better example of highly suspicious and quite likely to be motor assisted cheating is Fabian Cancellara in Roubaix-Vlaanderen in the second part of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Re: News for nerds? by NekSnappa · 2016-01-31 11:18 · Score: 1

I'm surprised I had to scroll so far down to find a "This isn't news for nerds" post.

--
I want to shoot the messenger!
UCIâ(TM)s Womenâ(TM)s Driesscheâ(TM by execthis · 2016-01-31 11:56 · Score: 1

UCIâ(TM)s Womenâ(TM)s Driesscheâ(TM)s
This is 2016. Why is this happening? We still cannot have a means of presenting text electronically via the Internet without fuckups like this?
Re:News for nerds? by Frosty+Piss · 2016-01-31 12:02 · Score: 1

If you want it so badly, you should try appealing to the new /. overlords to turn it on in the code. (Yes, even the ACs know the support exists, but is currently disabled.)
The "New Overlords" already said that it is in the queue. Give it some time.

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Re:Could be very interesting technology by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 12:09 · Score: 2, Informative
I think the market for electric bikes that sacrifice much performance for not looking like an electric bike from the outside is quite small. This thing is only 50-100w whereas you'd want at least 400w for a proper electric bike.
Huh?
- The market is huge (all those rich wankers that want to pose as professional riders and pay more than $8K AUD for their bikes). That's why Vivax, and others make good money.
- That motor is 200W (which is more than your fat arse would deliver to the pedals).
- Most countries put a 250W limit on ecycles - bigger motors make the bicycle a motorcycle.
But don't let the fact that you are consistently wrong change anything.
Re:First?? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 12:38 · Score: 1

There was a case where it is highly likely a motor was used 3-4 years ago. I can't find the link, but I recall the video of it where they showed a bike inexplicably speeding up in a race, and they had pics of the bike with a suspect frame.
Re:First? by DeathElk · 2016-01-31 14:04 · Score: 1

http://www.fastcoexist.com/303...
Re:First? by hondo77 · 2016-01-31 14:07 · Score: 1

Yeah, Cancellara switches to a higher gear and goes faster. SO suspicious!

--
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
Re:Sales Boost by DeathElk · 2016-01-31 14:09 · Score: 1

http://www.fastcoexist.com/303...
Cheating in other sports is part of the game by swb · 2016-01-31 14:42 · Score: 3, Interesting

And the cheating is so institutionalized that it has to be egregious before it becomes a problem.
Most team sports have this thing called a "penalty" or a "foul" where the offending team gets some small penalty or the offended team some small advantage -- fouls in basketball, the yellow flag in football, penalty box in hockey, balk in baseball.
There's just so much attempted cheating they've just made it part of the game -- intentional fouls are part of the late-minute strategy in basketball to stop the clock. In hockey, it's actually against the rules to beat the shit out of an opposing player yet it too is (although less so now) part of the game, down to "the enforcer" each team hires to intimidate members of the other team, up to and including beating the shit out of them once in a while.
In those sports only the most outrageous cheating becomes a scandal, like illegal hits in hockey that put someone in the hospital, hard fouls in basketball that result in an ejection or deflating the football (which, IMHO, couldn't have provided the advantage relative to the BFD it caused).
1. Re:Cheating in other sports is part of the game by fredgiblet · 2016-01-31 21:34 · Score: 1
  
  The football thing was because it's the Patriots. If another team had gotten caught doing that it would have been a minor scandal, but the Pats win a lot and cheat a lot.
2. Re:Cheating in other sports is part of the game by dcw3 · 2016-02-01 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ne...
  The Pats have also benefited from plenty of incorrect calls by the officials.
  
  --
  Just another day in Paradise
Re:First? by whoever57 · 2016-01-31 14:47 · Score: 1

Yeah, Cancellara switches to a higher gear and goes faster. SO suspicious!
If it is so simple to go that much faster, why don't the others just switch to a higher gear?

--
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Re:Could be very interesting technology by AchilleTalon · 2016-01-31 14:50 · Score: 1

I don't think so, to charge the battery it would be very difficult to hid the mechanism on the wheels and the wires.

--
Achille Talon
Hop!
Re:First? by gavron · 2016-01-31 16:26 · Score: 1

>I read one of the reports where the rider confessed.
No. You didn't.
>I consider that confirmed.
You're the only one.
E
Re:First? by AK+Marc · 2016-01-31 17:05 · Score: 1

How do you know what I read? http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnie... That's not the same one I read, but was the first hit on Google. She admits riding the illegal bike, and claims she didn't know it was illegal, and thought it was her bike, as it was an exact match for her bike.

She confessed to the infraction and is asking for leniency. At least according to all the articles I've read that weren't linked in TFS.

The violation seems settled. The only question left is the punishment.

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:First? by gavron · 2016-01-31 17:21 · Score: 1

> She admits riding the illegal bike
As per the citation you gave (her chain broke) and the original article (mechanical problem before the race) she wasn't riding it.
She also didn't admit to riding it.
Seriously. Read the article.
E
Cool tech by Catbeller · 2016-01-31 17:25 · Score: 1

I want one! It's brilliant design. Let's get the price down.
As for the woman, it's inconceivable she thought she could get away with it - it's easy to spot, with magnets if nothing else. Possible it was a trainer that got mixed in, or someone else's bike, I think they're claiming. Possible. It certainly jammed up the crank and gave itself away (toys don't always work, self-driving-car fans). As a cheat, it doesn't give you much, with a certainty of detection added in.
I'll let them decide, but it would quite stupid if so if they brought it to race day.
Re:First? by gavron · 2016-01-31 18:22 · Score: 2

Right. She didn't read it.
Keep on trying to ask me to read the article you insist on not reading...
SHE DIDN'T RIDE IT.
SHE DIDN'T APOLOGIZE FOR RIDING IT.
SHE DIDN'T CONFESS.
IT'S NOT CONFIRMED
You made that stuff up in your post. And then you said you believe it.
Good for you.
Sucks, donut?
E
Re:nascar has If you ain't cheatin', you ain't try by Anonymous Coward · 2016-01-31 18:40 · Score: 1

Yes, that's said in other sports such as finance.
Re:First? by AK+Marc · 2016-01-31 19:06 · Score: 1

I didn't make it up. Did you not read the quoted material in my last post. She admitted the bike they took was the one she rode, and that it had an electric motor in it. That's not the only site with that description of events. Why are you so set on claiming she didn't confess, when multiple places have reported her saying that the bike she rode had an electric motor in it?

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:First? by gavron · 2016-01-31 19:12 · Score: 2

Because it didn't. Read the article. Don't add extra words you think are missing from her sentences
YOU SAID she confessed.
She did not.
YOU SAID she admitted to riding it
She did not.
Seriously, go detach from reality on your own now. I CAN'T QUOTE A NEGATIVE but you have not at all quoted her agreeing with any of the stuff you made up.
E
Junior by SomeoneFromBelgium · 2016-01-31 19:51 · Score: 1

Just some nit picking (and not for downplaying the incident): Femke was European champion with the juniors ('beloften' in dutch).
Re:First? by sad_ · 2016-01-31 23:38 · Score: 1

because they were not as good as he was that day, it happens, it's sport.

--
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Re:First? by sad_ · 2016-01-31 23:41 · Score: 1

also other riders may have gotten the instructions to not follow his escape, there were still more then 40km's to go (in roubaix).
ofcourse this is a gigantic mistake, because he's an excellent time trail rider and very strong in this type of race.

--
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Re:First? by michelcolman · 2016-02-01 00:36 · Score: 2

Your lack of reading skills is quite surreal, you know. Especially when you keep insisting you're right when you're obviously not. The words you added in square brackets are entirely your own fantasy yet you're using them to somehow "prove" your point?!
The (incorrect) summary of that article indeed says "the bike she was riding" but the actual text of the article (and any other source I've heard so far) makes it clear she did not actually ride that bike. After her chain broke, she "saw that bike standing there" (i.e. a different bike, not the one she was riding) and she didn't know how it got there. It belonged to a friend of hers, looked identical to her own, and was accidentally placed there by a mechanic who thought it was hers. She didn't know that her friend used a motor in his bike.
Now it's entirely possible that she's lying, and she did ride that bike on some other occasion during the season. But she never actually admitted to that.
By the way, I saw the actual interview in the original Dutch language, not some bad translation bordering on ambiguity. She clearly said she did not ride the bike. Her friend already apologized a hundred times for leaving his bike there. (That's not in the article, but was said in the actual interview).
Next up: Cyborg riders by jfdavis668 · 2016-02-01 02:42 · Score: 1

Next they will have to x-ray the riders to make sure they don't have mechanical implants.
Re:News for nerds? by thoromyr · 2016-02-01 03:39 · Score: 1

You do realize that ASCII doesn't have an apostrophe?
Oh, you thought that a single straight quote was the same thing?
Then you're excused -- after all, ignorance is bliss, right?
I just hope you aren't confused into thinking that a back tick is actually a left single quote. If all you have is ASCII then there are no typographic quotes or apostrophes, just single & double straight quotes.
(And this is really boils down to the same problem as the, mostly retired now, folks who insisted that they could use a lower case l for 1 and even interchange 0 and O.)
Re:News for nerds? by KGIII · 2016-02-01 05:43 · Score: 1

That and it already WORKS© for some definition of WORKS®. You can do $, £, € and even do ¥. © and ® work and you can type El Niño if you want.
äåéëüúíóöáßðfghïø©®bñç£½¾ÄÅÉËÜÚÍÓÖ“”¦ÁÐFGHÏ®B and the "<" works too.

--
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Re:News for nerds? by Frosty+Piss · 2016-02-01 09:28 · Score: 1

ÃÃ¥Ã©ÃÃ¼ÃÃÃÃÃÃYÃfghÃÃÂ©Â®bÃ±ÃÂ£Â½Â¾ÃÃ...ÃÃÃoeÃsÃÃ"Ã-âoeâÂ¦ÃÃFGHÃÂ®B

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Re:News for nerds? by KGIII · 2016-02-01 13:31 · Score: 1

If you don't tell too many people how to do it, they'll think you're brilliant for doing it. You'll be The Wizard!© (Property of Substandard Adventures, Inc.®)
Use the Keyboard, Luke.
I'm not actually sure how many more I'd like enabled. Do we really need a pile of poop or a hot dog? There's gotta be a limit, somewhere. Right? Do we need the emoji part of Unicode? ÷ × Hmm... It looks like some mathematics symbols are included.

--
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Re:First? by goose-incarnated · 2016-02-01 18:24 · Score: 1

She admitted riding a bike with a motor in it. Your objections can't change reality.
From your own damn link:
"After my chain broke I got off and was told that there was something wrong with my bike. I didn’t know what was wrong. Then I saw that bike standing there. I don’t know how it go there I am more preoccupied with myself on days like that”.

"That bike belongs to a friend of mine. He bought it from me at the end of last season. It is exactly the same bike as what I ride. The friend had ridden round the course with my brother before the race. He had left the bike against the lorry. One of the mechanics must have thought it was my bike and cleaned it up and brought it to me.” Where exactly did she admit to riding the motorised bike? You have severe reading and comprehension problems.

--
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
Re:Belgeuse by HornWumpus · 2016-02-02 06:28 · Score: 1

Bunch of cheating sprouts.

--
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'