UKC

Why is the ban so much longer than for good old fashioned dope doping?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/van-den-driessche-handed-six-year-ban-for-m...

"Mechanical doping" is an asinine expression. I realise it isn't yours.

In reply to DaveHK:

Because its a shot across the bows. Low hanging fruit. Its rife at the top level. But money.

D

In reply to DaveHK:
Probably because it easy to accidentally take on a banned substance in classical doping. Even a sniff of cold remedy is enough, or a steak from an animal that was fed growth hormones. All the stuff on the drugs banned list is not proven to improve be performance. Mechanical doping, there's no way you wouldn't know, no possibility of a mistake, and it clearly offers a significant advantage.

In reply to Dogwatch:


Massively so. I guess the sport doesn't want to be associated with terms like "outright cheating, lying and deception" however...

In reply to Dogwatch:


Then you'll also love the accusation levelled at Sky by teams with smaller budgets: financial doping.

In reply to Lion Bakes:

Are you serious? Do you really believe top athletes do not have precise control over what they are using, trying to be one step ahead of the testers?
I grant you that THC is only on the list for political reasons, but can you name any other banned substance that does not have a use in at least some disciplines?
Mechanical doping is used in cycling since quite some years, I need to check if I can find the thermal camera video showing several suspiciously hot seat tubes on youtube.

CB

In reply to DaveHK:

I guess even dopers have bad days, you don't have bad days when you have a 200w turbo button. In the view of the UCI and probably most of the peloton, it's more reliable and therefore worse cheating than doping.

In reply to Lion Bakes:

On the flip side, doping has potentially very serious health implications, can be dodgy legally (on the continent at least) and has caused serious damage to the sport in the past. Coupled with the fact that it's so much harder to detect, it seems strange that they've set a precedent for motor use being penalised more heavily than doping.

Still, cheating's cheating and it's good to see them taking this seriously.

In reply to Lion Bakes:

I don't buy that, just like I didn't buy Bertie's dodgy steak excuse.

In reply to DaveHK: at least with classical doping you have to press the pedals. This is worse as its such blatant cheating, so a very big ban seems good to me

In reply to cb294:

I'm not sure I buy that either. Here's the video you were referring to. youtube.com/watch?v=IKSScOzjaRw& It is not at all convincing to me.

In reply to Alun:

I can't imagine any other way if explaining it though.

In reply to DaveHK:


Oh my, I hadn't heard that one before.

In reply to Alun:

I had another video in mind, but could you provide another explanation for the hot seat tube? Deformation sounds not particularly plausible (should be visible in other parts of frame and all bikes).

CB

In reply to Alun:


That looks convincing to me. What's your take on it?

It doesn't have to be convincing. It just has to 1. give an indication that more investigation is needed and 2. put the fear into potential cheats.

In reply to DaveHK:

The whole thing seems to be getting farcical. It always reminds me of this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8820301/Marathon-ru...

In reply to cb294:

Deformation is one cause, the other is the batteries for the shift system are located there

In reply to balmybaldwin:

Why don't the UCI outlaw the use of electrically assisted gear shifting to remove any need for any electrics, batteries, motors or solenoids, to be fitted to any bike?

In reply to DaveHK:


I thought they were going for a life ban, so 6 years is quite moderate, particularly as she did nothing to assist the inquiry and her explanation was laughable. The reason why longer bans aren't imposed for first time drug offences are that CAS would overturn them - there seems to be agreement that 4 years is about right, reduced if they cooperate.

However this case is unique to cycling, so an opportunity to set a precedent and a warning. Plus, they know she won't go to CAS - she's simply walked away.

Is it worse than drugs ? I think so. There's no grey area here, unlike PEDs, which depend upon someone saying that one drug is permissable, another isn't, another maybe in these circumstances etc etc.

Seen lots of muttering that the UCI should have sanctioned her team as well, but the problem is lack of evidence - she's accepted all the blame, and is saying nothing

In reply to balmybaldwin:

Deformation heat should be visible in all bikes, and if one bike should suffer from this especially, also in the lower tube. AFAIK the batteries are located below the chain stay.

CB

In reply to cb294:

Deformation heat? Surely the BB/downtube area are one of the most rigid areas on the bike, especially in the vertical direction where most of the force on a bike manifests?!

In reply to Removed User:

You could argue that the biggest strain on the frame, and hence the biggest source of deformation heat, is the sideways bending of the seat tube just above the BB that occurs with every pedal push. That the frames are constructed to prevent deformation of this region does not mean that the energy is not dissipated there.

However, my point was that this is not a plausible explanation, as the lower end of the bottom tube should then also heat up, and all bikes in a group should show at least similar heat patterns.

CB

In reply to DaveHK:


It's just blatant cheating isn't it?

I know that performance enhancing drugs are also cheating, but at least with drugs, the rider still has to 'perform' and not let an electric motor take the edge off for them. Using a motor just seems worse to me than doping.

In reply to Jimbo C:

To my mind it deserves a life ban. It is as cynical an act of cheating and deception as you can imagine.

In reply to Rob Parsons:

A life ban is easy to bandy around when the event doesn't matter so few commercial or international interests are involved. Recall that VdD was an decent rider, a good junior and national U23 champion in the heart of cyclocross but the event hasn't really mattered outside of Belgium since Roger and Eric de Vlaeminck were killing it in the 1970s. Name the last British cyclocross world champion in any age category? OK I can but I know shit like that.

Wilier's mechanics, on the other hand... Who the f*ck are they?

In reply to Mike Highbury:


Ok you've got me there, but I think Evie Richards won the race where VdD was caught - actually wasn't that the U23 worlds. Not using google here

And of course Nikki Harris and Helen Wyman are pretty good. But I did here a comment that it was easier to get a top 10 finish at the worlds than the Belgian national champs, cos you only get 4 Belgians at the worlds.

In reply to Mike Highbury:


I'd hope the same hard treatment would be meted out to any rider - or team - doing this. These motors - which until recently I had thought were a fantasy - are clearly out there, and their use makes the sport a complete joke.

In reply to DaveHK:

I totally missed that, quite cheeky really.

In reply to Chris the Tall:



In any age category was the rule. Well done!

In reply to Mike Highbury:

Roger Hammond? Edit - just seen the post above.