Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

fittish.deadspin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 307 posts

Re: Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

#101

Post by bigiain »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #82
jdietrich wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technology is an integral part of cycling, just as it is in motorsport. There are some one-design motorsport racing classes, but they are far from the most popular. Fans like to see innovation, we like to coo over the beautiful new machinery on display. Some of the greatest moments in cycling are directly related to technical progress, most obviously the Obree/Boardman battle for the hour record. On one side a profes…

If technology is integral, then why ban motors at all? Small motors and powerful compact energy supplies are technological advancements.

Why ban steroids? Why ban amphetamines? Whyban surgical modification? Why ban genetic engineering? Why ban motorised exo skeletons and nano technology? (I just read a great short story along these lines called ""Slipping" by Lauren Brookes - from the EFF'S PWNING TOMORROW short fiction anthology...)

Re: Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

#103

Post by paulmd »

bigiain wrote: post #101
dclowd9901 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If technology is integral, then why ban motors at all? Small motors and powerful compact energy supplies are technological advancements.

Why ban steroids? Why ban amphetamines? Whyban surgical modification? Why ban genetic engineering? Why ban motorised exo skeletons and nano technology? (I just read a great short story along these lines called ""Slipping" by Lauren Brookes - from the EFF'S PWNING TOMORROW short fiction anthology...)

The same question applies to all of those. If we allow technological enhancements, why is one enhancement too far? You couldn't run the course as fast as you can cycle it, after all. The same argument applies to all those other things - if we allow them then the playing field needs to stay absolutely level otherwise the person who can afford the strongest drugs, the newest gene-splicing, and the most efficient exoskeleton wins.

It's either about the athletic competition or it's not. If it's about the athletic condition, then the impact of technological factors should be minimized.

Re: Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

#104

Post by danielvf »

stbtrax wrote: post #73
wl wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time I bought a new bicycle, I had to try a lot of them before I found one I really enjoyed. I'd imagine world-class cyclists are even pickier than I am.

I think they're picky about who pays them the most.

They are picky about winning. Money will make all the difference if they have no preference, but if they don't like something or are slower, there's no way someone who finishes in the top three would be willing to trade more money from one sponsor for moving down in the rankings.

Re: Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

#106

Post by paulmd »

greggman wrote: post #96
harlanlewis wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to disagree from my own perspective of a commuting cyclist who would like to see racing drive cycling advancement in ways that trickle down to affordably solving the last mile(s) problem for the human race, but allowing more than a single human as the source of power would simply transform the sport into something else. It's not necessarily better or worse, but using a motor is a fundamentally different act…

What about a flywheel? Probably a net negative. What about a motor with no battery. You pedal to power it? Just wondering what the limit of "human powered" is

A clutched flywheel would probably be an advantage in many kinds of terrain. Imagine being able to spin up the flywheel from pedalling or gravity (geared) while going downhill, and then when you hit an uphill section you kick in the gear and pedal easy. It would essentially turn most tracks into "flat" tracks.

Re: Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

#107

Post by bigiain »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #94
hooloovoo_zoo wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will obviously pay for itself in terms of energy... in the limiting case, you could just hop in a Tesla and win the race.

Hm. I love the idea of a logic proof, but is this correct? In the limit the Tesla runs out of battery and you can't push it up the hills.

Interestingly, they race electric motorcycles at the Isle of Mann TT, and the riders all talk about how it's a different game to racing fuel-powered bikes - the bikes are capable of using up all their energy much more quickly that a fuel powered bike, so it becomes as much an efficiency trial as a race, they need to manage their energy consumption to ensure they make it to the finish line (all while still averaging over 100mph around the 40-odd mile mountain racecourse...)

Re: Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

#109

Post by grahamburger »

greggman wrote: post #96
harlanlewis wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to disagree from my own perspective of a commuting cyclist who would like to see racing drive cycling advancement in ways that trickle down to affordably solving the last mile(s) problem for the human race, but allowing more than a single human as the source of power would simply transform the sport into something else. It's not necessarily better or worse, but using a motor is a fundamentally different act…

What about a flywheel? Probably a net negative. What about a motor with no battery. You pedal to power it? Just wondering what the limit of "human powered" is

Or a motor + battery but the battery has to start discharged. Basically the same as the flywheel I guess, except you have a little more control over when the energy you store gets used.

Re: Thermal camera footage allegedly shows pro cyclists using motors

#110

Post by esturk »

paulmd wrote: post #64

Just take the bike out of the race entirely. Declare a year in advance that the bike will be XYZ model Q so people can train on them, and the race maintains custody of all race bikes, spares, etc. It's already a money-competition to see who can buy the best super-bike. Yes, you have to have a minimum weight, but that just means that you can take a superbike and spend the extra weight applying aerodynamic fairings whe…

I agree. This is what happened to swimming with the super-suits. It became a matter of who can buy the best technology and a bunch of records came crashing down until they banned all the high-tech suits. Ian Thorpe's 400m freestyle record was thought to last for a least a decade or two and poof it was gone.
Post reply on HN