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

Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 354 posts

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#341

Post by borroka »

lonelyasacloud wrote: post #100
ekianjo wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> drugs are not used much they just switched to drugs you cant easily detect.

For the prestigious pro events samples are kept for years afterwards and are subject to re-testing at any time as science advances. If any of those re-tests fails (or if cheating comes to light through any other means) the rider would be dq'd, stripped of the result, and be liable to pay back prize any and sponsorship money. These are riders in their twenties, that's such a long time to rely on getting away with it I…

Of course it happens. At the highest levels and at the amateur levels. People want to win. It's like telling people they shouldn't commit crimes because they might end up in prison or worse. But people continue to commit crimes and end up in prison when they are caught, or worse, when they are killed.

If prostitution is the oldest profession in the world, according to some, cheating is the oldest way to gain an advantage.

I mean, just a few weeks ago, we found out about a guy who was working for I don't know how many companies at the same time, that a start-up had developed some artificial intelligence software to cheat during tech interviews and had secured some good funding. Well, but that can't happen in sport, even though it's been happening since the dawn of time. Sport is business, and business is dirty.

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#342

Post by borroka »

stefs wrote: post #145
ekianjo wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> drugs are not used much they just switched to drugs you cant easily detect.

ah, the magic undetectable drug that's just the right kind of effective without the pesky side effects, which you'd need other undetectable drugs for. this drug would be worth a lot of money, but we'll keep secret except just for the one top performer, because wide distribution would increase the risk of a leak substantially. and remember: the top performers getting busted would probably mean the end of pro cycling a…

"cycling isn't a huge money maker for financial investors like football, rather it's a money pit for sponsors. do sponsors love a podium placement more than being forever associated with dirty cheaters? they'd risk it all for modest gains."

To me, this is an interesting comment, because on the surface it may sound true, like come on, this is common sense, but it is far off the reality that it is in front of us everyday. People want to win. They want to be better than others. You go to any gym and there are plenty of people who assume substantial quantities of hormones--test, hgh--just to look better in pictures. You go to any martial arts gym, and there are plenty of people of all ages, including 50+ years old, who are on TRT and more to win some rolls at the gym or dream about winning a cheap medal at a local tournament with 5 people in attendance.

People buy local teams because they want to be known, popular. They want to win. They want to humiliate the owner of the other team. Athletes are getting caught? Well, I strongly condemn their actions, they say.

You can do worse than reading "Speed Trap" or the book by Sandro Donati on doping, if you can find it translated from Italian.

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#343

Post by ubermonkey »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #340
ubermonkey wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Stuff like external cables actually are better for you as someone who isn’t a pro cyclist since shifting is smoother without under handle wraps, cables last longer with less tension in the brifter. My bike doesn't have cables at all, since SRAM's electronic groups are wireless, and the brakes are hydraulic. Actual gear range on a modern 11- or 12-speed bike can be FAR wider than you'd get with 7- or 8-. On gravel bi…

Well someone who isn’t a pro cyclist doesn’t care about pacetime rides. I commute. 11-28 is fine on 8 speed. If I am out of gear I shift or pedal faster or slower. Not a huge ask. My chains are also like $10 and don’t stretch for years. Electronic shifting I see as a con. Di2 at least is not serviceable and reaches an end of life. I am not as familiar with sram but I assume its the same. Either way just yet another o…

>Well someone who isn’t a pro cyclist doesn’t care about pacetime rides.

You have a very narrow view of cycling, I think. Plenty of amateurs do fast paceline riding. It's a huge part of the hobby.

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#344

Post by ubermonkey »

crashbunny wrote: post #318
kjkjadksj wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only things an older frame won’t accommodate is electronic shifting and disk brakes. You can run 12 speed its the same cassette width as its always been since probably 7 speed. Stuff like external cables actually are better for you as someone who isn’t a pro cyclist since shifting is smoother without under handle wraps, cables last longer with less tension in the brifter. Easier to service yourself than running t…

i don't know if braking performance is the main reason for disk brakes. I suspect the biggest benefit is bike makers get to sell new bikes to people who don't need new bikes. For professional riders who don't buy their own bikes, it's probably more about areo, and maybe weight, as the rims don't need a braking surface. They have more creativity with the shape and material. They only brake for emergencies and going in…

Aero matters a lot, even for enthusiastic amateurs. You're spot on about wheel shape being more flexible with disc brakes vs. rim. Materials matter here, too -- early carbon wheels were crap at stopping vs alloy because the rim brake tracks were iffy on the carbon, and if you let them get too hot on a descent you'd ruin the wheel. But carbon wheels are an ENORMOUS upgrade over alloy in terms of weight, and in terms of aerodynamics, so the desire for carbon helped fuel the shift to disc braking.

Discs are also absolutely better at stopping the bike, especially if it's hilly and SUPER especially if it's wet (or muddy, which is why off road bikes took to disc first).

Even in a flat place like Houston where we never would've gone to disc in the absence of market forces, we all realized quickly how much nicer they were. It's a definite upgrade.

You're also right about the cassette. More cogs mean we can have a wider range AND preserve the small steps between them, which is great for finding the right cadence in a paceline just as it is for accelerating.

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#345

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

wyre wrote: post #334
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense is PBP not a race? It is a timed event, with a cutoff. The organization that runs it maintains a results list that includes times. If you mean there are no prizes, then fair enough, but that's not my definition of a race.

The nature and culture around the event discourage treating them as races. The point is completion, not competition. It shares a lot of the definition of a race while not being one.

The culture centers on completion because that's so damn hard. The fastest riders, however, are absolutely racing each other.

Would you say that Tour Divide or TransEurope are not races, because enough people fail to finish them that the focus is on completion, not competition?

Another reason why the culture is different: drafting is not widely used, and pack formation is rare. This magnifies the effects of very small differences in riding speed so that riders are generally widely spread out. I know from own experience doing brevets in the 90s that it would be rare to be in visual contact with other riders. Same is true for Tour Divide, TransEurope, RAAM etc. This makes "competition" look and feel very different than in pro-cycling and cat racing where "can I hang with the pack?" and "should i attack now?" are the constant questions.

However, all the same things are true of ultramarathon running too. Limited visual contact with other racers, high DNF rates, completion being the goal for the majority of participants. Nobody says, however, that WS100 or UTMB are "not races". And the reason for that is: in this category of racing, there is no other format. Nobody runs 100 miles like the pack on a track and field event, or even the way most major marathons play out. The nature of racing WS100 or UTMB just simply is the nature of ultramarathon running races.

And so it is for cycling. When you increase the distances and terms (e.g. "the clock runs non-stop"), the nature of the event changes. PBP is nothing like any TdF stage, but it is still a race. Granted, more like triathlon where only a small percentage of the entrants are actively racing other people, but people don't say that's not a race, either.

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#346

Post by mft_ »

littlestymaar wrote: post #335
mft_ wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(While I'm not arguing that motor doping was widespread) I don't think that's how it would be used. Firstly, in 2025 (let alone a decade ago) LiPo batteries are pretty heavy for a meaningful amount of power. Even if you could hide them in a frame, there would be a disadvantage to pulling a lot of weight around for hours. (Try riding a ebike with the engine turned off.) It's therefore most likely that their power capa…

For classics maybe, but for TdF, a “crucial attack” isn't going to do much if you aren't able to ride faster than your opponents in average on the whole climb , and doing that is going to have an impact of the timings (each “col” has its own record table).

Drafting’s a factor on many climbs at the crazy speeds they achieve, and it can be enough of a benefit for a slightly slower rider to keep up with a slightly faster one. That’s why it’s rare that people ride away from others on a climb without an attack to break the draft.

A few hundred extra watts for a few seconds could be the difference between a failed attack and a stellar attack, then allowing the attacking rider to ride away.

(Of course, the weight of the batteries and motor would have to be considered as it would slightly impair the climbing performance.)

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#347

Post by littlestymaar »

mft_ wrote: post #346
littlestymaar wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For classics maybe, but for TdF, a “crucial attack” isn't going to do much if you aren't able to ride faster than your opponents in average on the whole climb , and doing that is going to have an impact of the timings (each “col” has its own record table).

Drafting’s a factor on many climbs at the crazy speeds they achieve, and it can be enough of a benefit for a slightly slower rider to keep up with a slightly faster one. That’s why it’s rare that people ride away from others on a climb without an attack to break the draft. A few hundred extra watts for a few seconds could be the difference between a failed attack and a stellar attack, then allowing the attacking ride…

You're forgetting all the unsuccessful attacks where the attacker is simply swallowed back by a faster pace of the racers left behind by the attack.

I can see situation advantage for a very strong, title contending, competitor, but honestly that sounds too niche to be really useful.

Also:

> That’s why it’s rare that people ride away from others on a climb without an attack to break the draft.

Did you watch Tour de France the past few years? Even without attacking, Pogacar was simply too fast to follow in the mountains for everyone but Vingegaard, so there's only one guy who could have gained something and it's two times champion Vingegaard. Talk about a niche.

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#348

Post by stefs »

labcomputer wrote: post #337
stefs wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm unconvinced. EPO was undetectable, but not anymore. new undetectable substance would run the risk of being detectable in a few years. who would ignore whistleblowers today? and the USADA did bring the hammer down on LA at some point. sure, they pay off is high, but the risk - at least in cycling - is even higher, exactly because they've been caught once and now all eyes are on them. if pog gets popped, nobody wil…

EPO was always detectable. The trouble was detecting synthetic EPO. In fact, the maker of synthetic EPO (Amgen) was the title sponsor of the Tour of California! After they developed that test stage speeds dropped dramatically. Now speeds are back up to where they were right before the EPO test was developed. You really think that’s natural? Cycling has a doping scandal once every decade or two. Why would another one…

yeah, i think i'm convinced.

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#349

Post by sincerely »

dr_dshiv wrote: post #253
Tuna-Fish wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, never. Because any small change in chemistry is something that evolution is very effective at picking up. Which means that if there is a simple intervention that improves performance, there is always a good reason why nature hasn't already given it to you. In the case of EPO, it's significantly increased risk of blood clots and blood pressure related conditions.

Caffeine is still the only outlier? I remain optimistic.

Aspartame seems to be a newer contender

Re: Tour de France confronts a new threat: Are cyclists using tiny motors?

#350

Post by wyre »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #345
wyre wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nature and culture around the event discourage treating them as races. The point is completion, not competition. It shares a lot of the definition of a race while not being one.

The culture centers on completion because that's so damn hard. The fastest riders, however, are absolutely racing each other. Would you say that Tour Divide or TransEurope are not races, because enough people fail to finish them that the focus is on completion, not competition? Another reason why the culture is different: drafting is not widely used, and pack formation is rare. This magnifies the effects of very smal…

I think a thing fit all the definitions of something while not being that thing. For example, tomatoes are berries according to the definition set by botanists, yet if you ask anyone in genpop they consider tomatoes a vegetable because that is how people view them.

I’m not trying to disagree that PBP isn’t a race, because i acknowledge it fits the definition of a race, but I hope we can agree that calling it a race does a disservice to its history and culture.

For similar reasons I wouldn’t consider the Tour Divide a race either because the organizers don’t call it a race. For the same reasons an ultramarathon or rides like Unbound, Silk Road, TransAm, or Transcontinental is a race; because the organizers call it one. Is this a rational viewpoint? Definitely not, but that’s fine with me.

There is a power in what things are called and I think it is important to stay true to roots.

Post reply on HN