Hidden motors in cycling: Van den Dreissche banned for 6 years, titles stripped | Hacker News Reader

Hidden motors in cycling: Van den Dreissche banned for 6 years, titles stripped

cyclingtips.com

159 pointsburo9200 comments

This is a follow-up to discussions on "mechanical doping" in cycling.

The first story I recall on this topic was in 2010: http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2010/may/19/cycling-motors-...

This is now 6 years later, and we finally have the first pro cyclist banned based on being caught red-handed at an event with a motor in her bicycle.

The type of motor she used was a Vivak, one of these: http://www.vivax-assist.com/en/produkte/vivax-assist-4-0/viv... though probably with a slightly modified button to make it more discreet.

"It was controlled by a Bluetooth switch installed underneath the handlebar tape." (in the article)

They should install Bluetooth sniffers before steep sections, it would be cool to see a little ping on the radio and then watch one of the racers magically pull ahead.

Cyclist also (legally) use wireless candance, speed, power, gear ratio, heart rate sensors, etc. Though they're normally ANT+ and not Bluetooth.

BTLE is becoming increasingly popular (eg Polar has moved entirely to using it).

Cheaters will also find a loophole. Jammers and etc aren't worth talking about.

how would you filter out Bluetooth signals that are and aren't cheating signals?

By cross-correlating with performance shifts (ie, the pulling ahead comment above).

It's not a smoking gun, but it could be evidence perhaps to do more thoroughly audit that bike, for example.

The rider's strategy may be merely maintaining relative positioning with the top riders, save energy, and use that small reserve for a better chance in a sprint finish or whatever. It's no way certain someone just starts going faster using one of these.

While they're at it, they should make better humans.

My point here is that I have always found it so completely unfathomable that someone would spend so much time on an activity -- any activity -- and then cheat. Cheating is about looking better, not being better. At the same time, it robs others, equally devoted, of a fair basis of comparison.

That it ever happens is amazing to me; yet, it happens all the time at the highest levels of competition. And it happens in academics too! Same shit, different day. And in politics. Ok, I'm stopping now before I give up on us as a species. Again.

There was a paper shared on HN a month or two ago about this. Winners cheat more. Not just cheaters win, but winners turn to cheating. The high from a win is addictive. It feels good, so you want it to continue. Winners also pick up the feeling that they deserve to win and so cheating is somehow justified. Add to this all the external pressure and the monetary rewards and cheating isn't really surprising at all.

I bet if you did a survey of cheaters in pretty much any field, you'd find that the biggest offenders are not people who had no chance without cheating, but people who had significant success and then turned to cheating to continue or to increase that success.

Yep.

Same applies to rogue traders. They usually start faking profits after a run of success ends and they need to keep up the appearances.

Nobody (that I heard of) just started rogue trading from zero.

>>My point here is that I have always found it so completely unfathomable that someone would spend so much time on an activity -- any activity -- and then cheat. Cheating is about looking better, not being better. At the same time, it robs others, equally devoted, of a fair basis of comparison.

I remember as a 17 year old guy in my pre university college examination in India. There was this guy sitting behind me in the exam- he was a classmate, though he routinely bunked lectures and rarely showed up for lectures. Right before the exam he came to me with his dad and the requested if I could only help him pass the exams by letting him read from my answer sheets, I would do them a big favor. Of course I refused.

But they had bribed the supervisor in the exam hall and I had enough of the guys frequent disturbance asking me to allow him read.

Finally I had to give in, he copied enough to pass. Most of us boys who worked hard made it to engineering. We are now in jobs. From another friend who was close to him, I later learned he joined a science course, BSc(Physics, Math, Chemistry) which I learned he dropped out in the very first year and did exactly get into a regular job. You don't get too far doing this cheating stuff.

The worst part of cheating, is we cheat ourselves. I have a rule, it's to never lie. We lie to the world, lie to ourselves about our work, about ourselves. It makes us feel comfortable for a while but it destroys us on the longer run.

Partially because we as society likely reward "results" better than "good effort" or "team playing".

I'll leave it an open question whether the money involved in these activities is an influencer, or whether it's just rotten ol human nature (addictiveness to winning).

Perhaps the reality is that cheating happens everywhere and only in the highest-stakes competitions do we notice and punish it?

Pro athletes aren't just motivated by an intrinsic desire to do the best they can. There is an external pressure to win. It's a real pressure with money behind it. In the case of cycling, teams are supported by sponsors out of their marketing budget. They would like to see their names in the press. (associated with a win obviously, not a cheating scandal)

Apparently there may also be an aspect of gambling and/or mafia involvement in cyclocross as well: http://fittish.deadspin.com/professional-cyclist-gets-six-ye...

Or Bluetooth jammers.

Bike motors were discussed fairly in-depth on HN 2 months ago; it seems to be this website's ticket to the front page:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11247598

Haha wow, for the Vivak, there's even a "Invisible Performance Package".

>She also said that this bike was taken by accident by her helpers to the pit area.

>She claimed that he had put a motor in unbeknownst to her

What is with athletes and never admitting their mistakes. You were caught, I would have much more respect for someone if they just came out and said "Yes, I did it, I take full responsibility." Instead they come up with these ridiculous excuses that do nothing but continue to degrade their integrity.

Well, if you notice, the team was also fined for some odd millions of dollars. If the athlete were to admit culpability, they could probably also be successfully sued by the team to cover their costs.

Not to mention sponsors. That's where the real pain comes in.

The USPS has been trying to claim back the $40 million they gave Lance Armstrong over 6 years of sponsorship.

If you're interested in this topic, the world of poker is ripe with cheaters and their apologists. This is the most recent scandal from just last week (the cheater shows up with a lousy attempt at defending himself):

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/news-views-gossip-spons...

No matter how many of these I see, I'll never fully understand their mindset. It is fascinating though.

This is a lying, cheating, athlete in particular, so it's not surprising. Many athletes do have integrity and don't need to concoct such excuses.

Good point. Why aren't cheating athletes honest? Because honest athletes aren't cheating.

But personally I've wondered the same thing. Ryan Braun's doping was hard to take, but not as bad as all the whinging he did when caught.

Sharapova immediately took full responsibility for her recent failed test -- though in her case it seems likely it was an honest mistake...

It was a mistake that she didn't check that her drug was banned, but it wasn't a mistake taking the drug. Usually you would take that drug for a couple of weeks. She was taking it for 5+ years, for its doping powers.

From my understanding, a "cycle" of the drug is some amount of weeks but that doesn't imply that it cures whatever ailment / you never have to take it again.

More importantly, the difference between a regular dose and a doping dose is very severe (by a factor of 10).

When the blood tests are revealed, it would be easy to tell if she was just taking the doctor suggested dose or downing 10 pills per day for its increased endurance.

Marion Jones is the only person I can think of that has actually done this.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/05/jones.doping/index.html?ere...

I seem to remember Andy Pettitte immediately taking responsibility, as opposed to Roger Clemens who denied it for awhile. However, I'm not positive.

Yes, but only after initially denying it all

What is the proof what she said is wrong?

Hard to believe that she gave a bike to a friend who installed a hidden motor. The friend brought the bike to the race so that he could ride the course with the motor. Then when the team was called to bring the bikes to inspection, they accidentally brought the bike the guy brought (that also happened to belong to the girl in question). Either a series of coincidences or someone making up excuses.

The hidden bluetooth button that she pressed to actvate the motor.

Maybe she's telling the truth and the bike had a disappearing twin?

How does the UCI enforce a fine? When you race do you have to sign a contract stating that you will pay any penalties, or can the fine be seen as "must be paid before competing again"?

You don't have to pay it, but you won't be racing again. As a former USA Cycling official, I'd occasionally fine riders for infractions (usually $20-50 payable to the youth rider fund). They didn't have to pay it, as I had no enforcement authority outside of bike races. However, if I saw you next week and you hadn't paid the fine, you won't be at the start line. I couldn't make you pay it, but I could prevent you from racing.

She has no fine, only if she wants to cycle again, then she has to pay the fine. The UCI can't force it as she's not a member anymore and the UCI isn't a court

I don't see it in the article but I heard it recently so I guess I'll share.

Lance Armstrong was on the Joe Rogan Experience and discussed doping within the sport. He said at one point in time, people would thread fishing line through a wine cork. They'd tie the line to the tail of a car and stick the cork in their mouth. As the car starts moving, the cork pulls against your teeth giving you just enough pull.

That's got to be the most French way of cheating I've ever heard.

That's because you don't know about the early days of the Tour de France where the racers would drink wine along the way.

The early years were different, though. It was illegal to get any help. In one famous case, a rider got a 3 minute time penalty because he let a boy operate the bellows while he welded his own bike (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eug%C3%A8ne_Christophe#1913_...)

And aside: alcohol works! The correlation between "drinking champagne during a stage" and "winning the Tour de France" is surprisingly high, even in recent years.

I'm 90% certain you're making a joke; the last stage is pro forma (for GC) and the presumptive winner traditionally shares a bottle or two of champagne as they ride into Paris.

No easy feat even for riders comfortable with group riding, but of course they are pros for a reason! At least they've switched from glass to plastic in recent years.

Wine skin. It's been around forever. We use them while skiing.

Haha what?? Did they have camel backs back then

They used glasses you barbarian ;-)

For context, this was in the early 1900s

http://www.bikeroar.com/articles/the-4-greatest-bicycle-chea...

What the hell? This guy, Hippolyte Aucouturier, was a legit great cyclist, not a charlatan. He won Paris-Roubaix twice!

I can't find anything about this cork biting incident involving him, and I reckon it's made up out of whole cloth.

Joe Rogan Experience #737 - Lance Armstrong:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEfSdPz1WtA

Sounds like a fine way to lose your teeth.

More like a good way to get a nasty fishing line cut when it snaps back and smacks you in the face.

pretty sure the cork would break before your teeth.

I wouldn't want to test that theory.

Then you're not a professional cyclist ;) The lengths they will go to for a small advantage...

Infrared FLIR cameras are being used to help spot the cheaters.

http://hackaday.com/2016/04/25/cyclists-use-tiny-motors-to-c...

That news article may not be entirely correct: https://www.eptc.co/watts-the-deal-with-motors/

This guy analysed a control image - image taken of a KNOWN bike with a vivax motor - and came to a conclusion there is no motor in that picture.

What's more it claims that friction is the biggest source of losses in an electric motor, when it's actually a very minor source of losses. The biggest losses are from resistive heating. See section "Motor Efficiency" at:

http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/products/reference/15297

If the motor was installed by a family friend, why would that person need to conceal the switch?

And there was the race at the Koppenberg where she smashed everyone up the hill setting the Strava QOM, then lost lots of positions on the descents and technical parts, right until the next lap of the hill where she smashed up it again. Rinse repeat.

It's not surprising the ban starts at a date earlier than when she was caught, the UCI strongly believe she was using the motor earlier.

I'm not familiar with that race specifically, but it's not unheard of for a young rider to have massive strength, but little technical skill. The ability to descent and maneuver technically only comes with years in the saddle.

There is considerable variation in the ability to descent in the senior peloton, and I don't think it is correlated with age; some people just are better at the subtle work, such as recovering from a wheel slipping away, and some have more brute power.

For example, the ability to bunny hop varies. http://www.cxmagazine.com/to-hop-or-not-bunny-hopping-cycloc... claims that, in Sven Nijs's case, it is to do with his BMX experience.

I couldn't find a good video from cycle-cross, but here is a nice example from road racing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPHnqI13vPk. Not everybody is as willing to take those risks and as good in recovering from (for him) minor mishaps as Vincenzo Nibali. Some cyclists are even known to take in a few bisons of water at tops of mountains because heavier bikes descend faster.

Presumably her competition wasn't significantly older...

The article mentioned she's competing with people of similar age.

So that they could still boast about their own performance. Or not take ribbing about the motor, not much difference.

(I don't say that because I buy the story about the friend, it's just a plausible reason to keep it hidden)

It was alleged, that the bike with the motor, was not her bike but a friend's bike, that was left in their tent, and mistaken to be the althlete's bike. But also supports your statement, if this wasn't the athlete's bike, why go through the effort to hide the switch or mechanism at all if you're not competing?

On the flip side, if the bike was actually a friend's bike, what do you say to that friend that got you banned?

More convoluted than even that.

She admits that it WAS her bike. But that she sold her bike to a friend who then installed a motor, brought it to her event, then her "helpers" mistakenly brought it out to the pit area.

See, her original explanation that it was just a friend's random bike didn't wash with it being painted like her other race bikes are. This new explanation of it being one of her bikes that she sold to a friend, now fits in with the narrative she is trying to spin.

Honestly the whole story is nonsense.

... and is the friend racing as well ?

What's interesting to me is that these folks, from Lance to moto-users, think there's a reasonable chance they won't get caught cheating at one of the most observed, recorded, scrutinized events in the world. They're playing a delicate game of signaling and information theory.

Either they're right and the ones who were actually caught were only the tip of the iceberg, or they're making what should be a blatantly obvious miscalculation of the odds of getting caught. Not sure which yet.

It makes me wonder if the engines would be this sophisticated if they weren't for cheating?

Most probably not. It's pretty clear in the FranceTV video (It's in French though) in the section starting at 14:40 https://youtu.be/e0s2yo6ws9U?t=884

Starting at 17:00, he describes an electro-magnetic wheel, Lipos inside the tube, magnets all around the wheel, remote controlled by a wristwatch. Priced 50K€ at 200K€, can't possibly be used for casual cycling.

I was thinking that I wanted to build that motor using magnets, hot glue, coils, and an Arduino... Can't be that hard can it...

It's worth 50-200k when you can make it look exactly like a non-motorized wheel in front of many spectators and race inspectors :) if you don't mind people seeing the motor, there are tons of DIYs in the hundreds to single-thousands of dollars range depending on how far and how fast you'd like to go: https://m.reddit.com/r/ebikes/ etc

Even rather casual cyclists will want something as light as possible and the in-frame hub drive arrangement has nice aesthetics.

And less likely to be stolen if parked. Though not sure if anyone would park a bike with such an engine.

But they have no reason to hide it, as in the frame can be in a shape giving more room or at least making it easier to access for maintance without "breaking" the aesthetics of whole.

Yes but casual cyclists will not pay €2499 for the pleasure of doing so

It depends how you define "casual". I tend to think of casual cyclists as avid cyclists who don't race. Anybody who isn't avid is just a guy/gal on a bike.

By that definition, casual cyclists spend ridiculous amounts of money on cycling kit. $2000 for a set of carbon fiber wheels. $1000 for a power meter. Trek has a custom line of bikes (Project One) that retail in the $7000-$15000 range (US).

Those aren't "casual" bikes. Maybe you could call them "prosumer", but really those are ridiculous prices for bikes, that's like calling a $300k Ferrari a car for "casual" car fans.

You can walk into any decent bike shop in the US now and buy a very nice carbon-frame bike for $2-3k, and a really nice aluminum-frame bike for under $1k. And these are road bikes BTW, where there simply is no low-end market any more: if you want a low-end bike, you go to Walmart and buy a $100-150 mountain bike. If you're spending more money on a bike than a new economy car costs, that is not even remotely "casual", and not even "avid" unless you're someone who has more money than you know what to do with.

By my thoughts, somebody who's spent more than $1000 or so on bike and gear, maximum, isn't a "casual" cyclist.

If they're buying individual parts that cost more than an entire road bike that would be recommended by a store clerk to some guy walking in off the street, they're well beyond "casual".

That isn't too much to spend on a bike. My bike is more than that and isn't special in any way, just a good regular bike. And I just use it to ride to work, this isn't anything I'm enthusiastic about.

Add the bags/panniers, lights, pump, clothing and other accessories on top.

I get about 100 miles a week, 8-9 months a year so it justifies the investment.

I'd say anyone who has special clothing for cycling is an enthusiast, particularly if it's more than $50 worth.

I don't have that either. Just some gear to withstand light rain and cold. Nothing that's especially made for cycling, I use this with other outdoors activities too. My way to work is too long to comfortably ride in work clothes. Imagine riding 8 miles in your jeans and sweater and then sitting in front of the computer all day in the same clothes after that.

You're trying to label people "cycling enthusiasts" in your heads (and I know exactly the stereotype you're thinking of). They do exist, but for most people riding a bike, it's just their daily commute. It might need a decent bike and a few items of clothing.

You don't call every car owner a "car enthusiast" even though taking the train/bus is a viable option in many places of the world and owning a car is much more expensive than a bike.

By this logic, you're a motorsport enthusiast if you've spent more than $1000 on a car?

$1000 get's you a decent entry level bike to commute on, that's pretty casual if you ask me.

Given that I suspect you can't get a brand-new assembled car for $1000, I'd say you could extend the "motorsport enthusiast" level to $20000 or more easily.

[Please note that I've never bought a new car, nor a car in America]

In Silicon Valley, I see people all the time riding >$5k bikes as commuters. It's also not uncommon to see people here riding carbon aero wheels (thousands of dollars for a set) on casual rides or getting groceries. It's the "taking the Ferrari to pick up milk". Free country and all, I just find it a massive waste; they'd be better off with some sew-ups and light rims instead of deep-section carbon jobs, but I guess they do it for the bling more than the performance.

>Free country and all, I just find it a massive waste; they'd be better off with some sew-ups and light rims instead of deep-section carbon jobs, but I guess they do it for the bling more than the performance.

Depends upon the roads you ride. For anything less than 4/5% aero is king. Sure light weight feels nicer to ride, but if you're after performance then you're in the wrong place.

Saying that, perception plays a huge part in performance, so heh.

I guess I consider myself casual, I cycle to commute and for fun but I don't spend $2k on wheels.

Of course they do - imagine ladies training with men only. Imagine folks at the age of 70 still wanting to ride with their sons etc.

In those situations you don't need it to be hidden therefore you could get a bigger and better battery for the same price.

I didn't mean that they would, just that light weight and performance get a lot of consideration in cycling so it can be expected that a product category will address them even if it isn't aimed at pros.

2499 is a pretty reasonable price for an electric bike though.

There's also the power factor. These hidden motors are on the order of a few hundred watts. While enough to make a huge difference, if you want a non-hidden version, you can get a few hundred watts for a few hundred bucks: https://www.electricbike.com/12-kit-power-levels-360w-to-800... to well into the thousands of watts range for $2500. The price is because it's stealthy.

I imagine that you could get more efficient ie more power at lower cost, for your money if you were looking for something that did not need to be hidden away.

In NYC, motorized bikes are technically illegal, although they're used all the time by delivery workers. I'm not aware of anyone getting tickets for them ... but it's a law that makes all of us cheaters, potentially. I'd feel a lot better with a hidden motor than a visible one (though I can't afford either).

The engines aren't from cycling - but F1 and motorbikes. Its a few alterations to run on road bikes

“I was stood in the pit next to Femke’s entourage,” he said then. “I don’t quite know what it was, but something seemed a bit weird there. The whole team had walkie talkie radios, ear pieces and seemed pretty anxious and, overall, just a bit odd. I’d never seen that before and it kind of stuck in my head.”

Very clear that everyone knew about it.

No it's not.

The quote and your command are all based on feelings and assumptions.

Confirmation bias can lead to seeing "guilty" behavior everywhere. Lots of people are just a bit odd at major events without being guilty of anything.

Being a cycling fan and rider, and reading quite a bit about the various allegations and methods of cheating over the years have led to me becoming quite jaded — and not surprised in the least at this announcement.

Thinking of all the ways riders have cheated, from Lance's blood-doping to the Festina Affair to Marco Pantani...it just seems like many of the icons of the sport are mired in cheating and doping scandals, and this story is further evidence that while testing may have evolved, so too have the methods of cheating.

This leads me to wonder why cheating is so rampant in the sport? I used to think it was only due to lax testing policies, but now think it is more a product of the insane amount of stress the grueling courses put on a rider's body, along with the likelihood that anyone in this very individual sport is probably more competitive than most other people by nature.

It just disheartens me as a fan. I truly wonder sometimes if the testing and oversight can ever catch up with all the cheating. A part of me wants to think yes...but stories like this continue to make me think otherwise.

>>This leads me to wonder why cheating is so rampant in the sport?

May be one of the major reasons is money involved. Cheating is one side the other is fixing: with aim to get more and quick money. In first case, i.e. of cheating, you aim for money by becoming famous and then grab advert contracts. In the other case, you get direct money to lose.

Money and advertisement are destroying many a sports. Sadly, it seems to go worse.

It's probably money. Millions of money.

Why do they care about such a niche/illegal market, this idea is fantastic, imagine Boris bikes in London for example - they could recharge batteries when docked, it would be awesome to have this kind of engine in those tank-bikes.

Extra points - please distribute heat on the handles because it's often cold. Thank you.

A few cities have electric bike systems, particularly cities that are quite hilly, for example Madrid's BiciMAD[1]

[1] https://www.accessiblemadrid.com/en/blog/bicimad-public-bike...

I guess the motors are expensive, and you can only put them in an expensive bike that is not left alone in the middle of the street. (Perhaps some day the thieves will usually carry a detector for motors ...)

Apparently they were trialling/planning to trial electric boris bikes in some parts of London in 2013. I've been googling and can't find any follow up to it though

The hire bikes in Copenhagen have electric motors. And ipads mounted on the handlebars.

I don't know why, the system doesn't seem especially useful in a flat city.

On a totally unrelated to this post note, heated motorcycle grips are the best thing in the world, and if you're a rider even in the Bay Area, it's an incredible upgrade for anything with handlebars. You won't regret it, I promise.

What about Ryder Hesjedal's bike spinning on itself a few years back?

Are we addressing that as well? It feels like the UCI is only going after easy pickings to prove a point and not doing its best to actually to fight mechanical cheating in fear of yet another scandal.

That's already been demonstrated to be a side effect of a still-spinning rear wheel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak7xP8eghog

It should also be noted that "incident" occurred on a fast downhill section while Hesjedal wasn't pedaling so even if there were a motor it is exceedingly unlikely it would still be engaged at the time of the crash.

With a plausible physical explanation and no way to go back in time to check the bike for a motor, there's not much for the UCI to go after even if it felt the need to.

I'm not convinced. Compare:

https://youtu.be/ynLMfzLTc8M?t=8

and

https://youtu.be/Ak7xP8eghog?t=13

That was the best run in that video. The wheel spun less than 180 degrees after being carefully placed on the ground. In the original video the wheel was in contact with the ground for seconds before it got free to spin. It then spun for more than 180 degrees and seemed to be accelerating.

I know such motors are supposed to stop when you stop pedaling, but it could be a different one. There's still enough evidence to look damning.

It was also on a pretty steep downhill slope, which by itself could have been enough to cause this. You put a wheel on a slope and it's going to try to move downhill. It'd be suspicious if the bike had moved uphill, but the video clearly shows it moving downhill.

I'm willing to believe the explanation for this particular case, but I find the Cancellara video to be much more damning, and a pretty strong hint that mechanical doping has found its way into the highest levels of the sport:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Nd13ARuvVE

The way he just smokes everyone around him without changing his cadence, standing out of the saddle, or even changing the expression on his face seems at least a little suspicious.

Except it's not plausible. Come on.

These motors work by directly coupling to the pedal shaft in the bottom bracket. It's hard to tell but it seems pretty clear to me that the pedals on Hesjedal's bike are not turning when it lands. The angular momentum is just from the back wheel which is still spinning.

Probably a different type of motor. If you watch the video the back wheel slides along sideways for a while. This would stop all usual motion of the wheel and there is no way that it would maintain sufficient power to move the bike as it does even if there was some residual rotation.

What kind of motor then? Wheel hub motors are sufficiently large that you could recognize one from meters away. There are only so many places to put a motor on a bicycle and at some point you have to come up with an explanation for what happened that doesn't involve a motor.

I'm not saying that's what he did, but they have very clever (and expensive!) electromagnetic wheel motors that can provide ~50W of power for extended periods that likely wouldn't impact the pedals.

http://cyclingtips.com/2016/02/electromagnetic-wheel-motors-...

These "motors" aren't expensive, they're completely theoretical. There's no proof anyone has built a frame-rim reluctance motor anywhere ever. The linked article literally says "So, is an electromagnetic wheel possible? Yes, in theory" and has no concrete examples of one ever having been built.

For some additional context / evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynLMfzLTc8M

Appears at least in some models that if the pedals stop turning that the motor stops and the wheel spins normally; meaning to me, if true for most motors like this, seems like it's very hard to say that video is proof.

Ride any bike, let it fall off - it will do exactly same thing. The video that was posted doesn't prove anything.

Some people just loooove conspiracy theories...

Has this specific bike in question been show to the public?

I'm very much aware the technology exists where this can realistically be a problem, but I'm surprised that the actual smoking gun has not been shown.

Are there any competitions where this sort of motor assist is legal? It seems like that might be an interesting sport.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_sport

Yeah - if you allow any kind of motors as a standard part of the ruleset, you've basically got 'lightweight motorcycle racing'.

You can get something like this already with trial riding or motocross races, where having a lightweight motorcycle is essential for handling in rough terrain and to take falls and jumps without breaking the suspension.

I think it would be interesting to have a league where these are legal, but you have to start the race with a dead battery and change it with resistive breaking.

Mostly, I'd like that league to exist so that there would be an incentive for high-end innovation.

The novel Free Radical by Shamus Young has a great description of something similar.

http://www.shamusyoung.com/shocked/main.php?21

I assume you are talking about assisted cycling, rather than the well-known motorsports suggested in other comments!

There are motor-paced cycle races [1] where cyclists get to slipstream powered vehicles - for example derney-paced races [2] and Keirin [3]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor-paced_racing [2] https://youtu.be/8cvSGNiaZRI?t=29s [3] https://youtu.be/4aPBqwfj_mQ?t=1m45s

It's only tangentially related, but the first year of Formula E electric car racing was fascinating last year. It's really adds a dimension to the race when battery status is reported. I think it's 2/3 done this year too (I haven't had time to catch the races yet...)

Motorbike racing?

Formula 1, Moto GP, karting, Nascar.

Did anyone listen too the Telegraph Cycling Podcast - they were talking about respected journalists being convinced some of the big names have been using motors. They expect any revelations to come before the tour of italy or france - as is normal for big cycling stories

Yeah, but that's yesterday's news.

Today had Marcel Kittel winning a snow-shortened stage in the Tour de Romandie and Sacha Modolo winning in the Tour of Turkey.

Also, the guidebook for the upcoming Giro d'Italia has been published: http://static2.giroditalia.it/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Gar...

Looks to be a great race, although I think there's a risk that stages 19 and 20, which thread their way through the Alps on the French-Italian border will get cancelled or rerouted due to snow.

The stage in Friuli looks like it could be particularly good, and the Dolomite stage is going to be awesome!

On a personal level, watching the Giro will make me nostalgic, I'm sure. One stage, Modena-Asolo even goes over some of the roads that I used to ride on near Padova.

I used to really like to follow cycling -- I have now concluded it is the dirtiest sport there is. They are the original dopers -- note that the list starts in the 1800's:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cyclin...

    e.g. 1930 "The acceptance of drug-taking in the Tour de
    France was so complete by 1930 that the rule book, 
    distributed by Henri Desgrange, reminded riders that 
    drugs would not be provided by the organizers."

Now their "doping" the bikes.

Oh, bullshit.

Look at how rotten soccer is from FIFA on down. Look at US sports where those guys were oozing steroids out there ears with basically no consequences.

It's just that cycling is kind of a working man's sport in Europe and is sort of caught in a no-man's land: it's not wealthy enough to buy its way out of trouble like soccer and US sports, but does have enough money to attract cheaters.

When the scandal linked below hit, all the cyclists got caught and punished (rightfully so!), but people in other sports? The judge has ordered the evidence destroyed!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operaci%C3%B3n_Puerto_doping_c...

This was roughly the time period when the Spanish soccer team was running away with all kinds of international success.

Cycling has surely had its share of problems, but it is also making a big effort to clean things up, with fairly draconian out of competition testing that would no way, no how be accepted by stars in other sports.

And like the response says, the only reason soccer doesn't have a bunch more is because they don't test well. If there's doping in cycling, you can bet that, at 10X (at least) the money in soccer, there's some serious doping going on there too.

I get it -- you like cycling -- I do to. I think the races are so grueling that it was the first sport to find methods to endure the inhumane distances and terrain. But if you really like cycling you got to come to grips with how dirty the profession is -- real change won't happen until the organizers pull their heads out of the sand.

Take a look at the leaderboards at the Tour de France -- these are just those that are caught:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_at_the_Tour_de_France#2...

It doesn't do any good to point at FIFA soccer... their dirt is more in the power and financial aspect of their sport -- and its horrible. Cycling has far higher demands on the human body in terms of endurance and a willingness to suffer -- thus drugs (and hidden motors) will always be a real temptation.

I like cycling, and I like clean cycling, and it does not do any good to smear the whole sport with "dirty!".

What's that do to the guys who are competing clean? It pisses all over their efforts is what it does. It's not fair, and it does not help.

Soccer is certainly not as hard as cycling ( https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/55/b5/51/55b551bfa... ) , but with that much money involved, being relatively fresh after 80 minutes can count for a lot.

What's that do to the guys who are competing clean?

And just who would be on that short list? Like the commenter to whom you reply, I too used to be into cycling. Paid for streaming all the races. Used to race myself, and was a race official. But one after another got popped. I used to say that if Jens Voigt ever tested positive, I'd quit watching the sport, because I thought him to be the epitome of the hard-working rider who gets by on hard work and talent. Now I'm pretty sure Jens is on the juice, too. Hell, amateurs are getting popped for doping in Grand Fondos, where there's no money and no one gives a shit. Yeah, I'm going to smear the whole sport, because it's demonstrated to be dirty top to bottom. Go read A Dog in a Hat, about an American's time low-level racing in Europe. In that author's experience, everybody dopes. Doping defines cycling, IMO, and it's been that way for years.

So I don't pay any attention the sport at all and watch MotoGP instead. Because playing the game of "who's clean and who's not" is not why I watched the sport. Sure, the sprinkling of clean riders get caught in the downward spiraling revenues, but that's not my problem.

I'd bet good money that Taylor Phinney competes clean.

Also: Jens Voigt retired a few years ago.

I'd bet good money that Taylor Phinney competes clean.

There was a time I'd bet good money that a number of riders competed clean. I no longer hold that opinion. Not to disparage Mr. Phinney; if I had to bet, I'd put money on him. Seems like a stand-up guy, tech inspected his bike once, really nice and down-to-earth. But I'd still only bet money I could afford to lose.

Also: Jens Voigt retired a few years ago.

Shows how long it's been since I've paid attention. :-)

Neymar gains a competitive advantage working over the referee's opinion of the severity of a foul by feigning injury there (I can't believe I'm defending him), but the cyclist would not gain any advantage by laying on the pavement moaning.

Also, Neymar literally broke his back in that occurrence, which is evident mere frames after that still.

Yes, soccer has an incentive to roll around on the ground. That's kind of the point.

The cyclist is Adriano Malori, by the way. Sadly, he crashed again in January, with much worse consequences, but is slowly recovering:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/malori-has-goosebumps-at-spe...

Do you have any evidence of FIFA matches having rigged equipment?

And the Spanish national football team's string of success would have been after the investigation you linked to.

There were a bunch of rigged matches in Italy a while back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Italian_football_scandal

> And the Spanish national football team's string of success would have been after the investigation you linked to.

The one where no one but cyclists got singled out? Looks like they figured out they were pretty much in the clear.

I've seen videos of this it's got to be one of the lowest things in a sport you could do.

But I had to laugh out loud when I saw a video bikes crashing yet the back wheel was still spinning.

> But I had to laugh out loud when I saw a video bikes crashing yet the back wheel was still spinning.

Was that the old chestnut with Hesjedal's crash? Com on, that's just nonsense. The wheel was spinning after the crash from inertia — that is not only plausible, it's entirely expected, and the case in major crashes all the time. There's absolutely no reason to believe that this was caused by a motor.

Besides most of these motors (including the one just found) spin the pedals. So if the pedals continued rotating after the crash, you'd have a point. The ones that propel the wheels directly with neodymium magnets cost like 50k a wheel and are probably a lot less common to begin with, if they're even being used at all.

I don't know who it was I'm not into cycling or its famous athletes I saw a few crashes on an Italian investigative TV show with French subtitles. I don't read or speak either language so I have no idea who they were talking about.

Small note to dang about the title: here and in the original title is wrong. The name is 'Van den Driessche' so with the i and e switched.

Part of me wonders why only 6 years.

It doesn't seem like someone who would do this has much respect for the sport.

Because six years for a 19 year old cyclist is essentially a lifetime ban. There is little to no chance of her returning to the sport after that kind of extended absence.

It's enough to destroy her career which is all they really needed to do.

To do it you have to have no respect at all. Sure EPO is awful, but an extra 200 watts for no extra work is a different level.

It's really not. At least it doesn't fuck her body up for the rest of her life. Because everyone was taking EPO, to compete you had to take EPO.

If it put you out of the sport permanently then it could be assumed to be long enough.

I dunno, it seems pretty harsh given that drug doping cases on the men's side only receive 2 to 4 years for a first offense [1] and given it's not something she could have gone out and done on her own - coach and mechanics must have been highly complicit and were probably driving the use of the cheat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cyclin...

None of those guys showed up with a 'motorcycle.'

Granted the motor didn't do all the work. I think she would have used a more powerful motor if she could have gotten away with it.

Even murder, in most countries, has a limit at around 20 years or so.

Just be like formula 1 - create passing zones where they can use the motors (I know it's DRS and not the motor, but that concept) remotely disable them otherwise. Regulate everything.

Cycling needs a shake up, way too many scandals recently...

This is unrelated, but that has to be the most confusing way to write a price I've ever seen: 2.699,00 - a period for the thousands separator, and a decimal comma for the cents.

I am aware of decimal commas - but a period for the thousands? I thought they used a space, or an apostrophe? 2'699,00

It must be tough writing code in Europe - computers only use decimal points, not decimal commas. And how do you make an international interface for money, when you never know how people will enter things?

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11581036 and marked it off-topic.

Out of curiosity, what does marking a subthread off topic entail?

It makes it rank lower.

Sorry, I didn't expect the subthread to get that long.

These things happen. Off-topic musings are often just fine, but if the subthread gets too heavy it's best to prune it.

I'm kind of confused as to why you're confused, so bear with me if I oversimplify, but are you aware of the globalization settings in your OS? It determines the display and entry format of things like currency. Yes, one will have to mentally switch back and forth when writing a float in code (float i = 3.14159) and paying bills with online banking ($1.345,12 sent to my mortgage company, please). But for the most part, you set bankBalanceTextField.text = $12000.01 and let the OS handle properly displaying it to the user.

To put it another way, for the globalized/localized applications I've worked on, I put a little effort into making sure it's globalizable (not hard-coding strings, not making assumptions about currency formats, make sure display fields are set to pick up display settings from OS, etc.), let the OS handle putting commas and decimal points as appropriate, and haven't had major complaints so far. No complaints, despite not having the faintest clue how currency is formatted in, say, Russia.

I don't know about you, but for me it's pretty common to output numbers that I then use in the program.

So you have to distinguish between output meant for a program and output meant for human.

Say someone gives you a logfile of problematic transactions - you then have to convert all the numbers to decimal points before using them in some one-off program that checks them.

Not wishing to condescend, but where it matters, there are standard ways of doing this. For example, the standard library of .NET and Java have date format localisation so they can deal with local time zones and read and write dates. They have standard local methods for localized string joining strings, numbers and currencies.

Here are two articles:

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/1ksz8yb7(v=vs.110)....

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/5hh873ya(v=vs.90).a...

If you don't want to write software for anyone but yourself or people in an identical environment that's fine, but if you want to write software for other people then there's lots of library support.

So you have to distinguish between output meant for a program and output meant for human.

That pretty much defines my career, yes.

Say someone gives you a logfile of problematic transactions - you then have to convert all the numbers to decimal points before using them in some one-off program that checks them.

Say someone gives me a MongoDB full of transactions that need to be transformed into relational data for our data warehouse...hey, I'll bet I could make a career out of this.

I truly don't mean to be trite, but what you describe is just the way of things. In your log file example, a regex would more than likely solve the problem. One loop, a readln() and a writeln(), sorted. People do it everyday. Hell, I'll probably do something similar before the day is out.

I'm not trying to be annoying - I'm simply curious. I never had to deal with that (internally that is, I do localize for end users - but that data is one way), and I was wondering how people handled it, that's all.

Sounds like it's a bit annoying, but you just deal with it because you have to. I guess it's a slight extra use of time, but nothing major?

Oh, I'm not taking you as annoying at all. I'm just having a hard time sussing where you're coming from. As a multi-decade veteran of the industry, to me the answer seems obvious. I want to explain in appropriate terms, but I don't want to condescend, either.

Anyway, to get to the heart of it, you just deal with it. I don't even find it annoying, it is what it is. It's like being annoyed by the fact that elephants have long noses. It is truly, after all, what most of us here do for a living. Whether it's slapping a one-off regex on a log file to get the currency format right, or sucking down JSON from a REST API and presenting it in a nice mobile UI to tell you when your Uber will be here, we take data and munge it, then put a pretty face on it. So were I to have to deal with currency formats in a text file that don't match what the machine expects, I just transform it appropriately without thought to "annoyance" or "inconvenience", just that it needs to be done.

Much, much worse is the US mm/DD/yyyy format, especially if mixed with DD/mm/yyyy format, unlabeled, in the same file.

See, that's kinda my question. As a programmer I refuse to use anything except yyyy-mm-dd, unless I'm forced to.

So do Europeans analogously refuse to use anything except decimal points, except where they have to?

Britain and Ireland use the "American" way (presumably, it's actually the British way).

Displaying English-formatted numbers is incorrect in the rest of Europe, and will confuse users. Programming languages handle this, but you still write pi = 3.14 in the code.

Note 123.456,78 is German, but Swiss is 123'456,78. I think.

(Displaying miles and yards, inches and 'letter' sized paper is also incorrect, but it's unfortunately not uncommon.)

Are you sure you didn't mean to write yyyy-mm-dd?

I did, thanks I fixed it. (If you delete your post, I'll delete mine and we won't clutter the thread.)

«computers only use decimal points, not decimal commas»

That's what localization is all about: eliminating these false assumptions.

It's only confusing when you're not used to it. On a similar note, 12-hour time notation (eg. 3pm) is confusing as heck when you're used to 24 hour notation.

> That's what localization is all about: eliminating these false assumptions.

I've never seen a production compiler use anything except decimal points.

So writing code that outputs code must be extra confusing: Turn off localization for the parts meant for the computer, and turn it on for the parts meant for humans.

> I've never seen a production compiler use anything except decimal points.

There's a distinction between literals used in programming languages and how various input/output routines emit different numerals. Most programming languages follow the convention: a '.' for a radix symbol and no thousands separator. Many programming languages also include: explicit '.' implies a floating-point numeral, scientific notation support. Most modern programming languages (and even some older ones) have standard library or extremely popular library support for localization. That localization will customize things like the radix and thousands separator.

Some languages support custom literals, so you probably could adapt it to match your locale if the grammar doesn't somehow become ambiguous.

Other interesting stuff literals sometimes include: different numeral bases, signedness, precision.

It doesn't seem confusing to me, but I'll admit that there have probably been many times that I could take advantage of the programming languages' support for parsing literal numerals whose format happens to match my locale's (en_US.*).

Well here's the thing: decimal points are for humans in the first place. Computers use fixed, floats or whatever binary representation that suits the needs of the environment.

Yes, period for digit separator is a thing in many countries, including Russia, we were taught that way in school [1]

It was a little bit inconvenient when I started programming, but nothing too major.

Interface for money and many other things is a solved problem: we have locale settings for that in operating systems and software that respects them, works just fine.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_mark#Examples_of_use

I can't tell if the parent is a joke. If not, I should tell you that decimal separator is usually regarded as variable and therefore just part of local representation, in a similar way to time and date formats. Plenty of code is only able to cope with a particular representation, or has bugs around dealing with varying ones.

I'm mostly talking about the programmer, not the presentation. You need one kind of number for the program, another for humans.

Hi ars, this is an article that discusses your concerns: http://www.xencraft.com/resources/multi-currency.html

Take a look at the section titled "Presentation Formats"

That's common. 18 hits in:

http://www.thefinancials.com/Default.aspx?SubSectionID=curfo...

Writing code is not that tough in Europe - just use a proper i18n library.

> Writing code is not that tough in Europe - just use a proper i18n library.

Not even having to think about that initially is sure handy for US startups. You can get pretty big without worrying too much about other languages and all the confusion that entails.

True - until you go north and need a french translation ;)

English, Spanish, French, Portuguese, and to a lesser extent Dutch will get you pretty much the entire western hemisphere. They all use the same alphabet, all read left-to-right, and are all SVO word order--except for Dutch, which is SOV/V2.

Also, a US company will need a Spanish translation before it even considers French.

Anyway, the point is that it is a lot easier to half-ass internationalization and localization for both of the Americas and the Caribbean than it is in Europe and Asia. That is just indisputably true. European coders must get that correct starting from version 1.0, whereas Americans can blithely ignore it for years.

Spanish is probably more likely in the US, depending on the market you're addressing.

> Writing code is not that tough in Europe - just use a proper i18n library.

That only goes so far - the actual code you write has to use decimal commas. You can't even export, say a list of numbers, and then directly copy that in to your code.

Or for example: Use SQL to print a list of numbers to use for testing queries. If you used i18n, all the numbers would have decimal commas, so you can't combine them with a comma to make a list.

So you have to turn off i18n, print your list, and make sure it's off when you use that list in a subsequent query.

Any European programmers here? Do you simply leave i18n off for all low level tools? And just use it for customer facing code?

I'm not sure what's so difficult to understand about calling a function like parseInteger(userEnteredNumber, defaultLocale) on user input and then calling something like formatInteger(numberToBeOutputted, defaultLocate) on numbers that will be shown to the users. Programming languages already have a fixed representation for decimal numbers that will be used regardless of the user locale which is generally always with a dot for the decimal seperator and often there are no thousand seperators.

It's more the confusion about seeing two kinds of numbers.

If I see:

123,456

Is it a list of two numbers? Or a single number with a decimal?

In American, how do you know it's not 123 thousand etc?

The are two ways to distinguish it being one number or two:

(1) Context. This helps most of the time. Not the most helpful for computers, or CSV files. (2) Space. 123,456 is one number and 123, 456 are two. Again, not _strictly_ helpful for CSV files, which is why people use e.g. TSV.

Then do the same if it's been written the European way...

My point was the OP is making mountains out of molehills.

Huh? That's not the case at all. Numbers are represented the same way as in the US throughout your code, your just put it through an i18n library when presenting it to the user.

It's really not as difficult as you're making it out to be.

> when presenting it to the user.

That's what I mean - sometimes the user is you, i.e. the programmer, and you have to put those number back in the program - but of course you have to convert them first.

> It's really not as difficult as you're making it out to be.

Not ever having done it, I will take your word for it.

Yes. Minor haggles occur when importing numbers into code , but all good tools can export to whatever format.

Typically the internal representation is not related to the external format.

But yes there are bugs in (American) programs sometimes that forces you to run them in the C locale. Typically they serialise something and fails parsing it back...

Oh yes, it's a thing. I remember being really interested in a sign outside a pub in the Canary Islands that listed a beer as 2,00 or similar. Then I noticed it everywhere and realised the convention I'm used to is reversed there.

Sorta like being British and looking both ways at a road in a foreign country!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com