Did Lance also use a bike motor?

Why mechanically dope if already taking every PED known to man? I don't think Postal/Discovery was THAT reckless!

PitBull3 wrote:

Why mechanically dope if already taking every PED known to man? I don't think Postal/Discovery was THAT reckless!

Here we go again.

Former pro cyclist Cassani has said that motorized bikes have been used since 2004 (as I said, some also believe that they have been around since 1999)

Cancellara has been accused of using it in 2010 (when I first heard about it, Yet Lance didn't know about this? Remember that Lance was still an active cyclist in 2010)

Hesjedal was accused of using a motorized bike in 2014...

Just a few examples...

Why did he lie to the interviewer by saying that he only really found out about motorized bikes recently?

Why did he attack the journalist when he asked him about them?

Given the facts (Cassani, Cancellara, Hesjedal and recent cyclist who was actually caught) there was zero reason for Lance to be upset about the question (if he is/was not guilty). It was a very fair and valid question.

he should be Trump's vp

Also read that he had bike destroyed after Tour de France. Why? Seems pointless...

Do you have a link to the interview? I'm interested in listening to it.

That interviewer was almost as ignorant and clueless as the Brojos.

I was impressed by Armstrong's responses.

Fhtvghgvhvgh wrote:

Why did he attack the journalist when he asked him about them?

Because he doesn't have any other response.

The guy doped so much he probably gave himself cancer. His team was bribing other teams to win races. He was given free reign to cheat as he/the team pleased from his days being doped by USA Cycling and Chris Carmichael.

Throw a motor in his bike and it doesn't change the story much.

Here is another possible response.

Yes, our team looked into it. We knew that it was around. The technology that was offered to us at the time was simply not good enough. It was either too big or did not perform correctly. When we did get our hands on the right technology, bikes were being x rayed after the races. The risk was too high for us. So we did not participate in this type of cheating.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

Fhtvghgvhvgh wrote:

Why did he attack the journalist when he asked him about them?

Because he doesn't have any other response.

The guy doped so much he probably gave himself cancer. His team was bribing other teams to win races. He was given free reign to cheat as he/the team pleased from his days being doped by USA Cycling and Chris Carmichael.

Throw a motor in his bike and it doesn't change the story much.

Lance is old news, at least he did confess. Krimmage should now be interviewing/going after Bradley Wiggins (the guy who took steroid injections dring the Tour de France just in case might have some asthma LOL) and Chris Froome (another case of "asthma" in team sky that could be only "treated" with steroids).

Journalists: it is time to out more cheats, don't waste time with cheats who have already been outed.

Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn wrote:

he should be Trump's vp

Lance is a registered Democrat.

Lance's reaction was far from "ballistic". More like extremely irritated that he was being asked such a stupid questions. I'm not a big fan of his by any means, but I have to say, I thought the interviewer came off as more of a jerk than Lance and that's not easy.

Fhtvghgvhvgh wrote:

Given the facts (Cassani, Cancellara, Hesjedal and recent cyclist who was actually caught)

Nice facts

No Tour de France rider would ever use a motorized bike. It's too easy to get caught. It would be career suicide. There is no plausible deniability.

Are you out of your mind?

Can someone explain to me how you can have a motor on a bike small enough to not be visible yet powerful enough to provide some advantage? What is the power source. Percentage wise, how much of an advantage could be gained?

Mohammed A wrote:

Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn wrote:

he should be Trump's vp

Lance is a registered Democrat.

So is Trump.

Mohammed A wrote:

Lance is a registered Democrat.

And a noted Republican Hater (aka bigot), with your typical liberal entitlement complex.

Runtherockies wrote:

Can someone explain to me how you can have a motor on a bike small enough to not be visible yet powerful enough to provide some advantage? What is the power source. Percentage wise, how much of an advantage could be gained?

The difference between winning a stage, and getting dropped is actually not as high as one would think. American pros are finishing mtn finishes in the front group at 5.7-6 WPKG. World Tour Pros (Froome) are doing around 6.2-6.4 wpkg.

A motor in one's bike can add 40-50 watts for around 30 minutes. 40-50 watts would bring up my end of race WPKG to above world tour level. So while it doesn't seem substantial, it's a difference that could substantially affect the outcome of the race.

It would be really hard for me to believe that these motors are rampant however. Cancellara motor doping in 2010 at Roubaix?? Ahhhh---Maybe?