Thanks, I see it now. This must be rampant in pro cycling and probably going on for years, right.... Tip of the iceberg. Even 110W for 30 minutes would be a huge advantage on any climbs. Sad that cycling is always so tainted.
Thanks, I see it now. This must be rampant in pro cycling and probably going on for years, right.... Tip of the iceberg. Even 110W for 30 minutes would be a huge advantage on any climbs. Sad that cycling is always so tainted.
Even 110W for 30 minutes would be a huge advantage on any climbs.
"Even" 110 watts? With 110 extra watts over 30 minutes, plenty of Cat 2 cyclists could be world class and some climbing specialists already at the world class level would be churning out nearly 7.8 W/kg for 30 min. This would allow them to taunt their paltry 6.3 W/kg rivals by humming Ride of the Valkyries as they pulled away to a mountaintop victory at 90 rpm.
motorized bicycle? wrote:
Thanks, I see it now. This must be rampant in pro cycling and probably going on for years, right.... Tip of the iceberg. Even 110W for 30 minutes would be a huge advantage on any climbs. Sad that cycling is always so tainted.
Any motor on a bike doesn't have the fuel storage for 30 minutes. Only used for attacks off the front.
Clerk wrote:
motorized bicycle? wrote:Thanks, I see it now. This must be rampant in pro cycling and probably going on for years, right.... Tip of the iceberg. Even 110W for 30 minutes would be a huge advantage on any climbs. Sad that cycling is always so tainted.
Any motor on a bike doesn't have the fuel storage for 30 minutes. Only used for attacks off the front.
But even so, a dramatic effect, for sure.
motorized bicycle? wrote:
Greg Lemond did a bit on this over the summer, for which he was ridiculed.
“It produces between 50 to 75 watts for about an hour and a half, does 150 watts for an hour and in its highest setting, produces 250 watts for up to 30 minutes."
Batteries can be hidden in the frame or in a water bottle.
http://cyclingtips.com/2015/07/hidden-motor-demonstration-with-greg-lemond/Clerk wrote:Video of motor in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv3CiyrRTMgThat video proves nothing. It has to have power and torque. It is easy to spin the wheel and gears without a load on the bike. That bike is off the ground with no load.
How much power do they have?
What powers these motors? Wouldn't they need a huge heavy battery?
I saw this, but it is all speculation, right?
http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/07/news/froome-driven-to-distraction-by-motor-bike-claims_378474
Greg Lemond did a bit on this over the summer, for which he was ridiculed.“It produces between 50 to 75 watts for about an hour and a half, does 150 watts for an hour and in its highest setting, produces 250 watts for up to 30 minutes."Batteries can be hidden in the frame or in a water bottle.http://cyclingtips.com/2015/07...eg-lemond/Read more: http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7003691&page=2#ixzz3yszLgVvb
Clerk wrote:
Clerk wrote:Any motor on a bike doesn't have the fuel storage for 30 minutes. Only used for attacks off the front.
But even so, a dramatic effect, for sure.
I stand corrected. Thank you.
monaco mondo track comes under technological dopin too
~1 sec faster 4 middle dis. than times, w.r done on normal.fair!
aduck2002 wrote:
monaco mondo track comes under technological dopin too
~1 sec faster 4 middle dis. than times, w.r done on normal.fair!
Even if you truly believed the track was shorter, the 'advantage' applies to all athletes in the race.
World records have never assumed similar track surfaces or technology such as shoes etc.
And Dibaba's WR had nothing to do with track length or surface, that was something else entirely.
no it was bad wrote:
aduck2002 wrote:no different from illeagal track in monaco and new beijing track
If you can't seem major obvious differences you are dumber than I thought.
I wish I could like this
tracknoob wrote:
Kinda reminds me of "brush spikes," only this is obviously way worse. That would be like hiding some kind of hydraulic piston in your race kit to make your legs more powerful or something like that.
At least people wore brush spikes out in the open until they were declared illegal. The story provided by the OP is hilarious.
NP! That is an amazing amount of power out of such a small device. It is funny and sad that Lemond was given so much grief when he brought up the issue last year. Could certainly save the legs on a big climb and that much power during the course of a time trial in an event like the TDF could help to post some fast times.
Clerk wrote:
I stand corrected. Thank you.
The UCI (think main organization group) of world cycling is going for a lifetime ban for Femke, as well as a financial penalty that she likely would not pay, given the lifetime ban.
Femke retired from competitive cycling, effective immediately.
19 years old.
I can't see that its worse than doping as surely its easier to check a bike in competition than check a person 24-7
ukathleticscoach wrote:
I can't see that its worse than doping as surely its easier to check a bike in competition than check a person 24-7
Worse from the standpoint that the athlete isn't even doing all of the work. At least a doper still has to do the workouts and race the race.
Femke Van den Driessche will not defend herself in motor doping case
mol21 wrote:
Femke Van den Driessche will not defend herself in motor doping case
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/femke-van-den-driessche-will-not-defend-herself-in-motor-doping-case-216502
= doping is for the rich
Fortunately, she has found a new sponsor in website electricbike.com