And so it begins…? "mechanical doping" first?

Euro speaks sense, I have seen my bike do some proper weird stuff bailing out from trials moves beyond my skillset over the years!
Just because it looks a bit odd from one camera angle doesn’t mean foul play…

As for this CX situation, IF her very dodgy explanation about it being an identical bike but with hidden motor and IF there is some legitimate reason for such a bike in thier fleet then I can’t see any reason why said bike doesn’t have a massive sticker saying ELECTRIC on it or a bright pink paint job to make sure that exactly this kind of mix up never happens.

All very dodgy…

You’re working that out from a stock photo of her from a different race?

The odds of two people having the same saddle height/angle/stem length/bar height/brake position/bar type at professional level are so low she would have realised it wasn’t her bike immediately.

aracer – Member
You’re working that out from a stock photo of her from a different race?

Sorry, should have used a winky 🙂

so will it be Belgium banned from female U23 CX for 6 months then or all Belgium national teams banned from all male/female UCI Cycle races/events for 6 months? (When is Olympics)

I want to see the proof of this before I make any more comments.

Maybe releasing pics might give away the tech and how it might be better hidden next time? Maybe they are waiting for the sanctions process to be completed? Maybe check out her own (video) interview on Sporza where she comes out with the BS about it being someone who’d bought an old bike of hers and they’d fitted a motor to it? Quotes from the president of the UCI and the offending rider not enough – it’s like Hora defending LA all over again 😉

The odds of two people having the same saddle height/angle/stem length/bar height/brake position/bar type at professional level are so low she would have realised it wasn’t her bike immediately.

I don’t think she had gotten as far as riding it this race and she claims it was one of her bikes that she had sold to a friend at the end of last season

jameso – Member

for me it’s worse than doping.

How so? I don’t agree or disagree, just wondering.[/quote]

I think it’s easier to delude ourselves that physical doping could be the act of an individual, rather than something which must necessarily involve the organised and systematic collusion of a group of people at all levels within the team.

Someone wondered if the manufacturers were involved.
I doubt it, but it shows the impact this has on the way we think.

I think we all accept that human nature and ingenuity means that cheating is inevitable where money and status is involved.

Still enjoy watching though.

Still enjoy watching though.

Yep. Just sitting here waiting for the feed to start 🙂

Ah, so its her friends bike, that she brought to a race that her friend was in, she brought it into the team pits and no one said a word, This seasons bike just happens to be exactly the same as last seasons, no colour change, same gearing, same old wheels, apart from a motor that was fitted presumeably in the off season.

Presumably then? her mate isnt actually her mate at all. And there is some one who now has to admit to this and the reason for fitting for the motor, and for bringing it back to her? Maybe there was a warranty issue.

I think there’s a clutch, so the only additional drag would be from the drive cogs between that and the BB – given no load through those cogs, the drag should be pretty minimal.

The “It’s not mine, it belongs to a friend” excuse doesn’t work when mum discovers your porn stash, and it shouldn’t work for bikes either…

Seems super fishy.

It cant be…………. Motors in frames don’t exist, i read that on here so it must be true, it cant be done, no one has the technical know how, expertise nor money to pull off such an elaborate hoax, I mean why would any one even bother when you can just drugs cheat and not get done.

There’s no point even arguing, demand to see photographic evidence and in the event that none are produced claim innocence until proven guilty, i mean no one wanted to believe that Lance Armstrong was a cheating, lying bastard, so trying to convince people that there is battery hidden in a frame………. your on a hiding to nothing.

Just bury your head in the sand, put your fingers in your ears and raise your arse in the air.

Its getting like RoadCC here. Tons of people jumping in with mindless opinion. About cheating? Have your say, I’m with you there but as yet there is nothing to say that she cheated.
Its going to be much harder with this. Currently there is absolutely nothing to stop you owning such a bike. You can take it to an event. A trifle silly I would think but that’s not cheating.
If her father’s statement is true, and why shouldn’t it be, then she has broken no rules. Unless she has recorded somewhere an intent to cheat and then actually done then she hasn’t cheated.
Everyone considers being naughty at some point. That doesn’t make it happen.
Maybe she did ride it, that should be rather easy to prove bearing in mind the state of the track, but as I seriously doubt that anyone posting here knows that 100%, then evil supposition should shut up.

xyeti, what are you on about? Nobody – literally nobody – is suggesting such tech doesn’t exist.

Are you getting confused by the debunking of the Hesjedal conspiracy theory?

It is cheating to have the bike at an event. Here is an explanation:

The Electric Shock

“They took the seatpost out and there were wires,” no shit sherlock, welcome to Di2.

When i see pictures of the frame cut up and the motor exposed then I’ll believe it, until then it’s just noise.

Of course there was that Gran Fondo guy……

NO, Not getting confused, Just commenting on posts demanding to see pictures from the UCI of the offending article “OR IT DIDNT HAPPEN”

As one poster rightly stated in reply, why would they? just to put the Nay Sayers minds at ease, it would then give the game away,

Her bike was apparently Seized, Some one tweeted that somethings been found, all of a sudden there are demands for proof, despite the fact that shes made up an excuse, her mates admitted fitting a motor and her Father has aquitted her, “Just as he did his son” Now i can’t say he’s actually taken Performance Enhancers BUT the powers that be banned him, despite not seeing his test results he still got banned, now i’m under the impresion he did it? bad reporting Yes or No? so i’m inclined to think that after some ones bike was seized then somethings not quite right.

Despite the fact that she’s denied it, there was reported a bike identical to her own in the pits fitted with a motor, i am inclined to believe that and await a conclusion.

If she is banned then as far as i’m concerned she did it. If she isn’t banned then NO wires were present and the bottom bracket did come off with ease and nothing was inside.

tech doesn’t exist eh ?

sq225917

What is Di2?

Please explain?

AND, here we are again, The UCI have CONFIRMED This very same morning THAT A MOTOR WAS FOUND

Yet you still want to see an exploded diagram and a cut away frame, WTF is wrong with people?
WHY won’t anyone believe anyone else?

Well for one thing the UCI have a lot of history about hiding evidence, taking bribes and sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting “blah-blah-blah-blah” whilst someone tries to explain anything to them.

You are new here, perhaps new to cycling even.

I think there’s some confusion in this thread. YES, it would appear that yesterdays incident relates to an electric motor. NO, Hesjedal was not using one in that race where he fell off.

Clearer?

No i’m not new to Cycling, i’ve been riding bikes over 30 years, compete regularly and know that Di2 isn’t used successfully in CX and that she doesnt run Di2. Was she trialing the wires do you think? but couldnt get on with the shifting due to mud,

Iknow how unreliable the UCI are, and the fact that blood samples get misplaced, lost or even destroyed. i know they dont like evidence BUT i’m now to disregard their statement re finding a motor.

Scotroutes, were you the Commissar? did you scrutineer Hesjedals bike. In that case yes it’s clear. I believe you.

Happy Now?

When will you over rule the UCI and publish your own findings on this new case.

No i’m not new to Cycling, i’ve been riding bikes over 30 years, compete regularly and know that Di2 isn’t used successfully in CX and that she doesnt run Di2. Was she trialing the wires do you thin? but couldnt get on with the shifting due to mud,

Are you on crack? The last two rounds of the World Cup were won by a bloke on di2.

Was SHE Running D12, YES or NO?

Shouty…

No idea, although it does look like she’s blatantly cheating.

The point here is that you said di2 doesn’t work for cross. Which it clearly does

In fact according to cxmagazine, 73% of podiums were achieved using di2 during the 2014/2015 season across senior men and women. So I’d say fairly successful

Was SHE Running D12, YES or NO?

This says no.

The Electric Shock

It’s a bit weird / upsetting that it looks as though the technology exists, and people are (apparently) using it, yet the UCI seem to struggle to find cheats using it in races. I don’t really know how / whether they examine bikes after races, but it seems with all this talk over the last few months that they really should do so to look for motors which can’t be that hard to detect.

Feeling kind of ashamed sitting here at home in Belgium….

It is 100% confirmed that there was a bike in her pitbox equipped with an electric motor driving through the crank.

Femke & family are not disputing this. Their only (very weak) defence is that story about it being one of her old bikes that is now the property of one of her training friends & that it was mixed up by accident.
(I don’t think anyone is believing this)

Belgian coach is sooooo angry about the whole case.
It’s gutting because Belgium have had a great champs of course.

Believe me; this girl (regardless of intent or knowledge) is finished here!

The boss from the Belgian cycle organisation (wielerbond) confirmed that UCI has advised that in this instance ‘team’ does not constitute Belgium but her direct entourage.

More rumour based is that they have been monitoring her since Koppenberg cross in November where she put in some very surprising spurts in the women’s elite race.

Flange, of course it does work, but not Clearly, Not when you only have 1 bike to complete a race on, when you have 6 bikes and are a world class rider then it works, it’s got to win at that level otherwise we wouldnt buy it,

And NO shes not running it, and Yes she is blatantly cheating

Oh and NO i’m not on Crack, i cant afford it,

This aint Di2

https://youtu.be/ZEEP7EGFk_U?t=2750
(edited – it seems embedding to a specific time in a video doesn’t work properly, you’ll have to click on the link to see Van den Driessche departing the race on her mechanical geared bike – oh and whilst you’re at it watch the rest of the vid to see the new British World Champion)

Phew – can we leave the Hesjedal conspiracy theories now, it would make the thread simpler

I’m going to leave you to it – I’m not sure how having one bike or ten makes any difference to whether it works or not. Surely those at the top of their game whose livelihoods depend on it would only use stuff that works. In fact some (me included) would say it works better because there are no cables to choke up with mud. But different strokes for different folks and all that…

See, that’s where I’m obviously different, I was of the opinion they used what they were paid to run, that’s how i thought it trickled down to the open market, they are using their sponsors kit and equipment not just what they fancy running,

I’ve had problems with clag, admittedly it was a while ago now but a decent set up on cables that are thoughtfully routed works just as well, I always thought that a new bike after a few laps that was clean would communicate better and not clog up with crud,

ref the mechanical vs drug doping thing, I’ve heard a few commentators saying that mechanical doping crosses a rubicon where you are admitting/accepting that something else is driving the bike and therefore doing the winning. Drug-doped riders could rationalise that it was still them putting in the performance, albeit and enhanced them, but still their muscles, sweat and effort.

There’s currently a lot of talk about her Koppenberg performance with people tweeting links to the vid on youtube, on the first climb she very quickly puts 30m or more into the leading Elite women (Cant, Wyman, Harris et al) who are commenting that it was noteworthy at the time. And she won the Europeans earlier this year.

Marge, can you confirm how long she has been with her current team and on the same bike? I saw a comment that she was riding different bikes last season which would sink the “modified sold old bike” defence?

They’re not paid to use Di2. They can chose mechanical or Di2. Rider’s choice. Advantage that amateur racers (with only one bike racing in Scotland where arguably conditions are pretty filthy) have told me is that Di2 is a big advantage in CX as you can stay on the bike more, as the shift quality remains regardless of conditions.

Marge, can you confirm how long she has been with her current team and on the same bike? I saw a comment that she was riding different bikes last season which would sink the “modified sold old bike” defence?

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20141226_01448109 there is a late 2014 article that sports a quite similar bike. Team name as per interwebs was different but the old bike holds sofar. I want the friend do do a polygraph though

At a press conference today UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) president, Brian Cookson, confirmed the bike the 19-year-old Belgian was riding, when she pulled out of the race with mechanical problems, was later found to contain a concealed motor. – See more at: http://road.cc/content/news/177183-mechanical-doping-cyclocross-worlds-confirmed#sthash.phCkYSST.dpuf

N.B. according to that report, she was riding the bike with the motor, it’s not a bike that was sitting in the pits.

So we’re trying to prove that the spinning bike with no credible evidence of cheating had a motor in it, and the bike that has been found with a motor in it didn’t really have a motor in it; am I up to speed?

😆