Cancellara Motor Doping

[happycampyer]

Originally Posted by r_mutt

I don't see how a contest of 2 retired riders is going to prove that Cancellera didn't have a motor 7 years ago at Flanders and Roubaix- even if cookies are involved.

I find it amusing that there are so many people who have absolutely no proof of motors being used by Fabian are so quick to say it didn't happen. How the fu@k do you know? Then last time there was such a impassioned defense of a rider accused of doping ended very badly on Oprah's sofa.

There's probably only 1 person who knows for sure the definitive answer to the motor doping question and that's Fabian.

I would argue that it's much easier for a rider to conceal doping from the team (DS, coaches, doctors, soigneurs, etc.) than it would be to conceal a motor in one's bike. A bike with a motor would be noticeably heavier than one without. The team mechanic would surely know, and if the team mechanic knew, the DS almost certainly would know. The presence of motors in the pro peloton would suggest a pretty wide conspiracy, and a lot of people who would need to keep the secret quiet. The use of motors seems far fetched, but then there are people like Greg LeMond who believe (without any proof afaik) that they are being used and have been used in the pro peloton. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt (i.e, innocent until proven guilty), but that's not how society—and certainly not society on the internet—works.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Originally Posted by r_mutt

I don't see how a contest of 2 retired riders is going to prove that Cancellera didn't have a motor 7 years ago at Flanders and Roubaix- even if cookies are involved.

I find it amusing that there are so many people who have absolutely no proof of motors being used by Fabian are so quick to say it didn't happen. How the fu@k do you know? Then last time there was such a impassioned defense of a rider accused of doping ended very badly on Oprah's sofa.

There's probably only 1 person who knows for sure the definitive answer to the motor doping question and that's Fabian.

There's no way to know for certain without a LOT more investigation, and the only way I see how that ever happened in the first place with Armstrong is because he seemed so dedicated to creating so many enemies for himself and it came back to bite him in the ass.

Fabian is generally regarded as a nice guy, which I think would make it a LOT easier to call in the favors that would keep something secret. The infrastructure and personal loyalty from friends/employees that would be needed to keep such cheating secret would be much easier for him to sustain.

I also see no reason for Gaimon to rise to this "challenge." Gaimon has never been the same kind of rider Cancellara is, and you can bet Fabian knows that. So Phil is supposed to suddenly up and fly over to Europe, at his own expense, to race? I doubt Gaimon will go for it, and he shouldn't.

Additionally, Gaimon is known for his musing, opinionated style of writing, and that's exactly the way I read his statement about Cancellara. The alleged moto-doping from Spartacus is a well-established topic for discussion in cycling circles and PG is as entitled to talk about it as anyone else.

At this point, as Happycampyer says, "I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt (i.e, innocent until proven guilty), but that's not how society—and certainly not society on the internet—works."

Sadly true, and it's on Cancellara to provide some exonerating proof at this point. Where are the actual bikes he used in those races? Until he can produce those for inspection, there's a lot of people who are going to believe the worst, and that's just the way it is.

BBD

[azrider]

Originally Posted by Clean39T

I'm not sure what's more shocking...that Tweet, or your battery being at 7%...you like to live dangerously!

Such a great episode.

The battery life is the new normal with iOS11.....i mean iOS11.1....errrr iOS11.1.1.....no wait........iOS11.1.2

[54ny77]

The new normal is disproving a negative....

....in so many aspects of public life, not just cycling/sports.

I blame Al Gore for inventing the internet.

[FlashUNC]

Originally Posted by r_mutt

I don't see how a contest of 2 retired riders is going to prove that Cancellera didn't have a motor 7 years ago at Flanders and Roubaix- even if cookies are involved.

I find it amusing that there are so many people who have absolutely no proof of motors being used by Fabian are so quick to say it didn't happen. How the fu@k do you know? Then last time there was such a impassioned defense of a rider accused of doping ended very badly on Oprah's sofa.

There's probably only 1 person who knows for sure the definitive answer to the motor doping question and that's Fabian.

That's ignoring a mountain of context though to make that comparison. One guy climbed off his death bed and transformed from a one-day rider to one of the fastest climbers the world had ever seen, suddenly producing results his pre-cancer performance gave no indication he had. Punchy rolling courses? Totally. Scorching up the Tourmalet? No way.

Fabian was already at the tip of the spear when it came to one day and time trial riders in the pro peloton, by doing the very same kinda stuff he did before and after j'accuse le motor. There's a consistency there that is incongruous with what we saw from Pharmstrong.

More than happy to eat crow on this, but there's one rather fuzzy data point to try to pin "he had a motor" on Fabian, whereas there was a laundry list of circumstantial evidence against Mellow Johnny.

[KJMUNC]

Originally Posted by FlashUNC

Fabian was already at the tip of the spear when it came to one day and time trial riders in the pro peloton, by doing the very same kinda stuff he did before and after j'accuse le motor. There's a consistency there that is incongruous with what we saw from Pharmstrong.

No denying that he was much more consistent throughout his career, but people never want to bring up the fact that FC came of age with Mapei, quite possibly the most overtly doped team in history ('96 1-2-3 at Roubaix....seriously guys?!), then he moved to Fassa Bortolo (the "jet-fuel boys"), then on to CSC and Riis's merry band of dopers, before moving to Leopard Trek with Riis and then Bruyneel.

I have zero evidence that he ever doped and frankly I don't care, but if he rode clean he did so among a virtual murder's row of the biggest doping teams in the last 30yrs.

FC doesn't seem like the Armstrong archetype (win at any costs, i.e., motor in every race), but I could see him using something because he expected Boonen to have one and was caught up in the arms race. Not that it matters or makes it right, but if he really did use something I'd expect there to be more examples in his career. More than likely he just had an extra few watts when Boonen didn't, whether doped or otherwise.

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

Sadly true, and it's on Cancellara to provide some exonerating proof at this point. Where are the actual bikes he used in those races? Until he can produce those for inspection, there's a lot of people who are going to believe the worst, and that's just the way it is.

The bike is hanging in his garage.

You may not be familiar with why inspecting the bike is an exercise in futility.

[r_mutt]

Originally Posted by happycampyer

I would argue that it's much easier for a rider to conceal doping from the team (DS, coaches, doctors, soigneurs, etc.) than it would be to conceal a motor in one's bike. A bike with a motor would be noticeably heavier than one without. The team mechanic would surely know, and if the team mechanic knew, the DS almost certainly would know. The presence of motors in the pro peloton would suggest a pretty wide conspiracy, and a lot of people who would need to keep the secret quiet. The use of motors seems far fetched, but then there are people like Greg LeMond who believe (without any proof afaik) that they are being used and have been used in the pro peloton. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt (i.e, innocent until proven guilty), but that's not how society—and certainly not society on the internet—works.

As has been already stated (Mapei, etc) , it might be easier to conceal chemical doping for a lone wolf, but in the past, there have been few lone wolves. One things for sure, the Omertà still exists- then and now. Everyone knew about doping in the past and no one talked about it. So the argument that it's harder to keep motor doping a secret is moot. I think what's telling (and this is just my opinion) is that there are no instances besides Fab's mechanic of anyone coming to his defense.

To be honest, I really don't care all that much, but to just sit there and hear people say that there's absolutely no way that Fabs was using a motor? I'm not that presumptuous to say that absolutely.

[93legendti]

I don’t know if he had a motor or not....

But I’m sorry - do I read this correctly that because someone has made the unsubstantiated charge that FB had a motor in his bike in 2010, that it’s up to FB to disprove that 7 years later? Guilty till proven innocent?

[chiasticon]

Originally Posted by r_mutt

To be honest, I really don't care all that much, but to just sit there and hear people say that there's absolutely no way that Fabs was using a motor? I'm not that presumptuous to say that absolutely.

I honestly don't care either. but to me anyone claiming either way "with certainty" is just silly. there will likely never be evidence either way. until him or a wrench comes forward and admits otherwise, all we can do is presume innocence; with suspicion, if you're so inclined.

[Clean39T]

Originally Posted by azrider

Such a great episode.



The battery life is the new normal with iOS11.....i mean iOS11.1....errrr iOS11.1.1.....no wait........iOS11.1.2

Just saw it on re-run two days ago - classic episode with George being hangry before we had the word - bonus was James Spader showing up for a bit - same acting style he’s got in the Blacklist..

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by chiasticon

I honestly don't care either. but to me anyone claiming either way "with certainty" is just silly. there will likely never be evidence either way. until him or a wrench comes forward and admits otherwise, all we can do is presume innocence; with suspicion, if you're so inclined.

I agree, and I disagree.

I agree with the part about certainty. It is all about likelihood. What is the likelihood that he had a motor in his bike? I think only a few people are betting their life on the fact he had a motor.

I disagree with presuming innocence. That may be your presumption going in, before encountering any facts. (Someone else, based on the history of doping in cycling could just as easily start with a presumption that he cheated).

After we see the evidence, weigh it, think about it, we (hopefully) arrive at a reasoned decision of what we believe. Hopefully we are cognitively flexible enough to go in to a situation believing one thing, parse the new evidence and then change our minds if the evidence no longer supports our initial belief.
If one's conclusion is determined 100% by their presumption, what role does the evidence have?

[adub]

This is the best thing that has happened to Phil's so called "Pro" Career, retirement or whatever it is..

[skouri1]

This is relevant. But of course (ha!) some will see it as evidence of motor doping...I suspect most people were and are doped, to some degree.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ucis...our-de-france/
Fab-o had a score of zero. Menchov was on the other end.

But I don't think this dude would ride with a motor...
I think that's one step too far. The everyone's doping argument can help them to rationalize drugging themselves, but a motor for a professional athlete? I don't think the ego would let them cross that line...

[KJMUNC]

Originally Posted by adub

This is the best thing that has happened to Phil's so called "Pro" Career, retirement or whatever it is..

Make no mistake about it - this wasn't just accidentally brought up.....Gaimon and/or his publicist was hoping this would goose book sales. I'm guessing they're right.....

As Barnum (or someone) allegedly said "there's no such things as bad publicity"