Nowdays there are more then one video.
This one started the whole thing but now very serious chanels give other arguments which make it plausible... and nothing seems to contradict what they say.
Edit : And Lachi I'm sorry but these arn't my arguments I am just repeating what several programs say, all of them requesting the comments of experts (which I am not). I repeat that I do not think Cancellara used such a thing, but now I have second thoughts.
Edited by BouBBox on 08-06-2010 11:22
BouBBox wrote:
Nowdays there are more then one video.
This one started the whole thing but now very serious chanels give other arguments which make it plausible... and nothing seems to contradict what they say.
Edit : And Lachi I'm sorry but these arn't my arguments I am just repeating what several programs say, all of them requesting the comments of experts (which I am not). I repeat that I do not think Cancellara used such a thing, but now I have second thoughts.
Oh I would very much like to see some of those "several programs". Any sources? Other than dodgy youtube conspiracies that is...
If only there were some sort of forum somewhere with English speaking French people, with an interest in cycling, who could translate the gist of it...
If only there were some sort of forum somewhere with English speaking French people, with an interest in cycling, who could translate the gist of it...
This is what I am dooing I just saw it once, and i am giving out what I remember.
Funny how you can manipulate pictures with some graphic and a few dramatic texts right?
Are you talking about your video? I can remind you that it is also a Youtube video, so it shouldn't have more credibility than the known one.
And is there any responsable person confirming this video? Curiously this video changed my mind in the opposit way...
And come on the arguments like why dindn't he win Amstel, LBL etc... seriously the guy who made this video is just a blind fan of Cancellara like we have others for Lance.
The people laughing at mechanical doping are most likely the same who can never believe it when we get a positive drug test.
It's around guys, it's being used (Not sure with Cancellara or not, thats unimportant) and it's not going to be obvious, remember this is formula 1 technology.
As for the argument "He can't be using a motorized bike, why attack here if he did?". Just because you are using one of these technologies doesn't mean your brain stops functioning.
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
Finally! I feel less lonely xD
The thing is mechanical doping is possible (No one will take Cancellara's victory away) so after this, bikes will be checked which will help avoiding this sort of cheat : which is a good thing.
jacknic wrote:
So now we are suspecting everyone with a little speed in their bikes?
I don't doubt that the mech doping is posible, but show me any evidence against any rider in the peloton other than "he went weally fast!". And no, a youtube video with red arrows in it is not evidence. It is a youtube video with red arrows in it.
Exactly. There's not even a shred of circumstantial evidence...
Also, following up on Lachi's questions, I have another one:
- Why did Matti Breschel make the switch shortly after Cancellara, yet never made it back? With a motor in the bike, it'd be pretty easy to get back, wouldn't it?
Well, maybe because he hasn't enough money to afford such stuff
If only there were some sort of forum somewhere with English speaking French people, with an interest in cycling, who could translate the gist of it...
doddy13 wrote:
The people laughing at mechanical doping are most likely the same who can never believe it when we get a positive drug test.
It's around guys, it's being used (Not sure with Cancellara or not, thats unimportant) and it's not going to be obvious, remember this is formula 1 technology.
As for the argument "He can't be using a motorized bike, why attack here if he did?". Just because you are using one of these technologies doesn't mean your brain stops functioning.
I am not laughing at mechanical doping. I am laughing at using the youtube videos as proof that cancelarra did or didn't cheat.
doddy13 wrote:
The people laughing at mechanical doping are most likely the same who can never believe it when we get a positive drug test.
It's around guys, it's being used (Not sure with Cancellara or not, thats unimportant) and it's not going to be obvious, remember this is formula 1 technology.
As for the argument "He can't be using a motorized bike, why attack here if he did?". Just because you are using one of these technologies doesn't mean your brain stops functioning.
I am not laughing at mechanical doping. I am laughing at using the youtube videos as proof that cancelarra did or didn't cheat.
Well, why wouldn't I laugh at the video you just showed us, and which proves "more or less" (as you said) nothing to me.
If only there were some sort of forum somewhere with English speaking French people, with an interest in cycling, who could translate the gist of it...
?
He just means there's no point for us, or whoever is a non-English-speaking television watcher, to use what's being said as an argument in a debate if you can't either recall the points made, nor roughly translate what has been said. It just makes the arguments void.
doddy13 wrote:
The people laughing at mechanical doping are most likely the same who can never believe it when we get a positive drug test.
It's around guys, it's being used (Not sure with Cancellara or not, thats unimportant) and it's not going to be obvious, remember this is formula 1 technology.
As for the argument "He can't be using a motorized bike, why attack here if he did?". Just because you are using one of these technologies doesn't mean your brain stops functioning.
I am not laughing at mechanical doping. I am laughing at using the youtube videos as proof that cancelarra did or didn't cheat.
Well, why wouldn't I laugh at the video you just showed us, and which proves "more or less" (as you said) nothing to me.
That was actually my point with posting the other video. It uses roughly the same pictures to prove the opposite of what the original video claimed.
None of the videos can be used as evidence of anything.
If only there were some sort of forum somewhere with English speaking French people, with an interest in cycling, who could translate the gist of it...
?
He just means there's no point for us, or whoever is a non-English-speaking television watcher, to use what's being said as an argument in a debate if you can't either recall the points made, nor roughly translate what has been said. It just makes the arguments void.
OK
The point is, that what's said in the video is translatable : the commentator says : At the arrival, the bike was hidden, and the RAI reporters, who were trying to film it, were turned away, and testified it later. On the Muur, Cancellara doesn't change of gear, his RPM stays at 96, while the slope is from 12 to 16 %. His body, his hips, his shoulders don't move. Bio-mechanically, our experts think about some sort of external help.
Juan wrote: On the Muur, Cancellara doesn't change of gear, his RPM stays at 96, while the slope is from 12 to 16 %. His body, his hips, his shoulders don't move. Bio-mechanically, our experts think about some sort of external help.
So, basically, he kept on pedalling at the same speed while the slope got steeper (while Boonen couldn't, and slowed down), and this is somehow proof that he's using an engine?
