Shame on him (or anyone else) for doing something like this, however,

You're wrong.

http://www.slowtwitch.com/...ike_Motors_5752.html

Surprised if Ironman is actually doing those checks. But even then, they look to be using the fatally flawed iPad Mini magnetometer method which Gadget Blues on YouTube shows in extreme detail why it doesn't work with just a thin sheet of metal shielding. Not to mention that the iPad Mini method ends up giving a higher reading for SRAM eTap components than for a hidden motor.

I would be surprised if cheating is as rampant as you believe it is, so each to their own.

To sum up the 28 minute video:

1. Use the free iPad app

2. Have a bike expert weigh the bike and look for exotic modifications

3. Pull the crank if you still have suspicion

I can see how this would work; I could also see where the Wide World of Mechanical Failures is going to increase with the complexity of the equipment being used.

---

DFL > DNF > DNS

The vast majority of people are, obviously, going to be against mechanical doping. But I don't see it being practical to test or inspect all bikes. Afaik someone checks my helmet strap isn't too loose and that is it. Heat cameras are expensive things let alone the people needed to do it. Surely that level of inspection is only really needed if someone is getting something out of the race - say a top three or a qualification for something. They could also do some random testing given more time and resources.

One thing I'd like to see is some sort of automated crunching of splits. If we have enough check points on a course then it should be possible to apply very simple logic to the times and spot people cutting the course. Surely that is more common than motors and is pretty easy to do with almost no more investment. I once finished a sprint tri, looked at the results and it was obvious that 3 bike splits above me were way too fast. It was a very low key race so I think they are more likely to of taken a wrong turn. But the point was the race officials didn't even look until I pointed out that these times were faster than world record time trials. A computer should be highlighting this automatically.

But I think it would also be possible to apply a bit more sophisticated logic to that data and spot potential motor doping. I think you could potentially spot a pattern of motor use of an individual against all the other unassisted splits. Of course no-one would be guilty based on that but it could flag the need for an investigation of that bike. You'd then inspect the most suspicious bikes based on splits and the top finishers rather than everyone. I just think that is more practical.

The other thing is fixed point cameras on the bike course. A computer could highlight cyclists riding close together for long stretches. Then you could inspect the camera footage and make a pretty good judgement as to whether they were drafting. You might need more timing mats and you might choose a specific part of the course to concentrate them and the cameras. But I think, again, that isn't too hard to setup or prohibitively expensive. I fact a third party could do it independently and report/name and shame.

Thermal cameras are not expensive. You can even get a FLIR thermal camera add on for your phone for only a couple hundred dollars. There is no excuse for any tri to not have at least 1 or more thermal cameras, the cost is so low.

http://www.flir.com/store/

With how widespread PED use in triathlons, are you seriously questioning the widespread use of hidden motors? Someone using PEDs would have no problems cheating with a hidden motor.

If you can get a camera that cheap and you think it is that wide spread then do it. Get one, get a race organiser interested and let you stand at bike check in with the magnetic app as well. I don't mean that in a confrontational way, I'd genuinely be interested if you found any. I might even do it myself.

I don't think it's wide-spread, only that like other forms of cheating, that it's out there. And I would not recommend just blithely imagining that somebody else is going to catch the cheaters. If they put that much effort into course-cutting the run, hiding their fins while they swim, or secret motors in the bike, it's all part of the same behavior that should be addressed and not condoned.

---

DFL > DNF > DNS

Yup.

Define "widespread", please. Don't use other vague words like "rampant" to do it, either.

I think you misread me, I'm sold on the idea. I'm saying any of us could decide to test ourselves, given a races agreement. I genuinely hope someone takes up the challenge. As I say, I might myself.

I think it would be easiest at a race with day before racking. Then agree with the race to walk the bikes in the evening, with an escort. I think there are people on the forum involved in race organisation. If a race did a few things that other races didn't in regards to catching cheats then you'd think that would be a selling point.

It's of Lance Armstrong levels. I think that is a pretty accurate descriptor.

OK. Thanks for playing.

And you know this, how?

Or rather, this is just a bit of conjecture and hyperbole to bolster your strained assertions and thread topic?

Really, it is not a stretch to see there are a lot more cases of motor doping that haven't been caught, such as the infamous Fabian Cancellara seated accelerations in the classics. Cheating techniques trickle from the top down, not the other way around.

Your imagination is strong.

Good on ya for that.

I would be surprised if cheating is as rampant as you believe it is, so each to their own.

So you don't think a lot of triathletes draft or would draft if there were no marshalls?

Given that some PEDs can be unintentionally ingested, I tend to favor the existing structure of penalties (namely, that first offenses do not yield lifetime bans).

You can't unwittingly have a motor in your bike. So, I would support that if a triathlete is caught with a motor, he/she should be banned for life.

What say all of you? Too draconian?

In this context of this thread we're talking motors and PED's. Drafting is another topic entirely, and it gets beaten to death here. I'll stay on topic, and leave that for anyone else that wants to throw around more baseless speculation as fact as OP has done.

DieselPete wrote:

You can't unwittingly have a motor in your bike.

'Course you can. You have a family friend who is attending the same race and has the exact same model and size of bike. You probably talk before the race. Bikes get left leaning somewhere together and you walk off with the wrong one. It's a completely creditable defense. I'm not sure how she explained activating the motor during the race, probably the button is easily pressed by accident at the bottom of a climb.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/...world-championships/

You got me there!

Or it would be like Sammy Sosa's corked bat. "Oops, that was my trainer and I accidentally brought it into the game."

Too bad. Gone for life.

So - a LOT of triathetes are much faster than you, so therefore they must be taking PEDs and/or mechanical doping?
that checks out.
/pink.

---

float , hammer , and jog

Well, the difference is the corked bat does not involve pressing an additional button to activate. The "virtually spring loaded bike" (as in the motor having pre loaded energy stored in electrical form to be converted to mechanical), you have to press a button to activate the '"virtual springs" to unleash all that stored potential energy.



PS. Whenever there is something messed up in the world, a quick google search on looney tunes and you pretty well get a graphic that covers the scenario. Those guys were brilliant.

Pink?
Come on, that's lame. At least man up.

On some group rides I attended, people used motors. And had no problem admitting to it.

Given the sales demographic of electrically enhanced bikes I hear from an e-bike retailer (hint: it is not the old ladies who need the extra push to shop for groceries), I have no doubt that the same guys look for disguised enhancement to show off.

Same as pimping STRAVA, claiming to have ridden mountainous 20 miles in one hour, but not able to produce the data from their GPS if you ask nicely.

Well, Type A's are mostly holes.

I don't think they are widespread because a) I think they are pretty expensive b) I can't image anyone using one of these really thinks they have accomplished anything. At least the dopers still have to train. You might as well call an Uber and get off a couple miles early. Much easier and cheaper.

You are so wrong on b) it is not even funny.

Looks like a bicycle...so it is a bicycle...just happens that I have The Best (it even has an expensive motor)!

Same 'customers' who buy $10K bikes.

thermal camera's are getting pretty cheap, in fact the latest CAT phone has a themal camera,

in terms of it being to hard to check... why not just check the top grouping riders, say the top 10 in each group, or if thats too many people then the podium finishers for each group. compulsary inspection for the bike ridden.

same should be done for meds.

I can't /haven't watched the video right now so apologies if this is explained there, but, how is thermal imaging used to detect the presence of a motor in a bike?
The motor/battery will only differ significantly from ambient temperatures during or for a time after charging/discharging the battery and/or running the motor. While riding there is significant forced convective cooling over the seat-tube or any other frame tube that might be carrying these components so they will cool fairly quickly. On a 70.3 or long distance triathlon bike leg it would be quite feasible to use a motor to cheat out on the course and stop using it early enough to let the bike cool before entering transition. Perhaps the idea is to photograph or film all competitiors with infra red cameras throughout the race?
It seems to me that there are many ways a cheat could reduce the likelihood of detection too. For example heat sinks connecting the motor/battery to external heat conductive components like a chain catcher or guard, BB cups and the front derailleur hanger. It wouldn't be too difficult to hide a water cooling system to allow the rider to empty a water bottle into the frame to cool the motor/battery before draining back out again. Done well this would be difficult to detect without a very careful inspection of the bike.

Who is going to make/sell this?

Motors in bikes have legit uses, and can be easily produced/sold. Doping products have legit uses, and are made for that, then some are diverted to doping.

How is that - the production/marketing going to work for a cooling system to hide motors?

---

http://www.jt10000.com/

I didn't say anything about it being a commercial product. I could make one quite easily if I was so inclined.
Let's see...My Felt IA has a "Calpac" bento box. I could drill a small hole in the corner of that right down the bottom, pour water into the storage area and it would act as a funnel. Water would exit the hole into the down tube. You could attach a small tube to the hole to bring the water to a cooling jacket on the motor and battery or you could make it less obvious by just letting the water trickle into the downtube and then gather it lower down with another funnel to guide it into the cooling jacket. The configuration of the Felt IA perhaps makes it particularly easy, but most if not all bikes could have small modifications or additions made to allow something similar to be done. For example any bike with top tube mounting bosses could employ the holes or the bolts themselves as a water injection point. Any ETap bike with unused cable ports could use them to inject water, etc.

There's nothing terribly complex about this that someone with a little technical ability couldn't put together in a few evenings of tinkering. Are most triathletes so obsessed with buying stuff that they think it's impossible to do things for yourself?

That's easy?

Nice straw man: easy vs impossible.

---

http://www.jt10000.com/

Yes, easy.
Of course it's all relative and depends on your background.
It might take a little time, as in several hours, but for many people it would not be difficult at all.

What strawman am I creating? You honestly have me puzzled.

I just did IMLP. I saw zero fat guys flying up the hills. I saw an awful lot of absolutely jacked 50+ men AND women. I don't think motors are the biggest doping problem in tri, they certainly aren't going to help you run. That being said, they have the bikes a day ahead of time, so they should look for motors if the technology exists to do so.

---

Dimond Bikes Superfan

even a cheap thermal camera has the kind of sensitivity that you are going to be able to see a motor and batterys easily, forget about cooling them, they will pick up the tem diferencial of the water in the frame,

i'll post a pic up in a bit, but literally they will show heat on somthing that you have held in your hand for a few seconds.

cheap hand held drill, i would immagine this is goijng to be somwhere in the ball park of the wattage of a doping motor, this is after about a minuites use, apart from the heat from the motor, note the heat in the hand grip from body temp, and the heat showing from the batterys.

and this is just a pic from the Cat smart phone...

http://www.catphones.com/...hones/s60-smartphone

This is why I would call for lifetime bans for motors.

"We have your bikes one day in advance. We will use the best available technology to look for motors. We are only handling a maximum of 3,000 bikes. We can search randomly, search them all or target test; we won't tell you which we are doing. If we find a motor, the bike owner is out for life."

What kind of moron would turn over a bike with a motor? I would take my chances with doping long before I would turn in a motorized bike.

You can get a handheld non contact infra red thermometer at Harbor Freight for $27 that is sensitive enough to find a warm/hot spot in a bike frame from an electric motor that has been recently used. My guess is there is a decent chance that was as sophisticated as the "thermal imaging" used got. And even that is not the easiest way to find bike motors. iPhones/iPads actually have built in magnetic field detectors (why i don't know) and the UCI just uses an app that "sees" the magnets in the motor.

Yes, it's true you can easily detect small differences in temperature. But, as I said earlier, a motor or battery will only have a significantly different temperature if they have been charged/discharged or run recently. When idle and exposed to airflow this heat will dissipate. Photographing the bike in transition in steady state temperatures will not tell you anything. My query was whether the idea was to photograph/film people's bikes out on the course.
You say thermal cameras can show heat on something you held in your hand for a few seconds, and that's true. What about 20mins later?
So when you say "you are going to be able to see a motor and batterys easily", what is it that you are going to see and when will you see it? Where will the temperature difference come from?

You could perhaps heat or cool the frame and look for areas of higher thermal mass (by looking for areas that are slower to respond with a temperature change) but I don't think that's a practical way to test without excessive time and logistical costs and would probably not yield a definitive answer anyway.

So, to clarify: I am not debating the ability of infra red cameras to detect temperature differences. I'm asking when and where the cameras will be used and whether there will be a temperature difference to see. On course and in use, in transition before, in transition after....?

Well, the amount of drafting in triathlon certainly allows us to say that cheating is rampant...

True, except we're talking PED usage and hidden motors. Drafting hasn't been mentioned, and it's a whole other kettle of fish that gets flogged on here on a regular basis. Even with drafting, it's not "Lance Armstrong" levels anyways.

THIS. question is though, if they turn the motor off before rolling into T2, can you still see it light up?

I agree that it's not LA level, but if I recall the post you were answering to, it was referring to rampant cheating.
My guess is that many triathletes could easily get the same time gains out of blatant drafting as they would using EPO.
I'm referring to these races where you see large groups, hanging out together like it's a weekend group ride.

Edit: you actually did say "I would be surprised if cheating is as rampant..." :-)
so, yes, obviously it is that rampant.

[quote FrancoisEdit: you actually did say "I would be surprised if cheating is as rampant..." :-)
so, yes, obviously it is that rampant.[/quote]
Yes, but you missed the posts before it too that provide context.

And still......no. It's not as rampant as the Lance Armstrong era. That's a time when essentially *everyone* was cheating. Certainly the top 1% of professional racers were all (as history has shown) taking PEDs. Probably more.

Do you think *all* of the top 1% of tri pros are taking PED's? They aren't. Are some? I suppose, they get caught occasionally. But in the Lance era they *all* were.

So.....even if you add drafting (which again from the context wasn't the case) it's still not as rampant.

I would lay money on it, you can practically see down to a fraction of a degree, I would say somthing would stay noticable for a fair while, especially as you can prety much see " thorogh" somthing to the core temp so wind would only cool the outer frame and the centre would still show as hot.

The ITU does do mechanical fraud tests. There were sections added to the rulebook around the process and procedures for it, and they have been training and equipping a number of officials to do the testing (and this is likely to continue to grow). I'm not sue the number of tests that have been completed, and whether they're all elite, or a combo of Elite and Age Group. But I would suspect that if you're doing an ITU worlds event (Penticton or Rotterdam) there will be some testing of bikes.

It's actually a lot easier to control in Tri vs. Cycling, with athletes having to check their bikes in, often the day before, there's ample opportunity for testing, and there's no ambiguity of it being a "spare training bike" since bike changes are illegal...

And I agree that there should be lifetime bans for mechanical fraud (I also think there should be lifetime bans for doping (if it can't be proven to be accidental) as well).

It helps you run if it lets you ride, physically, at a lower percentage of your FTP for a shorter period of time.

Let's say you have an FTP of 300 watts and you somehow sneak a 150 watt motor into your bike and a big enough battery pack to last for two hours. Let's just say you'd normally ride at 70% of your FTP and have a bike split of 2:30. You could ratchet that down to 50% of your FTP and with the motor on your bike split would be almost fourteen minutes faster. So you'd be on the bike for about 10% less time at an exertion that is almost 30% lower. I can guarantee you'll run faster.

I agree with you though that EPO, HGH, and T are much bigger issues for the sport. Frankly I think this is one more argument for the category system as it would allow race organizations to focus their efforts.

Here is an article on the various ways you can detect a motor in a bike. Looking for heat works but the main way testing is done is scanning bikes before or after the race with an iPhone or iPad. There are several off the shelf commercial apps that will detect the magnetic field generated by an electric motor (even if it is off) just by waving the phone within a couple inches of the frame.

https://www.wired.com/2016/02/clever-ways-to-catch-a-pro-cyclist-cheating-with-a-hidden-motor


Frankly, it is so easy and cheap (basically free) to "test" for motors that unless the get way more sophisticated, it is never going to be a big deal in high level cycling and it should not be in low level cycling either. It is akin to testing human doping if you could do it by just by waiving an iPhone in someone's face at registration.

The real danger of electric motors, and I have already seen this, is someone on an e-Bike with 15 mph handling skills trying to mix it with the local group ride at 25 mph.

On the other hand, I may just power up in about 10 years when I can no long mix it up with the boys on the coffee shop rides on my own power ;-) I'd let everyone know and use my new "powers" only for good (e.g taking long hard pulls for the guys at key moments) and obviously never in a race but little motors on bikes hold a lot of promise too.

You keep telling us how great these cameras are (which no-one has debated) and yet you haven't yet answered my questions about how they are used to detect motors or batteries. So, again, when are/should they to be used in order to ensure the motor or battery are at a different temperature to the rest of the bike and therefore detectable?


No you cannot see through something. The camera is detecting light reflected from the surface of the object you're photographing or filming. The only difference between this and a normal camera is the wavelength of the light involved. The camera is observing infra red rather than visible spectrum light and then translating it to visible spectrum wavelengths to display it so that we can see it.
It would take some time for heat to dissipate after you stopped running a motor. The time required for a thermal camera to become difficult or useless would depend on a number of factors. Primarily, power usage, motor efficiency, battery impedance, speed controller efficiency, thermal mass of components, means of cooling (you could use heat sinks, thermal adhesives, water cooling, etc to accelerate cooling), ambient temperature, solar gain, frame colour and reflectivity, wind speed and direction, cycling speed, humidity, camera sensitivity, frame uniformity.......I'm sure there's a few more.

Have you ever taken an infra red photo of a bike straight after a ride? I haven't, but I'm curious how uniform the frame temperature would be, especially how it would differ from bike to bike and with changes in weather or course profile. While a camera can certainly detect differences of fractions of a degree, looking for differences at a very small scale means there will be a lot more noise in the signal and it may be far less obvious what you're seeing. My guess is a long course racer could use a motor mid bike leg and leave the motor and battery to cool for an hour or more before T2, dribble some sweat and water on the frame and it may not be detectable at all. That's without even getting into any fancy cooling systems or heat camouflage paint schemes.

ok seing though stuff is misleading, what I actually mean is the heat has to exit somehere so you will see it on the camera,

as this is thermal camera's iotis not light being reflected, it is the actual heat radiation from the object, in this case the motor.

in terms of where how they can be used, basically anywhere, it will probably be an issue to get an image of somone cycling past on a cheaper thermal cam, but if you were along side in a car it would be simple enough, certainly people coming into transition would be easy enough to check as you would not have ambient air cooling the frame so the heat being dumped from the core would show better.

that said the apps available for ipads etc that work of the compass would also be a fast easy check, prbably better than a themal cam for stationary checks, hell you could probably check reliably with one of those compases you get out of a christmas cracker,

I havent taken pic of a bike, but there are plenty on the net.

You misunderstand. It IS light.
Most of the thermal radiation emitted by objects in the temperature range we're talking about is emitted as infrared. Incidentally, light is radiation. Infrared radiation is just a name for light that has a wavelength in a range just above that visible to the typical human eye. i.e. IR is a colour of light we aren't able to see, but it IS light. These cameras detect infrared radiation in the same way as a normal camera detects light visibile to humans. There is nothing magical about them. They are just cameras that detect a different wavelength range and that display the image with a shift in wavelength so that we can see it.[/quote] So back to my original query. How can IR cameras be used to easily detect motors?
They are not much use unless the motor is in use or has recently been in use or the battery has recently been charged. So there is not an obvious way that they can be used in transition. You could try and use them out on the course but that would be a PITA to implement and you wouldn't be guaranteed to catch all offenders unless you did multiple checks throughout the bike leg for every competitor. You'd also need people checking the images during the race and inspecting suspect bikes by other means before they're taken from transition after the race for confirmation. Is this the proposal?
This was my query. I never said it couldn't be done. I queried the assertions that this was easy and cameras are cheap. There's a bit more to it than that!

How expensive are PEDs compared to $15,000 bikes? Not that expensive at all after all... of course I can't afford either, so I don't have to worry about that moral dilemma. The dentists on the other hand....

this I like.
The only problem is that your serial cheaters have the mentality of "it won't happen to me".

The rest of us don't cheat because we either believe in Fair competition, which I think is a minority, or, they're afraid of getting caught.

This is all much ado about nothing. He didn't have a motor and his recent jump to the podium is because he fixed some problems with his back:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/...g-mechanical-doping/

So it's all just a misunderstanding. He couldn't submit his bike to a technical inspection because he had a wedding to go to. Makes total sense to me. /s

Although to be fair, after racing in the morning I wouldn't mind going to an Italian wedding in the afternoon/evening. Sounds like a good day.

A full drug screen for PEDs costs money and takes special personnel and a pretty serious commitment to a very specific sampling and testing protocol. That is why so few athletes get tested. And in many cases PEDs "work" by improving training and can thus still be beneficial even if not "used" on race day so you have to get into out of competition testing to be truly effective.

Looking for motors is several universes away from that. They must be present at the race to be of any use and it is infinitely easier and cheaper to "test." You are literally talking just a free, or nearly free, iPhone app that anyone can be trained to use in about 8 seconds and requires no certification, etc to be a "tester." Get as many people as you want scanning bikes at the start or finish and for the ones that register a "positive" your confirming test involves an allen wrench, pulling the seat post and taking a look. It takes way longer to do a junior gear rollout which gets done, on every junior at every bike race, than it does to test for a motor. You can test such a high percentage of the field that cheaters will be deterred (or caught) if the organizers care enough to "test." This is fundamentally different than human doping. Motors will never be a big problem.

The way these people double down with denials and excuses is what really irritates me. For a second, I had thought, well...at least he admitted it. Nope...wishful thinking.

I get why people cheat, but once caught, to call everyone an idiot while making yourself look like one is just beyond me. I feel sorry for the family members and friends (maybe former?) of these type of people once their story, and their denial are made public...and go viral.

Reminds me of what road racers have said about triathletes on group rides.

Yeah, I seriously see the usefulness for older people or people with other problems being able to keep up with friends, on groups rides etc. Seems like a good thing to me.

---

http://www.jt10000.com/

Why use thermal imaging?

The conversation should be as easy as, "please remove your seat post, our mechanic will help you reinstall it." "okay now I am going to use this $30 camera and my iphone to look in your frame..."

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

I'd be absolutely flattered if a race official asked to inspect by bike for a motor!

---

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody

Doping and motors are completely rampant. It's the reason I don't win every triathlon I enter and go to Kona every year.

So back to my original query. How can IR cameras be used to easily detect motors?
They are not much use unless the motor is in use or has recently been in use or the battery has recently been charged. So there is not an obvious way that they can be used in transition. You could try and use them out on the course but that would be a PITA to implement and you wouldn't be guaranteed to catch all offenders unless you did multiple checks throughout the bike leg for every competitor. You'd also need people checking the images during the race and inspecting suspect bikes by other means before they're taken from transition after the race for confirmation. Is this the proposal?
This was my query. I never said it couldn't be done. I queried the assertions that this was easy and cameras are cheap. There's a bit more to it than that![/quote]

Yes heat is light, but its where its coming from and the quantity thats important here, and in this case its a localized point probably just above the bottom bracket,

I take the point that I've been banging on about thermal camera's a bit, and really thats just because I've been playing with one this week so this thread popped up at a good time, its not hard to point a camera at a bike from 10-20 ft away and see a hot seat tube, as for the implementation of actually doing it, personally I'm from TT/ cyclocross not Tri, so dont really have any knowedge of how transitions work but regardless of sport, I think checking needs to be done whether its by camera, compass or dissasembly,

Anyway my point about it not being hard to check wasnt really intended to sugest using thermal stuff, just that if you compulsary test the top finishers for doping, mechanical or other wise and give anyone caught a severe punishment then the problem should not be a problem for long.

The rules for Tri (ITU) are found in Appendix N (p 207) of the current rule book, in terms of the checks. Thermal cameras are effective when the motors are in use or shortly thereafter. If you controlled in transition, it would likely be using the tablet style scanner that the UCI uses. That's not to say that you couldn't put an official in plain clothes on the side of the road with a thermal camera to flag athletes for targeted post-race testing...

I'd not be comfortable doing that the day before a race. Lugs epoxied into CF, and seatpost collars, can and have failed, especially if one has no access to a torque wrench at a race site. This is exactly the kind of a problem that isn't fixable in the short term, what with the proliferation of different seatpost systems.

The race officials should just use a thermal camera. They are cheap. There are even models that attach to tablets or smartphones.

I don't agree that motors are a widespread problem. I'm sure someone has done it somewhere at least once, but it isn't widespread. PEDs on the other hand, that is widespread especially amongst the 40+ crowd.

They better know what they are doing on a wide range of bikes. I have a BMC TM01 and the bike needs to be held at about 110 degrees to ensure the seatpost clamp doesn't fall into the seat tube when removed. People have had there's jammed into the bottom of the frame. I carry a spare clamp just in case when I travel to destination races. And you need a torque wrench to tighten it down without cracking the frame. So it's not as fast as you would think, and it presents a potential financial liability the RD probably doesn't want to take on.

okay, how about remove a water bottle cage and use a water bottle boss or any other penetration in the frame.

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

And do what...push a wire in or something with zero knowledge of what might legitimately be inside ... such as the foam core left from the mold? BTW, I also have a 2010 Giant Advanced Trinity SL-1 superbike with NO water bottle bosses anywhere on the frame...a true time trial bike.

You've clearly gone to great lengths to make your motor hard to find...


There is no solution to this problem so we can forget about it. (I really don't think this is a wide spread issue)

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

Ha, I sure don't bike like I have an electric motor. I agree that this is not a widespread problem, but I do support WTC doing some sort of infrared testing in transition. It's only a matter time before they catch someone.

I don't understand all these ridiculously complicated methods of testing that obviously have little value. It takes seconds to remove a crank and inspect the bottom bracket. If you got a hollowtech for example it's 1 Allen key and a multi-spline tool. Inspect the first 3 bikes into T2 plus a handful of random testing. You could probably even flick the tube and see if it sounds right or place a magnet against the tubes and see if it feels consistent. What the heck can an iPad with a pretty graph tell you?

If it's done after the athlete enters T2 there is no concerns over putting the bike back together again in a rush and you aren't allowed to swap bikes on the course so no-one should be able to ride on their e-bike then jump on a clean bike. There isn't a need for pre-race scrutineering. Leave it down to the athlete to put the crank back on so can't say anything has been damaged or over-tightened. You'd still have a potential problem of some sort of rear wheel/hub system being swapped out on the course but I don't know how you'd ever negate that.

I used to work at an engine builders / race car builders. We were the approved workshop for eligibility testing for a couple of national championships. The chief scrutineer would observe us strip engines to ensure compliance to rules. Then we would reseal them with lock-wire and a unique seal number or there would be sanctions imposed if it didn't conform, photographs taken etc.

This seems to only be a problem for cycling/ triathlon. Other sports have been doing intrusive eligibility checks for years.

I'm all for catching the cheats, but you are seriously suggesting that the RD pull athlete cranks and then hand the bike back with it off because everyone has the tools and knows exactly what to do. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Yes I am. If people don't like the entry criteria they are welcome not to enter the race.

They could put the components back in place, nip any bolts up loosely and put a tag on the handlebars to the effect of "your bike has been examined for eligibility and will require re-assembly/inspection prior to further use". Job done. They do it to our baggage at the airport,why shouldn't it happen to our bikes at a race?

This isn't the same as HSA putting a piece of paper in your luggage telling you they looked. I'm not a RD, but I suspect they would find this proposal to be ludicrous and detrimental to participation. There are untold numbers of triathletes who can't even change a bike tire let alone know how to reassemble a crank. Calling Fleck and Slowman to weigh in on this idea.

Here is a quick solution to not inspect having to inspect everyone.

Inspect top 10 overall, top 3 on each age group. Shouldn't take that long. Avoid any disassembly of cranks/bb unless external method brings a positive.

My suggestion is it would be targeted, not done routinely to everyone same as anti-doping is. A process reserved for the podium finishers, super fast bikers, someone who appeared to have had a breakthrough cycling performance or directed by intelligence (a tip off)... plus a handful of randoms as a deterrent.

I personally don't see a problem, particularly at prominent races like regional champs. Might not be appropriate at small local races. Better than wasting time with thermal imaging, iPads and all this other non-destructive nonsense they isn't even guaranteed to identify a motor IMO.

Targeted inspections are much more reasonable although I still think that if a RD touches a bike they must return it in the same condition. As to "regional champs", at least here in Florida, that is just a name bestowed on some local races to potentially increase participation even though it doesn't mean squat. I want them inspecting, enforcing drafting rigorously, going after dopers, watching for course cutters, etc., at races with qualifying slots: IM, IM70.3, and USAT National Champs.

I suspect the real reason they don't conduct more physical inspections is liability if they damage anything and like you mentioned, putting people off entering if they feel their bike is going to be fiddled with by someone who may or may not be competent to do so.

That is the worst possible way to handle this. For a race to take apart bikes, not put them back together the way they found them, and instead hand unsafe bike back to the athletes who may or may not know about this, or may or may not know how to reassemble the bikes themselves?

Now my evil plans include racing on a steel frame bike with a hidden motor.

It's the best way if you want to catch cheaters and it's only 3 bolts typically. If you can't handle that you shouldn't be allowed to breed let alone race.

If people don't want this to happen then just accept there are no other proven ways of catching people. Using fancy cameras and iPad is just an illusion they are doing something.

Personally I don't think there is a big problem with motors, it's a fantasy. But we'll never know unless we really check.

But that wouldn't work. A hollow tube should 'ting' where as one with something solid in it would be more like a dull thud. With a motor in there it would feel a more powerful attraction to a magnet than areas which are just tube wall.

You can use a magnet and sound to identify body filler in vehicle bodywork if you have a tiny bit of experience. Same principle really. Not foolproof by any means but it's a start.

This would likely be a bad idea. Not to mention, that the intrusive option is only when the suspicion is strong. Currently they use the tablet based scanners to check and if they suspect a motor, then they would disassemble as necessary. The rule states that the athlete and their representative should be present when they do this, and the athlete themselves are asked to remove the seat post or crank... if they don't want to, then a mechanic will do it. They are currently doing this pre-race for elite events, but they could scan bikes after the T zone is closed, and flag numbers and do disassembly post race. That said, I'd rather they do all of this pre-race, that way the winner is the winner, and you're not robbing someone of the podium.

Similarly thermal cameras could be used on course, bib numbers noted for more thorough inspection post race...

There are countless threads on here about the rampant drafting problems in races. Every post race report includes stories of what amounts to peletons. But, we (can't / won't) (catch / enforce) drafting rules...which doesn't require a teardown or an IR camera to detect. But, you are suggesting that the sport has the appetite and desire to implement a teardown procedure to inspect for hidden motors and batteries at the regional racing level (whatever that is)?

Your motor racing example is a bit laughable. Motor racing is like doping in cycling, except that playing in the gray area is accepted practice and pushing into the downright black is *almost* necessary to win. I'm not even sure how the engine seals example is even relevant---regardless even those are easily defeated. Everyone knows how to reseal an engine/transmission/diff such that it passes tech.

If you've been involved in motor racing for any length of time, then you are keenly aware that for every "control" in place there are, at least, 2 (if not 10) methods for defeating it. If you tell me how or when you are going to inspect me (or my bike, or my racecar), I guarantee you that you will not find anything using those method, at those times. In the racecar, I'll have a GPS fence and a hidden switch that activates a capability at speed on the racetrack and not sitting still in tech.

Everyone comes up crazy ideas for how to "catch the cheater", but no one ever considers the implications of the idea. Who's going to implement it, how long will it take, how much will it cost.....does the customer (racing population) have the stomach for the inconvenience? Its easy to say, "its the price of entry...if you don't like it, stay away." On the other hand, what if 10, 25, 50% of the population do exactly that? is the remaining population able to support the sport? Are they willing to pay the rising entry fees due to escalating costs, and decreasing participation? We gripe about a $15 USAT 1 day fee. We gripe about active.com processing fees.

Back to motor racing. I own and drive a racecar (spec Miata) regionally. At the national races (SCCA majors, Runnoffs, NASA Championships) everyone is at risk of a teardown of any component on the car (engine, trans, diff, all of the above, etc). Every owner is expected (required) to perform this teardown upon request---it is the price of entry. They also pay double the entry fee for the privilege. But, national racers generally spend $5k+ for a weekend and have a full support crew on staff...whereas, I might spend $750 and do my own wrenching. However, none of this happens at the regional level. We (regional racers) know this, and expect that we will NOT be taking our cars home in pieces. If that changed, regional racing would dry up in a heart-beat---we are unwilling to tolerate the (risk of) intrusion, and expense of an engine rebuild every 6 weeks. Doing the work myself over nights and weekends, I might not even have it back together by the next race...and I have better things to do with my time.

Taking a crank off, or removing a seat tube is certainly not the same as an engine rebuild. But, if a frame gets broken in the process either during removal or re-install (and that WILL happen to someone---either by the volunteer mechanic or the owner ...doesn't matter who, the damage is done) THAT is equal to an engine rebuild. Once stories start circulating (true or false) "my bike was broken inspecting for a stupid motor cheat", a level of outrage will ensue, and enrollment WILL drop.