[HN Gopher] How Olympics officials try to catch "motor doping"
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How Olympics officials try to catch "motor doping"
        
       Author : belter
       Score  : 42 points
       Date   : 2024-07-23 18:43 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | kelseyfrog wrote:
       | What's the trainer-athlete conversation like that leads up to
       | installing such devices?
        
         | reallymental wrote:
         | Both parties want to win. There's no such conversation, they're
         | all in it to win it. Do whatever it takes.
        
           | willcipriano wrote:
           | Just show up one day and your bike has an unexplained button
           | on it that makes you go fast?
        
             | brookst wrote:
             | Sure, for training purposes. You know, on a long ride, you
             | don't want to overdo it. Of course, the actual race bike
             | needs the button for verisimilitude, and it would be a big
             | mistake if a batter was left in, and...
        
               | kelseyfrog wrote:
               | Surely there are certain logistics, like making sure it's
               | charged before the race, or asking, "wouldn't I perform
               | better by losing the extra weight?" being brought up
               | before, no?
        
               | recursive wrote:
               | There's a UCI minimum weight for competition bikes at
               | 6.8kg. We _can 't_ remove the button, as that would put
               | us under the weight limit.
        
               | kelseyfrog wrote:
               | That's funny. Thank you for explaining it
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | I cannot strongly recommend enough the documentary Icarus,
         | which starts out with the premise of "how hard is it to ask for
         | steroids" and spirals into completely insane territory from
         | there.
        
         | sctb wrote:
         | And when does Mephistopheles chime in? I'm fascinated by the
         | idea of doping in general, and there seems to be two distinct
         | kinds: 1) something that everyone is doing (e.g. EPO at the
         | Tour de France or AAS in bodybuilding) and 2) something that
         | will give you an actual edge. "Motor doping" seems to be an
         | example of the latter.
         | 
         | It really boggles my mind that there are people who are capable
         | enough to be in the competition and still decide to cheat in
         | order to win. Not because it's immoral or dishonourable or
         | anything like that, but just because it's so fucking _lame_.
        
           | OrigamiPastrami wrote:
           | > It really boggles my mind that there are people who are
           | capable enough to be in the competition and still decide to
           | cheat in order to win. Not because it's immoral or
           | dishonourable or anything like that, but just because it's so
           | fucking lame.
           | 
           | If your competition is cheating you are going to lose if you
           | don't cheat. It has nothing to do with honor - it's just
           | about winning. Cheating may be lame but it's a reality. It's
           | not just limited to sports either. In fact I can't think of
           | anywhere I studied/worked where cheaters/liars didn't get
           | ahead (I know multiple cheating students who got into MIT for
           | grad school, and I know multiple abusive liars who were
           | consistently promoted at unicorn startups or FAANG while
           | simultaneously working to get their honest coworkers fired).
           | 
           | Such is life.
        
             | sctb wrote:
             | > If your competition is cheating you are going to lose if
             | you don't cheat.
             | 
             | I put that in category #1, which isn't exactly cheating
             | because it doesn't buy you an advantage. Cheating at school
             | or at work is an interesting example. Perhaps by the time
             | cyclists are considering motorizing it's just like... a
             | job? And you have to win to eat?
        
           | JohnMakin wrote:
           | > It really boggles my mind that there are people who are
           | capable enough to be in the competition and still decide to
           | cheat in order to win. Not because it's immoral or
           | dishonourable or anything like that, but just because it's so
           | fucking lame.
           | 
           | If you have devoted your entire life to a particular sport
           | enough to compete and make a living in it, there inevitably
           | will come a time when your ability to compete is not enough,
           | whether that's due to declining ability or increased
           | competition. When faced with the decision of ending a career
           | or cheating, it is not too surprising that people could
           | choose the latter.
           | 
           | Of course there are many other reasons for cheating, but I
           | imagine that to be a common motivator.
        
             | sctb wrote:
             | > When faced with the decision of ending a career or
             | cheating, it is not too surprising that people could choose
             | the latter.
             | 
             | I do find it a bit surprising, myself.
        
               | JohnMakin wrote:
               | > I do find it a bit surprising, myself.
               | 
               | Ok let me phrase it perhaps in a more relatable way -
               | 
               | Your employer asks you to do an unethical or illegal
               | thing. Not doing so will result in you losing your
               | livelihood. Doing so presents a small but measurable risk
               | to you, but you keep your livelihood unless caught, in
               | which case you lose your livelihood anyway. Do you think
               | there is a significant subset of people that take the
               | first choice?
        
               | sctb wrote:
               | I find it surprising that athletes would choose to make a
               | drastic departure from their prior intentions of fair
               | competition in order to attempt to avoid the
               | inevitability of retirement. I don't find it nearly as
               | surprising that someone would make a bite-sized
               | compromise in order to preserve their livelihood, even
               | though it seems unwise to me.
               | 
               | Sport qua job has a different feel than sport qua sport,
               | as a sibling commenter illuminated.
        
           | TheCondor wrote:
           | What's boggling about it?
           | 
           | Cycling is a really good example because it is so stark: 1)
           | If you win you make more money, probably _a lot_ more money.
           | I don 't know the current numbers, but during the Armstrong
           | years there were plenty of Tour de France level riders that
           | worked wrenching bikes to make ends meet and lived with their
           | parents in the off season. You had Lance on private jets, and
           | then guys on the team making under $30k supporting him. 2)
           | Genetics is huge, you can do everything possible and simply
           | not be good enough, if you've dedicated a big chunk of your
           | life to this dream, you've won at every level, you live a
           | completely monastic lifestyle and constantly diet and you
           | reach your limit the desire to get just a little bit better
           | is strong. The drugs work. 3) If enough people believe that
           | "everyone is doing it" then the psychology of cheating
           | disappears. 4) There is no external pressure or risk; the
           | teams and sponsors don't get burned. When Lance won on a Trek
           | they went from being something like a $200m company to a
           | $2.5B company. They may very well have played a part in it,
           | perhaps unbeknownst to them, but they never had any jeopardy.
           | 
           | They're talking about what is physiologically possible after
           | this year's Tour, it was a complete ass kicking. If your
           | competition is doing things that are believed impossible, do
           | you hang it up? accept defeat? Or rationalize that a few
           | watts isn't really cheating since he's doing something
           | impossible?
        
             | sctb wrote:
             | Doping as table stakes is understandable. Money too, after
             | a while. But I genuinely wonder how an athlete who put a
             | motor in their bike and then accepted the resulting victory
             | would feel about themselves as a competitor and a person.
             | If they were stoked then by all means go for it, but in
             | that case they must have a different psyche than I do.
        
         | alistairSH wrote:
         | The same as the conversation that leads to athletes doping
         | their bodies.
         | 
         | Somebody in the athlete's inner circle suggests "hey, you'd be
         | faster/stronger if you did X..." and it goes from there.
        
       | sidibe wrote:
       | For those who aren't following starting a few years ago the top
       | cyclists have hit some crazy new levels unseen even in the EPO
       | era and the top ones at this year's Tour De France were smashing
       | power output records and not even looking tired in the winner's
       | case.
       | 
       | I think so far no one has been caught motor doping even though
       | they've looked for it for years. The rumor is the new magic is
       | carbon monoxide rebreathing
        
         | RegnisGnaw wrote:
         | Per the article, Femke Van den Driessche was caught motor
         | doping.
        
         | Saig6 wrote:
         | This is false, Pogacar and Vingegaards w/kg is lower than the
         | best juicers in the 90s/00s.
        
           | loeg wrote:
           | Can you put some names and numbers to that?
        
           | 0x000xca0xfe wrote:
           | Do you have sources for that?
           | 
           | Some quick searching yields this:
           | 
           | "Based on the numbers, Tadej Pogacar has an FTP close to
           | 7w/kg. These are the highest numbers that we've ever seen in
           | professional cycling, and what's even more incredible is that
           | Pogacar is pushing 7w/kg for 40 minutes after four hours of
           | racing."
           | 
           | https://velo.outsideonline.com/road/road-racing/tour-de-
           | fran...
        
         | isoprophlex wrote:
         | That doesn't sound dangerous at all
        
       | solardev wrote:
       | Tangentially, it would be cool to just have sanctioned ebike
       | races. We have motorcycles and cars, why not ebikes? I'd love to
       | watch a high speed, no holds barred e-cyclocross/gravel/MTB race.
        
         | PierceJoy wrote:
         | There is a UCI sanctioned electric mountain bike enduro race.
        
           | anthomtb wrote:
           | To the GP, an electric mountain bike (eMTB) enduro race is
           | probably not what you are envisioning.
           | 
           | Mountain bike (MTB) enduro is stage racing. Specifically,
           | timed downhill-only sections separated by untimed transfers
           | between stages. The name comes from motorcycle enduro racing.
           | Riders do not go head-to-head like in road cycling,
           | cyclocross or motocross. eMTB enduro is exactly the same
           | format but using electric-motor assisted bikes and, IIRC, one
           | timed uphill stage thrown in.
           | 
           | MTB/eMTB enduro is great fun as a participant sport but
           | either not-there-yet or not-suitable as a spectator sport.
        
       | etimberg wrote:
       | Why not just have the Olympic host supply the same bike model to
       | every participant rather than having each rider bring their own
       | bike?
        
         | RegnisGnaw wrote:
         | Why not have the Olympic host supply the same shoes to every
         | participant? The same swim suit to every participant. What's
         | the end?
        
           | hanniabu wrote:
           | They really should, that way everyone is competing on equal
           | levels. Less variables means a greater chance the best person
           | wins.
        
             | solardev wrote:
             | I don't think the Olympics were ever about equal footing or
             | decreasing variables. To really level the playing field
             | you'd have to have a clone army of athletes with the same
             | genes, diet, lifestyle, training, coach, sleep, etc.
             | Equipment is just one variable among dozens, and eventually
             | the rules can change to limit their contribution (like with
             | swimsuits).
        
             | rhinoman wrote:
             | Or it would benefit those participants who are best suited
             | to the chosen gear.
             | 
             | Taking an extreme example - imagine if we said "everyone
             | must wear size 9 shoes so everybody's on equal footing".
        
               | axblount wrote:
               | I'm not sure how your extreme example is helpful. No one
               | has made a suggestion like that.
        
               | rhinoman wrote:
               | The idea is that different equipment is better suited for
               | different individuals. By mandating a specific kind of
               | equipment for all athletes, you'd be benefiting some
               | individuals over others.
               | 
               | For example, road bikes have different frame shapes that
               | are suitable depending on your torso length compared to
               | leg length.
               | 
               | Of course, the natural next step would be allow some
               | flexibility (different frame size but same material), but
               | you can see how that could be a slippery slope of
               | legislation and lobbying that would end up in a similar
               | situation to where we are today?
        
             | jaggederest wrote:
             | Especially in the context of the original olympics, which
             | were largely conducted nude. The idea that a rich country
             | can field better equipment is absurd.
        
               | Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
               | Yes please!
        
             | thesz wrote:
             | If you have been training in different gear than is
             | supplied to you by host of the event then you are at
             | disadvantage.
             | 
             | Take a look at the variety of weightlifting shoes, as an
             | example of gear for a specific sport.
        
           | marinmania wrote:
           | There was a controversy in curling a few years ago where some
           | curling teams were using new brooms by a new company that had
           | significantly better tech. It was so good it made it
           | unnecessary to have two sweepers. The resolution was to ban
           | it and only allow brooms from certain manufacturers.
           | 
           | It seems reasonable that these sports could narrow down the
           | list of approved equipment down to a few approved suppliers
           | every year.
           | 
           | https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1427-broomgate-a-
           | curl...
        
             | alistairSH wrote:
             | Shoes had a similar issue when Nike released their first
             | modern super-shoe (Vaporfly, IIRC). The track and field
             | body had to limit shoe sole height and the other brands had
             | a lot of catch-up to do.
             | 
             | Same for swimming with high tech, low drag, bouyant
             | swimsuits. Again, the international body had to step in and
             | ban some materials/designs to prevent domination by nations
             | that could sink resources into the engineering.
        
           | altruios wrote:
           | External supplies, clothing, and equipment... that's the
           | end... we aren't going to be matching used muscles to see
           | which brain pulls on them harder.
           | 
           | External influences should be minimized within reason.
        
         | solardev wrote:
         | Different riders have different preferences, and there's a lot
         | of money and technology that goes into improving the bikes
         | every year (or at least every decade). The materials, the
         | construction, the electronics, the aerodynamics, the fit, the
         | saddle, the tires... they're all constantly evolving. It's like
         | car races, manufacturer sponsorship is a huge part of it, and
         | the races in turn advertise those bikes.
         | 
         | Would it make for more equal footing if everyone had the same
         | model? Yeah, probably, but does that happen elsewhere in the
         | Olympics? Does the host supply skis, shoes, bows, bobsleds,
         | etc.?
        
           | etimberg wrote:
           | To me, the olympics are about determining who is best at a
           | sport. It's not a technical problem like a car race where
           | bending the rules with creative engineering is expected and
           | encouraged.
        
             | icoder wrote:
             | Engineering is part of many sports, skiing, snowboarding,
             | swimming (albeit limited after those floating suits),
             | running. Even if you say they should all be about the
             | sports performance only, there's engineering behind
             | training schedules, equipment, diet, techniques & posture,
             | etc.
        
             | slaymaker1907 wrote:
             | The trouble is that people have different preferences for
             | different equipment and by mandating one particular bike,
             | you disadvantage a lot people based on who does better on a
             | particular bike and aren't judging people solely based on
             | who is the better cyclist. Consider the absurd extension of
             | using exactly the same equipment where even the size of the
             | bike is exactly the same, saddle height is the same, pedal
             | length is the same, etc. There will be maybe one person who
             | that is ideal with and whole lot more people suffering
             | injuries from riding incorrectly sized bikes.
             | 
             | Therefore, since we can't all have exactly the same bikes,
             | we need to come up with a definition of what is "fair" to
             | adjust for the bike that someone races on. Sure, this
             | allows for some degree creative engineering, but is that
             | really a bad thing so long as money doesn't become the
             | determining factor of who wins? It pushes the science of
             | bikes forward and eventually that new tech will make its
             | way to everyone, including amateur cyclists.
        
             | anthomtb wrote:
             | In your view, are activities like cycling and snowboarding
             | valid as Olympic sports? Neither could exist without a
             | significant amount of creative engineering.
        
               | playingalong wrote:
               | There's a difference between creative engineering
               | enabling the whole sport and creative engineers competing
               | with each other behind the scenes.
        
           | alistairSH wrote:
           | _Yeah, probably, but does that happen elsewhere in the
           | Olympics?_
           | 
           | Yes, sailing. I believe all but Formula Kite are one-design
           | classes (Laser, Laser Radial, IQFoil, Nacra 17, 49er, and
           | 470). A few have options between licensed manufacturer (but
           | to same spec) and a few are true one-make (Laser, Laser
           | Radial), not sure about the others.
        
         | notatoad wrote:
         | The olympics don't really set the protocol for any of this. the
         | rules and procedures for each sport are set by their respective
         | international sport organization. for cycling that's the UCI.
         | 
         | the olympics is only one event, and only happens once every
         | four years. the rest of the season, that happens every year, is
         | much more important and doesn't have an olympic host to provide
         | bikes. so there needs to be some procedure that catches motor
         | doping at all the races, not just one infrequent race. The
         | olympics is just going to follow the same procedures that are
         | used for all the rest of the worldtour level races. and while
         | the olympics might not care about keeping the rider's bike
         | sponsors happy, the rest of the races do.
         | 
         | if riders weren't out there promoting bike brands and riding
         | bikes provided by their sponsors, pro bike racing wouldn't be a
         | thing.
        
           | dmckeon wrote:
           | > promoting bike brands and riding bikes provided by their
           | sponsors
           | 
           | Therein lies an answer - change the disincentives - instead
           | of banning cheating riders, ban all of the sponsors of those
           | riders for a time. Now the onus is on the sponsors to
           | discourage cheating.
        
         | epanchin wrote:
         | That is the premise behind formula E, and no one watches it.
        
           | porkbeer wrote:
           | But that isn't why, Spec Miata (for example) is the same and
           | has an outsized following. in fact, single-make racing is
           | nearly as common as mixed.
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | A big part (possibly the primary reason) is to promote and sell
         | overpriced gear to amateurs. The Little 500 race is run with
         | all riders using standard bikes, so it's not unprecedented.
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_500
        
       | oksurewhynot wrote:
       | For those wondering what egregious motor doping (probably) looks
       | like, here's an extremely famous (and some would say obvious)
       | example of it:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6z7uUe0tVA
       | 
       | For those not familiar with Tom Boonen, Cancellara effortlessly
       | spinning up the Kapelmuur and putting in so much time that the
       | chase helicopter can't even find him would be like beating Usain
       | Bolt in the 100m by 5 seconds.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Nobody has ever shown that Cancellara was cheating there. Maybe
         | he's just a monster. When Joop Zoetemelk casually disappeared
         | from the front of the pack in the 1985 World Cycling
         | Championship nobody could believe it because Joop was 40 years
         | old. Nevertheless, he did it, and there was no stealth motor
         | technology at the time.
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | So far, with cycling, P(discovered cheating later |
           | outrageous) ~ 1. Some people will believe that when they go
           | indoors the sun stops shining because there is no longer any
           | proof. It's certainly a strict way to seek one's knowledge.
           | Others have a different view.
        
         | scheme271 wrote:
         | Yeah, except for Boonen is a sprinter and a hill climb even a
         | short very steep one is probably the worst terrain for him.
         | Cancellara isn't a climber but as a time trial specialist, he's
         | a lot better suited for the kapelmuur than Boonen. And
         | cancellara is better at descending as well.
        
         | matsemann wrote:
         | I don't buy your comparison with bolt. This is just a video
         | showing someone exploding? Happens all the time. They're riding
         | at the limit for long, and then when one can't handle it
         | anymore the difference is stark.
        
       | Invictus0 wrote:
       | The sport of cycling is toast. The culture is too far gone and
       | honest folks can't escape the suspicion of doping.
        
         | jjtheblunt wrote:
         | Well it could have a resurgence if doping were explicitly
         | allowed.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | If we want to see the best athletes, then we need to allow
           | them to do whatever it takes to be their best. We want the
           | best*. Is the best they can do with limits
        
       | renewiltord wrote:
       | These motors are pretty cool. They'll make mountain biking a lot
       | more accessible and for me, a lot more fun since a lot more time
       | on the downhill sections :)
        
       | Beijinger wrote:
       | Well, people dope now with CarbonMonoxide
       | 
       | https://escapecollective.com/exclusive-tour-riders-are-inhal...
        
         | beezlebroxxxxxx wrote:
         | Under the rules, how different is that from something like just
         | taking caffeine?
         | 
         | Doping is usually in reference to banned substances. But
         | huffing CO genuinely seems completely out of left field of any
         | rules that I know. They probably will ban it, but before they
         | do is it correct to call it doping?
        
       | swarnie wrote:
       | A 20w electric motor is child's play, real women beat the shit
       | out of a horse until it learns to dance.
        
       | kart23 wrote:
       | Can't you just weigh the bike? how much weight does a
       | motor+batteries add? And anything that isn't super light would
       | get heavier scrutiny.
        
         | cheeze wrote:
         | Bikes are at a point where they can be lighter than the UCI
         | mandated minimum weight. Aero has been the name of the game for
         | a while as well, so it's possible that a riders bike already is
         | heavier than expected for aero benefit
        
         | alistairSH wrote:
         | Bikes can already be built WAY below the minimum weight set by
         | UCI (6.8kg), so that doesn't help - it's easy to install a
         | motor, battery, and still come in right at the limit.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-23 23:01 UTC)