A concealed motor has been found during examination of Femke Van den Driessche’s bike, during the Cyclocross World Championships, it was revealed today.
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.
Rumours have abounded over recent years of mechanical doping, but this is the first confirmed case in top-level competition.
UCI boss: Mechanical dopers will pay
"It's absolutely clear that there was technological fraud. There was a concealed motor. I don't think there are any secrets about that," Cookson said.
"Technological fraud is unacceptable.
"We want the minority who may consider cheating to know that, increasingly there is no place to hide, and sooner or later they will pay for the damage they’re causing to our sport."
The bike was seized on Saturday after Van den Driessche, who was competing in the under-23 race, was forced to pull out with mechanical difficulties. According to reports, when the saddle was removed electrical cables were found in the seat tube.
Van den Driessche, who was among the favourites to win, denies knowledge of the motor, and says she has done nothing wrong.
A tearful Van den Driessche told Belgian TV channel, Sporza: “It wasn’t my bike, it was that of a friend and was identical to mine”.
“This friend went around the course Saturday before dropping off the bike in the truck. A mechanic, thinking it was my bike, cleaned it and prepared it for my race,”
She says she was “totally unaware” it was fitted with a hidden motor.
“I feel really terrible. I’m aware I have a big problem.
She added: "I have no fears of an inquiry into this. I have done nothing wrong”.
If found guilty of technological fraud a rider faces a minimum six-month suspension and a fine of between 20,000 (£13,700) to 200,000 Swiss francs (180,000 Euros).
Add new comment
48 comments
That excuse is hilarious. Complete and utter BS!
Mind-boggling.
If you can run an HGV through a scanner and find stowaways/explosives, it wouldn't be that hard to create some sort of bulk scanner looking for electronics. Anything abnormal could get a manual look; this way every single bike gets checked.
Lots of high tech seeking devices being extolled, how about taking the seat pin out and inserting a cavity camera down the seat tube!
Her friends bike that was exactly the same down to saddle type, bike brand, saddle position, stem length, bar tape colour, pedal type...
Exactly: there've been some tall excuses in cycling over the past few years, but this is right up there in the 'chinny reckon' stakes.
As she said it was one of her last year's bikes that she had passed on, it would be, but . . . . this friend/ex-friend needs to found (assuming they exist). Also the race mechanic who prepped the bike has some explaining to do, re not noticing the extra weight & button/switch to work the motor, and the need to charge a non Di2 bike!
At least
When asked if this could spell the end of her young career Van den Driessche said, “yes, I think so.”
So, at least no denial of the fact, unlike the chemical cheaters.
Which logically suggests it might be worth checking the bike her friend's riding!
StuinNorway, It was apparently found by radio waves being detected, so there must have been a battery in there somewhere. Question is, where does anyone get a Wilier e bike from? A lot of people must be involved.
Depends on how big her team is - if its just her Dad being mechanic - then it could be as low as the two of them. Buy the motor and a dremel and away you go. You'd have to make sure the bike got nicked before you were to return it to the sponsor though....
I really doubt anyone from Wilier would know anything of this.
Trickle-down technology? Under 23 racing isn't the arena where this stuff gets developed (in my opinion) so I take this as an indication that motors have been used in the pro-peleton. Doesn't prove it, but stands as a strong hint in my eyes.
What I'm a bit baffled by is the fact that folk are still willing to risk it - given that the UCI are switched on to checking for it.
OK, so they found a motor and some wires, so something was odd about the bike, however unless they also found a battery they motor would slow her down surely ???
Maybe it used a dynamo instead of a battery.
That is the funniest thing anyone has said in a long while. Back to physics class with you!
Apparently you're a little behind on the whole "technology" thing. No, having no battery wouldn't slow her down. Those motors don't work like that.
But your point is good - once the bike was seized, surely it can't be that difficult to determine if there is a battery or not. If she was riding a bike with a battery hidden with a 30% charge or no battery at all, that might lend credence to her story.
However, the level of BS in her story definitely sounds non-zero.
Electronic controls, weigh-ins, mechanical checks... also, how long ago did the "mix-up" occur? She was bringing a friend's bike to a pro level race? Because her sponsor couldn't afford for her to have a second race bike?
Just none of it adds up sensibly.
Is anyone really surprised though?
Billion to one chance? shame on that friend
Oh dear!
Pages