Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

TECH NEWS

BREAKING: Suspected hidden engine in bike at 2016 cyclocross world champs

UCI seize bike for 'mechanical doping' at the 2016 UCI Cyclo-cross World Championships

A motor has reportedly been found inside a bicycle at the 2016 UCI Cyclo-cross World Championships - with the UCI seizing the bike under suspicion of 'mechanical doping'.

The bike belongs to Femke Van den Driessche, acccording to the Belgian cycling federation (RLVB), who was riding for Belgium in the women's U23 race. So does "technological fraud" mean a motor has been found in a bike?

The UCI has confirmed it has seized the bicycle, but has not confirmed the nature of the alleged fraud. Meanwhile Belgian television is reporting that a small motor was found inside the frame.

The UCI said they were examining the bicycle for “technological fraud”.

“Our auditors detected mechanical fraud -- it quickly became apparent that something was wrong,” UCI race coordinator Peter Van den Abeele said.

Femke's father told the Belgian newspaper De Standaard that it was planted by "someone in her entourage [who] took the bike into the pit"

He said that it was a bike sometimes used by one of her trainers, and "it was never the intention that they would ride it."

He added: "We also do not understand well what "technical fraud" exactly means."

He also denied that Femke had ridden the bike at all, saying: "Femke has been European and Belgian Champion. Why would you do this in a world championship?"

We don't have any more details to go on at the moment,  and we don't obviously want to jump to any conclusions without knowing all the facts, but does it mean a rider has been caught using a motor concealed in the frame?

The UCI has stepped up tests for concealed motors in frames in recent years, following several allegations of mechanical doping, as it's often called, at races over the years.

 

Dampf-Fahrrad_2.jpg

An artist's impression

The UCI confirms the checks followed the women's under 23 race and doesn't involve any of the top three riders. 

- Mechanical doping - the pro cycling story that won't go away

Here's the statement in full?

"The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) confirms that pursuant to the UCI's Regulations on technological fraud a bike has been detained for further investigation following checks at the Women's Under 23 race of the 2016 UCI Cyclo-cross World Championships. This does not concern any of the riders on the podium. Further details will be shared in due course."

- "Hide it!" Vuelta video sparks fresh mechanical doping concerns 

- Videos: Ryder Hesjedal reacts to mechanical doping claims 

David worked on the road.cc tech team from 2012-2020. Previously he was editor of Bikemagic.com and before that staff writer at RCUK. He's a seasoned cyclist of all disciplines, from road to mountain biking, touring to cyclo-cross, he only wishes he had time to ride them all. He's mildly competitive, though he'll never admit it, and is a frequent road racer but is too lazy to do really well. He currently resides in the Cotswolds, and you can now find him over on his own YouTube channel David Arthur - Just Ride Bikes

Add new comment

7 comments

Avatar
don simon fbpe | 8 years ago
2 likes

Quote:

He also denied that Femke had ridden the bike at all, saying: "Femke has been European and Belgian Champion. Why would you do this in a world championship?"

Erm, because you got away with it in Belgium and Europe?

Avatar
kwi | 8 years ago
1 like

It's now being reported as a motor, seat tube removed exposing "electrical wires" and the crankset didn't slide out as it should.

Her father is claiming the bike belongs to one of her entourage, though her brother is on a ban for EPO.

Avatar
Danger Dicko replied to kwi | 8 years ago
0 likes

kwi wrote:

It's now being reported as a motor, seat tube removed exposing "electrical wires" and the crankset didn't slide out as it should.

Her father is claiming the bike belongs to one of her entourage, though her brother is on a ban for EPO.

Ah, the "tainted beef" defence.

 

Avatar
Bob's Bikes | 8 years ago
1 like

Storm in a teacup. The  UCI's Regulations on technological fraud might mean an under weight bike or wrong chainset,  I hate to be the odd one out on these august pages and not fly off the handle. Lets just wait until all the facts are in before lighting the torches and getting the pitchforks out.
 

Avatar
Awavey replied to Bob's Bikes | 8 years ago
1 like
fatbeggaronabike wrote:

Storm in a teacup. The  UCI's Regulations on technological fraud might mean an under weight bike or wrong chainset,  I hate to be the odd one out on these august pages and not fly off the handle. Lets just wait until all the facts are in before lighting the torches and getting the pitchforks out.
 

because if it were that simple the UCI would have cleared it up already, a chainset or other simple tech infringement is really easy to prove because its measurable, theres no its slightly out of gauge if you squint real hard, it passes or it fails, and the UCI candidly admitted it was the first time theyd established technological fraud, now Im fairly sure theyve had chainset and weight infringements before. And with a motor, and not least it being the first identified potential motor found in competition, you are going to want to know how it works, does it work, is it a prototype or something clearly manufactured in volume, is it bike make specific, where does a 19yr old junior rider get hold of such a device/bike fitted like that,are they just the experiment to see if theyll be caught, how deep does this rabbit hole go ? because those are all the questions the press & the UCI want answers to, before wrapping it up

Avatar
ped | 8 years ago
2 likes

To quote @roadccdave:

"Let’s not lose sight, among the motor doping furore, of the fact that @eviee_alicee tore it up, won by MILES and is a stone cold badass"

Avatar
Morat | 8 years ago
3 likes

OK, the photo you used for the artist's impression made me laugh. Lots  4

Latest Comments