You are forgiven for letting le Tour slide from your attention. Much of the race is no longer on prime-time television, there hasn’t been a compelling American contender for years, and the near constant stream of doping scandals is enough to make anyone tune out. But there are still reasons to care. Everyday athletes can learn a lot from cyclists who pedal 2,188 miles in 23 days at an intensity most of us would have trouble sustaining for two city blocks. On the eve of the 104th running of the world’s biggest bike race, we reached out to a few Tour stalwarts for the best (legal) training hacks for the rest of us.Ìę

Hit the Gym

ŽłŽÇ±đÌę¶ÙŽÇłŸČú°ùŽÇ·ÉČő°ìŸ±, Tour hopeful, team Cannondale-Drapac

“Focusing exclusively on endurance isn’t healthy. There’s a lot of hormonal suppression that comes with huge volumes of that type of training. Balance it out with some time in theÌęweight room. You’ll improve bone density and connective­tissue strength, which will help curb overuse injuries and keep you in one piece when you crash.”

Avoid the Rut

ŽĄČÔ»ć°ù±đ·ÉÌę°ŐČč±ôČčČÔČő°ìČâ,Ìęthree-time Tour racer, teamÌęCannondale-Drapac

“People—even pros—spend too much time riding at a pace that’s not exactly easy but also not hard enough to produce results. They never recover or improve. Don’t get stuck in the middle. On your easy days, take it really easy—you should be able to pedal and talk normally without huffing and puffing. On your hard days, challenge yourself. Join a club ride that’s above your comfort level and see how long you can hang. Try to break your record on the local hill climb. Race your friends to every city-limits sign. I guarantee you’ll get stronger and have more fun.”

Eat Smart

Peter Stetina,Ìętwo-time Tour racer, team

“Your digestive system can absorb about 300 calories per hour during exercise—about one energy bar and one sports drink. Any more than that and you riskÌęloading up your gut. You’ll want to stick with solid food at first; only switch to gummies or gels in the last 90 minutes of a ride or race. Gels are like nitrous, and as every good racer knows, you never hit the nitrous button too early.”Ìę

Suck It Up

Chris Carmichael,Ìęformer Tour racer for team 7-11; founder of Ìę

“Something always hurts. Bike manufacturers and fit specialists have convinced people that all discomfort can be eliminated from cycling, but there is almost never a time when everything feels right. So rest—that’s important—but know that you can’t always wait until you feel perfect before you get back on the bike.”

The post What You Can Learn About Training from Pro Cyclists appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

On the eve of the presidential election, I want to bring attention to a little-known fact about one of the candidates: Donald Trump was once at the center of the U.S. cycling world.Ìę

The year was 1989 and cycling wasÌęon the national radar. U.S. riders Greg LeMond and Andy Hampsten had, respectively, won the Tour de France and the Giro d’Italia. We were suddenly a force to be reckoned with in European cycling. But where was our Tour de America? The 1988 demise of the Coors Classic had created a void, one which Donald Trump jumped into a year later with the Tour de Trump.Ìę

https://youtube.com/watch?v=sbHNk5oZQK8%3Frel%3D0

The inaugural Tour de Trump was a 10-day, 837-mile race that wound through five eastern states, beginning in Albany, New York, and finishing at Atlantic City in front ofÌęthe Trump Plaza and Casino. “For a first-year race, it was impressive,” recalls Ron Kiefel, who won that final stage in Atlantic City and whose team, the hallowed 7-Eleven squad, also fielded the overall race winner, Dag Otto Lauritzen of Norway.

“There were plenty of fans cheering us on at every start and finish,” says Kiefel. “Plus the promoters were offering big prize money on every stage—$250,000 total. That was one of the reasons so many of the big teams of the day chose to race Tour de Trump instead of the Vuelta a España, which was going on at the same time.”

One-hundred and fourteenÌęriders from fifteen countries rode the inaugural stage race. NBC signed on as a sponsor, guaranteeing plenty of televised coverage and Trump did what he does best—he hyped the event, predicting a future whereÌęhis Tour spanned the nation. “I think this is an event that can be tremendous in the future and it could very much rival the Tour de France,” Trump told NBC NewsÌęin 1989.Ìę

That illustrious future didn't pan out. The Tour de Trump grew slightly in 1990, but Trump’s looming financial problems (his Atlantic City casinos were teetering toward bankruptcy), forced him to step down as the title sponsor. The Tour picked up a new sponsor in 1991, carrying on for five years as the Tour DuPont beforeÌęfoldingÌęafter the race’s namesake , who led DuPont’s Team Foxcatcher wrestling team.Ìę

Given its eventual demise, it’s easy to write off the Tour de Trump as a billionaire’s boondoggle, but for seven years the event did attractÌęmany of the world’s best riders. Trump’s Tour isn't a complete failure. At worst, the mogul’s promise to create a race as great as the Tour de France was simply too ambitious. “Everyone always wants to create the next Tour de France, but there is only one Tour de France and that’s the bottom line,” says Kiefel, who's competed in that hallowed Grand Tour raceÌęseven times. “But it was a top-class, world-caliber event.”

Why has America struggled for decades to create a tour that truly challenges the European Classics? “Maybe it’s our culture or the fact that it's just so expensive to put on a race like this,” says Kiefel. “But from a rider’s perspective, the Tour de Trump was a success. The quality of any race always comes down to the quality of the riders andÌęhow hard they are willing to push it. There should beÌęgreat battles, sprint finishes, and good crowds. The Tour de Trump had all that.”

The post Donald Trump Once Sponsored a Major Bike Race appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

What a difference a year makes. In 2015, the Union Cycliste Internationale (competitive cycling’s governing body) caught flak when its officials inspected 25 bikes for hidden motors during the Tour de France.

Super-secret electric bikes? The very notion was laughable. Well, nobody isÌęchuckling at the UCI now, not after its inspectors caught Belgian racer Femke Van den Driessche with a motor tucked inside the seatÌętube of her bike during the World Cyclocross Championships last January. Suddenly, several years’ worth of rumors didn’t seem quite so silly.

The UCI has stepped up its game. The organization was on track to makeÌęas many as 4,000 unannounced bike checks at this year’s edition of the Tour de France, using a combination of thermal imaging cameras, its own magnetic field scanner, and a mobile X-ray machine on loan from the French government.

So what exactly is the UCIÌęlooking for? What kind of motors are we actually talking about? Here’s the breakdown.

One Well-Known Retrofit Kit

The Vivax Assist is the best-known concealed motor and the model found in Van de Driessche’s bike during the infamous bust. While the 3.9-pound motor and battery assembly is rated at 200 watts, it actually supplies 110 watts of power to the cranks for as long as 90 minutes. If that doesn’t sound terribly impressive, rest assuredÌęit’s more than enough of a boost to drop competitors.

The tube-shaped motor features a beveled gear that meshes with another beveled gear mounted on a standardÌęShimano bottom-bracket spindle. A battery stowed inside a water bottle powers the motor.

The Vivax Assist has been available as an upgrade kit since 2008. In the United States, you can expect to pay about $4,000 for the kit alone. Is Vivax the only outfit supplying such motors? It’sÌęthe only company doing so openly. How many individuals are building and supplying cyclists with motors in a more discreet fashion? No one knows.

A Few Ready-to-Roll Bikes

Only a few companies sellÌęcomplete bikes outfitted with concealed motors. Vivax, not surprisingly, sells its own house-brand Forza CF carbon road frameÌęoutfitted with its motor and crank assembly for 4,999 euros (about $5,540). Goat Bikes is a small operation from the United Kingdom that also sells Vivax-equipped bikes,Ìęincluding an aluminum road bike called the Race that retails for 4,499 eurosÌę($4,985).

The newest entry to the market is Monaco-based Typhoon Bicycles. The budding brand recently launched carbon-fiber models containing Typhoon’s patented e-Assist battery and motor system. Typhoon claims its motor offers three distinct power modes (50 toÌę70 watts, 130 toÌę160 watts, and up to 250 watts)Ìęat the push of a button. The price for its entry-levelÌęcarbon-fiber road bike? A cool 8,000 eurosÌę($8,865).

Magnetic Wheels:ÌęThe New Frontier

A few journalists contend there’s yet another variant of mechanized cheating on the rise that requires no motor at all—electromagnetic wheels. Claudio Ghisalberti, writing for the Italian newspaperÌęGazzetta dello Sport, claims to have met with a confidential source who creates electromagnetic rear wheels that provide an extra 60Ìęwatts of power and sell for a staggering 200,000 euros ($221,570).

Similarly, reporters Thierry Vildary and Marco Bonarrigo met with Istvan Varjas, an engineer and former racer who has been building concealed bike motors for more than a decade. Varjas claims to have also developed an electromagnetic wheel.ÌęAccording to the engineer, neodymium magnets concealed within the sidewall of a deep-section carbon rim generate an induction force when they rotate past battery-charged electromagnets housed within the bike’s chainstays and/or seatstays. Varjas claims the system can be activated via a Bluetooth device. ÌęThe Varjas interview aired in April on the French television programÌęStade 2.

Ìę

The post How to Motorize Your Road Bike appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

In short, very.Ìę

“If you took one of these racers and you presented him to a normal doctor, without telling the doctor that this rider had just been in the Tour de France, the doctor would think he was on the edge of becoming anorexic,” says Jens Voigt, who recently retired from professionalÌęracing and is now the cycling analyst for NBC Sports. “He would send the racer to a psychologist for counseling. It’s an artificially low body weight, but the Tour does that to you.”

Contenders for the yellow jersey now sport between four and six percent body fat. Let’s put that in context.ÌęWhen people drop below three percent body fat, they run a risk of dying. Many of these racers spend the entire season paring their body weight down so that they arrive at the Tour as leanÌęas possible.ÌęVoigt speaks from personal experience, who says he started each Tour at 4.5 percent body fat and generally finished at 3.8 percent.

Why the fixation with being lean? It comes down to maximizing your power-to-weight ratio. Or, to put that in less egg-headed terms, if two competitors produce the same power on the bike, the lighter one will almost always be able to accelerate and drop their heavier competition on the big mountain climbs, where this race is often won and lost.Ìę

In a race decided by seconds, weight matters. A number of Tour de France winners began their careers with entirely unimpressive results, dropped weight,Ìęand returned a skinnier winner. Miguel Indurain, Bradley Wiggins, Chris Froome, and, perhaps most famously, Lance Armstrong are all examples.Ìę

“I was a swimmer and I was always stuck with a swimmer’s body,” says Armstrong, who started his competitive life as a triathlete and retained a heavily muscled upper body. It was a build well suited to winning one-day races, but which proved a liability in multi-week tours studded with long climbing stages. When Armstrong returned to cycling after his bout with cancer, he was 20 pounds lighter and worlds faster on the climbs.Ìę

“Being lean is all about the three or four months before the Tour and—let’s be honest here—this is just about starvation,” he says. “For me to get down to 163 pounds and still be four percent [body fat]? I’ll tell you, in those months leading up to the Tour, you’re just hungry, man.”

Being so lean, however, is not only difficult to maintain, but risky as well. A certain amount of body fat (usually around six percent for athletic men) is necessary for maintaining health. With their reserves pushed to the absolute limits, riders who maintain a body fat percentage below five percent for an extended period run numerous risks: muscles atrophy, energy levels plummet and their immune systems take a hit. Sick and worn out during the middle of the Tour is an even greater roadblock to victory than carrying an extra pound of fat.

“But here’s the thing,” says Armstrong, “it doesn’t happen every year, but in the first week of the Tour, the weather can be weird and you can get caught in a cold rain. When guys getÌętoo lean, they get sick easily because their reserves are so low. So there’s this dance you have to do—you want to be light so you can fly over the mountains, but if you get caught with a shiver on one bad day in the North, you’re done. You’re screwed.”

When I press Armstrong on the details of his own Tour de France diet, he shrugs the question off.Ìę

“If you made a big mistake and didn’t eat enough the night before the race, that matters,” says Armstrong. “But if we’re talking about one energy bar over another, or one chef or nutritionist over another
I don’t think it matters. You find something that works for you and you just stick with it.”

So what worked for him?

“Stroopwafels—just these shitty, toxic cookie things that you’d find right next to the Oreos at the corner store in Belgium. Those are what I existed on during each day’s race for the last three of four Tours. I liked the taste and it was loaded with calories, probably not the best calories, actually, but I was a creature of habit. It tasted good and I never bonked, so why change?”

The post How Skinny Are the Top Tour de France Riders, Really? appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

The Tour de France is one of the most punishing endurance event on earth. Twenty-three days and nearly 2,200 miles long, it’s akin to running a marathon every day for nearly three straight weeks. No surprise, cycling’s most prestigious race exacts a tremendous toll on competitors. On average, each racer will consume as much as 8,000 calories per day. That’s three to four times what nutritionists recommend for the rest of us.

And yet obtaining those calories is no longer a matter of shoveling as much food down your gullet as possible. There’s too much at stake today for such a slipshod approach. Careers, glory, and millions of dollars in sponsor contracts and endorsements ride on the outcome of this Tour, which is why every detail of these racers’ lives has been fine tuned in preparation for these three weeks in July—and that includes when, what, and how they eat.Ìę

Upon Waking Up: The moment riders rise, they often drain a glass of juice, whichÌęgives a quick bump of energy and starts the rehydration process.Ìę

At Team Breakfast: Gone are the days of heavy steak breakfasts. Nowadays, riders sit down to a better balance of carbs and protein. There’s rice, oatmeal, pasta, muesli, eggs, yogurt, breads, and plenty of fluids. It’s a big breakfast—as in 1,000 to 1,500 calories big.

On the Way to the Starting Line: There’s usually a three-hour gap between breakfast and the actual race start. Remember that 1,500-calorie breakfast (and the 2,500-calorie dinner from the night before)? “The toilet on the bus is a very, very popular place,” says Allen Lim, founder of nutrition companyÌęSkratch Labs,Ìę“because no one wants to start a four to six-hour race with a ton of food in their bowels.” Riders, however, are still topping off the tank, eating and drinking on the bus.Ìę

On the Bike: Racers are tearing through 700-1,000 calories per hour while on the bike, and that means eating the moment they begin riding.ÌęSolids—like paninis, rice cakes, and fruit—provide energy for the long haul and are generally the go-to items for the first half of each stage. Later in the race,Ìęas the pace typically picks up,Ìęeasy-to-consume energy bars and gels come in handy. Riders are also drinking constantly—about 16 to 24 ounces of water and electrolyte solutions per hour.Ìę

“If you look inside a musette bag, you’ll see that stuff in there—your gels and bars—but you’ll also have something like an apple tart from the local bakery, wrapped up in tin foil,” says Lance Armstrong. “I guarantee you, every dude eats that tart.”

Back on the Bus: Recovery time. Despite eating throughout the race, each rider is in serious calorie-deficit mode now. Their bodies can only absorb between 250 and 300 calories per hour while riding,Ìęand they’ve been burning at least twice that amount. Once they ditch the funky chamois and shower, they are back on the tour bus, guzzling protein-and-carbohydrate recovery shakes and eating rice, boiled potatoes and other carbohydrates to help recharge their spent glycogen stores. There’s a 20-minute golden window when their body best absorbs these calories and nutrients.

During Dinner: This is the big opportunity to restore what’s been lost. Riders will consume between 2,000 and 2,500 calories ofÌęa carefully prepared mix of carbs, protein, and fat. This includes pasta, rice, quinoa, and lean meats.Ìę“It’s also a good time for salad and vegetables,” says Lim. “Riders need these nutrients and this is the best time to take fiber on board, since they have the time now to digest it.”

At Bed Time: Riders often grab another protein shake,Ìęa bowl of cereal, orÌęyogurt before hitting the sack. As with dinner, protein is a must at this time, as it helps repair muscles that have taken a hit during the day’s racing.Ìę

The post What Riders Eat in the Tour de France appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

Jens Voigt can tell you all about long, repetitive stage races and how much food it takes to survive them. In his 18 years as a pro, Voigt raced in 17 editions of the Tour de France, winning three stages and donning the race leader’s le maillot jaune (yellow jersey) twice. No man has ridden in more Tours.Ìę

“There are times during the later stages of the Tour,” says Voigt, “when you are so worn out, that you can barely lift a fork to your mouth during dinner. You can hardly chew anymore. It’s too much of an effort.”

But what’s getting lifted onto that fork? And has Voigt seen a change in how racers eat? We made it our mission to find out.

The short version: Things have changed, big time. “The bottles of wine and the French baguettes are gone,” says Voigt, who recently retired and is now the cycling analyst for NBC Sports.“It has to be healthy, whole grain
 and Quinoa—that’s real popular at the moment.” The long version: See below.

Early Days: The Wheeled Locusts (1903-1920)

When Maurice Garin won the first Tour de France in 1903, it was less a race and more a gulag on wheels. Competitors pedaled 40-pound, single-speeds along dirt roads for 15 to 18 hours a day. There were no teams. In fact, race regulations required that riders fend entirely for themselves, forcing them to scavenge for meals along the way. If the lights were on at a roadside tavern and they were serving rabbit, rabbit is what you ate. Guzzling alarming amounts of alcohol was the norm. Beer, wine, and brandy were considered safer to drink than water from questionable roadside wells or springs.

Though Garin never gave an account of his Tour diet, he did recall consuming the following items a few years earlier during a 24-hour race:

• 45 cutlets
• 19 liters of hot chocolateÌęÌę Ìę
• 8 cooked eggsÌęÌę ÌęÌęÌę ÌęÌęÌę Ìę
• 7 liters of tea
• 5 liters of tapioca
• 2 kilos of rice
• Lots of strong red wine
• Coffee, champagne
and oysters

Forty-five cutlets during a day’s racing? It boggles the mind. And, given the specificity of Garin’s list, you have to wonder just how much wine you must drink before you simply give up and start calling it “lots.”

Egg Custard in Your Water Bottle and Steak at 7 a.m. (1920 to 1980)

The era of the scavenger racer was long gone by the time Fausto CoppiÌębegan dominating stage racing and one-day classicsÌęin the forties. Known as Il Campionissimo (“the champion of champions”), the great Italian racer won scores of grand tours, including the 1949 and 1952 Tour de France. Riders now competed on teams and ate their breakfasts and dinners at hotels along the route. Most riders, however, still consumed massive meat-heavy breakfasts and waited until after the first 100 kilometers of racing before rummaging through their musettes, the small bags of food snatched up at feed zones. Ìę

Meat gave you “energy,” or so tradition held. “We ate at 6:30 or 7:00 in the morning, before the race,” Eddy Merckx, the most successful racer of all time, explained in a recent interview with Stuart O’Grady. “First a small breakfast with the cheese and the ham and then steaks. It was horrible, but you know, you had to eat steaks to be strong. It was absolutely crazy.”

And during the evening? “Soup, maybe some fish,” said Merckx, “then pasta with another steak.”Ìę

Coppi’s approach was radically different. He generally avoided red meats and alcohol, experimented with vegetarian diets and was a fan of wheat germ. Coppi was also the peloton’s first proponent of a high carbohydrate race-day diet. While his rivals were gorging on veal for breakfast, smoking cigarettes to warm up their hearts and open up their lungs before the race, and chugging water bottles filled with the “Binda Zabaione” (20 beaten egg yolks and some sugar), Coppi ate a breakfast of whole grains. He also ate small quantities of carbohydrates (tarts, small sandwiches, and fruit)Ìęthroughout theÌęrace.Ìę

Today, we understand thatÌęCoppiÌęwas replenishingÌęhis body's glycogen energy stores, and thisÌęallowed him to push hard throughout the race withoutÌębonking.ÌęAt the time, thisÌęapproach was a revelation; the first scientific study onÌęexercise-induced hypoglycemia wasn't publish untilÌę1924. Similarly, the benefits of consuming carbohydrates during endurance events weren’t studiedÌęuntil 1939.Ìę

Carbs Get Scientific (1980s to 2000)

In the '80s, the pendulum began to swing the other direction—from high-meat to high-carbÌędiets. “The daily diet during races was pretty basic back in the 1980s,” says Chris Carmichael, who rode the 1986 Tour de France for Team 7-1. “Lots of pasta, rice, potatoes. There was some meat, but not that much.”

But on the bike, things were beginning to change. Riders began shifting away from real food and toward packaged bars and drinks. “Everyone was taking a reductionist approach to nutrition—carbohydrates, protein, fat, antioxidants—trying to isolate and package these things into very convenient, rapidly-absorbed, technical food products,” explains sports physiologist Allen Lim.

Carbohydrates began to go high-tech at the dawn of the ‘90s, recallsÌęShelley Verses,ÌęTeam 7-Eleven’s soigneur,Ìęor team assistant.Ìę“I was working for [Team] TVM and one of our sponsors was this Belgian company that made a carbohydrate drink called Extran,” says Verses. “Drinking a water bottle of the stuff was like eating six slices of bread. The idea was that you could get almost all your calories from your water bottle.”

Did it actually work? Yes and no. In addition to exacerbating the gastrointestinal distress that plagues riders during the Tour, the concentrated liquid carbs left little margin for error during the race.Ìę

“This one time, one of our guys made an attack,” recalls Verses. “He got free of the peloton and everything was great
 and then we suddenly got this call on the radio that he’s completely bonking. Turns out he’d skipped getting another bottle of Extran when he made that attack. By the time we drive up to him in the team car, he’s barely turning the pedals. He’s so weak that he can’t even reach out and take a water bottle from me, so I have to lean out the window of this speeding car, pry open his mouth with my fingers, squirt the Extran into his mouth and then rub his throat to actually make him swallow it. Instantly—BOOM—it’s like the lights just went back on. He jumps out of the saddle and tears on up the road to the peloton. The calories were there,” says Verses with a laugh, “but it wasn’t perfect.”

Rice Cookers and Michelin Chefs (2000s to Today)

The year is 2006 and Lim is in a bind. He’s coaching the TIAA-CREF cycling development team, on the eve of a big race in Ireland, and their shipment of fancy packaged sports bars and gels were stillÌęsomewhere across the Atlantic.Ìę

“One of the riders on the team was like, ‘Hey, Al, why don’t we just eat boiled potatoes?’ He was joking around,” says Lim, “but this light bulb went off in my head. I mean, why the hell not?”

One race and several dozen pounds of boiled potatoes later (coated in olive oil, salt, and parmesan cheese, because Lim is nothing if not a foodie), the riders were unanimous—bring on the potatoes. The team had an extraordinary week—putting one rider, Danny Pate, atop the winner’s podium. What’s more, the entire team’s energy levels were higher, their stomachs felt better and they flat out rode faster.Ìę

“That was the moment for me,” says Lim, “when I realized, holy crap, maybe we need to keep this really simple. Maybe we can make things taste great, the riders will eat more, feel better and suffer less gastrointestinal distress.”

Lim soon began experimenting with other whole foods.Ìę

Toting an army of rice cookers from race to race, Lim started packing the musettes with sushi-rice cakes—some filled with fruit, others with amino acids, protein, and fat-rich savories like bacon and eggs. Lim’s approach was at once both old fashioned and entirely science based—home cooked food loaded with a meticulous balance of protein, fat, and carbs.Ìę

Since then, Lim and his rice cookers have been to the the London Olympics, the Tour of California, and everywhereÌęin between. For his part, Lim has become the rare rock-star scientist slash celebrity chef. He’s worked with Tour de France winners, co-authored cookbooks,Ìęand runsÌęSkratchÌęLabs, a sports-nutrition company.ÌęIt wasn’t an easy transition. The older soigneurs he worked with initially resisted the new approach, going so far as to steal and hide his rice cookers after each stage during the Tour de France. At the persistence of younger riders, though,ÌęLim eventuallyÌęwon out.Ìę

“We’ve gone away from the red meat, except for maybe the night before a rest stage,” says Voigt. “Instead it’s now fish, turkey,Ìęor chicken—lean meats that are easier to digest. In general, there’s a lot more science involved.”

The post How the Tour de France Diet Has Changed Over the Decades appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

Joe Schubauer-Berigan heard the car before he saw it. A moment before the driver rear-ended him and sent his body and bike flying through a Cincinnati intersection, Schubauer-Berigan heard an unsettling scraping, screeching noise as the bumper tore through his rear wheel. His bike—a priceyÌęcarbon-fiber Trek Madone 6.9—was crushed beneath the car’s front wheels as Schubauer-Berigan hit the hood and rolled to the pavement. He walked away from the crash with a concussion and road rash—and helmet-cam footage documenting the whole thing.Ìę

A growing number of riders are strapping on action cams before heading out on the road. While some are hoping to capture glorious videos of themselves dropping the hammer during the next supposedlyÌęcasual group ride, their cameras are also recording run-ins with motorists. Schubauer-Berigan’s video is just one example. Hit and run in Berkeley? ÌęRoad rage near Boulder? ÌęEvery cyclist’s worst nightmare? Cataloged in by the Fly6, a combination rear bike light and video camera that nabs footage of everything happening on the road behind you.

Cycliq, maker of the Fly6, recently rolled out the Fly12,Ìęa handlebar-mounted headlight/video camera that also shows if cars are less than three feet from you when they drive past, which would violate the three-foot passing laws currently on the books in 24 states.Ìę

Bike-versus-carÌęincidents often devolve into he-said-she-said disputes, with neither party able to provide tangible evidence to proveÌędefinitivelyÌęwho was at fault. That could change with the proliferation in the past few years of inexpensive, portable POV action cameras, which are yielding evidence. Lots of it.Ìę

GoPro, Contour, Olfi, JVC, Drift, Garmin, Polaroid, Shimano, Sony—there’s no shortage of portable, affordable action cameras that will document what happened on your last rideÌęin brilliant, high-definition video.

“Once camera prices dropped and the technology advanced, they began to make more sense for riders,” says Megan Hottman, an avid rider and racer who has competed professionally and whose Golden, Colorado–based law firm deals exclusively with cycling cases. “These days, you can come home from your ride and quickly download or erase the day’s footage in a couple minutes. It’s become affordable and painless, and that’s why we’re seeing more video footage introduced in cases.”

But whether this footage holds up in court remains to be seen. Ìę

In the days following his 2014 crash, Schubauer-Berigan filed a civil claim against the driver whoÌęhit him. The driver proclaimed his innocence.ÌęHe told his insurance adjuster that Schubauer-Berigan had come out of nowhere and jumped in front of his vehicle. As is often the case, it came down to the cyclist’s word versus the motorist’s word. At least, says Steve Magas, Schubauer-Berigan’s lawyer, that was the case until he handed over the footage from his client’s Contour helmet camera.Ìę

“Oh, that footage had an impact, alright,” says Magas. “They were trying to blame Joe. But the videotape clearly shows Joe being hit from behind by a guy that just wasn’t paying attention. When we showed the insurance adjuster the video, it was all over. Slam dunk.”Ìę

Once presented with the video, the driver’s insurance company quickly agreed to a confidential settlement with Schubauer-Berigan.Ìę

Footage like Schubauer-Berigan’s typically gets used in one of two basic types of cases, says Bob Mionske, a two-time Olympian and former professional racer who, for the past 17 years, has worked as an attorney and author specializing in bike-related law. First, it could appear as evidence in a civil case between two citizens—a cyclist brings a legal claim against a driver to cover damages, and there’s a disagreement about who caused the crash. “In those cases,” he says, “video footage can be very effective in showing who’s responsible.”Ìę

But criminal cases, where the standard of proof is higher, are a different story. “The legal standard for a civil case is ‘more likely than not,’” says Mionske. “In other words, the evidence has to show that it’s more likely than not that the driver violated their duty of care as a motorist.”

In a criminal case, the state’s district attorney might bring charges against the driver for harassing or endangering the cyclist in an attempt to get a dangerous driver off the road. “The video footage here has to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the motorist is guilty,” says Mionske. “If someone on the jury has any doubt about what happened, the motorist can get off free.”

Consider the case of Bryan Larsen. In May 2014, the semipro cyclist was riding down Southern California’s Pacific Coast Highway when a driver in a pickup repeatedly drove into the bike lane and proceeded to roll-coal Larsen, accelerating alongside the cyclist and enveloping him in .Ìę

When the driver veered towardÌęLarsen for the fourth time, the cyclist pulled out his smartphone and .Ìę

Larsen brought the case to the Orange Country Sheriff’s Department. After reviewing the video, the sheriff’s department declined to file criminal charges against the driver. They did, however, consider bringing battery charges against the passenger who threw the bottle and against Larsen for using “words in public likely to illicit a violent reaction.”

You might think footage is footage, but there’s more than one way to watch any given video. “Let’s say a motorist buzzes you and violates their legal duty to pass with reasonable care,” says Mionske. “You catch the incident on video, and then the altercation continues. Maybe you yell or thump the car because you’ve just nearly been killed. Those emotions captured on video have the effect—for some people viewing the footage, at least—of creating an equivalency between the motorist’s act of aggression and your response. It turns the aggressive motorist and you, the cyclist, into equivalent combatants in the eyes of some jurists.”

In other words, the footage can cut both ways.Ìę

There are also limits to what a single camera can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. “A GoPro-style camera can capture the basic event, but is the footage clear enough to clearly show the driver?” says Hottman. “In some of these criminal cases, the driver will claim that someone else was driving their car—that they weren’t even there.”

Given the many YouTube clips and media reports of road-raging motorists, you might assume that riding America’s roads has become more dangerous in recent years. The truth is more complicated. While America’s roadway infrastructure needs further improvement, the risk of being killed while riding a bike has decreased.Ìę

On average, about 700 hundred cyclists are killed on America’s roadways each year. While every death is one death too many, these cases have actually declined slightly since the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration began tracking them in 1975. What’s more, this reduction occurred during a period when the number of bicycle trips actually doubled.Ìę

This doesn’t mean cycling America’s roadways is “safe” per se. The same statistics show that, on a per-tripÌębasis, cyclists in the United States die on roads at twice the rate of motorists. Moreover, cyclist mortality has risen slightly in recent years,Ìęa trend some suggest is tied to increasing numbers of motorists driving while texting. In short, there’s still work to be done, but there’s also reason to be optimistic.

“You continue to find a bias favoring drivers in the legal system,” says Mionske “but change is coming fast. I never saw an adult on a road bike until I was well into college. Today, there isn’t anyone in the United States who can say that. And because of that, there’s more awareness of cyclist and their rights. That’s a good thing.”Ìę

Could the proliferation of POV-style cameras further increase that awareness?

“I think so,” says Bill Shirer, an attorney in Dallas who also specializes in bicycle collisionÌęcases. “If people driving cars start to realize thatÌęthey might be on camera, it’s going to change how some of them share the roads with cyclists. It brings accountability to the table.”

For his part, Joe Schubauer-Berigan, won’t ride again without his camera.Ìę

“I do feel pretty nerdy wearing my camera every day,” he admits, “but it works. It’s vital to proving what actually happened out there. Let’s put it this way:ÌęI wouldn’t ride without one.”

The post Caught on Camera appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

“I’ve never actually met anyone from the UCI, but
,” Robert Egger,Ìęcreative director of , pauses to consider the appropriate turn of phrase.Ìę“Then again, I’ve never met a Nazi. I just know I don’t like them.”

Egger, it should be noted, doesn’t actually hate the (UCI), competitive cycling’s international governing body. He just detests its rules:Ìęa mountain of guidelines thatÌęcontrol not only how bikes are racedÌębut also the specs of the bikes themselves. How much a bike weighs, the shape of its frame, the size of its wheels—UCI technical regulations dictate all these things and more, stunting bicycle design over the years.

The bike you own, some argue, would be a whole lot better if it weren’t for the UCI’s interference. But, as with all subjects worth considering, there are several sides to this story.

The Mad Man’s MachineÌę

A bike is taking up floor space at Specialized’s headquarters in Morgan Hill, California. Or, at least, it looks like a bike. Sorta. The prototype racer is a two-wheeled Pandora’s box of everything the UCI forbids. EggerÌęfittinglyÌędubbed it the “fUCI.”Ìę

The first thing you notice about the is its massive rear wheel. At 33.3 inches, the hoop dwarfs its companion up front, which violates the UCIÌęmandate that all competition-eligible bikes sport equal-sized wheels. The rear wheel, however, acts as a massive flywheel, maximizing the bike’s efficiency when brought up to speed. Of course, winding that monster flywheel up to speed would be hellishly difficult—that is, it would be if it weren’t for the electric motor tucked discretely inside the fUCI’s frame, which gives the rider another UCI-banned boost of power.Ìę

We’re just scraping the surface here, but you get the idea. The fUCI is a mechanical middle finger thrust in the general direction of cycling’s ruleÌębook. But it also makes youÌęask: Why? Why did Egger spend six months creating the thing? What’s the point of it all?

“I’m a designer. My job is to push the limits and design stuff that blows people away. I can tell you, all the regulations the UCI forces us to live by, it stymies us. It’s hampering innovation in the bike industry.”

The Other Side of the Coin

Ben Coates, road product manager atÌęTrek Bicycles, takes a slightly different view of things:Ìę“The UCI has changed significantly in the last year. I don’t think the UCI has fully decided that they are going to embrace technology, but they are definitely cleaning up some of the rules that were, frankly, stupid. And there is much better communication between the industry and the UCI. For instance, we’ll take a prototype, with all the technology that we want to put into the final bike, and we go talk to them. There’s nothing like a face-to-face meeting.”Ìę

Wait.ÌęIs Coates saying he’s actually met the people at the UCI who come up with these regulations? “Sure,” he says. “We just call and say, ‘Hey, can we come see you?’ And they say yes.”Ìę

“It’s always been very cordial,” says Coates. “I mean, you can’t always get the exact date you want, but they never say, ‘No, we won’t meet with you.’”Ìę

I’m flabbergasted. Coates is the first person I’ve met who can say they have a one-on-one relationship with the UCI ruleÌęmakers.Ìę

The UCI has earned a reputation for beingÌęopaque. “Inaccessible” and “remote” are other adjectives that get tossed around when describing the organization. Does Trek simply enjoy easy access to the UCI because Trek happens to be America’s largest bike company?Ìę

Apparently not.Ìę

The TimesÌęThey Are A-ChangingÌę

“The UCI has definitely become much less retro-rigid recently,” says James LaLonde, global marketing manager for road bikes atÌę. “After years of seeming like they would have been happy if technology had stopped evolving after the Merckx years, they now seem much more open to innovation and wanting to move the industry forward.”

Andew Juskaitis, global product marketing manager atÌę, sees a similar trend. “It used to be nearly impossible to even get in contact with someone at the UCI,” says Juskaitis. “We didn’t even have a discussion with them. Now there’s a time and place for those discussions. It’s gotten much better during the past few years.”Ìę

Both Juskaitis and Lalonde agree, however, that the UCI’s technical regulations, relaxing though they may be, slow the evolution of the modern road bike.Ìę

“Most of the UCI rules do work as a means of creating and maintaining safe and interesting races,” says Lalonde. “That said, there’s no question that the regs, as they stand now, do stifle innovation and progress. Rather than devoting engineering energy to creating the fastest bike period, we are forced to spend it creating the fastest bike that fits within the rules, some of which can seem a bit arbitrary. Things like the weight limit, or the 3:1 aero rule could easily and safely be changed.”

Why All the Rules in the First Place?Ìę

What’s the UCI trying to achieve by, among other things, restricting how aero a bike can be or how much it can weigh?

We went straight to the source—Mark Barfield, technical manager forÌęthe UCI—to find out. Since March 2015, Barfield has managed the UCI equipment regulations, checks, and approvals processes.Ìę

“Safety is the ultimate concern,” says Barfield. “On the other hand, we want our sport to be attractive to our fan base and broadcast as a show and a performance, and to innovative businesses that invest in cycling, such as manufacturers. At the end of the day, we have to strike a balance between the safety of the athletes and the popularity of the sport.”

“There may be some rules in place that restrict innovation,” concedes Barfield. “However, they are generally in place for a good reason and with some safety or historic concern behind them. Our approach now is to work with our stakeholders and develop a close relationship that enables us to identify some of the key rules that may be seen to place a design restriction.”

Of course, the UCI also wants to level the competitive playing field. “The rules are designed to make sure that racing is a human competition and not a technological competition,” says Coates.Ìę

Your Last Formula 1 Race CarÌę

It’s hard to argue with the idea that victory should go to the best racer, rather than to the bike the racer pilots. At some level, however, every bike company that sponsors a team of pros does so in the hopes that you, the consumer, walkÌęaway thinking that their victories are the result of the bikes. That’s what sponsorship is ultimately all about—selling the product.Ìę

“The ‘allÌębikesÌęareÌęequal, level playing field’ stance? Let’s be clear about this: That is the UCI’s standpoint,” says Juskaitis. “We have a very different view of things. Our goal is to build the best goddamn bikes in the world that give the best athletes an advantage so they cross the finish line first. We have to play by the UCI’s rules, and we do, but, yeah, there is a tension and a give-and-take here between the UCI and bike companies.”

But here’s another question: Do you actually want to ride the same bike as the pros?Ìę

When you go shopping for your next car, will you look for a stripped-out Formula 1 machine? Do you care whether your next vehicle meets NASCAR regulations? Most of us prefer something very different—something with air conditioning, radios, a backseat, and suspension that doesn’t rattle the fillings from our teeth. Why should bikes be any different?Ìę

The UCI might not be ready to accept the lightest, quickest-stopping, most comfortable bikes ever to hit the road, but isn’t that exactly what a lot of serious riders are looking for these days? Why don’t companies offer both UCI-sanctioned bikes and hopped-up, no-limits bikes for the rest of us?

“That’s already happening,” says Trek’s Coates. “What was once the road-riding fringe has grown and grown. Niche is the new normal now. Endurance riding turned into Minneapolis-style gravel riding, which turned into adventure-style riding, which is turning into bike camping. Diversification is the trend. Now, every company has to make choices about how deep into that trend they want to go.”

Of course, cost is a consideration, and it’s often easier to justify the hero technology in the very highest-caliber bikes.Ìę

“It’d be nice,” says Juskaitis, “if we made our TCR road-racing bike for professionals and also offered a lighter, stiffer, and more aerodynamic TCR Unlimited version, available to anybody who wants a bike without limitations. But for us to do that, we’d have to open up special molds that cost between $75,000 and $100,000 per frame size.ÌęWe just wouldn’t sell enough of them to warrant those costs.”

More Than Just Another Bike

Back in Morgan Hill, Egger ponders the fUCI,Ìęhis protest on wheels. The prototype stands as an embodiment of what a bicycle might become if there were no restrictions placed on its builders.Ìę

“When people see this bike, their eyes go wide,” says Egger.Ìę“Even though this thing is really just a model—they can see the possibilities.”

“Why did we make fUCI? ÌęIt’s a message for the UCI, sure,” says Egger. “But it’s also a challenge to us—Specialized—and the rest of the bike industry to shake things up. We’re located next to Silicon Valley, where all this tremendous change is happening, and here we are, still producing models that look like safety bikes from the turn of the last century. There is so much technology out there in terms of motors, spoked wheels, aerodynamics,Ìęand the bike industry considers disc brakes on road bikes to be a big deal? We’re just scraping the surface of what’s possible.”

“Your bike,” says Egger “doesn’t even have to look like a bike at all. It can be better.”

The post The Specialized fUCI Is Proof Your Bike Should Be Better appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

“I feel really terrible. I’m aware I have a big problem
” Belgian racerÌęFemke Van den Driessche shortly after officials found a motor hidden inside her spare race bike during the cyclocross world championships inÌęZolder, Belgium.

That might go down as the biggestÌęunderstatement of the year. On Wednesday, Van den Driessche’s bike sponsor, Wilier Triestina, announced that itÌęplans to sue the 19-year-old rider, who went from being the U23ÌęBelgian and European cyclocross champion to a cycling-world pariah over theÌęweekend.Ìę“Our Company will take legal action against the athlete and against any responsible for this very serious matter, in order to safeguard the good name and image of the company
” reads the Italian bike manufacturer’s press release.

And that’s just the startÌęof her problems.

Van den Driessche’s case is still in its early stages. The UCI has launched an investigation, but has yet to reveal key details, such as the make of the motor or the list of people who might be charged beyond Van den Driessche. It’s conceivable that her team and the Belgian federation may come under scrutiny as well.

We know this much:Ìęif found guilty, Van den Driessche faces a minimum six-month suspension and a potential fine of as much as $195,000 (or 200,000 Swiss francs). If Van den Driessche’s team is implicated in the scandal, it could ultimately pay up to $978,000 (1 million francs) in penalties.

The UCI isn’t messing about on this one.Ìę“We will be testing more bikes, more often, more frequently,” Ìęduring a press conference this weekend. “Our message to those choosing to cheat is that we will catch up with you sooner or later.”

Not surprisingly, many have been quick to distance themselves from the embattled rider.ÌęThere have even been calls for permanently banning Van den Driessche from competition.

Belgian national team coach Rudy De Bie put it bluntly in an interview with Belgian television network, Sporza.Ìę“We thought that we had in Femke a great talent in the making,” said De Bie “but it seems that she fooled everyone
. This is a disgrace. I never imagined something like this would happen to our team. Why would a rider do this? Especially at such a young age. And who is responsible for her?”

Good question. WhoÌęisÌęresponsible here?

Van den Driessche has maintained her innocence from the moment the UCI discovered that her spare race bike contained a motor and wires hidden in its seatÌętube. She saysÌęshe sold her team bike from the previous season to a friend. This friend, she claims, showed up before the race and put in a few laps with her brother before leaning that bike against a team truck. The bike, according to Van den Driessche, was then mistakenly taken by a team mechanic, cleaned,Ìęand put aside as a spare for her.ÌęWhile it’s possible that it all happened as Van den Driessche claims, it takes a very generous soul to believe it’s true.

finds it difficult to be that generous. The longtime professional road, mountain bike,Ìęand cyclocross racer sums up what a lot of people are thinking.Ìę“I really have a hard time believing that mechanics would mistake her bike from last year with one of her current race bikes,” says Parkin. “The main job of a race mechanic is to be meticulous in the preparation of race bikes. They look at every square inch of every single tire, for example, to make sure there are no little cuts or imperfections. Certainly the weight of a motor and battery pack would’ve been enough for even a half-ass mechanic to question whether something was wrong with an ‘innocent’ bike.ÌęSomethingÌęon this extra bike would’ve raised a red flag.”

In recent days, Nico Van Muylder, the friend that Van den Driessche claims brought the illegal bike to the race, has corroborated her account.Ìę“It’s my bike,” Van Muylder . “All I can say is it’s my bike.”

Is Van Muylder telling the truth? It may not matter. The UCI’s rules on “technical fraud”Ìęput the onus of responsibility on the rider and team.ÌęIf a bike is in the pits during the race, it must meet UCI regulations. There’s no wiggle room here. One way or another,ÌęVan den Driessche is going to pay for this one.

This past weekend’s bust at the cyclocross world championships made headlines around the world. Hidden motors, however, do not have the potential to become the next major “doping” scandal. The clandestine drug cocktails that have long undergirdedÌęprofessional cycling are often either difficult to detect (EPO, for instance) or easy to mask during testing. That is what has made keeping the peloton clean such a Herculean task.

The UCI, however, won’t need biological passports, extensive tests, or cunning inspectors to weed out the cheats in cases such as this one. Want to find the motors in bikes? There’s literally an app for that—the UCI developed it this year and any race official with an iPad can use it to root out motors hidden inside bike frames.

After this weekend’s furor, it’d take a very, very desperate racer to attempt a motorized trip to the winner’s podium.

The post What Happens Next to the Woman Accused of Motorized Doping appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.

Femke Van den Driessche, a budding cyclocross star and race favorite, made news this weekend when race officials at the world championships in Zolder, Belgium, discovered a concealed inside the frame of her back-up race bike. For her part, the 19-year-old Belgian claims that the bike wasn’t hers (that it belonged to a “friend”). For its part, competitive cycling’s governing body (the UCI), isn’t buying it for a second.

Many of the facts are still foggy: What type of motor was hidden inside that team bike?Ìę How many people were involved in the ruse? How big of a problem is this really?Ìę

One thing, however, is clear—after years of experts dismissing the specter of it entirely, “mechanical doping” has infiltrated professional cycling.

The Rumor that Wouldn’t DieÌę

In 2010, cycling star Fabian Cancellara found himself besieged by rumors that his ability to motor away from rivals during the spring classics that year was the result of his having a motor tucked somewhere in his bike. Italian journalist Michele Bufalino posted online that showed Cancellara dropping other pros during that year’s Paris Roubaix after seeming to fiddle with something on his handlebars. While race commissaires inspected Cancellara’s bike and gave it a clean bill of health, the rumors never died, as evidenced by the fourÌęmillion views Bufalino’s video racked up on Youtube.Ìę

Motorgate roared back to life in 2014 when another surfaced, this time showing Ryder Hesjedal’s bike spinning around on the asphalt after a crash at the Vuelta a Espana. Hesjedal’s bike was later inspected and also deemed clean, though that assertion hasn’t stopped the video from developing its own cult following.

Greg LeMond: Mechanical Doping IsÌęa ProblemÌę

Cycling experts have always recognized that motors could be hidden in a bicycle frame, but have generally dismissed it as nothing more than a crutch for aging weekend warriors revisiting their glory years at the local Gran Fondo. There has been one notable exception: three-time Tour de France winner, Greg LeMond.Ìę

LeMond, who also insisted that the peloton was rife with doping at a time when no one wanted to hear that particular story, has been similarly vocal about “mechanical doping.” “I believe it’s been used sometimes in the Grand Tours,” LeMond told the Associated Press in France in 2014. Never one to mince words, LeMond went on to call out the UCI’s efforts to root about for motors as “fluff” and “all words.”

So How Deep Does the Cheating Go?Ìę

What are the odds that Femke Van den Driessche really knew nothing about the motor inside her spare bike? I put the question to Joe Parkin, the only man to have represented the United States in the pro road, cyclocross, and mountain bike world championships.Ìę

“Well, she is really young,” says Parkin “so she might not be as particular about her bike setup as someone who has been on the ProTour for 10 years, but I have a hard time believing that she wouldn’t have jumped on each of her bikes the day of the world champs. I rode Elite Worlds one time, was not a favorite, and still made sure I at least took a cursory parking-lot spin on my spare bike.”

Author Mike Ferrentino, who served as one of America’s team mechanics during the `99 cyclocross world championships, is similarly skeptical. “It’s not entirely impossible, but it still smells like bullshit. It has been a long time since my days in the pits, but back then it was expected that you knew your stuff. If you were a team mechanic, you probably built those bikes, or at the very least knew them inside and out
.The idea that the bike just somehow ended up migrating from “entourage” into the team, and happened to look and fit exactly like her regular bike, and nobody noticed anything out of the ordinary, it just seems to pile several layers of implausibility onto the story.”

Here’s the Thing: Anyone Can Buy These MotorsÌę

The UCI hasn’t revealed details about the motor found in Van den Driessche’s bike, but it’s likely similar to the Vivax-Assist—a four-pound that fits within most round seat tubes. The motor features a beveled gear that connects directly to a bike’s bottom bracket spindle. You can stow the battery inside your water bottle and discretely tuck the “on” button within your handlebar tape. Ìę

The Vivax pumps an additional 100 watts of power into your pedaling efforts. In other words, the motor won’t do all the work for you, but it will enable slower riders to handily drop better racers at clutch moments in a race. Vivax insists its product is not intended for outright cheating—it just so happens that you can equip your bike with that motor—with no one else the wiser.

So What’s the UCI Doing?Ìę

The UCI caught plenty of flak for its slipshod handling of doping scandals both before and during the Lance Armstrong years. You can’t, however, argue that the UCI is asleep at the wheel this time around. Though he’s received no shortage of heckling for his efforts, UCI President Brian Cookson has made a point the past few years of having his racing officials conduct random checks for “technical cheating” during major professional competitions.Ìę

In fact, the UCI’s technical manager Mark Barfield recently announced in an interview with Cyclingtips.com that the UCI would be using magnetic resistance-enabled devices to scan bikes at the (then) upcoming cyclocrossÌęworld championships. And sure enough, race commissaires were combing the pits, doing precisely that.Ìę

The UCI bungled the EPOÌęera because it waited too long to halt the spread of performance-enhancing drugs. If cycling’s watchdogs stay on course this time around, they might just stop this new style of cheating before it truly gets rolling.Ìę

The post 5 Things You Should Know About Cycling’s Motorgate Scandal appeared first on șÚÁÏłÔčÏÍű Online.