British Cycling sucks!!
zest28
Posts: 403
If the legal limit of drinking alcohol is increased to 21, then the government wouldn't arrest all the people who violated this rule before it became active.
Yet, that is what British Cycling did, banning someone for something that was not illegal at the time. :roll:
And they must have been out of their mind to think that someone won a race only because he used a different bike.
Yet, that is what British Cycling did, banning someone for something that was not illegal at the time. :roll:
And they must have been out of their mind to think that someone won a race only because he used a different bike.
0
Comments
-
What?0
-
Someone won the national Zwift championship using a bike that he obtained not true regular cycling. However there didn't exist a rule back then that made this illegal.
He got stripped of his title and a 1 year ban.0 -
Read the report in the drugs in other sports thread and you will see just how much he cheated.Zest28 wrote:Someone won the national Zwift championship using a bike that he obtained not true regular cycling. However there didn't exist a rule back then that made this illegal.
He got stripped of his title and a 1 year ban.0 -
He wasn't cheating, he's just a godlike genius with a W/kg figure around 10X higher than your average tdf winner
0 -
... and the ability to ride in 3 countries simultaneously.
Why, even Milemuncher's legendary threefold rides only managed to be in one place.0 -
bompington wrote:He wasn't cheating, he's just a godlike genius with a W/kg figure around 10X higher than your average tdf winner
He only used the bot to unlock the "Tron-Bike". In the championship it was legit Watts as he was using their equipment.0 -
He logged hours and hours at over 2000w. Enough said.
Credit to British cycling and zwift for catching him.
DCR write up is good - https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2019/10/bri ... ating.html0 -
Of the rules he was found contravening, Clause 3.2(h) states; "fixing or contriving in any way or otherwise influencing improperly the result, progress or conduct of any Event in which the Participant is participating in and/or can influence.".
That's pretty damning and vital to ensure those who do cheat outside of current knowledge of cheating can be brought to book eventually.0 -
Zest28 wrote:bompington wrote:He wasn't cheating, he's just a godlike genius with a W/kg figure around 10X higher than your average tdf winner
He only used the bot to unlock the "Tron-Bike". In the championship it was legit Watts as he was using their equipment.
Even if it were only to unlock the neon bike, it's despicable and unfair.0 -
Zest28 wrote:bompington wrote:He wasn't cheating, he's just a godlike genius with a W/kg figure around 10X higher than your average tdf winner
He only used the bot to unlock the "Tron-Bike". In the championship it was legit Watts as he was using their equipment.
Er no. It’s against Zwift rules to use bots. Oh and “someone logged onto my account” isn’t exactly convincing for an excuse
Since he’s admitted cheating what’s the issue?“Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to cycle and he will realize fishing is stupid and boring”
Desmond Tutu0 -
British Cycling doesn't suck. Zwift sucks.0
-
Jenner has sown the seed of doubt that his accolytes are now bleating on about the Britich Cycling ruling being unfair (oh the irony) because they didn't implement eRacing rules until after the event but Jenner was found to have breached existing British Cycling conduct rules.0
-
To quote someone on another forum on this:
I don't get why anybody gives a ****. It's hard to work out who is more stupid, the participants for taking it so seriously, the audience for thinking for a moment it wouldn't be riddled with cheating, or the governing bodies for letting their avarice suck them into the whole idiotic idea.0 -
Hard to disagree with this..Craigus89 wrote:To quote someone on another forum on this:
I don't get why anybody gives a ****. It's hard to work out who is more stupid, the participants for taking it so seriously, the audience for thinking for a moment it wouldn't be riddled with cheating, or the governing bodies for letting their avarice suck them into the whole idiotic idea.0 -
I thought Zwift was just to be a distraction while on the turbo.
People take it seriously? Sad!The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Fact of the matter is, the regulations did not exist when the bot was used. So he did nothing illegal.
And please, he won the championship fair and square. In the end of the day, it is all about your Watts and tactics rather than the bike you use.
British cycling is a joke punishing someone for a rule that did not exist back then.0 -
Are you too stupid or ignorant to understand he breached existing rules?Zest28 wrote:Fact of the matter is, the regulations did not exist when the bot was used. So he did nothing illegal.
And please, he won the championship fair and square. In the end of the day, it is all about your Watts and tactics rather than the bike you use.
British cycling is a joke punishing someone for a rule that did not exist back then.
I'd suggest you read the BC decision and BC handbook for the relevant rules but suspect reading and comprehension are not your strong points.0 -
Do you work for British Cycling? If so, you are lucky he doesn’t have the the financial backing like Pro riders have to get lawyers.
If Chris Froome can get away with breaking existing rules (basically doping), any decent lawyer would have alot of fun with this case then.
British cycling is a joke.0 -
Occassionally in life we come across people who are being so stupid or ignorant by choice that we have to call them out. You are, unfortunately, being one of those people.Zest28 wrote:Do you work for British Cycling? If so, you are lucky he doesn’t have the the financial backing like Pro riders have to get lawyers.
If Chris Froome can get away with breaking existing rules (basically doping), any decent lawyer would have alot of fun with this case then.
British cycling is a joke.
I guarantee you haven't read the BC decision nor the BC handbook so have no idea that Jeffer was found to have breached existing rules.
Instead you've been sucked into, and are peddling the lie that he was in breach of the rules brought in on 8th March. He wasn't.0 -
Imagine this. Someone uses a Specialized Venge that he got from a sponser for free.
Then all of a sudden the UCI creates new regulations which states that all teams have to buy all their equipment using their own money. This regulation is so new, that the Qualifier rounds were allowed to be used with the Specialized Venge that he got for free from the sponser.
So now he has a Specialized Venge that he can never use again ever because he got it from his sponser all of a sudden? Do you see the problem here?
And getting a 1 year ban for almost no performance advantage what so ever is nuts. He would have won on a Trek Madone, BMC Time machine or what so ever.
British Cycling went after him as if he used EPO.
Disqualifying from the event would have been fine but banning him from all cycling is nuts.0 -
So do you acknowledge that you were drawn into a lie by Jeffer when he falsely claimed he breached rules brought in on 8th March?
No shame in admitting you were fooled by him, afterall he has a proven track record for lying and cheating.0 -
Zest28 wrote:Disqualifying from the event would have been fine but banning him from all cycling is nuts.
You feel the ban was discretionary, rather than mandatory? Have you checked the rules to find out?0 -
LOL. I can guarantee with absolute certainty they haven't read the rules nor the BC decision to know which existing rules were breached.Imposter wrote:Zest28 wrote:Disqualifying from the event would have been fine but banning him from all cycling is nuts.
You feel the ban was discretionary, rather than mandatory? Have you checked the rules to find out?
Instead they're stuck in a loop of peddling the falsehood that rules brought in on 8th March were applied retrospectively, which is completely false.0 -
this should just say british cycling sucks at maths - zwift is just a computer program, it isn't beyond the realmes of possibility to rerun the race data and put him on the most basic zwift bike and see if he would have still won the race or not.
why they allow different bikes in official races is beyond me anyway - especially ones that are completely fictional, if there was a sponsor saying use our bike then fair enough but its a made up bike!www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
It should be Zwift sucks at maths as the cheating occured on their platform which didn't alert them to a rider maintaining 2,000W over 200km.
BC weren't in control of the platform but applied their existing rules to a BC event on that platform, and after a Zwift Terms of Service breach they enacted their existing rules.
Gaining upgrades is an interesting one. Computer games have long used gaining upgrades as a way to keep people playing and cyclists like to upgrade so it appears a perfect match as long the chance to upgrade is equitable and fair.
On this occasion the cheating was more akin to him entering a road race with a small child on an electric moped under his name, so pretty blatant.0 -
Zest28 wrote:Imagine this. Someone uses a Specialized Venge that he got from a sponser for free.
Then all of a sudden the UCI creates new regulations which states that all teams have to buy all their equipment using their own money. This regulation is so new, that the Qualifier rounds were allowed to be used with the Specialized Venge that he got for free from the sponser.
So now he has a Specialized Venge that he can never use again ever because he got it from his sponser all of a sudden? Do you see the problem here?
And getting a 1 year ban for almost no performance advantage what so ever is nuts. He would have won on a Trek Madone, BMC Time machine or what so ever.
British Cycling went after him as if he used EPO.
Disqualifying from the event would have been fine but banning him from all cycling is nuts.
He didn’t get the bike from a sponsor. Someone logged into his account and downloaded a bot in contravention to zwift rules.
He’s also monetised his apology
Seems more a character flaw than a single act of stupidity now“Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to cycle and he will realize fishing is stupid and boring”
Desmond Tutu0 -
PhilipPirrip wrote:It should be Zwift sucks at maths as the cheating occured on their platform which didn't alert them to a rider maintaining 2,000W over 200km.
BC weren't in control of the platform but applied their existing rules to a BC event on that platform, and after a Zwift Terms of Service breach they enacted their existing rules.
Gaining upgrades is an interesting one. Computer games have long used gaining upgrades as a way to keep people playing and cyclists like to upgrade so it appears a perfect match as long the chance to upgrade is equitable and fair.
On this occasion the cheating was more akin to him entering a road race with a small child on an electric moped under his name, so pretty blatant.
you haven't understood how he cheated.
he didn't use the bot in the race.
he used the bot to unlock the tron bike - this requires you to do a certain amount of climbing in the game. so the bot did the climbing not the rider - you keep the bike forever once unlocked.
he then used that bike, which is meant to be one of the most aero and lightest, in the race which he raced legitimately, so the watts he put into the trainer were the ones used in the race.
get it now?www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
Don't give a toss really. That he was brought to justice is what matters.Chris Bass wrote:PhilipPirrip wrote:It should be Zwift sucks at maths as the cheating occured on their platform which didn't alert them to a rider maintaining 2,000W over 200km.
BC weren't in control of the platform but applied their existing rules to a BC event on that platform, and after a Zwift Terms of Service breach they enacted their existing rules.
Gaining upgrades is an interesting one. Computer games have long used gaining upgrades as a way to keep people playing and cyclists like to upgrade so it appears a perfect match as long the chance to upgrade is equitable and fair.
On this occasion the cheating was more akin to him entering a road race with a small child on an electric moped under his name, so pretty blatant.
you haven't understood how he cheated.
he didn't use the bot in the race.
he used the bot to unlock the tron bike - this requires you to do a certain amount of climbing in the game. so the bot did the climbing not the rider - you keep the bike forever once unlocked.
he then used that bike, which is meant to be one of the most aero and lightest, in the race which he raced legitimately, so the watts he put into the trainer were the ones used in the race.
get it now?0 -
I for one now get it.
Jesus what a palarva.0
