That doesn't matter, the UCI code considers all equipment that a rider or team possesses within the confines of the race area as to be part of the equipment covered by the rules, and every rider and team knows this.
The presence, within or on the margins of a cycling competition, of a bicycle
that does not comply with the provisions of article 1.3.010. The use by a
rider, within or on the margins of a cycling competition, of a bicycle
that does not comply with the provisions of article 1.3.010. All teams must
ensure that all their bicycles are in compliance with the provisions of article
1.3.010. Any presence of a bicycle that does not comply with the provisions of
article 1.3.010, within or on the margins of a cycling competition, constitutes
a technological fraud by the team and the rider.
No rider brings into a competition area any equipment that they do not intimately know and they are fully aware that the UCI is going to have access to look at it all. Her excuse that it was a friend's is about as sound as Sharapova's excuse about doping yesterday. Possessing the bike, bringing it into a competition area, mixing it with competition equipment... it makes no difference whether or not anyone proves it was "used" (by any definition), the rules were explicitly clear.
My point isn't whether she broke a rule or not - she did, and deserves the ban. My point is no one has actually been caught taking advantage of the assistance from a motor during competition, and there are doubts as to it's true efficacy. It isn't just additive free watts, the type of "pedal assist" you get with top end bikes hasn't been miniaturized enough (to the known world) to be hidden, with a hidden battery. Look at the top end Bosch based e-bikes out there, it's a different world completely. These are more like if you can't put out X watts already, it will give it to you, not stack it on your existing high power. They can make a non-athlete get through a difficult section of terrain, but no one's seen anything that can augment a 1200+ watt attack enough to make it worth the risk in a ProTour race.
I firmly believe the tech WILL catch up that can do just that but it's not there, or if it is, it's being developed in relative secrecy. That just doesn't make any sense to me. Who is investing R&D money into this? For what return? They aren't getting prize money, sponsorship kickbacks.. the whole sport of pro cycling is dying financially without help from any external source. It's a very dated sponsorship model and races are drying up all over the world.
