JV talks, sort of - Page 190 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1891  
Old 11-03-12, 15:57
JV1973 JV1973 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Argyle_Fan View Post
I wonder if this is why:
"In the weeks afterward, Armstrong pressed to know the names of the witnesses, but the antidoping agency would not release them, fearing he would intimidate and silence them before they could testify at an arbitration hearing."
(from NYT article - see earlier post for link).
This would certainly explain JV's & USADA's involvement in denying a report they both well knew to be true (and that of USA Cycling too, if they too knew about it all).

Although I do still wonder about your (JV's??) opinions on the issue of 'delayed off-season bans with a riders' choice of dates'. Was the delay in the bans related to USADA's fears re. witness intimidation, or a desire to minimise the consequences for the riders, as far as the rules allowed? The 'choice of dates' would imply the latter, although the former could easily have been an additional consideration (and presumably explains why the bans were announced over a month after they actually started).

- Argyle_Fan
While my quotes re this during the TdF could seem untruthful, at that time no bans had been given or agreed to by my riders. Why? My guess is that USADA was hoping that there would be a broader truth and reconciliation effort across the sport and that bans would be put aside, as the need for full disclosure from multiple parties would be needed. However, when UCI started kicking up about jurisdiction, etc, they figured it would not be a cooperative effort, but instead a contentious one. Too bad.
Anyhow, at that point, my guess is, they realized the need for 6 mod bans, as no truth and reconciliation would occur.
Reply With Quote
  #1892  
Old 11-03-12, 16:25
Love the Scenery Love the Scenery is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 147
Default

JV,
Given that you have admitted to riding doped most of your career, why is it that your career results have been allowed to stand? Do you think this is just?
Doesn't it make a mockery of doping enforcement?

I mean, this isn't to knock your current efforts to reform the sport, nor, obviously, was it your decision. But what do you think of it, and how do you think it will affect your credibility?

Thx
Reply With Quote
  #1893  
Old 11-03-12, 17:17
Mrs John Murphy's Avatar
Mrs John Murphy Mrs John Murphy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stamping on Cadel's dog
Posts: 2,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JV1973 View Post
I don't have a good answer on this one. I was/am more upset with the fact that Cycling Australia and GE had every chance to ask about his past, and never did, and then fired him when they found out. That's cover you own *** behavior, not looking at the situation and doing what is right. Why not wait for the report from their new anti-doping investigator to come out, first, then decide what to do?
Here's a question for you - what would you do if one of your riders was outed as having doped (for example one of your ex-Gerol riders)?
__________________
Justcycling

...girls and ****ed 'em at school. All I know is that there were rumours he was into field hockey players

"the only thing worse than reading Cycling News is talking to them" Paul Kimmage

"The four most beautiful words in our common language: I told you so." Gore Vidal
Reply With Quote
  #1894  
Old 11-03-12, 18:12
skidmark skidmark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,873
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs John Murphy View Post
Here's a question for you - what would you do if one of your riders was outed as having doped (for example one of your ex-Gerol riders)?
Didn't this just happen with DZ, CVV and Danielson? I guess you're implying that it would be a rider that deceived the team on coming in (I assume there's some sort of interview process). Hmm, I guess that is an interesting question, or rather 2 - namely, what is the screening process in terms of talking about a rider's past when they come to Garmin, and what would you do if you found out that they lied?

Sorry if I'm misinterpreting your question MJM, I was just trying to flesh it out because I'm curious too.
Reply With Quote
  #1895  
Old 11-03-12, 18:37
Mrs John Murphy's Avatar
Mrs John Murphy Mrs John Murphy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stamping on Cadel's dog
Posts: 2,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
Didn't this just happen with DZ, CVV and Danielson? I guess you're implying that it would be a rider that deceived the team on coming in (I assume there's some sort of interview process). Hmm, I guess that is an interesting question, or rather 2 - namely, what is the screening process in terms of talking about a rider's past when they come to Garmin, and what would you do if you found out that they lied?

Sorry if I'm misinterpreting your question MJM, I was just trying to flesh it out because I'm curious too.
Well JV outed them himself.

I asked about the USP 3 and JV said that he was 'aware' from his time at USP of their doping and knew how far in they were. (That was how they came to be outed). What we've never established is whether he has asked his unconvicted riders (those who didn't ride for USP or CA etc) if they had been doping at their old teams.

So we don't know if JV has or hasn't asked say RH or HH if they have doped previously - and what he would do if they were outed as part of say an investigation into Gerol/Phonak etc
__________________
Justcycling

...girls and ****ed 'em at school. All I know is that there were rumours he was into field hockey players

"the only thing worse than reading Cycling News is talking to them" Paul Kimmage

"The four most beautiful words in our common language: I told you so." Gore Vidal
Reply With Quote
  #1896  
Old 11-03-12, 18:57
JV1973 JV1973 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs John Murphy View Post
Well JV outed them himself.

I asked about the USP 3 and JV said that he was 'aware' from his time at USP of their doping and knew how far in they were. (That was how they came to be outed). What we've never established is whether he has asked his unconvicted riders (those who didn't ride for USP or CA etc) if they had been doping at their old teams.

So we don't know if JV has or hasn't asked say RH or HH if they have doped previously - and what he would do if they were outed as part of say an investigation into Gerol/Phonak etc
Same treatment as the rest of my guys.
Reply With Quote
  #1897  
Old 11-03-12, 19:00
JV1973 JV1973 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love the Scenery View Post
JV,
Given that you have admitted to riding doped most of your career, why is it that your career results have been allowed to stand? Do you think this is just?
Doesn't it make a mockery of doping enforcement?

I mean, this isn't to knock your current efforts to reform the sport, nor, obviously, was it your decision. But what do you think of it, and how do you think it will affect your credibility?

Thx
As I've said before, I'm happy to give up those results, but most of the guys that were 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc have already been suspended or caught. So, I think it's just a matter of not being able to figure out correct reallocation.
Reply With Quote
  #1898  
Old 11-03-12, 19:04
Mrs John Murphy's Avatar
Mrs John Murphy Mrs John Murphy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stamping on Cadel's dog
Posts: 2,173
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JV1973 View Post
Same treatment as the rest of my guys.
which is what?

Have you asked RH et al about their doping pasts?
__________________
Justcycling

...girls and ****ed 'em at school. All I know is that there were rumours he was into field hockey players

"the only thing worse than reading Cycling News is talking to them" Paul Kimmage

"The four most beautiful words in our common language: I told you so." Gore Vidal
Reply With Quote
  #1899  
Old 11-03-12, 19:11
python's Avatar
python python is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,493
Default

jv,
here's the 16K question EVERYONE is likely wondering about but is not asking...

armstrong is not without talent but doped, cheated and lied. these are facts. he also owned the unparalleled and very efficient team of enablers. but so did his main competitors. yet, despite not being the most talented rider out there (even ferrari said so recently, see below*), he remained so dominant for very long...

perhaps now, that so much was outed and your depositions became public you can give your opinion as to why?

i am aware of (and agree with) your assessment that not everyone responds equally to synthetic epo specifically and the peds in general. tyler said the same and many scientists agree.

tyler in his book wondered the same but never gave an explicit opinion except at hinting that armstrong might have used more BBs than others, that is more than 3 per a grand tour

what do you think ?

*this interview

'Ma anche un amico vero, ed un atleta formidabile: «Però non è stato il più forte tra quelli che io ho allenato — ride Ferrari —: non mi chieda altri nomi….'

'But it is also true that [lance armstrong] is a friend and an excellent athlete, but he was not the strongest of those I trained, don’t ask the other names….’
__________________
I don't f***ing care. It's his problem not mine--Bernard Hinault
Reply With Quote
  #1900  
Old 11-03-12, 19:46
Elagabalus Elagabalus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 465
Default

Another follow-up question to the above:

What, in your opinion, was Armstrong's reason for coming back in 2009? Tyler, in his book, suggests that Lance wanted another TdF win in the belief that it would finally silence all his detractors and un-sully his legacy. What's your take on this? Do you think Lance actually felt that everyone in the clinic would finally just shut up if he won another TdF?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.