Blood Sweat and Gears - CVV interview

[scribe]

No - what makes me chucle is how you pretend that you knew about another article, confirming the story- as you wrote this earlier:


CVV was 22 at the time - and everyone wants to know where they are against everybody else. I would be bitter to if my results were undermined for the sake of someones ego.

As for would it have mattered if he won the 'test' - you should know, it was in the linked article you read.

Be careful what you wish for. If CVV is the one who is singing to the GJ and Nowinsky, then that might be Exhibit A for the defense team during the trial.

 

[NashbarShorts]

I'm curious as to what the forumites take is on CVV's career - cleanish for most of his career, then doped up for his '08 4th place? Lim was the trainer on Garmin that year. Granted it could have been rice cakes and the gluten-free diet alone.

I'm not sure how he could have remained cleanish on the USPS teams given the many allegations about that team.

As DocMaserati recently posted, none of this is new. It was covered in the Paul Kimmage article in which he followed Garmin during the '08 Tour....

If you read that article, nobody (including CVV) suggests that he has ridden "cleanish for most of his career". The way Kimmage writes, it's all 'off the record', you have to read it and understand the nuance. But, in the article:

CVV tells Kimmage he doped at Postal
Tells Kimmage he doped at Liberty Seguros
Tells Kimmage he doped at CSC
Tells Kimmage he didn't have a chance to ride clean until joining up w/ Vaughters

In the article, the wording (if I recall correctly) is "there was cheating." Ie, went to Team X, "and there was cheating". Went to Team Y, "and there was cheating".

Anyways, read the article and there's no way you'll come away w/ the belief that CVV was clean for most of his career. As for Garmin, I believe that team is clean. Vaughters has built a whole brand and personal reputation around that. I'm not cynical enough yet to believe that's it's smoke and mirrors. If that's the case, there's no hope for cycling, period.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Be careful what you wish for. If CVV is the one who is singing to the GJ and Nowinsky, then that might be Exhibit A for the defense team during the trial.

Scribe - I am not the one who is 'wishing'.

 

[tockit]

The legal action thing is a little silly.

It is just another anecdote that shows what a complete scumbag Pharmstrong is.

Regarding your last sentence. Pharmstrong isn't even a top 30 guy without PED's.
That's already been proven.

So the million dollar question is......

How did he go on to win 7 TDF's ???

Better PED's than the other guys, better response to the PED's, harder work ethic plus the PED's, the mental toughness to weather the daily in's and out's of a 3 week tour, etc ???

I've seen some of this stuff argued, but never have gotten a straight answer.

BTW, who else is on the list of 'not even a top 30 guy' without PED's?


Note: I am not pro-Lance, just trying to understand who he pulled this off.

 

[Disprin]

I wonder if it is true. Not exactly a great deal of evidence. Just some jokey conversation with former staff years afterwards. Who knows?

In a way the story kinda supports Armstrong. It seems he rarely got beaten even inside the team in their internal testing, so when he did, it was such an unusual and embarrassing event he managed to get the figures changed. There is no PR benefit at play here to the general public so it looks as though Armstrong genuinely did have the talent to go along with his mental toughness that set him apart from most of his contemporaries.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I wonder if it is true. Not exactly a great deal of evidence. Just some jokey conversation with former staff years afterwards. Who knows?

In a way the story kinda supports Armstrong. It seems he rarely got beaten even inside the team in their internal testing, so when he did, it was such an unusual and embarrassing event he managed to get the figures changed. There is no PR benefit at play here to the general public so it looks as though Armstrong genuinely did have the talent to go along with his mental toughness that set him apart from most of his contemporaries.

The test was in January 1999.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Anyways, read the article and there's no way you'll come away w/ the belief that CVV was clean for most of his career. As for Garmin, I believe that team is clean. Vaughters has built a whole brand and personal reputation around that. I'm not cynical enough yet to believe that's it's smoke and mirrors. If that's the case, there's no hope for cycling, period.

I would totally love to be able to believe that, but if it's the case, how do they come so close to matching the performances of guys (and teams) that have been shown to be suspect?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So the million dollar question is......

How did he go on to win 7 TDF's ???

Better PED's than the other guys, better response to the PED's, harder work ethic plus the PED's, the mental toughness to weather the daily in's and out's of a 3 week tour, etc ???

I've seen some of this stuff argued, but never have gotten a straight answer.

BTW, who else is on the list of 'not even a top 30 guy' without PED's?


Note: I am not pro-Lance, just trying to understand who he pulled this off.

Your question is valid - but it has been discussed on numerous other threads - and as recently as last week.

 

[JRTinMA]

No - what makes me chucle is how you pretend that you knew about another article, confirming the story- as you wrote this earlier:

CVV was 22 at the time - and everyone wants to know where they are against everybody else. I would be bitter to if my results were undermined for the sake of someones ego.

As for would it have mattered if he won the 'test' - you should know, it was in the linked article you read.

I was referring to the date of the article in the times. I was quite clear on this point, it was from 2008 or two years ago. Your reading comp is pathetic.

You clearly did not see the movie or you would know why he believes he was lied to. Back under the bridge now troll.

 

[scribe]

I would totally love to be able to believe that, but if it's the case, how do they come so close to matching the performances of guys (and teams) that have been shown to be suspect?

wiggans coy attitude regarding doping and Lim have got me suspicious. If there is doping, I am betting it's up to the individual rather than team organization. I'd think that's how all teams operate now though.

 

[JRTinMA]

Anyways, read the article and there's no way you'll come away w/ the belief that CVV was clean for most of his career. As for Garmin, I believe that team is clean Vaughters has built a whole brand and personal reputation around that. I'm not cynical enough yet to believe that's it's smoke and mirrors. If that's the case, there's no hope for cycling, period.

Just three reasons I have my doubts...

1) 2009 BW vs the 2010 Sky version
2) Why employ Lim
3) RH goes top 10 this year. (Please don't say its cause CVV crashed out)

 

[Disprin]

The test was in January 1999.

But the tone of CVV's remarks seemed to suggest it was unusual for anyone to beat Lance Armstrong in the internal testing, which is why this one was embarrassing for him.

That talent will have gone a long way with the mental strength and self belief that a rider like LA had over CVV.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I was referring to the date of the article in the times. I was quite clear on this point, it was from 2008 or two years ago. Your reading comp is pathetic.

You clearly did not see the movie or you would know why he believes he was lied to. Back under the bridge now troll.

Sure - but I was referring to your earlier comment:

Today the Fellowship suggests that the Postals have manipulated LAC measurements so LA could win a threshold contest. This is big ..

Please point out where I made any reference to why he was lied to?

 

[JRTinMA]

Sure - but I was referring to your earlier comment:


Please point out where I made any reference to why he was lied to?

My quote you reference was to the OP. While you are in the fellowship of the miserable its not exclusive to you, what a narcissist. I'm wondering now if you even ever read the OP. Its been established you didn't see the movie and if you never read the OP I give up. Its essential to understand the movie or the OP to comment intelligently.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

My quote you reference was to the OP. While you are in the fellowship of the miserable its not exclusive to you, what a narcissist. I'm wondering now if you even ever read the OP. Its been established you didn't see the movie and if you never read the OP I give up. Its essential to understand the movie or the OP to comment intelligently.

Ah, so this reference you made was to the OP:

...the Postals have manipulated LAC measurements.

I now realise I have a reading 'comp' - can you help me get by it by showing me where the OP actually said that?

 

[NashbarShorts]

Just three reasons I have my doubts...

1) 2009 BW vs the 2010 Sky version
2) Why employ Lim
3) RH goes top 10 this year. (Please don't say its cause CVV crashed out)

Well, nobody KNOWS, it's just conjecture, but...

I don't think Wiggo is such a shocker. He totally changed his focus and prep in 2010. Plus I think the weight of expectations can change things. This is not w/o precedent. For example, look at Andy Hampsten. Goes 4th in his first ever Tour (1st full season in Europe, I think), riding support for Lemond. After that, he leaves to became a team leader...and never is able to improve on his inaugural performance.

As for Lim...correct me if I'm wrong, but when Floyd hired him in 2006, I believe Lim was just a dweeb finishing up his PhD in exercise physiology...just a geek in a basement lab, running V02 tests on college students, and prob living off a university stipend. Along comes Floyd, says, "Hey, I'll pay you $40K if you spend the summer in Europe w/ me?". Of course Lim would say yes. Then after developing some trust, Floyd lets him in on the truth -- "You're gonna assist me w/ transfusions. Everybody does it, no big deal."

OK, so you can condemn Lim for not walking away at that point, but I don't think overnite he morphs into an Asian-American Dr. Ferrari over at Garmin. That would be like saying a recent bank heist MUST be the work of the local shoplifter...

As for RH, the guy had shown his promise in tough races like Amstel Gold, and the Ardennes, no? These are races that typically Tour riders do well in. I don't think Top 10 is so shocking... Nicholas Roche did Top 15, and he has even less palmares than RH.

Besides, Top 10 is not even close to "podium", or "contending for the win". If a clean rider can't go Top 10 in 2010, we might as well just stop watching...

 

[Hugh Januss]

wiggans coy attitude regarding doping and Lim have got me suspicious. If there is doping, I am betting it's up to the individual rather than team organization. I'd think that's how all teams operate now though.

Not all the teams, not THE SHACK.
But for the most part I agree.

Edit: I should say here that I still think Bruyneel was directing things but obviously they had toned it down a lot, which, to me suggests maybe Horner is one of those guys who would have had a bigger career if it wasn't for the doping?

 

[NashbarShorts]

...to me suggests maybe Horner is one of those guys who would have had a bigger career if it wasn't for the doping?

Slightly off-topic, anybody believe Horner is clean? I wanted to originally, but look at his progression. First he goes to Saunier-Duval...they pretty much gave him an ultimatum ("don't suck like TimJohnson"). Horner gets injured that season but magically returns in time for small stage race (TdS?), which he WINS. That catapults him onto their Tour team and the rest is history. Onto Lotto, and then Le Shack. Once on Astana/Shack, he is adopted by LA-LA (who gives him the name "Redneck").

Sorry but I doubt anybody ushered into the innersanctum of JB-LA is clean. As such, how can we pontificate as to your original question?

 

[Hugh Januss]

Slightly off-topic, anybody believe Horner is clean? I wanted to originally, but look at his progression. First he goes to Saunier-Duval...they pretty much gave him an ultimatum ("don't suck like TimJohnson"). Horner gets injured that season but magically returns in time for small stage race (TdS?), which he WINS. That catapults him onto their Tour team and the rest is history. Onto Lotto, and then Le Shack. Once on Astana/Shack, he is adopted by LA-LA (who gives him the name "Redneck").

Sorry but I doubt anybody ushered into the innersanctum of JB-LA is clean. As such, how can we pontificate as to your original question?

I see, I question your thought that Garmin might be clean so you shoot down my totally unsubstantiated dream that my boy CH might not be as dirty as the rest.
This is the pity of the whole thing, once you begin to connect the dots who can you believe?

Maybe Flicker is right, they are all doing it so we might as well attach our lips to Juan Pelota.

 

[Roland Rat]

Has anyone seen the movie "Blood, Sweat and Gears" and seen the part where CVV highlights how Lance lied about CVV's Lactate levels.

Huh. Can't be true because various articles have told me that Lance is a genetic freak who produces one quarter of the lactate of other mere mortals. CVV is just bitter is using Lance to raise his profile.

 

[JRTinMA]

I now realise I have a reading 'comp' - can you help me get by it by showing me where the OP actually said that?

Can you count? I'm going to assume you can so go to the OP and read sentence 2, 3 and 4. Some may refer to it as paragraph two but that is technically a stretch so I will refer to it as the three sentences after the first sentence and a space. There you will find a reference to:

- the Postal Team
- team doctor
- LA
- LB

I referred to this group as the "Postals", after all it pretty much represents the team. The OP suggests via a CVV interview that all listed above (or "Postals") manipulated a LAC measurement. LAC stands for Lactate, maybe the abbreviated test description confused you. Snip, snap, snout this tale is told out.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Can you count? I'm going to assume you can so go to the OP and read sentence 2, 3 and 4. Some may refer to it as paragraph two but that is technically a stretch so I will refer to it as the three sentences after the first sentence and a space. There you will find a reference to:

- the Postal Team
- team doctor
- LA
- LB

I referred to this group as the "Postals", after all it pretty much represents the team. The OP suggests via a CVV interview that all listed above (or "Postals") manipulated a LAC measurement. LAC stands for Lactate, maybe the abbreviated test description confused you. Snip, snap, snout this tale is told out.

Maybe its my lack of "reading comp - but I am still trying to figure out what this has to do with what I said earlier:

No - what makes me chuckle is how you pretend that you knew about another article, confirming the story- as you wrote this earlier:

Which was in reply to your Quote:
Today the Fellowship suggests that the Postals have manipulated LAC measurements so LA could win a threshold contest. This is big ...

So, I went back and had a look at paragraph no.2 (yes, it is a paragraph).
Actually the OP never says 'who' "listed" the measurements - so its your made-up reference that is confusing, please be more careful in future as some of us have just found out we have a 'reading comp'.

Yes, I can count - only as far as 10 though - its fun, you should try it before you post.

 

[JRTinMA]

Maybe its my lack of "reading comp - but I am still trying to figure out what this has to do with what I said earlier:


So, I went back and had a look at paragraph no.2 (yes, it is a paragraph).
Actually the OP never says 'who' "listed" the measurements - so its your made-up reference that is confusing, please be more careful in future as some of us have just found out we have a 'reading comp'.

Yes, I can count - only as far as 10 though - its fun, you should try it before you post.

I'm not sure about your "reading comp" obsession. I said your reading comp is pathetic, where comp is an abbreviation for comprehension, and its true. The two words together show ones ability to grasp the written word.

Simply inserting a space does not make a paragraph. The OP introduces the idea in his first sentence that lance lied about CVVs values. 2, 3 and 4 could have followed one very nicely. Its not really a big deal, I could care less about proper structure on a forum. I was trying to help you find the OP referring to systematic deceit in Lactategate as you seem to be struggling.

You continue to make no valid point regarding my post. I have addressed each of your ridiculous posts after trying to decipher your issue. Please take your obtuseness and move on as there is no way for me to help you.

You have certainly derailed this thread, good on you.

 

[NashbarShorts]

I see, I question your thought that Garmin might be clean so you shoot down my totally unsubstantiated dream that my boy CH might not be as dirty as the rest.
This is the pity of the whole thing, once you begin to connect the dots who can you believe?

No attempt to shoot down CH or pop your balloon. I was a big fan of CH and when he went to Saunier I was following him closely and hoping he'd succeed. Just looking back, teams like Saunier and obviously any Bruyneel squad has to be suspect. Also, I recall hearing the reason TJohnson underperformed and left Saunier was b/c he didn't want to go on a program. (I remember a journal posting he had on CN.com where he mentioned looking at his cyclocomputer mid-race on a climb, seeing the speed at 45kph, and thinking "something is wrong here".). Then there was a Horner interview on CN after he went to Saunier, where Horner says they told him "please don't be another TJohnson"...

Yeah, connecting the dots and such. Maybe was better when we all believed in Santa

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'm not sure about your "reading comp" obsession. I said your reading comp is pathetic, where comp is an abbreviation for comprehension, and its true. The two words together show ones ability to grasp the written word.

Simply inserting a space does not make a paragraph. The OP introduces the idea in his first sentence that lance lied about CVVs values. 2, 3 and 4 could have followed one very nicely. Its not really a big deal, I could care less about proper structure on a forum. I was trying to help you find the OP referring to systematic deceit in Lactategate as you seem to be struggling.

You continue to make no valid point regarding my post. I have addressed each of your ridiculous posts after trying to decipher your issue. Please take your obtuseness and move on as there is no way for me to help you.

You have certainly derailed this thread, good on you.

Where have you made a valid point?

This was your opening post:

Classic! But on to Lactategate...

Today marks a new level of LA hatin'. Today the Fellowship suggests that the Postals have manipulated LAC measurements so LA could win a threshold contest. This is big. I heard LA takes a Statin so he can win the Radio Shack cholesterol challenge each year...

Are you suggesting that the 'Postals' did not manipulate the LAC measurements? (The OP never said 'Postals').

I have no problem talking about the 'thread' - in fact the person to bring in the newspaper headline and go OT, was you.