• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Internal Garmin Email from Prentice Steffen

Feb 11, 2011
1
0
0
8 Jun 2008 06:08:01 -0700, "Prentice Steffen"

Riders and Staff,

There have been some questions and confusion about access to data
generated by the ACE testing. I'd like to clarify how this works and
then answer any questions that you may have.

First, the people who have access to the data are ACE, JV, and all
members of the team's medical/science staff. As part of our
transparency policy, we have offered to make data available to
journalists upon formal request... a couple of you have already been
involved in that process. That is a very limited and controlled
process, so don't worry that journalist have free access to the
numbers.

Second, please understand that this is about perception rather than
reality. Of course we all know the "perception is reality" thing, so
know too that while we trust everyone this issue is quite important.

The ACE data is not available to you directly because a major
criticism leveled against ACE is that it is a system put in place to
insure none of you test positive and is really a system that "aids
and abets" doping. ACE does sort of walk a fine line when you think
about it like that. If we gave you real time access to the data,
then it could of course actually be used in that manner which is
obviously not our desire or intent. So obviously much of this has to
do with perceptions outsiders may have.

It's worth pointing out here that you do have full access to your
quarterly UCI testing which I'll gladly provide to you in .pdf
format. That data is ostensibly for your health and is really quite
good in that regard.

All that said, JV and I don't have a problem if asked to look at your
ACE data and tell you whether or not all looks good. We might go as
far as to tell you some specific results to reassure you that all is
well from a lab numbers perspective. So there will be some degree of
discretion involved, but this will be our general approach/philosophy.

Sorry to be a bit of a downer after that last mass email that went
out. Nice work and thanks to all who are making that happen!!!

Questions?

Prentice
 
Mar 10, 2009
342
0
0
"Perception rather than reality"
That kind of sums up pro cycling over the last two decades.
 
Feb 21, 2010
1,006
0
0
rolfrae said:
"Perception rather than reality"
That kind of sums up pro cycling over the last two decades.
Wow. This is a bit of a bombshell.

Dr. Steffen, I think you may have some questions to answer coming up.

JV, if you are out there, how does this jive with all the bluster about how you run your team?

More to the point, how does this jive with the handling of the White/Lowe/Del Moral issue?

I'll say it again, wow.
 
Apr 13, 2010
1,199
0
0
I don't really know why you guys thinks this is interesting...
Sorry cyclingleaks, although I like leaks as much as anyone else, this doesn't really cut it for me.

I guess it's supposed to incriminate - why else, as it's clearly not meant for the opposite.

But if the most incriminating one can dig out is half a sentence going "perception is reality", which I guess could be incriminating when taken out of context (as it is here) or if an actual, incriminating context.

I have just read through a bog-standard internal email basically just telling riders they cannot have full access to their test data, as it could potentially be used to make doping easier. If the only incriminating thing in this email is saying that that management obviously trusts the riders it is a question of outside perception and that is the reason for blocking the information, then holy-schmoly this is the smoking gun of all ages... Not!

I have no doubt this leak is genuine as it would no doubt have been a lot meatier if it was made up. But, Cyclingleaks, what's the point of this leak?
I'm not sure I expect an answer as you could easily turn out to be one of those many, horribly annoying one-post-wonders...
 
May 10, 2009
3,654
0
0
JPM London said:
I don't really know why you guys thinks this is interesting...
Sorry cyclingleaks, although I like leaks as much as anyone else, this doesn't really cut it for me.

I guess it's supposed to incriminate - why else, as it's clearly not meant for the opposite.

But if the most incriminating one can dig out is half a sentence going "perception is reality", which I guess could be incriminating when taken out of context (as it is here) or if an actual, incriminating context.

I have just read through a bog-standard internal email basically just telling riders they cannot have full access to their test data, as it could potentially be used to make doping easier. If the only incriminating thing in this email is saying that that management obviously trusts the riders it is a question of outside perception and that is the reason for blocking the information, then holy-schmoly this is the smoking gun of all ages... Not!

I have no doubt this leak is genuine as it would no doubt have been a lot meatier if it was made up. But, Cyclingleaks, what's the point of this leak?
I'm not sure I expect an answer as you could easily turn out to be one of those many, horribly annoying one-post-wonders...
I actually agree with this post. This email - there isn't that much too it in my opinion. That line that jumps out at us could very well be their motto, but in this context it is innocent.
I believe there's more in the reference to the UCI quarterly checks than anythings else, in light of the recent happenings re: Del Moral. Interesting how you got the email, but the content, not so much I am afraid.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,793
0
0
JPM London said:
I don't really know why you guys thinks this is interesting...
Sorry cyclingleaks, although I like leaks as much as anyone else, this doesn't really cut it for me.
I agree this doesn't look very interesting or shocking or anything :S thanks for posting it anyway...
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,325
0
0
That is a very limited and controlled process, so don't worry that journalist have free access to the numbers.

The ACE data is not available to you directly because a major
criticism leveled against ACE is that it is a system put in place to
insure none of you test positive and is really a system that "aids
and abets" doping.

So obviously much of this has to
do with perceptions outsiders may have.
JPM London, i think the quoted bits are actually quite interesting.
 
Jul 16, 2010
370
1
0
/sarcasm?

cyclingleaks said:
Sorry to be a bit of a downer after that last mass email that went out. Nice work and thanks to all who are making that happen!!!
Last email:

Jam all the gear you can, boys! We don't plan on releasing actual data anyway.
 
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
You are barking up the wrong tree if you think for a minute Steffen is involved in either doping or covering up doping.

I was wrong about Lim, but if Steffen has anything to do with doping then there is no hope for the sport.
 
Oct 16, 2010
13,578
1
0
roundabout said:
I am somewhat puzzled as to why a clean rider would need to know wether his ACE tests are ok. with UCI checks surely it's not likely to be health related. :confused:
good point. perhaps JV can explain?
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,189
0
0
We might go as far as to tell you some specific results to reassure you that all is well from a lab numbers perspective.
Why would clean riders need to be reassured that their lab numbers look okay? Wouldn't they naturally fall within the proper parameters?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
So the press dont get given all of the information (shocker) and the riders dont see the full results of their tests so they cant use them to tailor doping programs. If anything, the fact the riders dont get to see their full tests is a positive thing.

Am I missing something really exciting in this email?

the phrase perception has been jumped on. Basically they are saying they are not giving the riders the full info because they dont trust them, but because if they give them the full info the publics "perception" might be that that was assisting the riders in doping. Simple.
 
Sep 19, 2009
85
0
0
All that said, JV and I don't have a problem if asked to look at your
ACE data and tell you whether or not all looks good. We might go as
far as to tell you some specific results to reassure you that all is
well from a lab numbers perspective. So there will be some degree of
discretion involved, but this will be our general approach/philosophy.
Isnt this the problem? What's the point of keeping it a secret if you are just gonna tell them yourselves if there's a problem? Isnt the only time they should know about the values when you give them their walking papers?
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
what if a clean rider wanted to know their values as they were worried about thier health? not sure the teams really take health tests that seriously myself
 
What happened to Ozzies post giving the twitter link to some Ny velo city.

I was going to respond to that, asking who the leak is (if its so obvious) and pointing out that CN forums is becoming the centre of cycling:D
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
when someone said there was a leaked internal email i was almost excited.

Cyclingleaks, if you are buying the domain dont get getting one of those flashy hosting packages with loads of bandwidth. If this is the quality of your leaks you aint gonna need it.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,793
0
0
The Hitch said:
What happened to Ozzies post giving the twitter link to some Ny velo city.

I was going to respond to that, asking who the leak is (if its so obvious) and pointing out that CN forums is becoming the centre of cycling:D
i guess it is the guy who just got sacked or trent lowe, I think it is an old email.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS