JV interview in Le Figaro

[Chuffy]

Just seen this
http://www.lefigaro.fr/cyclisme/2011/01/29/02007-20110129ARTSPO00497-ce-n-est-pas-qu-un-idealisme.php

Haven't had time to run it all through Babelfish yet but he does talk about Bassons, Floyd and Contador.

 

[L'arriviste]

I'll do a bit of translation (unautomated). I'm leaving out the Contador stuff because it contains nothing new. I'll summarise it later.

Sport24.com : What legitimacy has cycling when we know that the Tour de France, the biggest event in the sport, has since 1995 had just one winner without connections to doping?

Jonathan Vaughters : Yes, it's complicated. But let's look at it another way. How do you want it to be? If cycling really works to out the cheats, and puts in a lot of effort to do that, then of course we'll see a lot of these problems. Or would you have it the other way like soccer or American football, where we all go on strike against the anti-doping movement. That way there'd be no scandal. There'd be no stain on the reputation of a Tour winner. Everything would be covered in glory. But the truth is that the young riders would be lost. Like before with Christophe Bassons.

 

[Benotti69]

so 1 winner with out doping connections in 15 years and that is cycling really working to out the cheats.

Only 2 riders out of those 15 years has been banned and 1 is appealing his ban.

JV not making sense

 

[L'arriviste]

Sport24.com : Meaning?

Jonathan Vaughters : Christophe was a genuine talent with the vision of an idealist and at the end he said: "No, I can't keep going with the dream I had". Personally, I'd prefer that a rider like Christophe Bassons could come into the peloton, have a career without problems and win some races without any pressure to dope or rude comments from the rest of the peloton. I'd prefer that to the pain of facing up to 15 winners of the TdF having a bad reputation. I think that's worthwhile. Today, our sport wouldn't lose a idealistic young guy like that, with an ethical stance like Christophe Bassons. I'm sure that we're at that point now. There's been incredible progress in the last few years.

Sport24.com : Floyd Landis recently said that doping would never not be a part of the sport. Given that it couldn't be stopped, he advocated the legalisation of doping...

Jonathan Vaughters : I have another way of looking at it. Floyd hasn't ridden in pro cycling for five years. He's been apart from the sport and he doesn't know how things are now. So I wouldn't agree with that viewpoint.

 

[L'arriviste]

Sport24.com : Isn't one of the problems in cycling that the majority of DS's today were around during those years of doping?

Jonathan Vaughters : Yes, of course. I myself was a part of this "doped generation". But if we have a good mentality, a good ethical approach, we're good people. Because we made mistakes, we know the pain inside of living the lie. I don't want the new generation to do the same thing. It's our responsibility to present a sport where it's no longer necessary to make bad choices. I've got a ten year old boy. I don't know if he'll want to get into cycling but if he does become a rider, I'll pass on my knowledge to him because I don't want him to go into the sport such as it was. Quite the opposite, the best asset cycling has today is to have people with that experience, because if they have good intentions, they can stop errors happening. Everyone needs to realise that a new direction is required. It's a battle that needs to be won.

 

[L'arriviste]

Stop me if I'm breaking the reposting rules here.

 

[L'arriviste]

Sport24.com : Doping has been linked to cycling since the very beginning. Pot belge was around in the 1920s. Isn't cycling forever condemned to be dogged by doping?

Jonathan Vaughters : I want to lead the battle. I'm dedicating myself to that. If after three, four, five years we're at a point where it's impossible to get rid of doping, that'll be a sad thing. We'll see. I don't know if we can win or not. But I think that today, this is the first time that the spirit needed to change things really exists. The energy for it exists, the people with the right mentality exist, the pragmatic viewpoint of the business is also there. Because today, it's more important to have a team with the right image than to win races. The essential thing is to not have doping problems, to be transparent and to follow the rules. Winning races is second to that. In 2008, when I launched this team I said, "we're going to do the big races with a clean team. We'll see whether or not it works". It was an experiment. And sure, we've had some good seasons. Now I'm convinced that, at the end of October when the World Tour rankings are settled, we can be the best team in the world, an anti-doping team.

Sport24.com : If tomorrow you find out that one of your riders tested positive, will the team stop?
Jonathan Vaughters : It's possible, yes. If we were to have a confirmed positive result, our sponsor would have no obligation to keep going.

 

[L'arriviste]

Just seen this
http://www.lefigaro.fr/cyclisme/2011/01/29/02007-20110129ARTSPO00497-ce-n-est-pas-qu-un-idealisme.php

Haven't had time to run it all through Babelfish yet but he does talk about Bassons, Floyd and Contador.

For those who are actually interested in the Contador bit, JV reckons that "there could be three, four or five different theories about it" because of the small quantities of Clenbuterol found. For that reason, says JV, you can't pile all that emotion, opinions and rumours onto that. The scientific conclusion is the only valid one and if they decide to sanction Contador for a year, that must be the right decision.

 

[Chuffy]

Thanks for the translations L'Arriviste. I did run bits through Babelfish and it's fair to say it didn't do as good a job.

Nothing really new then, although I'll add the "I myself was a part of this "doped generation" comment to the list of JV almost confessions...

 

[Ecowarrior18]

Sport24.com : Isn't one of the problems in cycling that the majority of DS today were around throughout those years of doping?

Jonathan Vaughters : Yes, of course. I myself was a part of this "doped generation". But if we have a good mentality, a good ethical approach, we're good people. Because we made mistakes, we know the inner pain of living the lie. I don't want the new generation to do the same thing.........

Is this the closest to an out and out confession from JV?

All the tainted DS in the sport are a plus not a negative? Surely not JV? While I believe you may have the best interests at heart but I wonder if all those wise DS's out there share that?

The We are good people quote sounds like Hincapie yesterday.

Sounds like some of the players in the FDA drama are preparing the ground?

 

[L'arriviste]

Is this the closest to an out and out confession from JV?

Difficult to translate the phrase more precisely. It can mean "I was a part of" or "I took part in". These obviously mean different things in this most sensitive of contexts. I think he means it in the sense of "My career was during that".

 

[Chuffy]

Difficult to translate the phrase more precisely. It can mean "I was a part of" or "I took part in". These obviously mean different things in this most sensitive of contexts. I think he means it in the sense of "My career was during that".

The latter would make more sense grammatically.

 

[JPM London]

I'd also like to say thank you for spending the time translating and summarising, L'arriviste.

I can see JV points, but then again I'm not on the JV-is-bogus team anyway - I'm batting for the Infinitely Naives and like to believe he's doing his part in cleaning up...

 

[Epicycle]

I hate to hear him basically give the UCI a blanket seal of approval. The biggest bomb Floyd has thrown is the allegation of Verbruggen/Mcquaid playing favorites. That has to be dealt with, it's the biggest issue on the administrative side of cycling right now, the side that JV has dedicated his professional life to. Really tough for me to watch Spartacus' Ronde/PR performances last year and not wonder if that is still going on with his bio-passport numbers, much less the circumstances surrounding the Contador positive.

 

[L'arriviste]

Much as I like what JV [says he's] trying to do, I kind of feel like this is not the best of him. He's learned how to do what politicians do, which is answering the question he wants to answer.

The clearest example of what I mean is here:

JV: [etc]... It's a battle that needs to be won.

Sport24.com: Doping has been linked to cycling since the very beginning. Pot belge was around in the 1920s. Isn't cycling forever condemned to be dogged by doping?

JV: I want to lead the battle...[etc]

It's like he continues where he left off without really addressing the question. It's not so much an interview as a contiguous statement with temporary interruptions. This contrasts, conveniently enough, with Landis' interview transcript out this week. Though of course I accept that there was less editing and finessing involved with that, Floyd was at least answering the questions asked of him.

I do appreciate the situation JV is in, vested interests, ongoing investigations et al but for those of us who read a lot of this stuff over the years, it gets awfully monotonous and it's consequently rather saddening.

Whatever the circumstances, I suppose that freshness is what made the Landis transcript fascinating: there was candour in it, a willingness to talk turkey and then to publish it.

 

[Chuffy]

As I've said before, JV is playing a political game whereas Landis (and Kimmage) just want to kick the doors down and kick hell out of everyone. In some respects they have it a lot easier than him, they have much more freedom to say what they want. I think JV is playing a much longer game and I'm hoping he succeeds. If he feels, in five, ten years time that nothing has changed and the fight is lost, I suspect he'll have as hair-whitening a tale to tell as Landis.

 

[L'arriviste]

As I've said before, JV is playing a political game whereas Landis (and Kimmage) just want to kick the doors down and kick hell out of everyone. In some respects they have it a lot easier than him, they have much more freedom to say what they want. I think JV is playing a much longer game and I'm hoping he succeeds. If he feels, in five, ten years time that nothing has changed and the fight is lost, I suspect he'll have as hair-whitening a tale to tell as Landis.

Yes, indeed.

I wonder if some other disciple of the 'noughties' generation will be with us in five or ten years' time, shifting the goalposts and telling us that things have progressed. Not sure I will be listening by then though.

 

[hrotha]

As I've said before, JV is playing a political game whereas Landis (and Kimmage) just want to kick the doors down and kick hell out of everyone. In some respects they have it a lot easier than him, they have much more freedom to say what they want. I think JV is playing a much longer game and I'm hoping he succeeds. If he feels, in five, ten years time that nothing has changed and the fight is lost, I suspect he'll have as hair-whitening a tale to tell as Landis.

The problem with that game is that it can go on forever.

 

[Ferminal]

... and playing the poltiical game concurrently to running a top-tier cycling team.

 

[sniper]

The problem with that game is that it can go on forever.

One would say so indeed.

But perhaps cycling is like nature.
People think it is self-containing, and, therefore, that they can do with it what they want.
But the consequences are hard to ignore.
Even if those most guilty of screwing up nature are not going to change their habits: a climate change is coming.

 

[Berzin]

Jonathan Vaughters has nothing further to say and more importantly nothing new to add on this topic.

I'm tired of the "but we're such good guys" routine that he and now Hincapie has recently trotted out.

The only ones worth hearing from now are the Feds. Vaughters sounds like a politician, avoiding the controversy head-on and his role in what went on when he raced while stating how committed he is to a cleaner sport. His only interest is in consolidating his position as a director sportif. That's it.

What never occurred to him is that cycling would be a better place if there were a crop of team directors who weren't at all involved in doping at one point in their careers. Why would anyone put their trust in guys like him and Riis?