JV reaches out to anonymous critic.

[Martin318is]

I find it interesting that the mods jump upon the word 'boycott'.

I understand that this forum is via a site that obviously, and fundamentally must, rest upon sponsor money to keep it going. And going contrary to that might bring the hammer...

Maybe a little less explicit application of 'financial omerta' in the cycling world would help?

That is an utterly farcical post bordering upon trolling.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I have suggested truthful responses to qualified journalists. Kimmage would seem to fit that category.

Now, please tell how JV's career would be harmed by that and by who?

Direct your attention that way then...

I've gotten backchanneled regarding players who felt that if JV spoke up, their burden would have been eased significantly.

Again to the highlighted - JVs did answer truthfully, he may have said 'No comment" to the USPS question but we are left in no doubt as to if he doped or not.

While the "players" rightly would have felt eased with JV making a public statement you are overplaying its significance.

The interview was in 2008, LA was retired 3 years (and no-ne knew of his comeback) any statement by JV implicating LA (assuming he can) would have been portrayed as a bitter ex-teammate by LA trying to get publicity for his new team and the UCI & McQuaid would have closed ranks as they did on Landis even with the Feds looking on.

Again - JV only duty is to tell the truth when called by the Feds - any public admission (particularly now) would be counterproductive.

 

[buckwheat]

I would also actively discourage people from buying the brands he and his team endorse, as I've done with LA, because of his stance on this issue.

okay now I am dumbfounded.....

Of all the DS's in cycling and all the teams out there, you have decided that JV's Garmin Transitions is the only one other than Lance's radioShack that deserves a boycott?

Thats rather petty and not at all logical.

For some reason JV has decided his career is going to be hurt by speaking truthfully on the issue.

I say that by not speaking truthfully, it may indirectly hurt him in the pocketbook.

He makes his choices. I make mine..

 

[Martin318is]

For some reason JV has decided his career is going to be hurt by speaking truthfully on the issue.

To be clear: Did he state that, or did you?

My understanding - and I admit it may be correct, is that he said he had valid reasons for the path he was taking and offered to hook you up with known figures who could help enlighten you about his position. As far as I am aware, you haven't actualyl contacted those people, correct?

 

[buckwheat]

To be clear: Did he state that, or did you?

Oh, ok, he just won't answer questions to Kimmage truthfully.

Do you really have a point?

 

[buckwheat]

To be clear: Did he state that, or did you?

My understanding - and I admit it may be correct, is that he said he had valid reasons for the path he was taking and offered to hook you up with known figures who could help enlighten you about his position. As far as I am aware, you haven't actualyl contacted those people, correct?

He was quick to PM me about how I'm misunderstanding his position.

See one of my above posts about how he was serious about getting me their contact info......

I didn't get it...

Why do I get the sense that this is heating up again?

Apparently I'm a crank.... but with influence? I don't see it....

 

[buckwheat]

Again - JV only duty is to tell the truth when called by the Feds - any public admission (particularly now) would be counterproductive.

I don't understand?????

 

[tifosa]

Again - JV only duty is to tell the truth when called by the Feds - any public admission (particularly now) would be counterproductive.

Yes, exactly.
Now, let it go.
Let JV choose to contact you--or not--without the browbeating and public pleas.


We get it.


He gets it.

 

[Martin318is]

And have you followed up with him?

Sorry but I am still on the fence on this. As far as I see it, a public figure went out of his way to contact an anonymous forum member to clarify something. Since then, there has been several pages of ranting and speculation by numerous other forum members here but nobody has a clue whether JV has even been near a PC in that time let alone seen any of the resulting discussion.

And yet people are demanding some form of comment in this thread/personally via PM/ and publicly on the steps of Congress.

They are also virtually implying he has shied away from it or gone into online hiding because of this conversation? Delusional.

You are completely putting the onus on JV to satisfy your expectations but you are doing nothing to follow up on his original post. Meanwhile you are now saying that you are going to call a Boycott on sponsor products as though that will have any bearing upon the situation.

As to my initial point - where is your boycott on all the other sponsors? T-mobile? Festina? Kazakhstan? etc?

 

[roundabout]

i think it's slightly unfair to demand that buckwheat should follow up without contact information made available to him

 

[Martin318is]

i think it's slightly unfair to demand that buckwheat should follow up without contact information made available to him

They are all very well known public figures and earlier in this thread someone gave all the necessary contact details. He doesn't actually need a further contact from JV

 

[buckwheat]

They are all very well known public figures and earlier in this thread someone gave all the necessary contact details. He doesn't actually need a further contact from JV

JV, direct quote "I'm dead serious. If you need contact information for any of these folks, feel free to ask."

Well, I'ma askin......

and I haven't been following the thread that closely as I've missed the necessary contact details.

He said feel free to ask, which I'm doing, here and I've done by PM.

 

[buckwheat]

Hope I don't fuel anyone's ire here...



Although you agree with the tenor of my post, I'm not sure you understand the tenor of my post...

I am not asking anyone to make a decision.

I am trying to comprehend how JV can expect to be viewed as anti-doping by anyone when he hasn't lived up to what most people would see as an extremely crucial requirement - honest personal disclosure about doping.

Not naming names, not scr*wing his riders and sponsors, not utterly destroying his carreer. Strictly lending some honesty to a position that would find honesty to be requisite.

I don't give rat's *ss whether he does or not.

All I'm saying is that he fundamentally CANNOT be viewed as who he would like to be viewed as. After reading a few hundred posts, I think that's the point a lot of posters are trying to make.

I'm really too jaded to get rabid over it...

I like this POV a lot..

 

[Martin318is]

JV, direct quote "I'm dead serious. If you need contact information for any of these folks, feel free to ask."

Well, I'ma askin......

and I haven't been following the thread that closely as I've missed the necessary contact details.

He said feel free to ask, which I'm doing, here and I've done by PM.

The last time he visited this site was before this thread was created........

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

JV, direct quote "I'm dead serious. If you need contact information for any of these folks, feel free to ask."
Well, I'ma askin......

Why not make an effort to contact the people he told you to, or to email him directly and ask for the contacts? It takes very little effort to call people out on the internet....if JV allowed himself to respond to everyone who decided to just 'kick his tires' he wouldn't have much time for anything else. So I think it's up to you to demonstrate that you will make some effort to get the information. That effort is about the only way that you can demonstrate to JV that you are prepared to consider his side of the story. If he has no reason to believe you will consider it, why would he waste his time interacting with you?

Really? I just think the criticism is warranted and I think my underlying good nature got played upon by JV.The burden is on him because he set the height of the bar, not me.

No. You set the bar when you demanded that he speak publicly about his doping. I think your criticism is premature and unreasonable. I also think it greatly reduces the chance that you will get any further information out of JV.

Basically, by publicly stating your assumption that JV is managing this situation/playing on your good nature, you are not acting in good faith. There could be reasons why he didn't get back to you yet....perhaps he hasn't checked in here since you stated that you didn't intend to contact the people he suggested.....perhaps he expected you to contact him outside CN and assumes that, because you haven't, you aren't serious....who knows? But good faith would be assuming the best, assuming something got in the way of JV communicating with you and making another attempt to contact him, before making negative public judgement.

I think that you are failing to see this from the other side. You might know that you are well intentioned and able to be reasonable, but JV doesn't know that. He has just been on the receiving end of some pretty harsh statements from you. Although you retracted the most personal stuff, he is unlikely to have forgotten it. I think he is entitled to some consistent tolerance and patience from you, before you expect him to take you seriously or believe you are genuine.

BTW, I noticed you're getting a little nasty here.

Frustrated. Don't know how to communicate to you that you're still coming across as quite belligerent and unreasonable. Decided try a different approach.... FAIL?

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I agree that Buckwheat can be beligerent. That's one of his saving graces. He knows what he wants, isn't picking stupid fights, and is trying to hold others to what they say.

His points may be made through circumlocution, varied metaphors, and convoluted reasoning, but his points still stand. That's probably why JV popped his head into the ring to start with.

If JV found Buckwheat's argument worth debating, that should be enough of a gesture for all of us.

If he really is 'pussing out' with the contact information, that should be something that's recognized as well.

I know that I personally spent a tonne of cerebral energy figuring out where I stand on the issue, and have made my point as clearly as I could.

As to boycotting certain brands, I'm not sold on that. The corporate world is so convoluted and in-bed at such a fundamental level, that I really don't believe not buying something from someone would really make a difference.

That being said, I'm sure it wouldn't hurt to fire off a letter to corporate HQ explaining why you won't support their product.

It's not like the American model where everyone is scrambling for cash. There are a lot of global corps that would love to take advantage of the marketing potential cycling has to offer. That's why it's worth so much today, and will maintain its value regardless of what happens with the current sh*t-show/debacle...

 

[buckwheat]

Why not make an effort to contact the people he told you to, or to email him directly and ask for the contacts? It takes very little effort to call people out on the internet....if JV allowed himself to respond to everyone who decided to just 'kick his tires' he wouldn't have much time for anything else. So I think it's up to you to demonstrate that you will make some effort to get the information. That effort is about the only way that you can demonstrate to JV that you are prepared to consider his side of the story. If he has no reason to believe you will consider it, why would he waste his time interacting with you?



No. You set the bar when you demanded that he speak publicly about his doping. I think your criticism is premature and unreasonable. I also think it greatly reduces the chance that you will get any further information out of JV.

Basically, by publicly stating your assumption that JV is managing this situation/playing on your good nature, you are not acting in good faith. There could be reasons why he didn't get back to you yet....perhaps he hasn't checked in here since you stated that you didn't intend to contact the people he suggested.....perhaps he expected you to contact him outside CN and assumes that, because you haven't, you aren't serious....who knows? But good faith would be assuming the best, assuming something got in the way of JV communicating with you and making another attempt to contact him, before making negative public judgement.

I think that you are failing to see this from the other side. You might know that you are well intentioned and able to be reasonable, but JV doesn't know that. He has just been on the receiving end of some pretty harsh statements from you. Although you retracted the most personal stuff, he is unlikely to have forgotten it. I think he is entitled to some consistent tolerance and patience from you, before you expect him to take you seriously or believe you are genuine.



Frustrated. Don't know how to communicate to you that you're still coming across as quite belligerent and unreasonable. Decided try a different approach.... FAIL?

Ok, I don't really agree with you on much of what you said and answered all your points...... then reconsidered. I'll see what happens.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

I know that I personally spent a tonne of cerebral energy figuring out where I stand on the issue, and have made my point as clearly as I could.

Your point made perfect sense. However, I still tend to see JV as part of the solution for a number of reasons: 1) He didn't deny Landis' claims, then Garmin made statements that riders are expected to tell the truth. 2) Don Catlin. Unlike others, Garmin didn't fire him. 3) Consistency of JV's message about bio-passport being best tool available but an imperfect tool.

There aren't obvious career or commercial pressures on JV to keep him quiet any more. But I don't know what pressures he has from the investigation, or what other pressures he might have that would prevent it, so I'm not really prepared to try and second guess.

This debate has an element of people yelling loudest at the few they think just might listen. A bass-ackwards cacophony which in effect means JV would be treated better if he didn't try and reduce doping in cycling. That's why, even IF JV did something I though was seriously counterproductive to his stated goals, I wouldn't be expressing myself with anything like the vehemence seen on these threads. YMMV

If JV found Buckwheat's argument worth debating, that should be enough of a gesture for all of us.

If he really is 'pussing out' with the contact information, that should be something that's recognized as well.

Yes and yes. To be clear, I'm not trying to suggest these things shouldn't be discussed. I just think that, because of buckwheats previous posts, his accusing JV of managing and taking advantage of good nature was out of line at this time.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Ok, I don't really agree with you on much of what you said and answered all your points...... then reconsidered. I'll see what happens.

Fair enough. Hopefully I've made my point clearly enough in the last few posts that you understand it, even if you don't agree with it.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Your point made perfect sense. However, I still tend to see JV as part of the solution for a number of reasons: 1) He didn't deny Landis' claims, then Garmin made statements that riders are expected to tell the truth. 2) Don Catlin. Unlike others, Garmin didn't fire him. 3) Consistency of JV's message about bio-passport being best tool available but an imperfect tool.

There aren't obvious career or commercial pressures on JV to keep him quiet any more. But I don't know what pressures he has from the investigation, or what other pressures he might have that would prevent it, so I'm not really prepared to try and second guess.

This debate has an element of people yelling loudest at the few they think just might listen. A bass-ackwards cacophony which in effect means JV would be treated better if he didn't try and reduce doping in cycling. That's why, even IF JV did something I though was seriously counterproductive to his stated goals, I wouldn't be expressing myself with anything like the vehemence seen on these threads. YMMV



Yes and yes. To be clear, I'm not trying to suggest these things shouldn't be discussed. I just think that, because of buckwheats previous posts, his accusing JV of managing and taking advantage of good nature was out of line at this time.

Hmmm... maybe that era of American riders just have a penchant for media largesse, and can't keep their mouths shut when they probably should.

JV has brought this upon himself. The friendly media may try to paint it a nicer shade, but he still needs to take that large step of personal disclosure.

He can only talk out of one side of his mouth for so long. People do get tired of a poncey hipocrite after a while...

 

[ultimobici]

He PM'd me on the 9th.

With each passing day that the situation persists regarding doping in Pro Cycling, the criticism of JV becomes more warranted IMHO.

Then he will do the steam control and manage the situation again.

The main reason put forth by others was that JV wouldn't speak up was that it would hurt his career.

I think that was thoroughly debunked and the criticism of JV is valid.

I would also actively discourage people from buying the brands he and his team endorse, as I've done with LA, because of his stance on this issue.

Whil I didn't agree with you, I did have respect for your opinion and your obviously passionate fervour on this subject.

However, this idea of boycotting JV's sponsor's products is a step too far. If you do this I presume that you apply the same standard to your purchases across the board. By that I mean, do you buy goods produced in China? If so you are being hypocritical in the extreme.

 

[TexPat]

Somewhere in here I lost the plot.
Whose contact details do you want? I may be able to help.
As you would expect, I agree with damn near everything that Buckwheat says.
Put up or shut up JV. You knew the score all along. Quite a few people got railroaded, and run out of town while others sat on their hands.
To be fair: Now there may be
some mitigating circumstance (i.e. he has been instructed to keep mum while the investigation is under way)? Of course, it's impossible to know.
Still, he had ample opportunity to make right over the last few years, and I cannot understand why he would let people burn --assuming he knew what was going on as indicated by statements, suggestions, and IM conversations from the past.
I don't buy the change starts from within nonsense. It won't work.
I love this sport. It's got to be fixed. And I disagree with JV's soft approach.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Somewhere in here I lost the plot.
Whose contact details do you want? I may be able to help.
As you would expect, I agree with damn near everything that Buckwheat says.
Put up or shut up JV. You knew the score all along. Quite a few people got railroaded, and run out of town while others saton their hands.
To be fair: Now there may be
some mitigating circumstance (i.e. he has been instructed to keep mum while the investigation is under way)? Of course, it's impossible to know.
Still, he had ample opportunity to make right over the last few years, and I cannot understand why he would let people burn --assuming he knew what was going on as indicated by statements, suggestions, and IM conversations from the past.
I don't buy the change starts from within nonsense. It won't work.
I love this sport. It's got to be fixed. And I disagree with JV's soft approach.

The ONLY reason he still has any credibility...

 

[TexPat]

The ONLY reason he still has any credibility...

Agreed.
However, why has he waited so long? Has the comfort level changed?

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I get the feeling his pooper's a little puckered at the moment.

Tough to talk freely when you can feel you persona getting kicked into the ditch...