JV talks, sort of

[skippy]

Why is it dead? Because Pat said so? I'll bet on Bakala v Pat any day.

Those of you reading my blogs , would have seen my suggestion that there be a " Panel composed of Internationals adjudicating on ALL Racers being Sanctioned " . This panel would be drawn by ballot from an International Pool , with the Racer's country being excluded ! With the Internet Conferencing facility being available , it would not be necessary for ALL , to be at the same location ! Simple teletype and video link , would enable ALL parties , to see, read and hear , all that is being said , during the hearing .

With this facility in place , Timely action would resolve matters , such as the Contador fiasco , thus we would have less of the " Support our man " syndrome and less of Racers being allowed to continue grabbing victories and limelight from more deserving Racers ?

Members of the Pool , from which the Panel of say 5 members , is selected , would already be on their National Federations , so there would be reasonable appreciation of the WADA regs in respect of PIED Products .

With institution of this procedure , less need for Lawyers to be involved and the delays they engineer .

Good to see JV , take the time to add his input to the debate , although why he should have to defend himself from those anonymous parties , with an axe to grind , is disappointing . Perhaps it is the reason for other DS's and Team Managers avoiding , revealing their thoughts about the current morass , in which this Sport is bogged down ?

 

[samerics]

It's a good thing JV seems to have thick skin. Respect for the article, and respect for throwing yourself in front of the occasional fruit loops that reside in here

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Liked the column, even a banana hint in it, only Vaughters forgot to mention the spectators/fans as 'guilty' ones imho.

 

[sniper]

Cecchini:

"It's not that simple. Just because I coached them, it doesn't mean I could tell if they were doping, even with SRM data, or whatever. I never knew that riders might have been doping."

Is he full of ****, or has medical science in cycling evolved significantly in the past couple of years? (honest question)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Really? JV's position didn't evolve from the time of the SCA trial and the 2006 NYT article where he was anonymous to today?

No, JVs position did not evolve - he talked to NyT in 06 and he speaks now. Same story.
He did not evolve, the landscape has changed (& he actually was part of that) -, the story hasn't.

I appreciate that you've given up on getting rid of McQuaid. Many haven't.

The fact that you have to make this up shows your intent.

I am confident that Pat will eventually 'resign', but that it will take a little bit more than writing letters in Caplock or visiting skippys blog.

I don't know why you're arguing with me here. My opinion was that the article was terrible and the only thing meaningful was that the UCI should be removed from anti doping.

The rest was a waste of space.

The rest was a waste of space, I agree. And the reason he had to write something so obvious and dumb was because of people like you.

Because there is a tiny hardcore group that instead of reading what someone says focus only on the person, "he's a hypocrite', 'he didn't say anything about the passport'.
The very fact that you agree with what he says and yet call his article "terrible" proves he was correct.

 

[zigmeister]

Those of you reading my blogs , would have seen my suggestion that there be a " Panel composed of Internationals adjudicating on ALL Racers being Sanctioned " . This panel would be drawn by ballot from an International Pool , with the Racer's country being excluded ! With the Internet Conferencing facility being available , it would not be necessary for ALL , to be at the same location ! Simple teletype and video link , would enable ALL parties , to see, read and hear , all that is being said , during the hearing .

With this facility in place , Timely action would resolve matters , such as the Contador fiasco , thus we would have less of the " Support our man " syndrome and less of Racers being allowed to continue grabbing victories and limelight from more deserving Racers ?

Members of the Pool , from which the Panel of say 5 members , is selected , would already be on their National Federations , so there would be reasonable appreciation of the WADA regs in respect of PIED Products .

With institution of this procedure , less need for Lawyers to be involved and the delays they engineer .

Good to see JV , take the time to add his input to the debate , although why he should have to defend himself from those anonymous parties , with an axe to grind , is disappointing . Perhaps it is the reason for other DS's and Team Managers avoiding , revealing their thoughts about the current morass , in which this Sport is bogged down ?

You basically just suggested there be a United Nations of Cycling. Yes, that would work as well as the actual United Nations does. Sigh.

 

[techknowgn]

Really? JV's position didn't evolve from the time of the SCA trial and the 2006 NYT article where he was anonymous to today?

I appreciate that you've given up on getting rid of McQuaid. Many haven't.

I don't know why you're arguing with me here. My opinion was that the article was terrible and the only thing meaningful was that the UCI should be removed from anti doping.

The rest was a waste of space.

I'm sure his mindset evolved some over time as all of ours do, but he was willing to support positive change back then even when it was far riskier to his career.

It's one thing that he made a poor choice as a rider; it's understandable if not necessarily forgivable. But take his stance basically since his earliest time as a DS/Manager, and he's saying and doing the right things. I expect him to act ethically, but I don't expect him to stick his neck out 100% of the time "for good of the sport". He can only fight so many battles and still be around to keep fighting.

If he had taken the outward stance he is now back in 2006, he'd be like Floyd, on the outside looking in. I honestly believe the progress that's been made could only have occurred through a combination of outsiders with nothing to lose, journalists who won't take no for an answer, and insiders like JV willing to chip away at the wall from inside like Andy Duphrene with his rock hammer.

 

[Jeremiah]

Dude, I get it,

No, JVs position did not evolve - he talked to NyT in 06 and he speaks now. Same story.
He did not evolve, the landscape has changed (& he actually was part of that) -, the story hasn't.


The fact that you have to make this up shows your intent.

I am confident that Pat will eventually 'resign', but that it will take a little bit more than writing letters in Caplock or visiting skippys blog.


The rest was a waste of space, I agree. And the reason he had to write something so obvious and dumb was because of people like you.

Because there is a tiny hardcore group that instead of reading what someone says focus only on the person, "he's a hypocrite', 'he didn't say anything about the passport'.
The very fact that you agree with what he says and yet call his article "terrible" proves he was correct.

You'll relentllessly argue anything and doubly so, when you can suck up to JV.

Let me dismantle your nonsense.

You do realize JV was anonymous in the 2006 NYT article? He said something about being one of the cool kids. Was that the extent of his statements to USADA and what he freely admits on Twitter and here. So to say he hasn't evolved since 2006 is completely idiotic. Now he speaks freely. Did the story change? No, the last time JV rode with Armstrong was 1999. He was doping before he was ever on USPS as was recently made public.

I also didn't "make up" anything and for you to suggest I did is a lie.

People like me? You mean people who realize that it's always a good time to tell the truth and people who wouldn't leave Betsy, Emma, Greg LeMond and Mike Anderson twisting in the wind, before they came out of hiding?

I pay very close attention to what JV says and while he does a lot of good, he also had previously done a lot of equivocating. If you can't see that you're blind.

He article (with the exception of what I noted, was just more self justification which he has already done with his NYT opinion piece.

Keep being a JV fanboy and I'll keep an open mind regarding what he says.

 

[Jeremiah]

I'm sure his mindset evolved some over time as all of ours do, but he was willing to support positive change back then even when it was far riskier to his career.

It's one thing that he made a poor choice as a rider; it's understandable if not necessarily forgivable. But take his stance basically since his earliest time as a DS/Manager, and he's saying and doing the right things. I expect him to act ethically, but I don't expect him to stick his neck out 100% of the time "for good of the sport". He can only fight so many battles and still be around to keep fighting.

If he had taken the outward stance he is now back in 2006, he'd be like Floyd, on the outside looking in. I honestly believe the progress that's been made could only have occurred through a combination of outsiders with nothing to lose, journalists who won't take no for an answer, and insiders like JV willing to chip away at the wall from inside like Andy Duphrene with his rock hammer.

Well to start, I understand what JV did and I don't think he's a "bad" person for doing it.

But after reading Michael Barry's affadavit I realize he was profoundly affected by the environment and he's probably not the best person to look to for change.

This is what I referred to as his evolution. I understand that he wants to have his career in Pro cycling but that defininitely limits how effective he can be advocating for clean sport.

If one can't see this, like this Dr. Maserati, obviously can't, there's nothing anyone can say to him.

JV obviously knew A LOT since the mid to late 90's and then he backed off his IM dialogue with Frankie for SCA. (Dr. Maserati, I know you'll justify this on very narrrow grounds as being gossip).

Frankie for that matter was never entirely truthful either as to how he related the story to Walsh. He was always very hazy about his timeline and has he been totally clear even now as to whether he was doping before the LA cancer diagnosis in Oct. 96?

My point isn't to beat up on these guys but rather to illustrate how almost all of them evolve in their telling of the truth.

Even Coyle had to point this out to TH when TH said he wasn't doping at certain points and Coyle then confronted him with doping schedules showing he was in fact doping.

Now it's come out that even though most of them were doping, they all stopped in 2006? C'mon.

Another big point is that while JV has done a lot of good, he's also trying to have it both ways IMO. He was trying to shape outcomes for years and I think he should have said everything which has recently come out back around the time of SCA.

 

[sniper]

...
This is what I referred to as his evolution. I understand that he wants to have his career in Pro cycling but that defininitely limits how effective he can be advocating for clean sport.

+1
you're making a couple of valid points.
JV's claim that cycling supposedly cleaned itself up internally is completely reactionary, and incompatible with his alleged dedication to anti-doping. period.
arguing with doc M on that point is difficult. Doc M. sees contradictions everywhere except in JV's words.

 

[Jeremiah]

+1
you're making a couple of valid points.
JV's claim that cycling supposedly cleaned itself up internally is completely reactionary, and incompatible with his alleged dedication to anti-doping. period.
arguing with doc M on that point is useless. Doc M. sees contradictions everywhere except in JV's words.

What are the invalid ones?

 

[techknowgn]

Another big point is that while JV has done a lot of good, he's also trying to have it both ways IMO. He was trying to shape outcomes for years and I think he should have said everything which has recently come out back around the time of SCA.

honesty above all else? Sure I buy that; but like the riders doping because Lance/Johan/the system didn't give them much of a choice. I wouldn't lie for anyone else, but in a culture where speaking out costs me my job? I'd much rather find the middle ground to do things the right way and work for change without making life harder for my wife.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

I think Jv is doing a good job in cycling though i have stated my positions on him and good of him to come talk to us arrrrseholes here on the clinic and may he have a masculine child.

 

[JV1973]

What are the invalid ones?

One invalid one:

That I'm trying to have a career in Pro cycling. I have a career in Pro cycling, but i'm hardly trying to have mine. As I've said before, this is a fun option and rewarding for me, but hardly the only one. And hardly the most financially advantageous option.


And as for Michael Barry's affidavit? Yes, I was profoundly affected. In a lot of negative ways. Why I quit at 29.

Either way, you guys are stuck with me, for a while. So, better to try an give me suggestions, as opposed to hoping I replace myself.

 

[JV1973]

I think Jv is doing a good job in cycling though i have stated my positions on him and good of him to come talk to us arrrrseholes here on the clinic and may he have a masculine child.

You should meet my son. he's 12 yrs old and has hair on his back.

 

[Jeremiah]

I appreciate that

honesty above all else? Sure I buy that; but like the riders doping because Lance/Johan/the system didn't give them much of a choice. I wouldn't lie for anyone else, but in a culture where speaking out costs me my job? I'd much rather find the middle ground to do things the right way and work for change without making life harder for my wife.

but my interest in these "dilemmas" comes from having to speak up in my position and putting my job in jeopardy.

One thing I don't appreciate is that people in cycling keep acting like they have some unique position in life that others don't face.

I would say that the vast majority of people constantly make "accomodations and allowances" towards inconvenient truths in their climb up organizational ladders that allow them to say things like, "that's the way things have always been" and what can I do?"

Change comes from people who assent to what is true and dissent to what is false. If one doesn't have that clearly marked line of demarcation in life, there's a slippery slope into the abyss. That's just the way it is.

Fortunately for me I crossed those lines when I was a lot younger than these guys and it caused me some guilt. I would classify my behavior as infractions rather than crimes or misdemeanors, but I learned my lessons. I wasn't caught but I felt bad.

Some get away with stuff and rather than rein themselves in, they learn the opposite lesson and make a career out of cheating.



That doesn't anyone "better or worse" but it does save one a lot of grief.

 

[mewmewmew13]

You should meet my son. he's 12 yrs old and has hair on his back.

haha...I was just laughing at zam's comment


when my younger son was little he used to say he had a lot of hair because he was 'more primitive' than his older brother...

 

[JV1973]

+1
you're making a couple of valid points.
JV's claim that cycling supposedly cleaned itself up internally is completely reactionary, and incompatible with his alleged dedication to anti-doping. period.
arguing with doc M on that point is difficult. Doc M. sees contradictions everywhere except in JV's words.

Sniper, you are misinterpreting me. I'm saying that right now, here and today, things are pretty clean. Why? biopassport, pressure from media, people being scared of being discovered... Lots of reasons. I am by no means saying the system is robust enough to sustain this. It is not. I'm just saying that we happen to be in a bit of a purple patch, on the anti-doping front. It won't last long, unless we reform from the bottom up.

 

[Jeremiah]

One invalid one:

That I'm trying to have a career in Pro cycling. I have a career in Pro cycling, but i'm hardly trying to have mine. As I've said before, this is a fun option and rewarding for me, but hardly the only one. And hardly the most financially advantageous option.


And as for Michael Barry's affidavit? Yes, I was profoundly affected. In a lot of negative ways. Why I quit at 29.

Either way, you guys are stuck with me, for a while. So, better to try an give me suggestions, as opposed to hoping I replace myself.

Well ok. If that's the case, and it's only fun and you don't have your back against the wall, what prevented you from saying everything and attaching your name to it back in 2006 or earlier?

Regarding Barry's affadavit, I had an exchange with you on Twitter and you said that subconsciously you may have wanted to get caught at the time. I was referring to him finding your drug paraphernalia in your former apartment.

I don't hope you replace yourself. I hope that people in cycling speak out strongly about the absolute ridiculousness of McQuaid remaining in power at the UCI.

 

[JV1973]

Well ok. If that's the case, and it's only fun and you don't have your back against the wall, what prevented you from saying everything and attaching your name to it back in 2006 or earlier?

Regarding Barry's affadavit, I had an exchange with you on Twitter and you said that subconsciously you may have wanted to get caught at the time. I was referring to him finding your drug paraphernalia in your former apartment.

I don't hope you replace yourself. I hope that people in cycling speak out strongly about the absolute ridiculousness of McQuaid remaining in power at the UCI.

Patience.

Please.

 

[the asian]

JV, can you comment on Andre Tchmil's bid to become European Cycling Union's president and thereby possibly attempt to become UCI president late this year

Your thoughts on one of your contemporary pro, bidding to become UCI President?
Has he met with the teams and presented his views?

 

[Froome19]

JV, you have talked a lot about changing the sport and the way it is run. But at the moment all we are seeing are feeble organisations which have undermined their own authority and intentions such as the MPCC and CCN. These organisations may have noble intentions but they don't seem to be going anywhere and certainly not in the right trajectory which cycling needs and you have suggested. So what or whom do you think can be the catalyst for changing the sport, because it certainly ain't going to be the UCI and the fans still remain powerless?

 

[Arnout]

Please vote against him, Tchmil is an idiot.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Patience.

Please.

Another 22 years?

I feel fu@ked, I watched my 'boyhood' hero sink away in the EPO pool, being destroyed with his best years yet to come. Me believing he was getting an old man while his 'peers' were f@cking him in you know with EPO, destroying a sport.

And now we must have patience Vaughters?

Not just for Greg, also for your ámigo Jonathan Boyer, for Edwig, for Gilles, for Eddie, for all those athletes who did not want to be poisoned.

Get them all, no less.

At least get that sick mtf Hein Verbruggen, he is even worse.

 

[Jeremiah]

Patience.

Please.

Well that's your answer to that but then you have to understand that enquiring minds have questions and that you're asking those enquiring minds to buy a "product" you're selling.