JV talks, sort of

[ElChingon]

In the interim, could we just quit this thread? It's hurtful to me.

Moderators? Please?

Thanks, JV

Being a known co-conspirator in the USPS doping ring and never saying anything till being made to say it via a legal statutes is offensive to us fans.

Get it?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Maybe I'm just being a sensitive wuss?!

Ya - that must be it.

But seriously - what part do you find hurtful? (or is it more general frustration?)
I could understand some of the personal stuff, because whether true or not, it is personal.

But do you find criticism of your team hurtful?
The riders?
The sport in general?
Your efforts in anti-doping?
References to your past?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Being a known co-conspirator in the USPS doping ring and never saying anything till being made to say it via a legal statutes is offensive to us fans.

Get it?

He spoke to David Walsh in 2003 - thats almost 10 years ago.
He also spoke to Macur of the NYT for the piece on Frankie in 2006.

Your not offended - your just ignorant.

 

[ElChingon]

He spoke to David Walsh in 2003 - thats almost 10 years ago.
He also spoke to Macur of the NYT for the piece on Frankie in 2006.

Your not offended - your just ignorant.

So why did he write that fluff piece for the NYT apologizing?

Or are you saying he was lieing about it all along? D.A.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So why did he write that fluff piece for the NYT apologizing?

Or are you saying he was lieing about it all along? D.A.

To the highlighted no - don't even know where you got that.

The fluff piece was a fluff piece because your average NYT reader needs fluff.
By all accounts, it was well received.

 

[JV1973]

Being a known co-conspirator in the USPS doping ring and never saying anything till being made to say it via a legal statutes is offensive to us fans.

Get it?

Please don't forget the word "evil" - it's part of my new branding.

Not saying anything? Walsh 2003, Dan Coyle, 2004-2005, USADA 2004, Juliet Macur NYT, 2006, voluntary witness US FDA (never subpoenaed), 2010, USADA 2010, then again, USADA, 2012.... made to do what? get your story straight.

Get it?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Please don't forget the word "evil" - it's part of my new branding.

Not saying anything? Walsh 2003, Dan Coyle, 2004-2005, USADA 2004, Juliet Macur NYT, 2006, voluntary witness US FDA (new subpoenaed), 2010, USADA 2010, then again, USADA, 2012.... made to do what? get your story straight.

Get it?

Where is the statue?

I cannot be as "hardcore" as you folks would like, as I actually hold a position in the structures you discuss.

Just like the Santa Clara team manager. It is understandable. Just stop selling 'clean cycling' because it is far from. You are no Hein, no marketeer, or are you?

 

[JV1973]

Strictly based on his coming clean before he ever 'had' to. That's not the action of someone complicit in the lie. No extended period of crying and denying, no p*ssing at media about how they have it wrong in cycling, no eating a short off-season ban to get back in the action, none of the 'normal' bullsh*t.

Contrast that with everyone else implicated in doping.

I am certainly not trying to defend the 'clean team', or even the 'no needles' screen.

I was just pointing out that, by all accounts, JV is PERSONALLY anti dope. And that's ALL we can give him credit for.

The rest is PR...

The rest is not PR. The rest is not being ignorant, naive, or simply uniformed. Three thing I learned at Credit Agricole: one, the riders will respect management if they are clear, and not double messaging, about doping. Two, if sponsor/points pressure grows too large, the riders will disobey this. Three, this can only be prevented by real enforcement and knowledge. Roger didn't understand blood testing science, and he was naive to modern doping methods. In many occasions, preventing number two is simply a matter of knowledge - and that cold and nasty knowledge comes from having been a criminal.

Takes one to know one.

JV

 

[blackcat]

. You are no Hein, no marketeer, or are you?

he has a "brand".

dont attack his brand.

what are you, a hater?

 

[Catwhoorg]

Please don't forget the word "evil" - it's part of my new branding.

Not saying anything? Walsh 2003, Dan Coyle, 2004-2005, USADA 2004, Juliet Macur NYT, 2006, voluntary witness US FDA (never subpoenaed), 2010, USADA 2010, then again, USADA, 2012.... made to do what? get your story straight.

Get it?

Yeah but besides that, what have the Romans ever done for us
(This whole line of inquiry feels like a Monty Python skit to me).


Congrats to Talansky on his 2nd place at Paris Nice that was a solid performance the whole week.

 

[JV1973]

Where is the statue?

Just like the Santa Clara team manager. It is understandable. Just stop selling 'clean cycling' because it is far from. You are no Hein, no marketeer, or are you?

No. It's just what i believe at the moment. And the science backs me up. That doesn't mean we have fundamental and permanent change. It means, in early 2013, you can do damn well in top level professional cycling, clean. That was so far from reality in 1996, 2000, 2003, whatever... So far. So, why would I not say that when it's best thing I've seen in 20 years? That's not marking, it's happiness.

Now, does this mean it's clean? No necessarily. But it does mean that whatever doping is being employed, is not nearly as effective as it was. So, its either close to being clean or the doses are so small that it is not having a meaningful impact on the racing. The answer to which? I don't know.

I'd prefer a painting over a statue.

 

[sniper]

No. It's just what i believe at the moment. And the science backs me up. That doesn't mean we have fundamental and permanent change. It means, in early 2013, you can do damn well in top level professional cycling, clean. That was so far from reality in 1996, 2000, 2003, whatever... So far. So, why would I not say that when it's best thing I've seen in 20 years? That's not marking, it's happiness.

Now, does this mean it's clean? No necessarily. But it does mean that whatever doping is being employed, is not nearly as effective as it was. So, its either close to being clean or the doses are so small that it is not having a meaningful impact on the racing. The answer to which? I don't know.

I'd prefer a painting over a statue.

so why isn't Contador winning more?

 

[JV1973]

Where is the statue?

Just like the Santa Clara team manager. It is understandable. Just stop selling 'clean cycling' because it is far from. You are no Hein, no marketeer, or are you?

Btw - Do not compare me to Hein. I'd imagine you've never gotten voicemails from him when the phrase "****ing *******" is used over an over? It's not fun, especially when it happens a few years ago before it was cool to hate on Hein - and when he still had considerable power in the sport.

JV

 

[will10]

No. It's just what i believe at the moment. And the science backs me up. That doesn't mean we have fundamental and permanent change. It means, in early 2013, you can do damn well in top level professional cycling, clean. That was so far from reality in 1996, 2000, 2003, whatever... So far. So, why would I not say that when it's best thing I've seen in 20 years? That's not marking, it's happiness.

Now, does this mean it's clean? No necessarily. But it does mean that whatever doping is being employed, is not nearly as effective as it was. So, its either close to being clean or the doses are so small that it is not having a meaningful impact on the racing. The answer to which? I don't know.

I'd prefer a painting over a statue.

JV,
Earlier in the week you were tweeting about Froome putting out "only" 5.9w/kg on Prato di Tivo. When you were looking into potentially signing him in 2011, did you think he was capable of producing that sort of power on a 30-40 minute finishing climb? Did you think he was as big a talent as guys like Hesjedal and Talansky who you obviously have a lot of belief in?

 

[JV1973]

Yeah but besides that, what have the Romans ever done for us
(This whole line of inquiry feels like a Monty Python skit to me).


Congrats to Talansky on his 2nd place at Paris Nice that was a solid performance the whole week.

Talansky is quite the talent and personality. His audacity makes me smile.

 

[Benotti69]

The 'science' is that riders are not hitting LeMond like numbers. How many LeMonds have there been? Not many will make LeMonds numbers but we are sold this is the magic number.

Sky dominate 2 races and posters think yep that looks clean? Really? Just because they are not going over max wattages.

I can see Vino saying how much he prefers the racing the cleanER way

Easy to sell these numbers after the madness of the EPO era, but nothing in the sport has changed, all the doping enablers are still there, from DS, docs, soigneurs, mechanics, and federations including the international fed, UCI. So stop selling clean cycling. It is slower and the epo madness has passed till the next big PED, but it is not clean. And cleaner is a total misnomer. Doping is cheating no matter the size of the blood bags.

 

[blackcat]

Talansky is quite the talent and personality. His audacity makes me smile.

sound like DZ.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

what are you, a hater?

You got me there, red handed.

No. It's just what i believe at the moment. And the science backs me up. That doesn't mean we have fundamental and permanent change. It means, in early 2013, you can do damn well in top level professional cycling, clean. That was so far from reality in 1996, 2000, 2003, whatever... So far. So, why would I not say that when it's best thing I've seen in 20 years? That's not marking, it's happiness.

Now, does this mean it's clean? No necessarily. But it does mean that whatever doping is being employed, is not nearly as effective as it was. So, its either close to being clean or the doses are so small that it is not having a meaningful impact on the racing. The answer to which? I don't know.

I'd prefer a painting over a statue.

I know where you stand and I think that to some degree you have a point, even are right

But, there is enough eyebrowraising stuff around. The question is always who is doing what.

Eyes can not be deceived. History neither. Science on the other hand can deceive, ask the guy who told everyone the world is round, where did he end up?

Btw - Do not compare me to Hein. I'd imagine you've never gotten voicemails from him when the phrase "****ing *******" is used over an over? It's not fun, especially when it happens a few years ago before it was cool to hate on Hein - and when he still had considerable power in the sport.

JV

I talk in hyperboles, Hein is the ultimate cycling marketeer/a-hole, that should p@ss u off, it kinda did

 

[JimmyFingers]

Talansky is quite the talent and personality. His audacity makes me smile.

I liked Porte's description of Talansky:

“He’s quite American, in that he’s a little bit brash… I guess. But he’s actually a good guy. He’s a massive talent and, to be honest, I think he’s probably the [most] under-rated one of those young Americans.

'Quite American'

I don't think he's quite as fond of Tejay

 

[JV1973]

JV,
Earlier in the week you were tweeting about Froome putting out "only" 5.9w/kg on Prato di Tivo. When you were looking into potentially signing him in 2011, did you think he was capable of producing that sort of power on a 30-40 minute finishing climb? Did you think he was as big a talent as guys like Hesjedal and Talansky who you obviously have a lot of belief in?

Yeah, in 2011 i wanted to sign Froome. I gave him an offer a few days before the Vuelta. I knew he produced massive numbers in testing, but wasn't converting it onto the road because he has poor bike handling and because he had major issues with recovery due to some parasite issues he's struggled with. Anyhow, he asked me to wait a few days, as he wanted to make sure that Sky wasn't going to give him an offer (at this point Sky wasn't going to give him a contract, Brailsford "had no budget left").....and in a few days he was leading the Vuelta. So, I guess dave found a few million Euro under the couch and my offer was discarded.

Annoying, that.

But, yes, Ive known Froome was talented for a while. Just very rough. he still is. Not terribly smooth in the peloton, still has relapses of the parasite issue. But he's a massive motor.

*This is not defending him from all the doping accusations* I'm just being factual regarding my opinions/knowledge on the topic.

 

[hrotha]

JV, you've mentioned before that the current state of antidoping, where clean riders can perform at the highest level, is by no means assured to last, that culture and science have met at a certain point to create this window, and that this is the time to apply further structural and cultural changes so that the situation isn't reversed. I like that you don't have a linear approach to doping: neither "things can never change and doping will always be widespread" nor "history is constant betterment and progress".

Your stated position allows for the possibility of regression. What would it take for you to think (or say openly) that regression may be taking place? As you know, many of us aren't convinced by "physiologically possible watt numbers" alone.

 

[blackcat]

The 'science' is that riders are not hitting LeMond like numbers. How many LeMonds have there been? Not many will make LeMonds numbers but we are sold this is the magic number.

Sky dominate 2 races and posters think yep that looks clean? Really? Just because they are not going over max wattages.

I can see Vino saying how much he prefers the racing the cleanER way

Easy to sell these numbers after the madness of the EPO era, but nothing in the sport has changed, all the doping enablers are still there, from DS, docs, soigneurs, mechanics, and federations including the international fed, UCI. So stop selling clean cycling. It is slower and the epo madness has passed till the next big PED, but it is not clean. And cleaner is a total misnomer. Doping is cheating no matter the size of the blood bags.

in defense of this. we never gonna get clean cycling and a clean peleton, their never was and never will be.

as long as we get no salanson and kim kirchen avoidable OD's ok. but like Dr Jason Mazanov and Prof Julian Savulescu say, pro sport is not the pursuit of health, nor is it a safe enterprise.

Pedro Horillo, Wouter Weylandt, Mauricio Soler... Pantani, VDB

 

[Catwhoorg]

Did you get to see his (Froome's) Bio passport etc before making that offer, or was the offer conditional on seeing it afterwards ?

(I really don't know which way round is typical)

 

[JV1973]

Did you get to see his (Froome's) Bio passport etc before making that offer, or was the offer conditional on seeing it afterwards ?

(I really don't know which way round is typical)

Nope. never saw it. Conditional on me actually signing a contract, but never got to that point. Just telephone calls.

 

[blackcat]

But, yes, Ive known Froome was talented for a while. Just very rough. he still is. Not terribly smooth in the peloton, still has relapses of the parasite issue. But he's a massive motor.

tall tho, what is he, 6'1"? weighs about Andy Schleck now, 145 lbs. not ideal for descending.

Brailsford tested him circa 09 and his numbers were at TDF winner level.

I'm a big fan of Froome.

The Clinic 12 think he is a fraud and a donkey. I point them to Levi.