JV talks, sort of

[hiero2]

People or Riders, does the Vortex not know?



Hasn't stopped you accounting for Chemical JV.

Keep a cool head, gents. Beno, this is a personal attack - trying to discredit someone in general - rather than disproving specific points. It is not proper, but I'm feeling generous at the mom.

Be careful, everyone, show a little respect. We all have different opinions - and some of what we believe is conjecture based on our experience. It all comes with the territory - so respect that - and move on if necessary, rather than trying to disrupt things.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

he said cycling is clean (as opposed to cleanER) for instance in this tweet, but of course he backtracked on that so let's call that a slip of the tongue.

and never mind that on several occasions he's claimed Sky to be "clean" (as opposed to "cleanER"). No slip of the tongue this time.

he also recently (august) said this:
cool story bro.

So he said cycling is clean (in a tweet?! - and your link throws up a warning, 'possible phising') and then backtracked?
So, you actually acknowledged that he clarified his remarks - yet still feel it necessary to bring this up every time.

Why????

As for Sky - yet again, no links, but even if he did - guess what, Sky is not all cycling.

 

[gooner]

he said cycling is clean (as opposed to cleanER) for instance in this tweet, but of course he backtracked on that so let's call that a slip of the tongue.

and never mind that on several occasions he's claimed Sky to be "clean" (as opposed to "cleanER"). No slip of the tongue this time.

he also recently (august) said this:
cool story bro.

Yes, he did say he thought Wiggins won the Tour clean but his tweet after AX3 Domaines to me was a change in his thinking regarding Sky and indeed very telling.

 

[sniper]

Why????

i think hrotha's previous post hit nail on head.
you were being ridiculous.

 

[sniper]

Yes, he did say he thought Wiggins won the Tour clean but his tweet after AX3 Domaines to me was a change in his thinking regarding Sky and indeed very telling.

i too guess/hope/think it was telling.
there are two sides to vaughters, that much is clear.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

i think hrotha's previous post hit nail on head.
you were being ridiculous.

More deflection - Hrotha noticed the distinction.

This is the JV thread - why is it you feel compelled to twist what he says?
If JV is meant to be all PR that you portray him as, why is it you need to exaggerate what he says or does?
And why is it you acknowledge that he has clarified his remarks yet ignore that in your posts?

 

[Benotti69]

<snip>

As for Sky - yet again, no links, but even if he did - guess what, Sky is not all cycling.

to argue that JV did not try and sell clean cycling is plain silly.

Ashenden declared the dark era not over and that 'so called' clean teams were involved in doping.

There maybe cleanER elements to the sport, but I doubt it and how can we tell when the anti doping is run by UCI, the testers cant find riders and the those winning are breaking doping records for climbs.

As for Sky is not all cycling, they are one of 2 teams intent on selling the clean message of the sport.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

to argue that JV did not try and sell clean cycling is plain silly.

He has said many times the sport is cleanER.

Even the only quote provided by sniper mentions that those who dope are ostracized, if JV was selling a clean sport (whatever that means) he wouldn't mention the dopers, as they would not exist.

Ashenden declared the dark era not over and that 'so called' clean teams were involved in doping.

There maybe cleanER elements to the sport, but I doubt it and how can we tell when the anti doping is run by UCI, the testers cant find riders and the those winning are breaking doping records for climbs.

As for Sky is not all cycling, they are one of 2 teamsintent on selling the clean message of the sport.

One of 2 teams is not all of cycling. Thanks for proving my point.

Ashenden is IMO correct. And has zero to do with anything Vaughters says.

 

[sniper]

He has said many times the sport is cleanER.

Even the only quote provided by sniper mentions that those who dope are ostracized, if JV was selling a clean sport (whatever that means) he wouldn't mention the dopers, as they would not exist.

One of 2 teams is not all of cycling. Thanks for proving my point.

Ashenden is IMO correct. And has zero to do with anything Vaughters says.

funny, you're the only one thus far who speaks of "all of cycling".
and i've provided more than one quote.

but never mind, keep on trolling this thread.
it became unreadable a long time ago thanks to your interventions.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

funny, you're the only one thus far who speaks of "all of cycling".
and i've provided more than one quote.

but never mind, keep on trolling this thread.
it became unreadable a long time ago thanks to your interventions.

Let me help you....

he said cycling is clean (as opposed to cleanER) for instance in this tweet, but of course he backtracked on that so let's call that a slip of the tongue.

and never mind that on several occasions he's claimed Sky to be "clean" (as opposed to "cleanER"). No slip of the tongue this time.

he also recently (august) said this:
cool story bro.

Amusing that you accuse me of trolling this thread when you admit to 'exaggerating' and ignoring his clarifications to distort what he actually has said.

I would actually prefer to read what JV has to say (you know, the guy who is the subject of this thread) so I can make my own opinion rather than have you and your biased buddies make up stuff which has accomplished it goal of running him off this thread.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I don't put any credence into anything Vaughters says. He's a former doper now trying to sell "cleaner" cycling. He has a vested interest in convincing fans that the sport is clean and believable, despite obvious signs to the contrary.

 

[sniper]

Amusing that you accuse me of trolling this thread when you admit to 'exaggerating' and ignoring his clarifications to distort what he actually has said.

could you back this up please? no you can't. (1)

and it also still stands that i provided more than one quote whereas you said i provided only one.
i think we call that lying. (2)

and it still stands you're the only one who speaks of "all of cycling".
that's deliberate deflection, i think. (3)

not to mention it all started with you taking benotti's figure of speech literally. (4)

so that's a quadruple facepalm right there, and i guess four facepalms in the space of two to three pages is indeed a new clinic record, and certainly enough to warrant the lable "trolling".

not a big deal, but just for the record and perhaps something for the mods to ponder on.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

could you back this up please? no you can't. (1)

and it also still stands that i provided more than one quote whereas you said i provided only one.
i think we call that lying. (2)

and it still stands you're the only one who speaks of "all of cycling".
that's deliberate deflection, i think. (3)

not to mention it all started with you taking benotti's figure of speech literally. (4)

so that's a quadruple facepalm right there, and i guess four facepalms in the space of two to three pages is indeed a new clinic record, and certainly enough to warrant the lable "trolling".

not a big deal, but just for the record and perhaps something for the mods to ponder on.

You forgot you wrote this??

i'll grant you that my representation was exaggerated,
but "he knew johnny doped" is quite the euphemism compared to "he warned that johnny was a reputed drugcheat".

and so the point remains: weltz still hasn't come clean let alone shown any repentance, and it begs the question why prentice is no longer concerned.

Again - if you have a problem with anything I post then highlight it for a mod.

 

[sniper]

You forgot you wrote this??



Again - if you have a problem with anything I post then highlight it for a mod.

that wasn't vaughters, was it?
fifth facepalm. fifth misrepresentation. there black on white.
keep up the good work.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

that wasn't vaughters, was it?
fifth facepalm. fifth misrepresentation. there black on white.
continue the trolling, dr. mas.

If I am trolling then report it - very simple.

I am the one who wants to read what JV says, not your biased interpretation - if requesting you to stop lying, distorting things and exaggerating is trolling, then tough.

BTW - you want to back up the San Millan is Contadors Doctor, or is this just an attempt to clutter the thread to hide your lies?

 

[sniper]

If I am trolling then report it - very simple.

I am the one who wants to read what JV says, not your biased interpretation - if requesting you to stop lying, distorting things and exaggerating is trolling, then tough.

BTW - you want to back up the San Millan is Contadors Doctor, or is this just an attempt to clutter the thread to hide your lies?

i appreciate the lengths you go to try and spin my words and put false statements in my mouth, but it only makes your failure to do so more flagrant.

a pity we have to go through this time and again.
cuz let's face it, whenever you put your mind to it, you are indeed one of the best, most intelligent, funny, interesting and well-informed posters in here and few (least of all i myself) can stand in your shadow.
if only you'd put your mind to it more often.

so here you go:
i didn't say he was contador's doc. i said he bragged about it.

----------

on the topic of San Millán (and hopefully back on topic for good): he's another one of the garmin family who've tried to sell us sweet cookies:

The statistics for doping in cycling are probably the lowest in sports. They do about 10,000 tests per year and we only see only 4 or 5 cases per year. So we're talking .04-.05%.

 

[The Hitch]

Yes, he did say he thought Wiggins won the Tour clean but his tweet after AX3 Domaines to me was a change in his thinking regarding Sky and indeed very telling.

Some in the clinic said JV did not go far enough with that tweet. He just said "I don't know".

I defended JV, because he at least showed a step forward. he showed doubts, and it was good from someone in cycling as everyone else was offering mostly insults to the doubters.

But I remember a tweet shortly after that where JV said that actually, what people need to understand is how great Sky's science is and their training and why actually, Froome may be able to beat doped times clean afterall.

Which made the original "I dont know" sound more like a real "I dont know, let me consider it" before the eventual decision - actually he may be clean, rather than the - ooh, maybe it isnt all that clean afterall, that some of us originally interpeted it as.

If you place as much emphasis on times as JV has over the last 2 years, when they were dropping, its understandable that people expect you to hold to that when times start going up again.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

i appreciate the lengths you go to try and spin my words and put false statements in my mouth, but it only makes your failure to do so more flagrant.

Then report it to the mods.
And be very clear and show them how I spin your words.

a pity we have to go through this time and again.
cuz let's face it, whenever you put your mind to it, you are indeed one of the best, most intelligent, funny, interesting and well-informed posters in here and few (least of all i myself) can stand in your shadow.
if only you'd put your mind to it more often.

so here you go:
i didn't say he was contador's doc. i said he bragged about it.

Ah ok - and the "it" being when you wrote this?
"Inigo used to work closely with Allen Lim and used to brag about being Contador's former doctor."

---------

on the topic of San Millán (and hopefully back on topic for good): he's another one of the garmin family who've tried to sell us sweet cookies:

Indeed back on track - of course when you include the full context of what he was saying in 2009 it was a pretty accurate assessment.

You could argue a case if that was the only thing he said in the interview - but of course you left out the very next line. guess what he says in the very next line.......

ISM;

The statistics for doping in cycling are probably the lowest in sports. They do about 10,000 tests per year and we only see only 4 or 5 cases per year. So we're talking .04-.05%.

However, I agree with you that there are still some people who are still doping. I don't know about Kohl, where he says he was taking absolutely everything, which probably isn't real because they would've caught him or found him very suspicious, so I was wondering what kind of substances he was taking, you know what I mean? For sure, the blood doping is a major concern right now, 'cause there's no catch method right now. I think the community has to come up with a detection method before this gets out of hand.

So, again - this isn't Garmin, JV or people trying to sell something - this is you deliberately distorting, exaggerating and selectively quoting people to push your view.
It is pathetic.

 

[the sceptic]

Why does JV say there isnt a big market for Horner next year similar to Cobo? Because everyone knows they were juiced to the eyeballs?

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Why does JV say there isnt a big market for Horner next year similar to Cobo? Because everyone knows they were juiced to the eyeballs?

It's very hard to read his tweets about Horner (incuding that one) in any other way.

 

[the sceptic]

Thats what I thought too.

I dont understand how he can be "not sure" about Froome and at the same time imply that he is sure Cobo was doping.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Thats what I thought too.

I dont understand how he can be "not sure" about Froome and at the same time imply that he is sure Cobo was doping.

Oh come on now. You don't have to agree with the logic of an argument that differentiates between Cobo and Froome to see that at least potentially there is one: From Vaughter's point of view, Froome has the Badzilla excuse plus Sky (a team he seems to think are genuine in their anti-doping policy) vouching for him. Cobo has a year without a single cq point and Saunier Duval.

It's also worth noting that this tweet doesn't so much point the finger at Cobo as imply that everyone who might be hiring assumed he was doping, which is a slightly different thing.

What's more interesting than him implying a distinction between Cobo and Froome, given that nobody anywhere ever really tries to justify Juan Jose unless they are making a rhetorical point about Froome, is that his tweets also imply a distinction between Wiggins and Froome, where he vouches for Wiggins but says he doesn't know when it comes to Froome.

 

[sniper]

...So, again - this isn't Garmin, JV or people trying to sell something - this is you deliberately distorting, exaggerating and selectively quoting people to push your view.
It is pathetic.

"i agree with you"
you know what that means, don't you?
it means the interviewer saw straight through the BS san millán was spouting and decided to give him a couple of hints.
it means the interviewer didn't buy the sweet cookies san millán was trying to sell him.

even the interviewer, doc.

i've lost count.
6th or 7th facepalm?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

"i agree with you"
you know what that means, don't you?
it means the interviewer saw straight through the BS san millán was spouting and decided to give him a couple of hints.
it means the interviewer didn't buy the sweet cookies san millán was trying to sell him.

even the interviewer, doc.

i've lost count.
6th or 7th facepalm?

What a clever interviewer - he saw the BS before the answer and put it in to the question......

Amazing as this was the question Andy asked:

AS: I guess the frustrations for the fans is that you have someone coming forward who has been using CERA and transfusions, basically not being caught. There's always the suspicion that the UCI is not a strong enough enforcement agency, since the catches are being made by the IOC, AFLD, and the BDR, but not the UCI.

 

[sniper]

What a clever interviewer - he saw the BS before the answer and put it in to the question......

Amazing as this was the question Andy asked:

guess what, i think we agree.