JV talks, sort of

[sniper]

I imagine the difference is that they are now at Slipstream, a team with a clear mission statement, and if they fail to uphold it it's not the same as doping at Discovery, Liberty or Rabobank, where doping was facilitated or encouraged. I wouldn't think it's the same, and I'd expect a Garmin rider who tested positive would never come back with JV.

they won't fail. JV was part of the UCI anti-doping commission.
and what's so clear about the mission statement? the mission statement promises transparency , perfecting the process , and more marginal gain BS. Ah, and it's not about winning, but of course "we want to win as many races as possible".

 

[Autobus]

So it comes down to the fact that JV's team isn't pure and his motives aren't pure. I understand why you may be a sceptic, but then, why bother. Yes, JV needs to have a team that wins some races to keep the sponsors' names in the public eye. That gives any team motivation to cheat. He hires ex-dopers. They may cheat. And he's an ex-doper. These are all out there. But then, why make such a big deal about it? It's not like his is any worse than any other pro team. Or is it just that you think he has a holier than thou attitude? Is that the real issue? Sure he comes off that way sometimes and it gets rather cloying, but who would you rather see the sport of cycling look to for direction, JV or Johan Bruyneel? The bar in this sport is awfully low. I'm grateful that someone at least acts like it's worth raising that bar.

 

[Caruut]

You make it sound almost like Rock Racing now?


My point being:

it's ok to dope as long as you eventually confess and promise to never do it again?

or: this guy never doped / was never caught doping, so we'll give him a chance instead.

There's only so many spots on a team and there's lots of promising young riders missing out on the spots taken up by an ex-doper.

An ex-doper that now owns part of the team. Thanks for $$$ buddy.

While I do sometimes feel the Garmin confession and promise formula to rehabilitation feels just a bit like rinse and repeat, I have to say that I prefer an environment where the norm is admitting what you did rather than staying silent and pretending nothing happened. The bolded part sort of misses the point. Successful riders with no black clouds don't really need to be given chances. They already have options. It is those who find themselves blacklisted for one reason or another yet want to race clean who need a chance.

I'm not convinced entirely by JV/Garmin. It feels a bit like a PR move and their lack of honesty is disturbing, but they are a lot more believable to me than most teams. I'm sure they aren't immune to the odd bad apple, but in general better than most, though that's not particularly high praise. It's still good that it's commercially viable to be anti-doping and that a team and their manager have the stones to stand up to those in charge of the sport.

 

[the big ring]

While I do sometimes feel the Garmin confession and promise formula to rehabilitation feels just a bit like rinse and repeat, I have to say that I prefer an environment where the norm is admitting what you did rather than staying silent and pretending nothing happened. The bolded part sort of misses the point. Successful riders with no black clouds don't really need to be given chances. They already have options. It is those who find themselves blacklisted for one reason or another yet want to race clean who need a chance.

I guess that's my point - there's lots of people knocking on the door, and it's my belief that they don't have options.

And it's moot anyway if JV hires someone and they rock the house clean (or not). A bigger budget team open to doping can offer them megabux and then the temptation cycle begins.

I still want to know what the mission of Garmin is. In writing.

 

[sniper]

I imagine the difference is that they are now at Slipstream, a team with a clear mission statement, and if they fail to uphold it it's not the same as doping at Discovery, Liberty or Rabobank, where doping was facilitated or encouraged. I wouldn't think it's the same, and I'd expect a Garmin rider who tested positive would never come back with JV.

they won't fail. JV was part of the UCI anti-doping commission.
and what's so clear about the mission statement? the mission statement promises transparency , perfecting the process , and more marginal gain issues. Ah, and it's not about winning, but of course "we want to win as many races as possible".

...
I still want to know what the mission of Garmin is. In writing.

I guess in his TED presentation he comes close to formulating the mission. Winning supposedly doesn't matter, as long as a rider has aimed at 'perfection in the process' and 'precision across the board'.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I guess that's my point - there's lots of people knocking on the door, and it's my belief that they don't have options.

And it's moot anyway if JV hires someone and they rock the house clean (or not). A bigger budget team open to doping can offer them megabux and then the temptation cycle begins.

There are always going to be people knocking on the door, some may well have a history (but not a positive) - so the only thing any team can do is say no doping here.

While I was not particularly happy that Dekker was signed, it's because he had a past Garmin would have got him at rock bottom price.

I still want to know what the mission of Garmin is. In writing.

There isn't one.

 

[roundabout]

While I do sometimes feel the Garmin confession and promise formula to rehabilitation feels just a bit like rinse and repeat, I have to say that I prefer an environment where the norm is admitting what you did rather than staying silent and pretending nothing happened. The bolded part sort of misses the point. Successful riders with no black clouds don't really need to be given chances. They already have options. It is those who find themselves blacklisted for one reason or another yet want to race clean who need a chance.

I'm not convinced entirely by JV/Garmin. It feels a bit like a PR move and their lack of honesty is disturbing, but they are a lot more believable to me than most teams. I'm sure they aren't immune to the odd bad apple, but in general better than most, though that's not particularly high praise. It's still good that it's commercially viable to be anti-doping and that a team and their manager have the stones to stand up to those in charge of the sport.

How many people who were blacklisted rode for Garmin?

Beyond creating a team where the riders don't have pressure to dope, there isn't really a lot that Vaughters can do. The real change comes because of people who have less to lose. Like Manzano, Landis and even Cassani. They contributed to creating the environment where Vandevelde could finish 4th in the Tour.

 

[sniper]

how many people who were blacklisted rode for garmin?

Beyond creating a team where the riders don't have pressure to dope, there isn't really a lot that vaughters can do. the real change comes because of people who have less to lose. Like manzano, landis and even cassani. they contributed to creating the environment where vandevelde could finish 4th in the tour.

+5
.........

 

[Caruut]

How many people who were blacklisted rode for Garmin?

Beyond creating a team where the riders don't have pressure to dope, there isn't really a lot that Vaughters can do. The real change comes because of people who have less to lose. Like Manzano, Landis and even Cassani. They contributed to creating the environment where Vandevelde could finish 4th in the Tour.

Really just Dekker I suppose. Garmin don't even have that many ex-dopers, so I don't see what's such a big deal there. They're open and up front about hiring them, which is so much better than most teams, I think. I'm starting to feel I may have thought about things in the wrong way though. Garmin haven't hired anyone who did a real tell-all which actually implicated many people.

 

[Caruut]

I guess that's my point - there's lots of people knocking on the door, and it's my belief that they don't have options.

And it's moot anyway if JV hires someone and they rock the house clean (or not). A bigger budget team open to doping can offer them megabux and then the temptation cycle begins.

I still want to know what the mission of Garmin is. In writing.

A very good point. Hadn't thought of it like that.

 

[Benotti69]

So it comes down to the fact that JV's team isn't pure and his motives aren't pure. I understand why you may be a sceptic, but then, why bother. Yes, JV needs to have a team that wins some races to keep the sponsors' names in the public eye. That gives any team motivation to cheat. He hires ex-dopers. They may cheat. And he's an ex-doper. These are all out there. But then, why make such a big deal about it? It's not like his is any worse than any other pro team. Or is it just that you think he has a holier than thou attitude? Is that the real issue? Sure he comes off that way sometimes and it gets rather cloying, but who would you rather see the sport of cycling look to for direction, JV or Johan Bruyneel? The bar in this sport is awfully low. I'm grateful that someone at least acts like it's worth raising that bar.

I'd rather Riis not acting and pontificating about cleanliness than JV and his clean crap.

Millar, what a joke. Makes himself out to be mr anti-doping, and the biggest thing he has said recently is i dont like what the UCI is saying. Pish!

With Sky coming on the scene must have really pished JV off, because they in the beginning talked about transparency, before we all saw it was just a smoke screen. But Garmin have been the exact same. We know very little about this team. They talk about a clean sport getting cleaner and it is them leading the charge, but we know it isnt. They were goning to sign Rasmussen, if he got off his 3 missed OOC test on a technicality. Only reason Rasmussen missed 3 OOC tests. Doping. Garmin clean, nah!

 

[pmcg76]

Guess I must be misreading things here, but we have a poster who is questioning Garmin and their ethics whilst in another clinic thread defending Froome and SKY...................Right, got it

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Really just Dekker I suppose. Garmin don't even have that many ex-dopers, so I don't see what's such a big deal there. They're open and up front about hiring them, which is so much better than most teams, I think. I'm starting to feel I may have thought about things in the wrong way though. Garmin haven't hired anyone who did a real tell-all which actually implicated many people.

Realistically, how many of those type of riders are there?
But one of the conditions of signing Dekker was sitting down talking to WADA.

 

[hiero2]

I have to look that word up. I'm not trying to appeal to emotion / prejudice here. Sorry if it comes across that way. I am sincerely seeking information.

In the world of big business it's easy to let a perception or legend of good intent take shape. I believe JV has good intentions - I am simply asking if you can categorically state what they are, based on words the man himself has used, or if you are simply repeating what you believe to be true - an act of faith.

Methinks thou dost protest overmuch.

JV has stated his "mission" many times - earlier in this thread, amof, and now in the NYTimes, quite publicly, there, yes? Check post # 178 in this thread, hopefully this will get you there
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=18079&page=18

I understand one aspect of your point. Quite often a "Mission Statement" means nothing past the ink it was written with. However, in the case of JV, I believe we have actions consistent with how he has professed to believe. In this case, he does not appear to have a sentence titled "Mission Statement". But he has made his priorities and preferences clear to any who would listen.

 

[Caruut]

Realistically, how many of those type of riders are there?
But one of the conditions of signing Dekker was sitting down talking to WADA.

Very few, but those who have don't get back into the game. I think there would be some value in Garmin giving jobs to those who had "spat in the soup". They haven't though.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Very few, but those who have don't get back into the game. I think there would be some value in Garmin giving jobs to those who had "spat in the soup". They haven't though.

Seriously, how many is "very few" and who are they? I actually cannot think of anyone who fits that criteria.

 

[Le breton]

In terms of the math, 10s to 9.8s is ... (EDIT)... a lot more (than 2%) in terms of power. Might be that JV chose the example wisely.

it's probably roughly 10%

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'd rather Riis not acting and pontificating about cleanliness than JV and his clean crap.

Millar, what a joke. Makes himself out to be mr anti-doping, and the biggest thing he has said recently is i dont like what the UCI is saying. Pish!

With Sky coming on the scene must have really pished JV off, because they in the beginning talked about transparency, before we all saw it was just a smoke screen. But Garmin have been the exact same. We know very little about this team. They talk about a clean sport getting cleaner and it is them leading the charge, but we know it isnt. They were goning to sign Rasmussen, if he got off his 3 missed OOC test on a technicality. Only reason Rasmussen missed 3 OOC tests. Doping. Garmin clean, nah!

To the blue - actually, how do you know?

Because your Rasmussen point is flawed - he was with HTC at the time, (or are they a doping team too?) and he one of his missed was because he failed to submit his quarterly form on time. One of the other occasions he was at an event where he was tested. He would be the dopiest doper ever.

 

[the big ring]

Methinks thou dost protest overmuch.

Methinks thou loveth too blindly

JV has stated his "mission" many times - earlier in this thread, amof, and now in the NYTimes, quite publicly, there, yes? Check post # 178 in this thread, hopefully this will get you there

Rather than confidently and succinctly tell me what his mission is, every poster to date has said "You know what it is", or, "JV wrote something over here", "JV said something in this video".

Really!? It's like the emperor's effing new clothes ffs.

Here is what JV wrote:

I'm confident that "up to no good" isn't happening on my team from anyone. I make it abundantly clear that anti-doping is first, results second. Any sponsor signing up with us knows that this is the deal (maybe why we don't get the huge $$$ sponsors??? kidding... I hope)...

This is telling - he's concerned with the bottom line. And apparently is anti-doping first, results second. If only it said that somewhere on his website - you know - the public face of his business. And there's nothing about transparency in there. Or something like, "They know if they dope (not get caught, just dope) - they are OUT!".

Here's the brutal reality: results get sponsorship $$. Nothing else. Which is why you can have 2 bad performances before JV ditches you. Or 3 or 4.

2008: http://www.slipstreamsports.com/200...-edge®-705-to-elite-cycling-team’s-training-2

About Team Slipstream/Chipotle
Owned and managed by Slipstream Sports, a sports marketing and development company, Team Slipstream/Chipotle is dedicated to promoting ethical sporting and developing the next generation of cycling champions. In 2007, Team Slipstream partnered with Agency for Cycling Ethics (ACE), to create the most progressive anti-doping system in the professional sports world. Each of the team’s 25 riders will undergo combined voluntary testing at least 700 times throughout the 2008 season, 20 times the number of tests that most professional cyclists are subject to annually. Team Slipstream will be competing in a full schedule of professional cycling races in the U.S. and Europe throughout 2008. Additional information is available at http://www.slipstreamsports.com.

Did JV create the UCI's athlete's blood passport? Is that how he got on the anti-doping board? Isn't this JV's team's data, done by him - NOT the UCI? Has he released these results? Can we have some transparency, please?

No more team-based testing in 2009 - I guess ABP is handled by someone else now. Sorry, I can't show you the data any more, but let me assure you, it's definitely getting cleaner.

2009: http://www.slipstreamsports.com/200...orship-of-team-garmin-slipstream-through-2013

About Slipstream Sports
Founded in 2005, Slipstream Sports LLC is a highly progressive sports management company dedicated solely to promoting the ethical growth of cycling and developing the next generation of cycling champions.

About Team Garmin-Slipstream
Team Garmin-Slipstream is dedicated to promoting ethical sporting and developing the next generation of cycling champions. Team Garmin-Slipstream competes in a full schedule of professional cycling races in the U.S. and Europe. Additional information is available at http://www.slipstreamsports.com.

https://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/235466483029901313

This NYT oped response has been like a sociology class. First, massive support, then folks who fancy themselves iconoclasts, say "ah ha!"

Sorry JV. With Brad Wiggins, I had not been paying much attention until he implied I was a ****ing ****er. Then I had a really close look and didn't like what I saw at all.

I had not been paying much attention to you either, until you came out. You write well, and I dismissed the ChrisE's of the world but more careful analysis of your words lead me to really question what you stand for. It's been an interesting experience trying to find out. And I still want to know if you can guarantee your 2009 Tour team was clean.

 

[sniper]

Methinks thou loveth too blindly




Rather than confidently and succinctly tell me what his mission is, every poster to date has said "You know what it is", or, "JV wrote something over here", "JV said something in this video".

Really!? It's like the emperor's effing new clothes ffs.

Here is what JV wrote:



This is telling - he's concerned with the bottom line. And apparently is anti-doping first, results second. If only it said that somewhere on his website - you know - the public face of his business. And there's nothing about transparency in there. Or something like, "They know if they dope (not get caught, just dope) - they are OUT!".

Here's the brutal reality: results get sponsorship $$. Nothing else. Which is why you can have 2 bad performances before JV ditches you. Or 3 or 4.

2008: http://www.slipstreamsports.com/200...-edge®-705-to-elite-cycling-team’s-training-2


Did JV create the UCI's athlete's blood passport? Is that how he got on the anti-doping board? Isn't this JV's team's data, done by him - NOT the UCI? Has he released these results? Can we have some transparency, please?

No more team-based testing in 2009 - I guess ABP is handled by someone else now. Sorry, I can't show you the data any more, but let me assure you, it's definitely getting cleaner.

2009: http://www.slipstreamsports.com/200...orship-of-team-garmin-slipstream-through-2013

https://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/235466483029901313



Sorry JV. With Brad Wiggins, I had not been paying much attention until he implied I was a ****ing ****er. Then I had a really close look and didn't like what I saw at all.

I had not been paying much attention to you either, until you came out. You write well, and I dismissed the ChrisE's of the world but more careful analysis of your words lead me to really question what you stand for. It's been an interesting experience trying to find out. And I still want to know if you can guarantee your 2009 Tour team was clean.

your skepticism is fully warranted, big ring.

JV has gone on twitter defending wiggins. he's never gone on twitter defending landis.
the winning-doesn't-matter hymne is contradicted in basically every other statement he makes. (see e.g. the TED presentation: "we want to win as many races as possible")
And your argument that it's odd he's hiring ex-dopers where he could also hire upcoming talents is perfectly legitimate.

 

[RichWalk]

your skepticism is fully warranted, big ring.

JV has gone on twitter defending wiggins. he's never gone on twitter defending landis.
the winning-doesn't-matter hymne is contradicted in basically every other statement he makes. (see e.g. the TED presentation: "we want to win as many races as possible")
And your argument that it's odd he's hiring ex-dopers where he could also hire upcoming talents is perfectly legitimate.

+1, in a sport as murky as cycling, suggestions such as 'hiring ex dopers' and giving them a second chance just IMO makes the situation, certainly from an outsiders perspective, even worse.
If you want to promote an ethical product then do just that, don't muddy the waters before you start shouting about how clean they are! Issue as always is profit related the teams are all businesses and however much a sponsor loves the ideal of a 'clean team' in the end its interest will always be largely results driven.
My own opnion is any doper should never be allowed to compete again, simplistic view I know but until a fair mechanism exists to enforce this, its hard to see how many sports can move forward and proclaim a clean culture.

 

[roundabout]

Seriously, how many is "very few" and who are they? I actually cannot think of anyone who fits that criteria.

Really?

Rasmussen, Sella, Jaksche, Sinkewitz.

PEZ: After your suspension you were still young and had good results in your last year; why not come back?
JJ: I tried to, but couldn’t get a contract; I talked about what I had done and that ended my career, even although I only ever talked about my own activities.

I kept training and was talking to teams but because I was always in the Press due to Puerto, no one would give me a ride.

When I look back, confessing was not the cleverest thing I ever did; my mistake was to say how it was.

Of course, it's not up to Vaughters to give them all a job, but no point in pretending that Vaughters has hired 100% of dopers who said how it was.

 

[sniper]

With Sky coming on the scene must have really pished JV off, because they in the beginning talked about transparency, before we all saw it was just a smoke screen. But Garmin have been the exact same. We know very little about this team.

+1.
Just listen to JV's TED presentation. Lots of shallow talking about transparency and other idiomatic expressions we've been hearing in the past from the mouths of the most systematically doped up teams.
And what has JV provided hitherto in terms of transparency?
Hell, he recently adviced Wiggins NOT to publish any of his bloodvalues.

Very few, but those who have don't get back into the game. I think there would be some value in Garmin giving jobs to those who had "spat in the soup". They haven't though.

+3.
Throughout the past couple of years the true whistleblowers have been left standing in the dark. Completely.
JV never took a stand, instead repeadtedly claiming cycling is becoming "cleaner", whatever that means if you have the 2010 TdF winner stripped of his title, Vino winning the Games, Sky playing USPS, etc.

Seriously, how many is "very few" and who are they? I actually cannot think of anyone who fits that criteria.

Really?
Rasmussen, Sella, Jaksche, Sinkewitz.

+1

 

[hrotha]

Rather than confidently and succinctly tell me what his mission is, every poster to date has said "You know what it is", or, "JV wrote something over here", "JV said something in this video".

Really!? It's like the emperor's effing new clothes ffs.

It's already been put explicitly in this thread.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=981612&postcount=170

http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...ere-Will-Be-Blood--Clean-Blood-.html?page=all

He wasn't an anti-doping crusader yet, but he didn't like the prospect of his riders encountering the pressures he'd seen in the pro ranks. "I'm very driven by protecting the young riders," he told me. "They've never been faced with the decision of whether to dope or not. And they shouldn't have to be."

edit: by the way, searching for that I also found this:

“We want the skeptics,” declared Vaughters. “We want them to look as far into this team as they possibly can and make sure that we’re doing things right.” But, he said, the team cannot do that alone, and fans and the media need to examine their own actions.

 

[the big ring]

edit: by the way, searching for that I also found this:

“We want the skeptics,” declared Vaughters. “We want them to look as far into this team as they possibly can and make sure that we’re doing things right.” But, he said, the team cannot do that alone, and fans and the media need to examine their own actions.

Which action of mine would you like me to examine, and to what end? Seriously? This guy is sounding more and more like he speaks fluent obfuscation and you've bought into it.

What the hell does that last quote even mean? I speak English as a first language and can see no real value in that quote. Unless you think you can use it to stop me from questioning JV?