JV talks, sort of

[Dr. Maserati]

if doping pays off financially, doping will be what the cool kids do.
hesjedal is a lot cooler than the clean guy who wrote that blog to vent his anger about how hesjedal c.s. cheated their way up to the top of canadian mtb-ing.
hesjedal got into the position he is in through doping.
i don't think hesjedal regrets having doped in 2003. I think he regrets it has come out. let's not be naive here.

Not sure what you mean by that - but it is simple, doping is about risk v reward.

jv telling us that doping aint what the cool kids do anymore, and that dopers are being ostracized. come on. ostracized by whom? by the clean guys? the clean guys are at home doing normal jobs, writing (angry) blogs, and posting on forums. doping pays off, and you seem to be grossly underestimating the preparedness of guys like hesjedal and other garmin riders to cheat, have some money to spend, and thus, indeed, be cool.

I think you missed that word.

To the blue - hmmmm, thats sounds like a nice statement, it also sounds hollow.
So rather than a statement - why not post this preparedness that I am grossly underestimating RH & Garmin of doing.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I think JV is showing his true colours a little. He talks a good game, but this Ryder thing has blown up in his face. When I questioned his statement about Ryder not having to admit doping because Rasmussen hadn't fully fingered him in his book, and said the Giro win now looks suspicious, his response was 'to the uneducated, yes'

 

[goggalor]

Jonathan Vaughters ‏@Vaughters 7h

Ryder had a choice; Rasmussen said he never saw Ryder dope.The easy road would have been to just go with that and lie.Not the choice he took

Yup, full of **** as usual.

 

[sniper]

Not sure what you mean by that - but it is simple, doping is about risk v reward.

agreed.
and the reward still outranks the risks by quite a bit.
there isn't too much risk by the way for guys who, without procycling, would have rather little to build their lives around (which of course doesn't go for everybody in the peloton, but still for a good lot i think.)
i guess that's also why a guy like Rasmussen isn't remorseful. he'd take that risk again.

I think you missed that word.

i didn't. question is: why was it what the cool kids did, and why isn't it what the cool kids do anymore?
procycling contract = dough = cool.
no procycling contract = sitting at home writing blogs = uncool.
simple, imo.
why would garmin be different?
and do you really think hesjedal regrets the doping that got him a nice contract?

To the blue - hmmmm, thats sounds like a nice statement, it also sounds hollow.
So rather than a statement - why not post this preparedness that I am grossly underestimating RH & Garmin of doing

you think there are clean riders, and you think at least some of them reside at Garmin headquarters, am i right?
do you not think they have a morale that is somehow different/less inclined to cheating than the morale of other procycling teams?
is it because vaughters says so? (would be a fair reason, because admittedly he did spend some valuable time in here trying to convert you and others)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

agreed.
and the reward still outranks the risks by quite a bit.
there isn't much risk by the way for guys who, without procycling, would have rather little to build their lives around.

i didn't. question is: why was it what the cool kids did, and why isn't it what the cool kids do anymore?
procycling contract = dough = cool.
no procycling contract = sitting at home writing blogs = uncool.
simple, imo.
why would garmin be different?

Obviously money, or more accurately security is a big motivation - but it isn't like they are thrown back down the coal mine if they do not succeed.

you think there are clean riders, and you think at least some of them reside at Garmin headquarters, am i right?
you seem to think they have a morale that is somehow stronger/better/different/less inclined to cheating than the morale of others.
is it because vaughters says so? (would be a fair reason, because admittedly he did spend some valuable time in here trying to convert you and others)

Thats a rather strange, long and evasive answer to my query.

So, you can admit, that you really have no idea what you are on about, or you can show and post preparedness that I am grossly underestimating RH & Garmin of doing

 

[Catwhoorg]

Speaking of devolving... given the body's tendency to seek equilibrium when injecting artificial bits and pieces - ie, your natural EPO goes down when you inject EPO - I wonder what impact this is having on people who do use extraneous means for performance enhancement, over a number of years, and if it does in fact devolve the human genome.

Waddaya reckon JV?

Devolve the genome nope.

Potentially give a lifetime dependance on EPO (or steroid if thats the poison of choice) injections to survive - yes.

 

[The Hitch]

Dear Taxus you are talking evolution here. Let me tell you this: human race cannot evolve over a period of just 20 years.

Not a biology major are you.
Never mind the rest of this meaningless post.

Actually it's possible that froome actually does have vastly superior genetics to most other professional cyclists in history, and it would explain his (hypothetical) ability to ride at speeds only elite epo junkies have previously managed.

he just wasn't born with them.

 

[hrotha]

Actually it's possible that froome actually does have vastly superior genetics to most other professional cyclists in history, and it would explain his (hypothetical) ability to ride at speeds.only elite dopers hacer previously managed.

he just wasn't born with them.

Ha! Well played.

There's a simpler explanation though:

(No, I'll never tire of this joke)

 

[JimmyFingers]

I laughed!

 

[sniper]

Obviously money, or more accurately security is a big motivation - but it isn't like they are thrown back down the coal mine if they do not succeed.

they won't be thrown back down the coal mine, but to many it will feel like that though.
(existential) fears are seldom a 100% real, but they do determine many of our actions.

Thats a rather strange, long and evasive answer to my query.

So, you can admit, that you really have no idea what you are on about, or you can show and post preparedness that I am grossly underestimating RH & Garmin of doing

if i'm not mistaken, and merely based on the posts i'Ve read from you,
you seem to entertain the following thoughts/opinions:
a. many Garmin riders are (now) clean
b. the peloton cleanER than it was, say, in 2010
c. percentage-wise, Garmin is among the cleanest teams in the peloton.

If I misinterpret your thoughts/opinions wrt Garmin and the peloton I apologize. But even if you don't entertain said thoughts/opinions, there are at least some posters who do. And, while I could very well be mistaken, my point is that perhaps these thoughts/opinions stem from a tendency to underestimate (i) the incentives to dope and (ii) the available methods to get away with doping, anno 2013 that is.

there isn't much tangible, i.e. non-verbal, evidence of clean riders or of a cleanER peloton. As long as there isn't, i think a healthy forum opinion should be formed by historical knowledge of doping in cycling and thus be guided by strong skepsis. we've seen the baffling amount of doping, we've heard the baffling extent of the lies. not funny. not to be underestimated.

 

[JRTinMA]

Looks like it really was a witch hunt after all.

Scott Mercier said it best, if you're a doper sign with Garmin.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

they won't be thrown back down the coal mine, but to many it will feel like that though.
(existential) fears are seldom a 100% real, but they do determine many of our actions.

if i'm not mistaken, and merely based on the posts i'Ve read from you,
you seem to entertain the following thoughts/opinions:
a. many Garmin riders are (now) clean
b. the peloton cleanER than it was, say, in 2010
c. percentage-wise, Garmin is among the cleanest teams in the peloton.

If I misinterpret your thoughts/opinions wrt Garmin and the peloton I apologize. But even if you don't entertain said thoughts/opinions, there are at least some posters who do. And, while I could very well be mistaken, my point is that perhaps these thoughts/opinions stem from a tendency to underestimate (i) the incentives to dope and (ii) the available methods to get away with doping, anno 2013 that is.

there isn't much tangible, i.e. non-verbal, evidence of clean riders or of a cleanER peloton. As long as there isn't, i think a healthy forum opinion should be formed by historical knowledge of doping in cycling and thus be guided by strong skepsis. we've seen the baffling amount of doping, we've heard the baffling extent of the lies. not funny. not to be underestimated.

Thats your thoughts, you're entitled to them - but it has nothing to do with me underestimating the preparedness of Garmin& RH as you stated earlier.

This is getting circular - quite frankly, I am not that interested in what you think, I would be interested in what you can show - so I will assume the the underestimating preparedness stuff was hyperbole and leave it at that.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Looks like it really was a witch hunt after all.

Scott Mercier said it best, if you're a doper sign with Garmin.

As much as I like Scott, I lol'd that he included Horner, it killed his point.

Also, I think you missed the memo, it was upgraded from 'witch hunt' to a 'lynching'. Of course to uphold this view one must ignore that the ones punished in any way are LA, GH, LL, MB - and the rest are the Garmin riders.

There are a lot of redacted names - they are the ones who have so far gotten away with it, but thankfully, its an ongoing case.

 

[thehog]

Looks like it really was a witch hunt after all.

Scott Mercier said it best, if you're a doper sign with Garmin.

JV is a little nervous.

To this point those who, have confessed widely in the press weren't really at Postal when JV was there.

Bruyneel was and will be giving a different version of events that the serene view we have up till now.

Most expected Johan not to contest. Hence why the anger that he is.

I believe detailing UCI complicity is a way out for him. Although I don't give him much hope.

 

[Ferminal]

I think JV is showing his true colours a little. He talks a good game, but this Ryder thing has blown up in his face. When I questioned his statement about Ryder not having to admit doping because Rasmussen hadn't fully fingered him in his book, and said the Giro win now looks suspicious, his response was 'to the uneducated, yes'

I have tried to understand and at times defend the position but I tend to agree.

The more we learn the more we realise that it's all talk and not much substance. There is a disconnect between what we are told and reality, clearly some crafty words are said to project and maintain certain image. Again, I'm not saying it's a cover for known malicious activities, rather a barrier which is expected to deflect all negative scrutiny. However I think it's come to a point where the continual disregard of even the possibility that something dodgy may have occurred by anyone at anytime of the team's history is starting to blur the lines between the two, and it's somewhat understandable for people to feel that one may be complicit simply due to neglect.

The idea that one person can vouch for an entire team over it's entire history is ridiculous, even worse when it's supposed to be swallowed without question. This from a team with maybe more known dopers/facilitators employed than any other. If this team wants to be on a pedestal where is the openness, where is the accountability? Credit to the man for trying to create an environment without pressure, but the PR game is over, it's going to take serious action if the words are to regain any believability they may have had.

I wonder if any "journalists" out there will try and work this angle, or continue to give this team an undeserved free pass.

 

[thehog]

I have tried to understand and at times defend the position but I tend to agree.

The more we learn the more we realise that it's all talk and not much substance. There is a disconnect between what we are told and reality, clearly some crafty words are said to project and maintain certain image. Again, I'm not saying it's a cover for known malicious activities, rather a barrier which is expected to deflect all negative scrutiny. However I think it's come to a point where the continual disregard of even the possibility that something dodgy may have occurred by anyone at anytime of the team's history is starting to blur the lines between the two, and it's somewhat understandable for people to feel that one may be complicit simply due to neglect.

The idea that one person can vouch for an entire team over it's entire history is ridiculous, even worse when it's supposed to be swallowed without question. This from a team with maybe more known dopers/facilitators employed than any other. If this team wants to be on a pedestal where is the openness, where is the accountability? Credit to the man for trying to create an environment without pressure, but the PR game is over, it's going to take serious action if the words are to regain any believability they may have had.

I wonder if any "journalists" out there will try and work this angle, or continue to give this team an undeserved free pass.

A very good summation and agree.

To your final point I think that's the idea of ZTP etc. to avoid scrutiny. Whenever asked, oh we have a strict anti-doping policy.

 

[lean mean &green]

If this team wants to be on a pedestal where is the openness, where is the accountability? Credit to the man for trying to create an environment without pressure, but the PR game is over, it's going to take serious action if the words are to regain any believability they may have had.

I wonder if any "journalists" out there will try and work this angle, or continue to give this team an undeserved free pass.

I don't think JV expects people to blindly accept and not question but I agree on the above.

They need to go back to the drawing board. As you say there's a real need for more transparency and accountability. The ship is starting to sink and I think JV just wants to get off before it goes under.

 

[thehog]

I don't think JV expects people to blindly accept and not question but I agree on the above.

They need to go back to the drawing board. As you say there's a real need for more transparency and accountability. The ship is starting to sink and I think JV just wants to get off before goes under.

In 2007, Vaughters created the most progressive anti-doping system in the professional sports word. He partnered with Agency for Cycling Ethics (ACE) to create cycling’s first independent anti-doping testing program, submitting his riders to 20 times the amount of testing mandated by the sports’ governing bodies. Other teams took notice and instituted their own independent, anti-doping programs. Cycling’s governing body, the UCI, got on board and instituted a mandatory biological-profiling program for professional cycling, now known as the Biological Passport program.

Today, Slipstream Sports—dedicated to ethical sport and developing the next generation of cycling champions—owns and operates Garmin-Sharp. In 2011, Vaughters proved to the world that clean teams can win at the Tour de France, as his team took the podium for best team (the team also held the coveted Yellow Jersey for 8 stages and captured four stage wins, including the Team Time Trial). In 2012, he proved it again when Ryder Hesjedal won the Giro d’Italia.

He wants to bet his life on Ryder being clean.

But truth be told JV has bigger plans for himself. And he needs to get out of the rat infested ship.

All that stuff doesn't even exist anymore, if it ever did. ACE, printing testing results on the Internet etc.

All just marketing. Which he is good at.

But I think he needs to sit down with Ryder again and look him in the eye and get the real story.

 

[Benotti69]

I appreciate your thoughts.
But the above contradicts your earlier post about McQ getting Garmin.

Unless of course..... something has changed over the last few years.

See - this is where I don't agree.
You are looking at the likes of (I assume) Froome etc which is fine, but then using that to paint "the peloton".
There will always be outliners. Always guys willing to push the envelope.

As an aside - Ryders development actually looks similar to what I would expect - either out of the box good like Quintana, or a slow steady increase, like RH.
(Conversely neither scenario means that they are clean)

Doc i dont believe there is a strong system in place to catch doping. I just have to look at the winners of major races and I dont see any clean riders in the top 5, 10 or 20.

If he top riders are doping why not the donkeys?

As for Hesjedal's progression, take it with a pinch of salt. We know where he's been, why dope as an MTBer and not on the road where the culture is to dope?

That Hesjedal was not one of the guys we were told about by JV agains screams that all is not well on Garmin. But i dont expect Garmin to be any different from Katusha, OPQS, Liquigas, Lotto, BMC, Lampre etc etc.

JV talked the talk (like Sky) but has not walked the walk, and Hesjedal is proof of that.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I have tried to understand and at times defend the position but I tend to agree.

The more we learn the more we realise that it's all talk and not much substance. There is a disconnect between what we are told and reality, clearly some crafty words are said to project and maintain certain image. Again, I'm not saying it's a cover for known malicious activities, rather a barrier which is expected to deflect all negative scrutiny. However I think it's come to a point where the continual disregard of even the possibility that something dodgy may have occurred by anyone at anytime of the team's history is starting to blur the lines between the two, and it's somewhat understandable for people to feel that one may be complicit simply due to neglect.

The idea that one person can vouch for an entire team over it's entire history is ridiculous, even worse when it's supposed to be swallowed without question. This from a team with maybe more known dopers/facilitators employed than any other. If this team wants to be on a pedestal where is the openness, where is the accountability? Credit to the man for trying to create an environment without pressure, but the PR game is over, it's going to take serious action if the words are to regain any believability they may have had.

The disconnect here is that this is somehow new news - I don't think anyone here was surprised that Ryder had doped, and JV would certainly have known RHs history.

So, obviously JV is going to get a little ****y that RHs Giro win is questioned on 'old news'.

I wonder if any "journalists" out there will try and work this angle, or continue to give this team an undeserved free pass.

Now this to me is always the fun part of when a team gets scrutiny - it has the potential to expose the flaws or inconsistency - but so far nothing has been exposed to suggest there is an elaborate cover up.
But, RHs statements are locked down, so it will be interesting to see if someone comes forward to contradict what has been said.

 

[Benotti69]

If JV is telling the truth about Hesjedal's confession being a long time ago, why did RH not have a 6 month (minimum) suspension?

This smells and not of roses.

 

[Ferminal]

A very good summation and agree.

To your final point I think that's the idea of ZTP etc. to avoid scrutiny. Whenever asked, oh we have a strict anti-doping policy.

I don't think you can run the ship in a way that looks after both the employees and the team. Maybe that was the case until 2007-2008 when it went from an operation trying to give untainted guys a good chance, to one which wanted to give old mates a contract. Sky's ZTP is to protect the team (and in that regard I tend to agree with its intentions, their problem was the timing) whereas the Slipstream one is to look after the employees.

The funny thing is, there are several riders who are not "known" dopers although you suspect that they did at some stage who have underperformed at Slipstream. They haven't fronted up to any ADA to sort out a deal, yet I have far more faith in them being the clean ones at the team rather than all those who have "admitted" to doping yet went on to perform as good or ridiculously better.

 

[Benotti69]

I don't think you can run the ship in a way that looks after both the employees and the team. Maybe that was the case until 2007-2008 when it went from an operation trying to give untainted guys a good chance, to one which wanted to give old mates a contract. Sky's ZTP is to protect the team (and in that regard I tend to agree with its intentions, their problem was the timing) whereas the Slipstream one is to look after the employees.

The funny thing is, there are several riders who are not "known" dopers although you suspect that they did at some stage who have underperformed at Slipstream. They haven't fronted up to any ADA to sort out a deal, yet I have far more faith in them being the clean ones at the team rather than all those who have "admitted" to doping yet went on to perform as good or ridiculously better.

In relation to your second paragraph, how do we know they are clean, maybe the levels of doping at Garmin are low so riders get less from it than previous doping and appear clean and guys like Hesjedal got more from less, but his numbers were off on his Giro win and JV put that down to machine error, like Wigans numbers from 2009 TdF, machine error.

 

[hrotha]

The disconnect here is that this is somehow new news - I don't think anyone here was surprised that Ryder had doped, and JV would certainly have known RHs history.

So, obviously JV is going to get a little ****y that RHs Giro win is questioned on 'old news'.

While I agree that Hesjedal having doped is "old news" (sorta; obviously it wasn't confirmed, but the savvy folk was 95% sure, and JV knew that) and that as such it doesn't have an impact on the believability of his Giro win, the perceived lack of honesty in dealing with the confession does have an effect on how his subsequent career is seen. The confession is a bit of a screw-up because it won't satisfy anyone: the naive think Hesjedal has NOW become tainted, while the savvy are 95% sure Hesjedal is only giving us a low-fat confession and is still lying. Most of the latter group have no problem with past dopers per se, but have a low tolerance for liars and bullshiɨters.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Doc i dont believe there is a strong system in place to catch doping. I just have to look at the winners of major races and I dont see any clean riders in the top 5, 10 or 20.

If he top riders are doping why not the donkeys?

Basically you dismiss that there isn't a 'strong system' because of what you see - thats fine, but is just your opinion so we can agree to disagree.

And of course there will be some 'top riders' doping, (always will be) so if your view is that also means the donkeys must be too then I really dont see where you can ever get off this point.

As for Hesjedal's progression, take it with a pinch of salt. We know where he's been, why dope as an MTBer and not on the road where the culture is to dope?

That Hesjedal was not one of the guys we were told about by JV agains screams that all is not well on Garmin. But i dont expect Garmin to be any different from Katusha, OPQS, Liquigas, Lotto, BMC, Lampre etc etc.

JV talked the talk (like Sky) but has not walked the walk, and Hesjedal is proof of that.

This is crazy - you would be the first to shout PR if JV or Garmin disclosed RH had talked.
Very simple - RHs doping has been exposed, if he had not been to the authorities or threw out a denial it would show that all was not well at Garmin.