JV talks, sort of

[pmcg76]

Great post, well argued.



You're losing me here. Many people have vouched for LeMond, including Hampsten and that bastion of cleanliness Eddy B. Both unbidden and for no reason. Many, many more have.

There are many reasons people believe LeMond to have been clean, not the least of which are many people who would know saying so, and the fact that no one who worked with or rode with him, even when incentivized with a LOT of money has ever said otherwise. There is plenty of other evidence of his cleanliness which we don't need to go into here. He has nothing to do with JV, Garmin or the current crop of riders IMO.

You lost my final point or maybe I didn't explain it well. Yes plenty of people have vouched for LeMond being clean and I don't disagree with that belief. However I don't think anyone close to LeMond like Vayer is with Peraud has vouched for LeMond, plus has anyone with a reputation like Vayer vouched for LeMond.

Eddie B worked with LeMond early days, Hampsten was a team-mate for one season, Kochli was his director for 3 seasons, Bernard Tapie also backed LeMond as being clean along with Bauer. All strong support for LeMond but not anyone who was with LeMond throughout his career.

 

[Benotti69]

Of course deflection. MartinVickers was spot on, you sound like some sort of religious fanatic, posting the exact same mantra over and over and simply dismissing any evidence that shows the opposite.

Running to Marty the gas man for back up!

Where did the sport clean up? Just because JV says its clean, dont mean it is. JV didn't run the sport. He runs a team full of dopers.

You keep going on about how the sport can't change when all the same characters are in the sport. I gave you a real life example of an environment that had changed despite having the same characters involved.

<polictical bs snipped>

Where did the anti doping testing kick in and work? Plent yof evidence out there that is doesn't work. Remember who was running anti doping, UCI. So you believed Hein and McQuaid were running a sport where clean riders can compete? Wow!

Antoine Vayer has been considered a strong voice on the doping situation in cycling for a long time now, much like Bassons. Vayer was also lauded around here(undoubtedly including yourself) when he published his book showing 'mutant' performances and for questioning SKY s performances. Vayer also works with Peraud and has stated that Peraud is a clean athlete.

So what you are asking me to believe is that the guy Peraud pays to coach him says he is clean and i am to accept that? That is like accepting Garmin are clean because JV says so or Wigans was clean in 2009 cos JV says so, or SKy are clean because Brailsford says so. USPS said they were clean. Great quote from Stapleton about what Walsh was writing.

Peraud's performances don't jive with what you claim is possible for a clean riders so rather than address it, you just dismiss it as irrelevant. Typical hypocritical type of reasoning, Vayer is a hero when he might be pointing out doping but dismissed when he points out a clean rider.

This aint the Peraud thread. Where did i say Vayer is a hero. He has experience and a lot of knowledge in the sport. Doesn't make him my hero. I'll quote him when i feel he is saying something relevant.

Must really bug you that Vayer also believes Dan Martin is clean, add Vayer onto Kimmage for that but hey what do these guys know more than the clairvoyant Benotti. You simply cannot admit there might be a clean rider because if Peraud is clean, there could also be plenty of riders around his level that are also clean which then makes a mockery of your never-ending mantra 'Not clean-ER'.

Glad to see my posts get under the skin of those who believe that McQuaid would run a clean sport.

I simply cannot believe that there might be clean riders because anti doping is pathetic, the culture is to dope, the sport is full of people who believe in the culture of doping from the top to the bottom. The evidence of riders who wanted to ride clean have not lasted in the peloton. It would take huge confidence to ride race after race looking around at guys who all have an advantage int raining and in the race. I dont think many could do that. It would drive a normal person out of the sport pretty quickly.

So it is nothing to do with clairvoyance, it is simple logic. No anti doping worth speaking about and a sport full of dopers, ex dopers, dopings docs, doping soignuers, doping coaches, doping DS, doping enablers and I am supposed to think hey these guys are clean. Snake oil.

It is also laughable how you believe that LeMond was clean because nobody has ever accused him of doping. So what? Has anyone with a strong anti-doping stance ever vouched for LeMond being clean and I mean someone who actually worked with LeMond, not someone looking back and saying LeMond's performances were within human capabilities.

I give LeMond the benefit of being clean. Simple reason is he tried to kill cycling's golden goose in 2002 when the sport thought the sun shone out of Armstrong/Bruyneel's collective ar$es. Heck in 2005 JV was saying Armstrong was clean! So based on it is now nearly 20 years since the guy packed in and he has been a vociferous anti doping pain in the ar$e in all that time and no one leaked anything to stop him spitting in the soup, yes, that makes me think he is clean.

Dan Martin on radio this week saying the anti doping was really good and catching riders so it is much harder to dope. Bollix. What complete tosh! It has never been about catching riders. To i think Dan Martin is riding on bread and water? nope. Do i think he does epo? nope. But that dont make him clean.

Right now, Jean Chrsitophe Peraud has more credibility than LeMond.

Sure and Froome is the cleanest and greatest rider in the history of the sport.

 

[red_flanders]

You lost my final point or maybe I didn't explain it well. Yes plenty of people have vouched for LeMond being clean and I don't disagree with that belief. However I don't think anyone close to LeMond like Vayer is with Peraud has vouched for LeMond, plus has anyone with a reputation like Vayer vouched for LeMond.

Eddie B worked with LeMond early days, Hampsten was a team-mate for one season, Kochli was his director for 3 seasons, Bernard Tapie also backed LeMond as being clean along with Bauer. All strong support for LeMond but not anyone who was with LeMond throughout his career.

I did miss your point, thx for the explanation and my apologies.

 

[gooner]

So Froome with his astronomical rise is proof of doping, yet Dan Martin who wins LBL showing a more steady realistic rise is doping too.

I don't have the time of the day with people who give opinions from a set default position based on a one eyed obsessive point of view on a topic.

 

[Benotti69]

So Froome with his astronomical rise is proof of doping, yet Dan Martin who wins LBL showing a more steady realistic rise is doping too.

sorry the subtleties on the levels of doping are lost on you.

I don't have the time of the day with people who give opinions from a set default position based on a one eyed obsessive point of view on a topic.

too late

 

[gooner]

sorry the subtleties on the levels of doping are lost on you.



too late

You're the only one who knows about the history of the sport as you keep reminding us.

 

[martinvickers]

You're the only one who knows about the history of the sport as you keep reminding us.

You'd be quicker arguing the temple of Solomon, Gooner. There's no debate to be had with a zealot and his beliefs, it's a pointless exercise.

 

[pmcg76]

Running to Marty the gas man for back up!

Where did the sport clean up? Just because JV says its clean, dont mean it is. JV didn't run the sport. He runs a team full of dopers.



Where did the anti doping testing kick in and work? Plent yof evidence out there that is doesn't work. Remember who was running anti doping, UCI. So you believed Hein and McQuaid were running a sport where clean riders can compete? Wow!



So what you are asking me to believe is that the guy Peraud pays to coach him says he is clean and i am to accept that? That is like accepting Garmin are clean because JV says so or Wigans was clean in 2009 cos JV says so, or SKy are clean because Brailsford says so. USPS said they were clean. Great quote from Stapleton about what Walsh was writing.



This aint the Peraud thread. Where did i say Vayer is a hero. He has experience and a lot of knowledge in the sport. Doesn't make him my hero. I'll quote him when i feel he is saying something relevant.



Glad to see my posts get under the skin of those who believe that McQuaid would run a clean sport.

I simply cannot believe that there might be clean riders because anti doping is pathetic, the culture is to dope, the sport is full of people who believe in the culture of doping from the top to the bottom. The evidence of riders who wanted to ride clean have not lasted in the peloton. It would take huge confidence to ride race after race looking around at guys who all have an advantage int raining and in the race. I dont think many could do that. It would drive a normal person out of the sport pretty quickly.

So it is nothing to do with clairvoyance, it is simple logic. No anti doping worth speaking about and a sport full of dopers, ex dopers, dopings docs, doping soignuers, doping coaches, doping DS, doping enablers and I am supposed to think hey these guys are clean. Snake oil.



I give LeMond the benefit of being clean. Simple reason is he tried to kill cycling's golden goose in 2002 when the sport thought the sun shone out of Armstrong/Bruyneel's collective ar$es. Heck in 2005 JV was saying Armstrong was clean! So based on it is now nearly 20 years since the guy packed in and he has been a vociferous anti doping pain in the ar$e in all that time and no one leaked anything to stop him spitting in the soup, yes, that makes me think he is clean.

Dan Martin on radio this week saying the anti doping was really good and catching riders so it is much harder to dope. Bollix. What complete tosh! It has never been about catching riders. To i think Dan Martin is riding on bread and water? nope. Do i think he does epo? nope. But that dont make him clean.



Sure and Froome is the cleanest and greatest rider in the history of the sport.

Wow, just wow, so much nonsense it's hard to know where to start. Vayer has zero credibility and you only choose to believe what suits your own bias Zealot is the perfect word I think.

Vayer has a reputation akin to Basson's in anti-doping circles but you believe he can be simply bought off. In that there case we are at a situation where nobody and I mean nobody can be believed about anything in cycling on any side. It appears everyone can be bought off.

You keep saying that the controls are not working but in the same book that Vayer produced explaining all the mutant performance, he also recognised a downward pattern in the number of mutant performances over the last 3-4 years. If the controls are not working or there is no change in the culture, why is there a downward trend in 'mutant' performances. Why if the Bio Passport is useless that this trend has happened in the last 3-4 years which coincide with the introduction of the passport.

I have posted twice now how the political culture has changed in NI even though the same players are in place, this time you just chose to ignore it. What a shock. There is nothing to say a culture or mentality cannot change or will not change with the same people in place. Change happens even if you refuse to believe so. There is not one single person who has come out and said that the sport is in the same situation as it was in 2002 or 1996 yet this is the constant mantra you preach.

You have stated yourself that the French dialled back the doping after 99, why? Are you saying their longitudal testing was effective?? If not why did the French not improve significantly after a season or two once they realised the testing was easily beaten? Why did they remain so poor the whole way through the 00s and then start to improve with the arrival of the Bio Passport? Why spend a decade in the wilderness and then get back on the major program at the same time that testing improves?

Repeating the same thing over and over again does not make it any more valid. I think you have more than displayed your silly biases and small-mindedness on the subject of doping.

 

[Taxus4a]

Of course deflection. MartinVickers was spot on, you sound like some sort of religious fanatic, posting the exact same mantra over and over and simply dismissing any evidence that shows the opposite.

You keep going on about how the sport can't change when all the same characters are in the sport. I gave you a real life example of an environment that had changed despite having the same characters involved, Northern Ireland. Your response was to claim that the situation in NI had not changed and it was just the media ignoring it now. Serious case of denial.

Antoine Vayer has been considered a strong voice on the doping situation in cycling for a long time now, much like Bassons. Vayer was also lauded around here(undoubtedly including yourself) when he published his book showing 'mutant' performances and for questioning SKY s performances. Vayer also works with Peraud and has stated that Peraud is a clean athlete.

Peraud's performances don't jive with what you claim is possible for a clean riders so rather than address it, you just dismiss it as irrelevant. Typical hypocritical type of reasoning, Vayer is a hero when he might be pointing out doping but dismissed when he points out a clean rider.

Must really bug you that Vayer also believes Dan Martin is clean, add Vayer onto Kimmage for that but hey what do these guys know more than the clairvoyant Benotti. You simply cannot admit there might be a clean rider because if Peraud is clean, there could also be plenty of riders around his level that are also clean which then makes a mockery of your never-ending mantra 'Not clean-ER'.

It is also laughable how you believe that LeMond was clean because nobody has ever accused him of doping. So what? Has anyone with a strong anti-doping stance ever vouched for LeMond being clean and I mean someone who actually worked with LeMond, not someone looking back and saying LeMond's performances were within human capabilities.

Right now, Jean Chrsitophe Peraud has more credibility than LeMond.

Excellent post.

And Peraud is now one of the best riders on hard ITT, especially with no very step parts.

 

[Taxus4a]

Vayer anyway could know if Peraud is clean, but when he talk over performances, he make very simple analysis.
He must take into consideration a lot of things in a climb, not just w/kg, and to compare betwen diferent years, he must take into account several factors as well.

 

[Parker]

Vayer has a reputation akin to Basson's in anti-doping circles but you believe he can be simply bought off.

He really doesn't have that reputation at all. He's seen as a bit of a joke. Someone who has worked out that telling Le Monde what they want to hear pays better than teaching PE at a municiple college.
This is a guy who likes to style himself as a 'Professor' in English language publications - a mistranslation of Professeur - and still defines himself by his last job in road cycling - as a front for a doping team which disbanded a dozen years ago.

Having said that - he did coach Peraud a decade ago and will know his capabilities. If he says he's clean, it's probably because he is.

But then claiming, as Vayer does in his magazine, that Peraud is the benchmark of the limits of human capacity on the basis that he's the best of the 50 Frenchmen he's coached is somewhat stupid.

 

[the sceptic]

He really doesn't have that reputation at all. He's seen as a bit of a joke. Someone who has worked out that telling Le Monde what they want to hear pays better than teaching PE at a municiple college.
This is a guy who likes to style himself as a 'Professor' in English language publications - a mistranslation of Professeur - and still defines himself by his last job in road cycling - as a front for a doping team which disbanded a dozen years ago.

Having said that - he did coach Peraud a decade ago and will know his capabilities. If he says he's clean, it's probably because he is.

But then claiming, as Vayer does in his magazine, that Peraud is the benchmark of the limits of human capacity on the basis that he's the best of the 50 Frenchmen he's coached is somewhat stupid.

You mean he is seen as a joke by skybots that got butthurt when he called Froome a mutant?

 

[Parker]

You mean he is seen as a joke by skybots that got butthurt when he called Froome a mutant?

No. He's generally seen as joke elsewhere too. The only people who take him seriously are those whose prejudices he feeds -like Le Monde. Some day give his magazine to first year sports science student and they'll show you why he's not taken seriously.

 

[The Hitch]

Its this same mythical "everywhere" that the handful of discredited sky fanboys, like Polish, Flicker BPC and the rest before them, constantly refer to when trying to attack "the clinic". Then you visit their forum and you find its just a handful of loons who are obsessed with what happens here and have taken it upon themselves to try to spread the word about how evil the clinic is. No one but themselves are listening though.

 

[Parker]

Its this same mythical "everywhere" that the handful of discredited sky fanboys, like Polish, Flicker BPC and the rest before them, constantly refer to when trying to attack "the clinic". Then you visit their forum and you find its just a handful of loons who are obsessed with what happens here and have taken it upon themselves to try to spread the word about how evil the clinic is. No one but themselves are listening though.

You do realise that there's a difference between 'elsewhere' and 'everywhere', don't you?
You seem very threatened by views alternative to yours. You should probably take it a little less seriously. Go outside and enjoy yourself for a change. It's just an Internet forum. Being seen to be right isn't the great triumph you think it is.

Why do you have to characterise those who don't share your opinion as 'fanboys'? Is it arrogance or insecurity?

 

[martinvickers]

You do realise that there's a difference between 'elsewhere' and 'everywhere', don't you?
You seem very threatened by views alternative to yours. You should probably take it a little less seriously. Go outside and enjoy yourself for a change. It's just an Internet forum. Being seen to be right isn't the great triumph you think it is.

Why do you have to characterise those who don't share your opinion as 'fanboys'? Is it arrogance or insecurity?

'Or'?

three pigs, seven dwarves

 

[Ferminal]

'At what point did MTB become "clean"?'

 

[roundabout]

He really doesn't have that reputation at all. He's seen as a bit of a joke. Someone who has worked out that telling Le Monde what they want to hear pays better than teaching PE at a municiple college.
This is a guy who likes to style himself as a 'Professor' in English language publications - a mistranslation of Professeur - and still defines himself by his last job in road cycling - as a front for a doping team which disbanded a dozen years ago.

Having said that - he did coach Peraud a decade ago and will know his capabilities. If he says he's clean, it's probably because he is.

But then claiming, as Vayer does in his magazine, that Peraud is the benchmark of the limits of human capacity on the basis that he's the best of the 50 Frenchmen he's coached is somewhat stupid.

As far as I am aware of Peraud has world class values. I have doubts that there are "plenty" of people with similar physical ability riding around today.

Send me a PM when he finishes higher than 9th in a GT though.

 

[pmcg76]

He really doesn't have that reputation at all. He's seen as a bit of a joke. Someone who has worked out that telling Le Monde what they want to hear pays better than teaching PE at a municiple college.
This is a guy who likes to style himself as a 'Professor' in English language publications - a mistranslation of Professeur - and still defines himself by his last job in road cycling - as a front for a doping team which disbanded a dozen years ago.

Having said that - he did coach Peraud a decade ago and will know his capabilities. If he says he's clean, it's probably because he is.

But then claiming, as Vayer does in his magazine, that Peraud is the benchmark of the limits of human capacity on the basis that he's the best of the 50 Frenchmen he's coached is somewhat stupid.

Vayer's views may not be seen as credible because he comes across as OTT but that still doesn't change the fact that he has had a very strong anti-doping outlook for a long time. He was hosting round table talks about trying to fix the problem of doping long before it became fashionable.

 

[pmcg76]

As far as I am aware of Peraud has world class values. I have doubts that there are "plenty" of people with similar physical ability riding around today.

Send me a PM when he finishes higher than 9th in a GT though.

Finishing 9th clean in the Tour is a hell of an advance in the possibilities of what a clean athlete can do. It flies right in the face of what many around here consider is possible.

 

[Ney the Viking]

'At what point did MTB become "clean"?'

When Chicken and Hesjedal moved to Road?

 

[Ferminal]

Pointless argument when Danielson finished 8th clean (honestly, the least likely to have doped of the Slipstream GT riders)

Oh and Contador was there.

 

[roundabout]

Finishing 9th clean in the Tour is a hell of an advance in the possibilities of what a clean athlete can do. It flies right in the face of what many around here consider is possible.

Let's throw a party.

Allegedly clean Moncoutie finished 12th in the Tour, allegedly clean Blanco top 10 in the Vuelta.

Try exaggerating less next time.

 

[roundabout]

Pointless argument when Danielson finished 8th clean (honestly, the least likely to have doped of the Slipstream GT riders)

Oh and Contador was there.

It's not a pointless argument. There is some information about Peraud's physical capabilities out in the public domain (from Vayer, but even so ). What do we know about Danielson? He riders for Vaughters and he could get same-ish GT results at Slipstream as with Disco when he was doping.

 

[Ferminal]

It's not a pointless argument. There is some information about Peraud's physical capabilities out in the public domain (from Vayer, but even so ). What do we know about Danielson? He riders for Vaughters and he could get same-ish GT results at Slipstream as with Disco when he was doping.

As opposed to Hesjedal and Vande Velde who have far better results than when they were doping.

One almost fits into the narrative, the other two clearly don't.

Didn't Mollema finish 7th this year?