JV talks, sort of

[ralphbert]

Pantani has similar issues with his Hct. After using EPO for so many years his body struggle to make RBC without EPO. It took several months for his body to get back to normal

But would he ever be normal? IMO training with an expanded engine results in bigger long term changes than can't be achieved training with your natural engine. My experience from any aerobic training is those benefits don't go away, you can stop training, loose form but that engine is always there just waiting to be woken up and dusted off. Returning to your "old level" is always easier and quicker than reaching a new level.

Not that I believe that any of these Garmin guys stopped doping in 2006.

 

[DirtyWorks]

What burns me is this is classic JV.

On one hand he says: My guys have no advantage from historical doping, in fact they are at a disadvantage. You can let them back after a 6 month ban, everything is fair and even.

Then on the other hand he says: My guys can compete just fine now they are clean because doping doesn't make that much difference anyway, the sport is cleanER and they have recovered just fine, no long term damage from EPO.

A more sophisticated version of "cleanest peloton ever." JV is excellent at this kind of thing. Well played JV!

 

[Merckx index]

So much of this diversion could have been avoided if Mas, in post 6012, had just used the appropriate quote for the point he was trying to make:

For later generations who micro-dosed, he admitted that these long-term consequences were less likely.

Instead, he used the quote that JV had seen the effect last years, which is exactly what DW and Raph were referring to when they said speeds should have gone down recently:

Vaughters said he has seen riders drop well below their pre-EPO baseline abilities, and claims the effect last years in some cases.

Now if that kind of drop occurred with riders who supposedly went clean in 2006 or so, then we should have seen some of these reformed dopers performing much more poorly in subsequent years. That was the point being made.

What burns me is this is classic JV.

On one hand he says: My guys have no advantage from historical doping, in fact they are at a disadvantage. You can let them back after a 6 month ban, everything is fair and even.

Then on the other hand he says: My guys can compete just fine now they are clean because doping doesn't make that much difference anyway, the sport is cleanER and they have recovered just fine, no long term damage from EPO.

The bottom line is that JV doesn't know. He did say the long-lasting effects he observed were from the 90s (though what dopers in the 90s ever stopped?), and as the quote above shows, he thinks more recently there is no effect. His line is that the competition is cleaner and therefore easier. Whether you agree with that or not, he has been consistent in this view. Maybe he's only saying he thinks there is no big effect more recently so that it doesn't result in the kind of conflict that DW and Raph pointed out, but it is possible to read this article and conclude that there is no significant drop resulting from more recent levels and types of doping. Remember, in this century, it's been more about transfusions, which do suppress EPO production, but as far as we know, only temporarily.

In his book The Secret Race, Tyler Hamilton wrote about how he was finishing in the third group on the road before he started doping. He also implied that doping ruined his career. But who would buy a book from a little-known clean rider who spent his career finishing at the back of the peloton? As Olympic champion Nicole Cooke pointed out, Hamilton made more money from his book on doping than she did during a career of clean racing.

Really, Nicole? You made less money in your career than a book that barely cracked the top 20,000 in kindle?

I cannot see how that gets extended here to mean that riders who stopped in 2006 should not be able to reproduce by now.

OMG, this detrimental effect applies to Viagra, too!?!

 

[Race Radio]

It's another PR exercise for JV.

It is likely both.

JV is sticking up for his guys. It is also true that heavy use of the most popular doping products in the sport can lead to long and short term disadvantages. You would have to really hammer the EPO, and your body would recover soon enough, but things like HGH and Test can have long term disadvantages. Most of this is well documented.... The nuclei stuff? Not so much.

JV does make a good point about the amount of abuse. Guys like Riis took a pharmacy. I can't image his system is normal.

 

[Race Radio]

But would he ever be normal? IMO training with an expanded engine results in bigger long term changes than can't be achieved training with your natural engine. My experience from any aerobic training is those benefits don't go away, you can stop training, loose form but that engine is always there just waiting to be woken up and dusted off. Returning to your "old level" is always easier and quicker than reaching a new level.

Not that I believe that any of these Garmin guys stopped doping in 2006.

EPO does not permanently change your engine, just like Hi-Test gas does not change your car engine. I can't see how EPO could have a positive long term effect.

The article points more to muscular aids, cellular multipliers. I think there is a good chance these could have a long term positive effect, even after an athletes stops using them.

 

[DirtyWorks]

It is likely both.

JV is sticking up for his guys.

Yeah, but to what end? It's so, so messy. JV's doing an excellent job delivering a balanced, convincing message. I just hope his program doesn't eventually, after the SOL, end in scandal. Because that's the only time JV and his guys talk.

Meanwhile, the rest of the article is pretty potent propaganda.

 

[ralphbert]

EPO does not permanently change your engine, just like Hi-Test gas does not change your car engine. I can't see how EPO could have a positive long term effect.

What I am suggesting is EPO allows you to train a lot harder without breaking down than training without. A better, healthier you. If you are in this state for years then the cumulative amount of training you can achieve is significantly higher than can be achieved naturally. This higher training load results in permanent changes to the rest of your physiology. So no, I agree taking EPO does not directly change anything long term, but EPO and training? I think the question needs to be asked. It is relevant to life time bans for certain substances.

 

[DirtyWorks]

What I am suggesting is EPO allows you to train a lot harder without breaking down than training without.

Testosterone is very good for that. Bodybuilding forums would have you believe XXYYY1516(??) is very good too.

One of the creepier features of that article was how cyclists "took so little." They take so little to stay never tested positive. But it helps alot! Especially over months of use.

Also, detecting EPO and building an unstoppable case to sanction a rider is difficult with EPO. So, you can't reasonably have a lifetime ban for detected use.

 

[Race Radio]

What I am suggesting is EPO allows you to train a lot harder without breaking down than training without. A better, healthier you. If you are in this state for years then the cumulative amount of training you can achieve is significantly higher than can be achieved naturally. This higher training load results in permanent changes to the rest of your physiology. So no, I agree taking EPO does not directly change anything long term, but EPO and training? I think the question needs to be asked. It is relevant to life time bans for certain substances.

Life banns for certain substances and methods are coming.

I see your point but for a long term effect on the engine I would look more toward things like HGH and Test then EPO. Part of Ferrari's genius with Gewiss in the early 90's was figuring out the mix of EPO with drugs like HGH and Test. Yes, EPO allows you to train harder but this is useless if your test falls to the floor or lose too much muscle mass.

A not uncommon mix was HGH, Thyroid medicine, Cortisone, and Clen= Lose weight, maintain muscle mass. Perfect cocktail for the pre-Tour 2 kg. Gotta wonder what long term effect some of that crap has

 

[Dear Wiggo]

What I am suggesting is EPO allows you to train a lot harder without breaking down than training without. A better, healthier you. If you are in this state for years then the cumulative amount of training you can achieve is significantly higher than can be achieved naturally. This higher training load results in permanent changes to the rest of your physiology. So no, I agree taking EPO does not directly change anything long term, but EPO and training? I think the question needs to be asked. It is relevant to life time bans for certain substances.

EPO leads to vascular angiogenesis - ie new blood vessel creation and also helps with heart muscle growth.

I'd say these effects are potentially long-term, particularly when combined with the intensity and duration of training carried out by individuals also using test / hgh etc for recovery.

 

[sittingbison]

I am sending PMs to those involved in a purile contretemps.

On a general note, please stop the personal attacks, insults, threats etc

cheers
bison

 

[Benotti69]

plus ça change hey JV?

Eufemiano ‏@oufeh 25m

Puerto Affair 8 years later:
@TourDeJose: Ruta del Sol stage 2
1. Valverde (MOV)
2. LL Sanchez (CJR)
3. Navarro (COF)
4. Scarponi (AST)

 

[the sceptic]

plus ça change hey JV?

lol. new clean generation indeed.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

EPO does not permanently change your engine, just like Hi-Test gas does not change your car engine. I can't see how EPO could have a positive long term effect.

Without EPO, guys like Danielson or Levi never would have had a pro cycling career. The drug allowed him to get on a pro team, train full time, lose a bunch of weight, live in Europe full time, connect with a bunch of super rich dudes who will supplement his income while he serves suspensions etc etc etc.

Plenty of long term benefits regardless of physiological effects.

 

[Race Radio]

Without EPO, guys like Danielson or Levi never would have had a pro cycling career. The drug allowed him to get on a pro team, train full time, lose a bunch of weight, live in Europe full time, connect with a bunch of super rich dudes who will supplement his income while he serves suspensions etc etc etc.

Plenty of long term benefits regardless of physiological effects.

Good point. Danielson maybe could have but likely would have washed out early (Head Case) Levi though made the most of the opportunity, learned a huge amount.

 

[Ferminal]

DZ ever the comedian.

 

[JRanton]

DZ ever the comedian.

I can't stand him and Danielson. Give me the likes of Valverde and Scarponi over those two cretins any day. And yet they both have a cult following in the US. Go figure.

 

[the sceptic]

so, 6.7w/kg for almost 20 minutes, doesnt that put Dawgs FTP well above 6.0w/kg?

I seem to remember that JV said this was a sure sign of doping.. too bad he ran away from the forum once the "speeds are down" theory started to blow up in his face.

 

[mewmewmew13]

I can't stand him and Danielson. Give me the likes of Valverde and Scarponi over those two cretins any day. And yet they both have a cult following in the US. Go figure.

I live in the US and I would take Valv & Scarponi over Danielson as well. I don't think TommyD deserves to be making all his $ from his hollywood connex..at least DZ has quietly slinked away..

 

[hiero2]

Huh? What does this statement mean then:
"Vaughters said he has seen riders drop well below their pre-EPO baseline abilities, and claims the effect last years in some cases."

I genuinely don't understand your point.

It means exactly what is says.
I genuinely have no idea how you can get it to mean more than it says.

When the question is asked: Is there a long term gain in performance from using EPO training at an elevated level then stopping EPO and the answer is: No in fact they perform at lower level than before they took EPO and it can stay that way for years. I take it to mean they are at a disadvantage to riders who never took EPO. That doesn't seem like broken logic to me?

I genuinely find this whole exchange to be more than a little surreal. So JV said that riders who stopped using EPO suffered from a shut down in their body's ability to produce red blood cells but this does not put them at a disadvantage when it comes to racing? And here I thought more red blood cells was what made the cycling world go round.

Hugh,
As you know, I respect you so, if if I have errored I will accept your view.
In the piece I read JV states that when you cease taking EPO there is a backlash, and that your body stops producing for "a while".

Now. If JV said it stopped completely it would sound complete BS, but he does not say that. He even says he say that the consequences more from riders of the pre 50% HCT limit.
I cannot see how that gets extended here to mean that riders who stopped in 2006 should not be able to reproduce by now. (2014, although it feels like 2009)

But would he ever be normal? IMO training with an expanded engine results in bigger long term changes than can't be achieved training with your natural engine. My experience from any aerobic training is those benefits don't go away, you can stop training, loose form but that engine is always there just waiting to be woken up and dusted off. Returning to your "old level" is always easier and quicker than reaching a new level.

Not that I believe that any of these Garmin guys stopped doping in 2006.

I think one of the key points here is the words "SOME OF THE CASES'.

Those who seem to think this somehow should stand against JV's logic are trying to interpret these results as universal. I.e. "ALL OF THE CASES". One of the biggest things of interest, especially for EPO, is how variable the results are. And, how undecided science is about long-term effects. Steriods, on the other hand, are a bit more predictable, and taking testosterone supplements CAN mean you will have to take them forever after, just to maintain your pre-dosing levels. Most of the effects go away quite quickly - within weeks. Some effects may be longer term. A lot of variance depending on the person. A lot of this stuff nobody KNOWS - all we have expert opinions: "in my judgement" . . . .

Some opinions in those forums like the weight lifter's forums can be more expert than most doctors. Some cancer forums same way. Problem is, sifting the dross.

 

[Granville57]

https://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/438704521443692544

Believe me, large sponsors don't care so much about the dozen weirdos that obsess over cycling drama on twitter.

The Clinic 12 outdone by the Twitter Dozen!

Unless...


It's the same twelve people. Which would be weird, because The Clinic is so small, and Twitter so big.

But no one would ever pay any attention to just twelve people.

Except that people in high places keep bringing them up.

Over, and over, and over, and over, and over again.

But I'm sure there's nothing to it.

Nobody cares. It doesn't matter what goes on or what is said.

And yet there is so much contempt for those 12 souls.

But no one is listening to those so reviled.

Which is good!

Otherwise things might get ugly.

But it's OK.

It all falls on deaf ears.

Shhhh.

No one is listening.

Hear that sound?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

It's memetic. And every mention increases its power.

 

[Digger]

JV...He sells us the idea that everything is so much better now, that the cool kids don't dope, that the new generation wouldn't stand for it.

In 2005 he told us that over 85% of the peloton was clean.
He said lance was an all American hero.
Jonny Weltz his employee made an effort to discredit Floyd and tyler by saying they were jealous,
David Millar vilified landis.
Talansky said there was no evidence agsint lance.
Christian said Floyd was telling lies.

In 2008 JV admitted that doping scandals damage chances of getting sponsors.

Mr Vaughters, the guy who waited until the statute was up before he came clean officially.

And people wonder why I have an issue with him and his team.

Not forgetting the amazing Ryder who stopped doping in the midst of everyone doping around him...which amazingly coincided with the statute...and JV believes him...or says he does.

Yeah JV is a great guy...as his team also are. The six month bans some got in winter...tough days.

JV the guy who tried to sign Alberto.

The guy who tried to defend Alberto when all evidence said his name was on Puerto files.

JV the guy who said Lance's values from 2009 could very well be clean.

JV the guy who calls Wiggins a p r I c k and then says last year he's a great guy.

JV the guy who said Stuart O'Grady's excuse, I only doped once, adds up...until Johan corrected his nonsense.

JV the guy who signed Thomas Dekker, not to give him another chance, but because Dekker was bringing sponsorship with him.

JV, the guy who vilified Jorg Jaksche.

 

[The fridge in the blue trees]

Or simply:

JV the guy who dares not having your opinion, but his own.

 

[EnacheV]

Jonathan Vaughters ‏@Vaughters Feb 25

excellent interview, Krusty! http://velonews.competitor.com/2014...ome-but-doesnt-have-enough-information_318036 … @festinaboy

excellent huh ? my rider is cleans (no proof of that other than the proofs that are valid for all people in peleton, but that suddenly don't work for others) but some guys that beat my guy are dirty (also with no proofs).

what a weasel. a pathological liar probably.