JV talks, sort of

[Granville57]

Why was their first reaction to be negative? I don't know. But it was disappointing to me. I think they all understand how bad that was now.

Have any of them apologized to Floyd since?

 

[JV1973]

Have any of them apologized to Floyd since?

I don't know. I know that I have. But I've always kept in touch with Floyd. And I'm pretty sure we are on very good terms.

 

[JV1973]

Have any of them apologized to Floyd since?

I actually speak more to Floyd than I do to DM by a long shot! Irony there.

 

[Granville57]

Just look at DM not getting selected for the Tour this year! Holy moly... he wound up the public like no tomorrow with his statements.

I seem to remember that when you first recruited Millar for Garmin, he presence was key to lending credibility to this new, pro squad, and that part of the arrangement was that he had some ownership stake, or something similar, in the team.

Is my memory flawed? Is there anything to this?

Thanks.

 

[hrotha]

Also, remember, this was a time when Lance was actively talking to my boss about removing me and joining forces. Also talking to my riders about new contracts... Flying Taylor Phinney around in private jets to Aspen. i don't think my riders thought I'd survive the storm with my overly idealistic position. Lance held more cards than I did in their opinion. My ousting was more likely.

Luckily, my boss has some pretty strong resolve.

Fair enough, but that what that tells me is that many of your riders might go back to the old ways if you stopped looking for a minute, because the alleged cultural change doesn't seem to have touched them all that much. At a time of crisis, their gut reaction was to stand by Armstrong, a guy they knew plenty of bad things about, against the guy they knew was telling the truth. That you had to smack your folks around until they understood what an acceptable response was is very telling, in my opinion. In the past, I've wondered about how representative you are even within your own team. Sometimes you don't seem to be on the same page as other prominent folks at Slipstream (Millar, Weltz, etc).

When your guys make those dumb statements, do you not worry that they don't believe in what you're preaching?

 

[Col Okey]

Actually, Christian asked me and tried to convince me we should hire Floyd post suspension. CVV was one of the few that spoke up to me about it not being fair. I was the one who ultimately decided we weren't going to hire Floyd. The funny thing is, we were the only team in cycling that even considered this. That actually even thought about it. The rest never even gave it a first thought, much less second.

Yet.... We are to blame. Funny.

reading that couldn't help thinking of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpz9gxmfbN4&t=3m22s

 

[JV1973]

I seem to remember that when you first recruited Millar for Garmin, he presence was key to lending credibility to this new, pro squad, and that part of the arrangement was that he had some ownership stake, or something similar, in the team.

Is my memory flawed? Is there anything to this?

Thanks.

Yes, but the ownership has been diluted to basically nothing, as we've had repeated capital calls. I thought hiring DM was a move saying "I'm not going to pretend doping didn't happen"... that was the thought behind it. I didn't want a team pretending everyone was a saint. Figured it was better to tackle head on by hiring an ex-doper as the first guy to recruit.

 

[Granville57]

I was the one who ultimately decided we weren't going to hire Floyd.

JV,

Would you care to elaborate more on the fact that you said (previously in this thread) that you were actively encouraged by both the UCI and the ASO not to hire Floyd?

Some of us here are very curious as to the amount of influence both the UCI and ASO have in such matters. Some of of us feel that they shouldn't have any say at all.

Thanks again.

 

[WildspokeJoe]

I actually speak more to Floyd than I do to DM by a long shot! Irony there.

Why didn't someone tell DM that he wasn't riding The tour by phone?

It seems that world is going the way of detachment.
Email or through the media instead of facing someone when it's a hard decision.

 

[JV1973]

Fair enough, but that what that tells me is that many of your riders might go back to the old ways if you stopped looking for a minute, because the alleged cultural change doesn't seem to have touched them all that much. At a time of crisis, their gut reaction was to stand by Armstrong, a guy they knew plenty of bad things about, against the guy they knew was telling the truth. That you had to smack your folks around until they understood what an acceptable response was is very telling, in my opinion. In the past, I've wondered about how representative you are even within your own team. Sometimes you don't seem to be on the same page as other prominent folks at Slipstream (Millar, Weltz, etc).

When your guys make those dumb statements, do you not worry that they don't believe in what you're preaching?

While you have a point, i think they watched the world around them melt - and they got support, when others did not. I think they are 100% on page with me now. In 2009-2010? Yeah, they feared Lance. A lot.

But in the end, thy did the right thing. They overcame that fear. So, I'm happy to forgive and forget about that they'd have thrown me under the bus in 2010!

 

[JV1973]

Why didn't someone tell DM that he wasn't riding The tour by phone?

It seems that world is going the way of detachment.
Email or through the media instead of facing someone when it's a hard decision.

Dave was informed by phone - twice. He just was trying to call me at 3am to get me to overrule Charly Wegelius, which I wasn't going to do. And I wasn't going to answer at 3am either, especially when the evening previous we had a scheduled conf call with Doug Ellis, DM and myself at 9am.

But I didn't really see the point in fighting back with what he was saying at the time. he was hurt enough, i didn't need to call him out.

 

[JV1973]

JV,

Would you care to elaborate more on the fact that you said (previously in this thread) that you were actively encouraged by both the UCI and the ASO not to hire Floyd?

Some of us here are very curious as to the amount of influence both the UCI and ASO have in such matters. Some of of us feel that they shouldn't have any say at all.

Thanks again.

I wouldn't make too much of it. Basically both ASO and UCI would say "we don't think its a good idea for you to hire Landis"... Now, did they threaten or what not? No. They just made their opinion clear. That wasn't what drove the decision in the end.

 

[JV1973]

JV,

Would you care to elaborate more on the fact that you said (previously in this thread) that you were actively encouraged by both the UCI and the ASO not to hire Floyd?

Some of us here are very curious as to the amount of influence both the UCI and ASO have in such matters. Some of of us feel that they shouldn't have any say at all.

Thanks again.

BTW - AGAIN - NO OTHER TEAM EVEN ASKED UCI/ASO, BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T TOUCH FLOYD.... While I don't need a pat on the back, I'd ask folks here to consider that I was THE ONLY guy even asking the question.

 

[Granville57]

BTW - AGAIN - NO OTHER TEAM EVEN ASKED UCI/ASO, BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T TOUCH FLOYD.... While I don't need a pat on the back, I'd ask folks here to consider that I was THE ONLY guy even asking the question.

Whoa. Hold on a second...


Are you supposed to "ask" the UCI/ASO about such things?

Hypothetically, if either the UCI or ASO didn't approve of such a thing, and a team went ahead and did something contrary to their wishes, what types of actions might the UCI/ASO take in response?

 

[The Hitch]

While you have a point, i think they watched the world around them melt - and they got support, when others did not. I think they are 100% on page with me now. In 2009-2010? Yeah, they feared Lance. A lot.

But in the end, thy did the right thing. They overcame that fear. So, I'm happy to forgive and forget about that they'd have thrown me under the bus in 2010!

Fear seems to have a different meaning in cycling than elsewhere in life. In my experience fear of a baddy like lance can make you think twice before calling them out. In cycling it seems to be used as an excuse for praising some one. I can think in particular of one former Garmin employee who spent several years asslicking lance, attacking those who said he doped, saying he was clean, and now claims that it was fear of lance that motivated all those comments.

Was lance threatening to shoot anyone who didn't publicly suck him off or something? Cos I can think of hundreds of cyclists who never once said word one about lance in public and they seemed to get through it all perfectly fine.

What made these riders think that if they didn't praise lance every time they saw a mic their careers would be over?

 

[JV1973]

Whoa. Hold on a second...


Are you supposed to "ask" the UCI/ASO about such things?

Hypothetically, if either the UCI or ASO didn't approve of such a thing, and a team went ahead and did something contrary to their wishes, what types of actions might the UCI/ASO take in response?

You can ask or you can not ask. It's the choice of a manager. I asked. i was curious to their reaction. But no, they have no say on this at all. But they have a lot of influence, so i asked.

Those guys hate me nowadays, so I wouldn't ask if it were today, but back then I was trying to be everyone's buddy.

 

[Netserk]

Imo it seemed like a lot of things went in the right direction in cycling(anti-doping) in '07 and '08 before Armstrong's comeback with Clerc as president of ASO. AFLD was testing in the Tour and caught a lot of riders those years, the passport was established and speeds were (drastically) down. After Clerc left and Armstrong came back it seemed to go the other direction (though not as much as it went the right direction before). Now Armstrong has been caught and Pat is no longer in charge, but how much better are we doing atm? To me it seems like more was done in '07/'08 to combat doping than now, and I certainly don't think it's a good thing that no one has tested positive in the Tour the last few years(?) and I think (not really sure) that speeds are slowly rising again (last three years) and the 'new' UCI doesn't give me as good vibes as I had hoped for.

Where do you think we are currently in the fight against doping (compared to '07/'08)? Are we in a better state, but progressing more slowly than back then, are we regressing or how do you see it?

EDIT: I think the UCI might be better now, but ASO I think are far worse now than back then ('07/'08).

 

[Digger]

Fear seems to have a different meaning in cycling than elsewhere in life. In my experience fear of a baddy like lance can make you think twice before calling them out. In cycling it seems to be used as an excuse for praising some one. I can think in particular of one former Garmin employee who spent several years asslicking lance, attacking those who said he doped, saying he was clean, and now claims that it was fear of lance that motivated all those comments.

Was lance threatening to shoot anyone who didn't publicly suck him off or something? Cos I can think of hundreds of cyclists who never once said word one about lance in public and they seemed to get through it all perfectly fine.

What made these riders think that if they didn't praise lance every time they saw a mic their careers would be over?

This - I mean it's one thing to be afraid of him...but jesus just say nothing in that case, these guys went to the other extreme...and that's something I will never fathom...and it's more than just 'stupid'...it's lies.

And the Contador Millar comments - fear could have played a part with lance - but with contador I saw very similar patterns. And it's not acceptable...were these type comments on Contador exclusive to Millar or Garmin, absolutely not, but it shows again the terrible attitude that still pervades the peloton as a whole...irrespective of how we are told that dopers are not accepted anymore.

 

[JV1973]

Fear seems to have a different meaning in cycling than elsewhere in life. In my experience fear of a baddy like lance can make you think twice before calling them out. In cycling it seems to be used as an excuse for praising some one. I can think in particular of one former Garmin employee who spent several years asslicking lance, attacking those who said he doped, saying he was clean, and now claims that it was fear of lance that motivated all those comments.

Was lance threatening to shoot anyone who didn't publicly suck him off or something? Cos I can think of hundreds of cyclists who never once said word one about lance in public and they seemed to get through it all perfectly fine.

What made these riders think that if they didn't praise lance every time they saw a mic their careers would be over?

Good question. i don't know. But that sentiment was real. In hindsight a bit stupid, but it was very real.

 

[Granville57]

JV,

Thanks for your responses today. It helps to clarify a number of things.

I posed this question the other day, but I'll ask it again:

You recently turned 41. If you had trained consistently, and were currently on a doping program that was well suited to your own physiology (and let's assume that you were evading detection), how high in the GC do you suppose you could finish in a Grand Tour on a course that was also well suited to you...at the age of 41?

This being the era of improved equipment, training and nutrition and all that.

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

 

[JV1973]

JV,

Thanks for your responses today. It helps to clarify a number of things.

I posed this question the other day, but I'll ask it again:

You recently turned 41. If you had trained consistently, and were currently on a doping program that was well suited to your own physiology (and let's assume that you were evading detection), how high in the GC do you suppose you could finish in a Grand Tour on a course that was also well suited to you...at the age of 41?

This being the era of improved equipment, training and nutrition and all that.

Hypothetically speaking, of course.

I wish I could answer that. I have no idea! I'm 10kgs heavier than my race weight....and it aint muscle.

 

[Granville57]

Last question for the day.

I've always kept in touch with Floyd. And I'm pretty sure we are on very good terms.

Given that, I've always been very curios about something. When Floyd returned to racing in 2009 after his ban, what is your understanding of the level he was able to get back to relative to his natural potential? He never won any races after his ban, but he did podium on a number of occasions.

Was he anywhere close to his potential in his post-ban career or did all the personal distractions and stresses prevent that (to the best of your knowledge)?

On one hand it's easy to dismiss all his pre-ban success to being mostly the result of doping. But then we hear from some who say he had tremendous and exceptional natural talent—even when compared with other top-level pros.

What is your take on all this?

 

[Netserk]

Imo it seemed like a lot of things went in the right direction in cycling(anti-doping) in '07 and '08 before Armstrong's comeback with Clerc as president of ASO. AFLD was testing in the Tour and caught a lot of riders those years, the passport was established and speeds were (drastically) down. After Clerc left and Armstrong came back it seemed to go the other direction (though not as much as it went the right direction before). Now Armstrong has been caught and Pat is no longer in charge, but how much better are we doing atm? To me it seems like more was done in '07/'08 to combat doping than now, and I certainly don't think it's a good thing that no one has tested positive in the Tour the last few years(?) and I think (not really sure) that speeds are slowly rising again (last three years) and the 'new' UCI doesn't give me as good vibes as I had hoped for.

Where do you think we are currently in the fight against doping (compared to '07/'08)? Are we in a better state, but progressing more slowly than back then, are we regressing or how do you see it?

EDIT: I think the UCI might be better now, but ASO I think are far worse now than back then ('07/'08).

^^ In case it wasn't clear, this was a question directed to you JV.

 

[JV1973]

Last question for the day.



Given that, I've always been very curios about something. When Floyd returned to racing in 2009 after his ban, what is your understanding of the level he was able to get back to relative to his natural potential? He never won any races after his ban, but he did podium on a number of occasions.

Was he anywhere close to his potential in his post-ban career or did all the personal distractions and stresses prevent that (to the best of your knowledge)?

On one hand it's easy to dismiss all his pre-ban success to being mostly the result of doping. But then we hear from some who say he had tremendous and exceptional natural talent—even when compared with other top-level pros.

What is your take on all this?

I think it was always going to be very hard for Floyd to come back, fully. In 2009 he was 34 and had hip replacement surgery along with having had a hellacious few years. He was very talented, but these factors were a lot to overcome.

 

[pmcg76]

I think it was always going to be very hard for Floyd to come back, fully. In 2009 he was 34 and had hip replacement surgery along with having had a hellacious few years. He was very talented, but these factors were a lot to overcome.

JV, what happened with Rohan Dennis? He is another rider that seemed quite ****ed with Garmin.