JV talks, sort of

[blackcat]

Ah, the good old days.

As you likely recall, I took Will on because he was posting nonsense. At the time, I had no idea who he was. His assertions had no substance, though.

Had I known who he was, I am not sure if I would have been so willing to engage him. Funny that.

Whoever the poster, the best strategy is always to try and understand where they are coming from. If it is BS, then it should be pretty obvious and deserves being called on.

But, the Forum rules are good ones. Debate the post, and don't focus on the person.

There seems to be some 'already listening' attitudes here, however. It is not surprising that JV isn't posting anymore. If it were me, I would not have had the patience he did to face such hostility anytime he showed up.

Dave.

but Dr Arnie Baker? I figured Geoghagen before that, but later to the Party Arnie Baker arrived with a sockpuppet handle, and threatened me without threatening me if you will.

I could work out it had to be team Landis, so I figure o' one-of-the-coke-bottle-lens was the new avatar taking potshots at me. funny times.

the interwebz really could be the genesis of their own Baker's dozen DSV(just now). Godwin is soooo last century and not part of the American Assoc Spych Inst, they really need to get their act together

 

[blackcat]

There seems to be some 'already listening' attitudes here, however. It is not surprising that JV isn't posting anymore. If it were me, I would not have had the patience he did to face such hostility anytime he showed up.

Dave.

jv should go back to the long time listener first time caller MO

I cant take the sport seriously, and the forum is just an extension to this

 

[Granville57]

JV gave nothing to the clinic, except 2 slips of his ego about 2 riders that CN ran a story on.

Oh, OK. I must've confused some of JV's posts with other forum members then. Like the one about JV testing the waters with the UCI as to whether or not he should sign Floyd, 'cause, ya' know, we all knew about that already, right?

Or his firsthand assessment of Allen Lim (not flattering, by the way).
Or his take on Wiggins (not so flattering either).
Or details of his own doping combined with a valid scientific perspective (he does actually know more about doping than anyone here, btw).

We can also put aside this notion that JV MUST focus strictly on anti-doping when he posts here. His insider perspective on race tactics and other aspects of the inner-workings of pro tour team are certainly not going to be provided by anyone in the PRR sub-forum. Sometimes, even, he's just plain entertaining and amusing. But that's not good enough. He MUST address every accusation and doping issue that occurs in the peloton otherwise he is deemed to be a worthless contributor here.

I could easily go through JV's posts and pull up a dozen that were filled with interesting info that was simply not available to any other forum member here before he posted it.

Of course doing so gets me labeled as a JV fan, much like defending some of the arguments against LeMond will get me labeled as a Greg fan. It both cases, however, what I'm actually doing is defending logic. I'll do the same for Cookson when the arguments against him are failed. Same goes for Lance, for that matter.

Logic.

 

[Granville57]

It's the idea that participants should be nice so as not to chase JV away including tolerating his double-speak without question.

Who is saying "be nice"? How about just let him post?

No one has to believe him or agree with him. JV's position within the sport of cycling does make him unique among all posters here. Period. Should he get special privileges because of that? Maybe, maybe not. But expecting anything productive to result from constant attacks and insults is illogical (to put it in the mildest and most diplomatic terms).

If suspected of spewing double-speak, should he be called out on it? Absolutely. No reason not to. Just as there is no reason not to do so in a civil fashion.

I suppose I'm not really sure what the concern is if JV is allowed to offer a perspective that may be colored to suit his own agenda. It's not as if The Clinic is JV's sole outlet to the world. If he wants to spin something, god knows he can do that on Twitter, or on the front page of any major cycling news site, any time he chooses.

There seems to exist this idea that JV WILL BE STOPPED HERE! WE ARE THE FIRST AND LAST LINE OF DEFENSE AGAINST HIS HALF-TRUTHS AND OBFUSCATIONS! But whatever comes of it?

Nothing, as far as I can tell.

 

[blackcat]

Oh, OK. I must've confused some of JV's posts with other forum members then. Like the one about JV testing the waters with the UCI as to whether or not he should sign Floyd, 'cause, ya' know, we all knew about that already, right?

Or his firsthand assessment of Allen Lim (not flattering, by the way).
Or his take on Wiggins (not so flattering either).
Or details of his own doping combined with a valid scientific perspective (he does actually know more about doping than anyone here, btw).

We can also put aside this notion that JV MUST focus strictly on anti-doping when he posts here. His insider perspective on race tactics and other aspects of the inner-workings of pro tour team are certainly not going to be provided by anyone in the PRR sub-forum. Sometimes, even, he's just plain entertaining and amusing. But that's not good enough. He MUST address every accusation and doping issue that occurs in the peloton otherwise he is deemed to be a worthless contributor here.

I could easily go through JV's posts and pull up a dozen that were filled with interesting info that was simply not available to any other forum member here before he posted it.

Of course doing so gets me labeled as a JV fan, much like defending some of the arguments against LeMond will get me labeled as a Greg fan. It both cases, however, what I'm actually doing is defending logic. I'll do the same for Cookson when the arguments against him are failed. Same goes for Lance, for that matter.

Logic.

one legit criticism tho, he thinks he can be funny, but cant do humour. needs to check the funny at the coatroom, and get the receipt that says hipster coat, xs, no shoulders, coathanger mannequin.

hey, have Martin Hardie and JV shaved off their sideburn lambchops in unison? Who is doppelganger whom? Or since this is cycling, who is the chimera?

 

[Granville57]

hey, have Martin Hardie and JV shaved off their sideburn lambchops in unison? Who is doppelganger whom? Or since this is cycling, who is the chimera?

One, the inflated version of the other. Or even more nefarious: One, the result of having consumed the other.

Have they ever been spotted together?

 

[blackcat]

One, the inflated version of the other. Or even more nefarious: One, the result of having consumed the other.

Have they ever been spotted together?

nope, no they have not.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Or his firsthand assessment of Allen Lim (not flattering, by the way).

His opionion on someone. Someone he employed.

Or his take on Wiggins (not so flattering either).

Another opinion about another employee - who broke his contract to go to Sky. After coming 5th at the Tour. You need JV to tell you he doesn't think much of him? And what about all the "perfectly legitimate performance" posts he made about Wiggo's performance?

Or details of his own doping

There were no details of doping (pedantically), just some supposed results of the doping. And your sentence should IMO be written "alleged details of his own doping". Remember the Garmin website where he broke the record up Ventoux thanks to ground breaking training techniques...

combined with a valid scientific perspective (he does actually know more about doping than anyone here, btw).

Yeah I should have started here. Valid what?

His insider perspective on race tactics

... race tactics? ...

and other aspects of the inner-workings of pro tour team are certainly not going to be provided by anyone in the PRR sub-forum.

Yeah right. Like the Sysmex anomalies he's been trotting out since his time with USPS. Awesome insight.

Sometimes, even, he's just plain entertaining and amusing.

Especially to those who back his attacks on other posters.

But that's not good enough. He MUST address every accusation and doping issue that occurs in the peloton otherwise he is deemed to be a worthless contributor here.

... said noone ever.

I could easily go through JV's posts and pull up a dozen that were filled with interesting info that was simply not available to any other forum member here before he posted it.

Of course doing so gets me labeled as a JV fan, much like defending some of the arguments against LeMond will get me labeled as a Greg fan. It both cases, however, what I'm actually doing is defending logic. I'll do the same for Cookson when the arguments against him are failed. Same goes for Lance, for that matter.

Logic.

It looks like emotion to me. Fear you are going to miss out. Sadness that JV doesn't post here. Annoyance that that is because people called him on his utter BS.

Yes, for the most part our knowledge is limited, but if someone who probably does know, comes in and muddies the water further with half truths, scientific misdirection and outright lies, I'd rather they kept their distance thanks. No loss.

 

[Granville57]

It looks like emotion to me. Fear you are going to miss out. Sadness that JV doesn't post here.

Then you've missed my point, entirely.

A point, which, if stated outright, tends to undermine my intention: Allow him to expose himself.

Is that better?

Insight, contradictions, hypocrisy, "humor" —all of it.

I don't see the harm.

And FWIW, I can, and have, reached out directly to JV in the past, and could easily do so again (as could anybody else so willing). In doing so, I revealed my real name, home town, online identity, and cell phone number (I thought it only fair under the circumstances). So I hardly need to shed any tears if he doesn't post here for fear of losing my new BFF.

Annoyance that that is because people called him on his utter BS.

Nope. I've called him out directly on things that I consider to be BS plenty of times.


Still waiting for thehog to report back to The Clinic after embedding with JV's team as was tentatively agreed upon by the two of them in this very thread though.

 

[Benotti69]

Sorry Granville, not buying it.

JV could've come in here in an anonymous way and being helpful with information. He came in here wearing his ego and thinking he had the wit to tool around with the clinic. Big deal. He gave little information, most of it ready available in book form by various former pros. And anything truly relevant to his team we found out with other sources.

The most disappointing aspects of JV was his PR releases for his riders after 'reson decision', then Rasmussen revealing Hesjedal's doping, it stank and showed a guy playing the game of professional cycling and maybe that is the way it has to be done to survive in that cut throat environment, but spell it out if that is the way it is.

JV's excuses for high 3rd week blood levels for Wiggins and Hesjedal's big tour performances (Tdf'09 and Giro'12) as machine error were laughable.

Nope JV is his own version of Riis, Martinelli, Bruyneel, Brailsford, Lefevere et al, he has to be, this is pro cycling afterall.

IMO, JV used the clinic as part of his anti doping pr game, nothing more.

BroDeal nailed the thread title perfectly, "JV talks, sort of", meaning not really!

 

[Granville57]

The most disappointing aspects of JV was his PR releases for his riders after 'reson decision',

Oh, I couldn't agree more on that point. 100%. That whole episode was a big turning point for me. For reasons I won't go into, I had, for a time, what I would describe as two degrees of separation from some Garmin team members, and that had led me to give them a fairly wide latitude in terms of what they were presenting to the world. I had heard things that were encouraging.

But in the immediate aftermath of the Reasoned Decision? BS. All of it. Up until then I had been quite supportive of the team and their supposed policies, but I was disgusted by the shallow, cookie cutter, and transparently disingenuous statements issued from CVV and others after USADA went public with their report.

There was a crucial moment there for them to be totally honest with the public, and they blew it. Completely. As has been well documented, CVV's tears over having spent a few extra months with his family instead of being off training with his teammates was laughable.

JV's and CVV's pubic support of Wiggins when Sir Bradley turned his vitriol against the fans was another line in the sand for me. It was another straw on the camel's back of me giving a f'ck about the sport in general, and JV's team in particular.

BroDeal nailed the thread title perfectly, "JV talks, sort of"

Which, if you look carefully, has been my argument all along: Let him talk, "sort of." It's what JV does well. And, in my opinion, it ends up being "sort of" better than a lot of what transpires around here. At the very least, it gives a better idea of where JV really stands, even if some people feel they already know.

 

[blackcat]

perception is reality.

 

[Benotti69]

Oh, I couldn't agree more on that point. 100%. That whole episode was a big turning point for me. For reasons I won't go into, I had, for a time, what I would describe as two degrees of separation from some Garmin team members, and that had led me to give them a fairly wide latitude in terms of what they were presenting to the world. I had heard things that were encouraging.

But in the immediate aftermath of the Reasoned Decision? BS. All of it. Up until then I had been quite supportive of the team and their supposed policies, but I was disgusted by the shallow, cookie cutter, and transparently disingenuous statements issued from CVV and others after USADA went public with their report.

There was a crucial moment there for them to be totally honest with the public, and they blew it. Completely. As has been well documented, CVV's tears over having spent a few extra months with his family instead of being off training with his teammates was laughable.

JV's and CVV's pubic support of Wiggins when Sir Bradley turned his vitriol against the fans was another line in the sand for me. It was another straw on the camel's back of me giving a f'ck about the sport in general, and JV's team in particular.

I agree with pretty much the above.

Which, if you look carefully, has been my argument all along: Let him talk, "sort of." It's what JV does well. And, in my opinion, it ends up being "sort of" better than a lot of what transpires around here. At the very least, it gives a better idea of where JV really stands, even if some people feel they already know.

Sorry Granville, you are probably right, but to try and lull JV into a false sense of security would work once (it did which meant a CN article based on some of his posts) but JV quickly zipped up and reduced his input to attempted witticisms and little else.

JV gives very little away on twitter, which is where i would expect him to engage in his dedication to anti doping and cleaning up the sport, but if you read it you get more of the fluff he reduced his input into on here, most of it being quite immature.

IMO JV is a businessman first and foremost and in cycling that means getting down into the cesspit like everyone else.

 

[Benotti69]

Ooops...

ammattipyöräily @ammattipyoraily · 8m

#Giro, Alpe di Pampeago (7.70 km, 9.78 %)

1998 Tonkov 24:12
1999 Pantani 24:07
2003 Simoni 24:35
2008 Ricco 25:28
2012 Hesjedal 25:00

Hesjedal faster than Ricco.......hahahaha, it would appear that the machine result for those blood levels was correct afterall........hahahaha

Not possible to win a GT clean.

 

[D-Queued]

Sorry Granville, not buying it.

JV could've come in here in an anonymous way and being helpful with information. He came in here wearing his ego and thinking he had the wit to tool around with the clinic. Big deal. He gave little information, most of it ready available in book form by various former pros. And anything truly relevant to his team we found out with other sources.

The most disappointing aspects of JV was his PR releases for his riders after 'reson decision', then Rasmussen revealing Hesjedal's doping, it stank and showed a guy playing the game of professional cycling and maybe that is the way it has to be done to survive in that cut throat environment, but spell it out if that is the way it is.

JV's excuses for high 3rd week blood levels for Wiggins and Hesjedal's big tour performances (Tdf'09 and Giro'12) as machine error were laughable.

Nope JV is his own version of Riis, Martinelli, Bruyneel, Brailsford, Lefevere et al, he has to be, this is pro cycling afterall.

IMO, JV used the clinic as part of his anti doping pr game, nothing more.

BroDeal nailed the thread title perfectly, "JV talks, sort of", meaning not really!

Sorry, but respectfully, I completely disagree with you. Most particularly about Hesjedal's situation.

As noted previously, I spoke directly with JV about Ryder right around / before the contract signing was official.

JV was well aware of Ryder's past. If he wasn't, I was probably one of at least a few that informed him.

But, knowing something about that and saying something about it are different, and one does not and should not necessarily lead to the other.

That doping was done before Garmin. JV had no direct evidence of it and was not involved.

He has long had a simple rule: He didn't care what you did before joining Garmin. But, once at Garmin, you had to play by their rules.

It isn't JV's job to tell anyone about any rider that he believes might have been doping. His job is to make sure it doesn't happen on his team. He has stuck his neck out on that point. And, it is on that point alone that we should judge him.

Not sure how pro teams work, but if any employer releases confidential information about an employee that is a potentially large problem. Especially if that confidential information is from a time when there was no formal relationship.

How would you like it if your employer did something like that?

The point is that while you may feel JV could or should have done more, he still has to work within the confines of employment law let alone situational ethics.

Dave.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

That doping was done before Garmin. JV had no direct evidence of it and was not involved.

He has long had a simple rule: He didn't care what you did before joining Garmin. But, once at Garmin, you had to play by their rules.

Is it just me or did you just write "play by their rules", not, "ride clean"?

 

[D-Queued]

Is it just me or did you just write "play by their rules", not, "ride clean"?

Thought it a bit of a funny throwback to the FFF.

Anyhow, it fits. Garmin has 'rules'.

Based upon what we understand (all public), the riders have to follow the rules. Those rules obviously include UCI/WADA's policies, as well as the team's internal testing and conduct requirements.

Thus, it wouldn't be sufficient to simply state 'ride clean', would it?

Dave.

 

[sniper]

JV was well aware of Ryder's past. If he wasn't, I was probably one of at least a few that informed him.

are you seriously entertaining the thought that he wasn't aware?
sort of like Brailsford not knowing Leinders was blooddoping riders at Rabo, dont you think?

 

[sniper]

But, knowing something about that and saying something about it are different, and one does not and should not necessarily lead to the other.

that's fair, in principle, but aren't things slightly different though if you 'dedicate your life to anti-doping' and your guy, whom you know was a blooddoper, is about to win the Giro?

He has long had a simple rule: He didn't care what you did before joining Garmin. But, once at Garmin, you had to play by their rules.

and how is JV going about checking if his riders play by his rules? Let's consider Hesjedal: how many weeks of the year do you think JV and Hesjedal spend in eachother's presence?
Just sayin, JV's claim that he 'simply knows' his riders are clean should be considered one the biggest insults to the Clinic's intelligence in recent times.

 

[Avoriaz]

Just sayin, JV's claim that he 'simply knows' his riders are clean should be considered one the biggest insults to the Clinic's intelligence in recent times.

Why is it any different to Clinicians "knowing" that a rider. Is dirty?

 

[webvan]

On the hand it's "better" because JV has some first hand knowledge, on the other hand he has a vested interest in his riders not being dopers or at least not being caught.

 

[pmcg76]

JV has access to all a riders personal data like data, power, VO2 etc which is what people are calling for to be shown publically to demonstrate whether a rider is legit or not so the chances of him knowing who is clean is pretty high.

 

[mrhender]

Why is it any different to Clinicians "knowing" that a rider. Is dirty?

JV should be qualified to know better than most of us...
Sniper used the word "clean"...
I dunno if it's an exact quote from JV...
But clean could also equal:

That his riders are operating within the ABP limits.

Also if you mask a doping substance/microdose -you might be clean in a test right?

Thus clean, but maybe still doping...

Might seem far-fetched..

But think about it..
Is clean just the new mean?

 

[Benotti69]

Why is it any different to Clinicians "knowing" that a rider. Is dirty?

Because JV claims to spend half a million dollars on internal testing.

 

[Benotti69]

Is it just me or did you just write "play by their rules", not, "ride clean"?

Garmin and JV in a nutshell.