JV talks, sort of

Page 310 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 6, 2009
3,488
1
0
D-Queued said:
I have suggested that Ryder's Dauphine performance was questionable.

Typically it is hard to pick out a Domestique as having charged up, but that particular race gave us an interesting glimpse.

It isn't that he placed 16th, or that he placed top 20 on Ventoux. It was how Ryder accomplished his finish on the Ventoux stage that was beyond impressive.

The leaders already had ~3 min gap at the bottom, and Ryder was being loyal domestique to Floyd who started to fail badly, losing minutes to the leaders. And quickly.

Floyd then gave Ryder the all clear and Ryder bridged like nobody's business.

He almost certainly had the fastest time up Ventoux, let alone after starting with a huge handicap by hanging around with Floyd on the lower slopes.

Meanwhile, there were already rumors floating about his doping.

Then, Floyd pulled off the miracle Tour.

So, put 1+1+1 together.

Dave.
This doesn't make much sense when compared to the race report and results. The riders who had a 3 minute lead at the foot of Ventoux were the break. Then it says Sevilla attacked after 4k and was chased by a group of favourites without Ryder. Ryder eventually finished over 3 mins back with Hincapie who Leipheimer felt was sandbagging according to the report.

On whom did he close the 3 minute gap? Are you saying he went from Floyds group to some other group closing a 3 min gap? Which group was it?
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
JV in june could have told agents an answer, yes or no? But it appears JV implemented a Sept 30th deadline for riders to know their team situation and ignored it.

Hmm wonder does he do much of that?:rolleyes:
 
Oct 16, 2010
13,578
1
0
he's now saying on twitter his riders suffer more when they get fired than riders from other teams, because they feel JV is their friend.

you couldn't make it up.

i bet some riders are scared to lash out at JV.
Lashing out at JV = reduced chances of returning to the propeloton?
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
Ferminal said:
Can never forget Vaughters magical claim that Dekker tested as the best of the best, leading to this great discussion:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=729212&postcount=88

"We've done 18 months of testing on him to determine this," Vaughters said. "That included power tests every month and corresponding blood tests. His power should go up as his training increases, but his blood values shouldn't. That's exactly what happened, and his last tests when he won Duo Normand were world class."

The amount of talent in the Dutch rider coupled with his relative bargain contract price after his suspension gave Dekker the edge over other riders who were without contracts.

"Should I turn down an athlete who's in the top five per cent of guys from a physiological standpoint because he got caught [doping] when many others in his generation didn't get caught? That's a wrong decision.
he might be top 5%, but I bet he doesn't have Crazy Adaptive Physiology.
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
‏@Vaughters

@chogan76 @kieroliver oh brother. More friends of digger. ***** moan complain blah blah blah.
JV is all about interacting with the fans! as long as they are on his side of course.. otherwise you get blocked.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
once a doper always a doper

Jonathan Vaughters @Vaughters ·
Just got blood tests back for life insurance. Hematocrit was 54%! Hemoglobin 17.5! Cholesterol 162. Ready to race!!

...........:rolleyes:
 
Dec 7, 2010
4,453
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Jonathan Vaughters @Vaughters ·
Just got blood tests back for life insurance. Hematocrit was 54%! Hemoglobin 17.5! Cholesterol 162. Ready to race!!
I'm just wondering if his insurance carrier drops him, will he have to read about it on Twitter? :(
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
sniper said:
fair points.

one guess i expressed earlier is that Floyd may still be (have been) in a salary dispute with Mercury. If he'd admit he doped in that period then he can probably kiss that salary good bye.

Perhaps anyone in the know if that dispute is still a dispute?
not the reason imo.

the reason is, even after telling a mountain of mstruths, even when the athletes/cyclists/sportsmen come clean, they always hold something in reserve.

"They all did it."

"It was a level playing field."

"240km and three hors categories pass without dope? Surely you jest"

et al et al et al. They seek to make the most out of a bad situation and cast themselves in the most positive light. There is no true disinfectant in this light.
 
May 27, 2010
5,181
3
0
blackcat said:
not the reason imo.

the reason is, even after telling a mountain of mstruths, even when the athleters/cyclists/sportsmen come clean, they always hold something in reserve.

"They all did it."

"It was a level playing field."

"240km and three hors categories pass without dope? Surely you jest"

et al et al et al. They seek to make the most out of a bad situation and cast themselves in the most positive light. There is no true disinfectant in this light.
Yup.

A small difference between the admission of doping for one or two events, or for a couple of years on a bad team that everyone already knows about, and admitting that virtually all of your results were tainted. A small difference between admitting that you doped and getting whistle-blower benefits versus admitting that your career was a sham and any success undeserved.

Plus, the more truth you tell the more the collateral damage to friends and family.

Where is the real truth behind Arnie Baker, for example? Or, the real truth when Floyd told Will about Greg, gave Greg's number to Will, then apparently was completely unaware of the intimidation phone call while sitting right beside him during the entire call?

This is the same cuddly Floyd that seeks seven figure profits from exposing Lance. The same cuddly Floyd whose friends would openly recount how he would steal milk, drinking it straight from a carton subsequently replaced in a grocery store without paying. Oh, what a prankster. Laughable and harmless? Not to the store owner.

Or, by analogy, think of Lance and Carmichael. Or Lance and the USOC. Or Lance's refusal on Oprah to discuss the Hospital room.

Getting back to the subject of this thread, JV actually deserves credit for detailing his doping history to the NY Times and then to Joe Lindsey at Bicycling.

He revealed how anti-doping Nunez opened the door to EPO for him, and how he doped behind Legeay's back out of guilt and concern for CA's flagging results. How he got freaked out by IV self-injection versus sub-cutaneous. It is fascinating that these two manager's went out of their way to avoid doping.

Taking JV at his word - bear with me on that as many are not so charitable - experiences with Nunez and Legeay arguably provided the critical leadership examples to pursue an open no doping policy.

Why are all of these other guys still so reluctant to tell us more of the truth?

The collective experiences must hold enough material to fill a library.

Hincapie tied the record for most Tours completed.

Yet, think about when and how this was accomplished. Hincapie flourished and lasted throughout the '60s era' (i.e. when HCT reached the 60s) better than anyone. As his career progressed, as his body took on more wear and tear, and as doping became even more sophisticated, George became a better climber. If anyone succeeded during the worst doping in the sport's history, it was George.

They have all talked, sort of. But nobody has really told us much of anything save for the likes of Rasmussen and Tyler and JV.

There are many more dark stories yet to see the light of day.

Dave.
 
Mar 13, 2009
12,232
0
0
D-Queued said:
There are many more dark stories yet to see the light of day.

Dave.
but they wont see the light of day imo.

I dont even think Froome or Wiggins with have to do the forgivenenss trope like Armstrong. The entire media landscape, even now that the print media is dead, is still enough of a filter, they are still the gatekeepers. The folks who bother reading doping blogs are immaterial.

when I said they hold something in return, I wanted to imply, it was two fronts. self, and fans/or general public.

but the motive was the #ego.

on some meta level, they had all reconciled themselves to doping and their talent in their respective sports, so all the justifications in the world, for the general public, wont change the mistruths they tell themselves.

hye, but i still like ricky riccio. someone so dumb, someone so charming. p'raps they are one and the same.


#rickyriccioFTW

tho i do have a chuckle at the appelation for any doper as DISGRACED <insert your own doper>.
To me, the only disgrace is the media, but I understand the economic imperative when most media is now underwater like an italian ferry driver
 
Nov 14, 2013
373
0
0
D-Queued said:
But nobody has really told us much of anything save for the likes of Rasmussen and Tyler and JV.

There are many more dark stories yet to see the light of day
Excellent post. Don't forget about St David of anti-doping and His illuminating book race in to the darkness. The only darkness is the wool he tries to pull over our eyes.
 
Mar 6, 2009
3,488
1
0
ralphbert said:
Excellent post. Don't forget about St David of anti-doping and His illuminating book race in to the darkness. The only darkness is the wool he tries to pull over our eyes.
So may people seem convinced that Millar didn't tell the full story in his book but I am curious as to what people think he left out or lied about.
 
Sep 29, 2012
8,087
0
0
pmcg76 said:
So may people seem convinced that Millar didn't tell the full story in his book but I am curious as to what people think he left out or lied about.
That he actually stopped?
 
pmcg76 said:
So may people seem convinced that Millar didn't tell the full story in his book but I am curious as to what people think he left out or lied about.
Good write up here at Podium Café.

Racing Through The Dark then is David Millar's story, the current version of that story. That 'current version' bit needs to be stressed, Millar has flexed his story down through the years. He claimed to have told the authorities everything after they sweated a confession out of him, but it was clear then - and is even more clear now - that this was a lie. He has offered excuses for his doping that I wonder if even he really believes. I find it very hard to accept that a man as intelligent as David Millar does not accept personal responsibility for his own actions, even while I acknowledge the pressures of the environment he existed in.

This throws up a question: if Millar lied before his arrest, and now it's clear that - as most sensible people suspected at the time - he continued to lie after his arrest, why should anyone believe he's telling the complete truth now?
Well yes, that's just what Millar expected - because it wasn't his fault. It was IMG's fault. They were his agents and meant to sort all this stuff out for him. When you're David Millar and down in your cups, there's always somebody else to blame. (If it was IMG's fault, why didn't Millar sue them for negligence? Any lawyer worth their salt would take such a slam-dunk case on a no-win no-fee basis.)
That Millar ended up with Saunier Duval ... well it's forgivable. How about his hitching up with Luigi Cecchini upon his return? Millar knew well who he was ("The Italian was one of the most famous coaches in professional cycling, but also one of the most controversial. His clientele was a who's who of famous cyclists. Some, like Bjarne Riis, Tyler Hamilton and Jan Ullrich, are probably better described as infamous."). But Millar saw no problem. He was only looking for a training programme. And he never paid Cecchini anything for his services ("There was never any money involved and it was never even discussed. I'm sure I'm probably the only professional rider he has ever trained for free."). What was Millar thinking? ("In hindsight, despite everything, I was still naïve. [...] But I felt that Max [Sciandri]'s opinion of him was enough reason for me to give him the benefit of the doubt.").

Quite how Millar's relationship with Cecchini became public knowledge and quite why he ended it has various versions. One involves David Brailsford. That would be David Brailsford's version, the version which overlooks how Brailsford and British Cycling were happy to work with Max Sciandri and send young riders to train with him in Tuscany, but were horrified to be directly linked to Sciandri's mentor.
Kimmage was quoted condemning Millar: "I find it hard to accept that [Millar] is now being heralded as a whistle-blower. He didn't blow any whistles, didn't do any favours to cycling. [...] When I see Millar welcomed back like a hero ... I mean - I tried to do the sport a service. But he hasn't shat on any of his pals, he's still playing the game, still respecting the omertà. [...] Millar should not have been let back into the sport. He should have been banned for life. Until the sport does that, there's no chance."
http://www.podiumcafe.com/2011/6/17/2228568/Racing-Through-The-Dark
 
May 10, 2009
3,654
0
0
pmcg76 said:
So may people seem convinced that Millar didn't tell the full story in his book but I am curious as to what people think he left out or lied about.
three vials for the three times he took EPO
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts