JV talks, sort of

Page 37 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
pugdog said:
Why is it amazing? What about boxing and football? Why should they be allowed corruption a gogo and not cycling? ...NB sarcasm.
I have nothing but distain for the IOC, FIFA etc. However as this is a cycling forum and the UCI is currently displaying their total lack of principles this is why I referred to them and not the others.
 
Apr 23, 2009
121
0
0
roundabout said:
It's a reference to how "honest" a discussion can be. Especially as you say, when a person on the inside is talking to people on the outside.
Ah, I see.

I think you'd have to expect and accept an element of political expediency, in the same way that most of us have external issues that affect us but we can't overtly talk about (my mother-in-law's snoring, for example). Jv may have mixed motives, some may be about self-protection or self-advancement, but that does not neccesarily devalue what he says. It has to be taken on its own merits.

The difficulty is that there are things that he can't talk about, and yet he may allude to those things in a way in which leads us to read between the lines with no guarantee that we will come to the correct conclusions.
 
It is particularly sad to see people fall over themselves to be more righteous than warranted. He who is without sin ...

Some people in the clinic will never be happy unless you confess without any view to the consequences. So what if someone is clever enough to confess outside the SOL so as to escape sanctions. Does that really make his confession less true or less poignant? Why should someone have to risk life and/or limp in confessing to create value?

Regards
GJ
 
May 12, 2010
715
0
9,280
Galic Ho said:
One last thing. JV posted about steriods and testosterone. Make no mistake, they are effective. Very effective. They are recovery options. They help repair your body. So you can push a higher tempo day in, day out, than you can clean. It was explained in depth in 'LA to Landis.' Lance took steroids to help his legs recover so he could come back the next day on a massive blood vector assistance program and do mammoth wattages without a decrease in power. It helped with the pain. You still get pain, you still feel it, but it mitigates the depth you feel. Short story, it lowers the cumulative effect of pain over an entire GT. Ask Joe Papp how effective they are guys. He posts on here. Ask Big Boat.
This puzzled me as well. It appears to me that JV does not consider anything else than blood doping when referring to a cleaner peloton. T suspension? NPP if you are training in Mexico or on some island? So Wiggo lost a big chunk of muscles as well? Did he do it like the chicken, who is a cortison-addict for sure?

JV, is doing recreation métier-style all right with you?
 
Jun 18, 2012
299
0
0
GJB123 said:
It is particularly sad to see people fall over themselves to be more righteous than warranted. He who is without sin ...
Fairly sure most of us in here have never doped. Obviously I'm excluding Joe from that. :D

Some people in the clinic will never be happy unless you confess without any view to the consequences. So what if someone is clever enough to confess outside the SOL so as to escape sanctions. Does that really make his confession less true or less poignant? Why should someone have to risk life and/or limp in confessing o create value?
I'll take a punt at answering that: Simply, it's of far more worth to investigation and prosecution to report a crime when it's taking place, for a number of reasons. It makes it far easier to investigate something when the events are fresh, or taking place in the present tense than to ask people about it twelve years later. Suddenly it becomes a lot more difficult to substantiate. I can't remember a great deal from 12 years ago, outside of a few months when I worked during the Olympics.

But regardless, I don't think I've ever seen a claim made where someone was at physical risk of harm as a result of what went on. Maybe someday I'll be wrong on that count, but for me the risk of financial loss should be no deterrent to doing the right thing, and is absolutely no excuse. People think they need more to live than they do.
 
Mar 17, 2009
2,295
0
0
ChrisE said:
Thanks for the suggestions, but I use up my quota of mealy-mouth eufamisms in my day job. :)

And one more thing, not only would he get dog-piled for saying Wiggins is clean, he would then get banned for fighting back.
That never happens, Chris. The mods told me so. :eek:
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
ChrisE said:
Thanks for the suggestions, but I use up my quota of mealy-mouth eufamisms in my day job. :)

And one more thing, not only would he get dog-piled for saying Wiggins is clean, he would then get banned for fighting back.
:D
nice touch.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Mr.38% said:
This puzzled me as well. It appears to me that JV does not consider anything else than blood doping when referring to a cleaner peloton. T suspension? NPP if you are training in Mexico or on some island? So Wiggo lost a big chunk of muscles as well? Did he do it like the chicken, who is a cortison-addict for sure?

JV, is doing recreation métier-style all right with you?
I'd already considered that was his modus operandi. His mission in turning up here. It's why when he started reposting he was congratulated firstly, then after 10-15 pages the tone changed. Then the doubt arose and took centre stage in the comments. JV's stand point has to be fine by me. I cannot change anything he says or thinks let alone how he is perceived by a larger portion of any circle he enters.

I stated things like the part you quoted because he is blatantly wrong on that. Could be he doesn't care, or maybe he does. My point was he is frankly not specific enough with the real nitty gritty stuff. I gave reasons why...IMO he is compromised. He can't go messing up people's posteriors and mood within cyclings power circle. Kick dirt up on them, even on a forum, they'll hound you. Even with dark clouds circling around the UCI and LA. I do not think JV's position allows him to state outright another rider is doping.

So he says what he did about Wiggins. I wouldn't do that, but I understand his position pretty much left him that one option. Only someone in Landis shoes, or Jaksche, Kohl...an outsider not connected who did dope can take a punt. Someone like Kimmage, or Vayer can join the dots. JV? Nope. Not right now, not with what is coming up. No I don't like that, but I accept there are limits on what he can say. Garmin DS says Wiggins dopes where does that leave his team? Ryder Hesjedal is then fair game. Lets not kid ourselves here. Sky will have one of their lackeys reading these forums. They are paranoid and predictable like that. The whole 'marginal gains' mentality at work.:rolleyes:

Basically, when JV says something that is risable, take it with a barrel of salt and consider his position. It's between a rock and very, very, very hard place ATM. Also remember, he's not slinging current riders names around. It's just Lance and Postal and the older days, pre 2006 that has been touched. Nothing new and relevant, because it opens Garmin to criticism and some questioning is warranted and he knows that. He knows Lance and what he'd do to attain victory. He knows Armstrong finished a single place ahead of Wiggins in the 2009 TdF. That in itself says more than enough. So was JV being serious on that one about Wiggins being clean? I know where I stand on that issue. I really do hope for his sake he wasn't being serious...that would confirm all the worst stuff mentioned on this thread. ChrisE answered that quite well to my dismay and shock. Hrotha's approach is right...ask what you can and hope you get an answer, if not move to another question. But don't forget the basics of the Clinic and doping.
 
May 12, 2010
715
0
9,280
Galic Ho said:
Basically, when JV says something that is risable, take it with a barrel of salt and consider his position. It's between a rock and very, very, very hard place ATM.
This sums it up perfectly.

The reason I'm insisting on some points (commiting to full disclosure, doping substances/methods other than messing with the red sauce) is that I want to understand him and the scene in the top ranks better. I just don't have the right to crucify anyone because I lack lot's of important background info.

JV did not kill anyone, did not steal any result from a poor soul racing clean (at least not him alone). He was involved into organized crime, a doping conspiracy and hopefully found a way out. Is he a good person? I think yes and I just like him and wish him and his team all the best.

Maybe he finds time to answer my question but I'm not angry if he doesn't.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Galic Ho said:
Basically, when JV says something that is risable, take it with a barrel of salt and consider his position. It's between a rock and very, very, very hard place ATM.
And therefore better off not coming on here to give hints and suggestions.

He posts on here for his own agenda. To pish off LA, to add some anti-doping air to his team, who knows, i dont and dont care.

But if he comes on here he gotta take what is given just like any other poster.

That he comes in here as a Garmin fanboy, how can he not be he owns the flipping team, he is gonna take flack. So if he dont like it. Coat and door.

Moaning about criticism is being a big baby.

That he thinks Wiggins is clean is a joke. Take that with a pinch of salt. That Wiggins can ride for 3weeks without much trouble except from his team mate and then in the 3rd week before the final TT be leading out Cavendish is rubbing doping in our faces.

Nah the other DSs are smarter than JV to come on here. Even Vroomen has stopped posting. They aren't anti-doping they are playing pro cycling which ever way they see fit. When we see what is happening currently with the USADA v Armstrong case and how UCI is dealing with it, i see the sport is still a cess pool, to pretend that one can swim cleanly in it is just not believable.
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Nah the other DSs are smarter than JV to come on here. Even Vroomen has stopped posting. They aren't anti-doping they are playing pro cycling which ever way they see fit. When we see what is happening currently with the USADA v Armstrong case and how UCI is dealing with it, i see the sport is still a cess pool, to pretend that one can swim cleanly in it is just not believable.
Yeah, it is not believable on the face he is putting out there and that is why I posed the questions I did, and the basis of your skepticism. I doubt very seriously he will address those questions because they are not logically defendable.

What can he say about bragging about a clean team and other clean GT winners, while wanting way more testing ie implying people are doping because of lax testing and implying rules are not being followed, and then being successful in that environment? And, as you say what the UCI is doing with the LA issue and what we have seen with people such as the attempted AC coverup further promotes skepticism. I also want to know what other DS's think about him basically painting them in a bad light, deserved or not, by prmoting his team as a clean one.

If he comes on here with a reply then we can all have a discussion on those topics and perhaps some of us can be swayed. To think he hasn't read this thread the last few days when these things are flying around is not reallistic.
 
ChrisE said:
If he comes on here with a reply then we can all have a discussion on those topics and perhaps some of us can be swayed. To think he hasn't read this thread the last few days when these things are flying around is not reallistic.
Not sure why he would bother after reading the last few posts. What he says has been deconstructed to suit what other people's opinions are. One poster even goes as far as translating his supposed Orwellian "double speak".

JV doesn't need to reply, there are enough doping mediums on this forum to tell us what he really thinks...
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
From the Bicycling interview

“Five years ago, when someone would step forward and say, ‘Yeah, I doped,’ the reaction to that individual was amazingly negative,” he says of the time when ex-riders like Frankie Andreu made their admissions. “And basically, that person, in whatever capacity they might have had to improve the overall situation by being honest, they were immediately pushed aside. That is very dissuasive to coming forward.”
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
ChrisE said:
Yeah, it is not believable on the face he is putting out there and that is why I posed the questions I did, and the basis of your skepticism. I doubt very seriously he will address those questions because they are not logically defendable.

What can he say about bragging about a clean team and other clean GT winners, while wanting way more testing ie implying people are doping because of lax testing and implying rules are not being followed, and then being successful in that environment? And, as you say what the UCI is doing with the LA issue and what we have seen with people such as the attempted AC coverup further promotes skepticism. I also want to know what other DS's think about him basically painting them in a bad light, deserved or not, by prmoting his team as a clean one.

If he comes on here with a reply then we can all have a discussion on those topics and perhaps some of us can be swayed. To think he hasn't read this thread the last few days when these things are flying around is not reallistic.
I cant imagine JV is popular in pro cycling, but i guess he gets off on that, part of the reason he posts in here, fueling it!

This place is probably talked about alot in the peloton amongst the anglo saxons, mostly with false laughter.

He aint gonna post anything concrete in here. Give stuff for free, not JV!
 
Race Radio said:
Thanks, interesting read.

What I can't agree with is the talk about cycling constantly improving with regards to doping. Maybe with regards to blood doping (just maybe), but some of the things we've seen in 2011 and 2012 rather point towards a turn for the worse.

That view of continuous linear progress is IMO outdated.
 
the big ring said:
It's all about marginal gains now. Cool.

:rolleyes:
Yeah, that was disappointing to read, although expected.

The thing with marginal gains is that it only works if riders who dope don't bother with those marginal gains (let's accept for argument's sake that doping gives you a 2% boost and those marginal gains another 2%; hello, the dopers still come out on top)... or if all the biggest natural talents in the sport just happen to be Anglo-Saxon, despite those countries producing less riders and having less tradition than others.
 
Race Radio said:
From the Bicycling interview

“Five years ago, when someone would step forward and say, ‘Yeah, I doped,’ the reaction to that individual was amazingly negative,” he says of the time when ex-riders like Frankie Andreu made their admissions. “And basically, that person, in whatever capacity they might have had to improve the overall situation by being honest, they were immediately pushed aside. That is very dissuasive to coming forward.”
That much is true. A good article actually. Very good. He's comments re: the UCI are impressive.

He took a wide berth of USPS doping but I understand why.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Race Radio said:
More marginal gains talk. Pretty stunning coming from a guy who testified against Lance.

Last time I checked it was the DS of Radioshack and Lance's private mentor who invented winning through marginal gains.
So somebody please tell me how is Sky beating a team like Radioshack all season based on marginal gains?
 
hrotha said:
Yeah, that was disappointing to read, although expected.

The thing with marginal gains is that it only works if riders who dope don't bother with those marginal gains (let's accept for argument's sake that doping gives you a 2% boost and those marginal gains another 2%; hello, the dopers still come out on top)... or if all the biggest natural talents in the sport just happen to be Anglo-Saxon, despite those countries producing less riders and having less tradition than others.
I'm a little surprised you went there, seems out of character for you. Not sure if you count up major wins in the last 5 years that "Anglo-Saxtons" are over represented.
 
Mar 19, 2009
832
0
0
Yeah that is a great article and good to see him open up a little in the UCI:

“I honestly don’t know what to think about that,” says Vaughters when I ask if the (UCI) corruption allegation is legitimate. “But I do know that if you want to prevent criticism, you move ultimate power to a third party and it eliminates that possibility. Why would you want to have that criticism?”

But...come on, does anybody really believe JV doesn't have an opinion on the UCI and Lance? Really?

Seems to me this is exactly what he did with his doping admission. JV, the UCI corruption is an open secret. Just like how Joe Lindsey characterized doping itself during the years you waited to come clean. This time you can be ahead of the curve and actually make a big difference when it counts. If you have to wait until after the Armstrong hearing, that's perfectly understandable. And hopefully then USADA will have done the dirty work of uncovering UCI favoritism. But don't wait this time to speak out because it seems obvious that history is not going to be on the side of McQuaid and Verbruggen.
 
JRTinMA said:
I'm a little surprised you went there, seems out of character for you. Not sure if you count up major wins in the last 5 years that "Anglo-Saxtons" are over represented.
Anglo-Saxon riders are the backbone of Sky and Garmin, and therefore the ones benefitting the most from this "marginal gains" thingie. That's all I'm saying.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
42x16ss The Clinic 8

ASK THE COMMUNITY