JV talks, sort of

Page 38 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
From the 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.”
This is simply untrue. Only the guys who got caught and then admitted were pushed aside. Riis wasn't pushed aside. Zabel wasn't pushed aside.
I'm not sure why JV fails to make that distinction.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
0
0
the only technical bit that got my attention was according to jv as far back as 2002 he knew that injecting epo straight into veins will dupe the test...

we learned from floyd that's what was done in his times and ashenden is on record to be SURPRISED on learning this as late as 2010.

did i get the dates right ?
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
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.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
ChrisE said:
I am with you on applauding him being here as I stated upthread. If he was anonymous he would get dog-piled by saying Wiggins is clean.

But, aren't actions like "sucking up" to get a few morsels that cannot be verified one way or the other pretty pathetic? It's like what the press does...regurgitate BS and nuthug to maintain access.

Applauding what he says, instead of applauding him being here and putting stuff out for critical appraisal, is what I find nauseating. We have no idea if he is being "honest" or not; all we can do is hold up what he says and does vs the environment and undeniable reality of cycling and sport in general.

I'm just hoping to scam a free bike out of my fawning fanboydom.

BTW, you have just as little idea if he is lying, but don't let that stop you from pretending that your position is more tenable than anyone else's, it might screw up your superiority complex.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
sniper said:
From the interview:


This is simply untrue. Only the guys who got caught and then admitted were pushed aside. Riis wasn't pushed aside. Zabel wasn't pushed aside.
I'm not sure why JV fails to make that distinction.
Really? Manzno didn't get caught. Frankie didn't get caught.
And JVs point was in relation to anti-doping efforts - what have Riis and Zabel ever done.
 
In 1994 Vaughters moved to Spain to race for a new top-division team, Porcelana Santa Clara. He says he was young, idealistic, and clean. The team was a new kind of creation. Funded in a roundabout way by Opus Dei, a Catholic prelature that preaches a call to holiness in everyday life, Porcelana’s approach was markedly similar to teams like Garmin and Sky today.
Get Dan Brown on the phone. The Postal Conspiracy just got a whole lot broader.

Interesting remarks about natural HTs. Not just that riders with naturally lower HTs could get more benefit from EPO, but also points out that their RBCs are more efficient at transporting oxygen. Though he doesn't say so, I think what he's referring to is that blood flow is better at lower HTs, so going from say, 40 to 45 is likely to increase oxygen transport more than going from 45 to 50.

But it doesn't support the idea that LA was a better responder, since HT seems to be about average, low 40s. And if it's really true that Bert has a natural HT over 50, he would seem to be at a major disadvantage.
 
Aug 27, 2010
970
0
0
Hematocrit, hemoglobin, and OFF-score (a measure of new red-cell creation that can be linked to EPO use) have all declined as new advances in anti-doping are made. He professes to be mystified by why the UCI hasn’t used those figures to talk about the success of anti-doping, but then concedes that much depends on the messenger. “Who from cycling does the public trust to present the data?” he asks. “It has to come from someone people trust or they won’t believe it.”
I found this quite funny. Because this is the excact reason a lot of people in here is sceptical with regards to soem of JV's messages :)
 
Aug 27, 2010
970
0
0
roundabout said:
And the whole piece feels like an extended version of his board posts.
Maybe the clinic can pat itself on the back for having made him think a bit more about what should be said in public media :p
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Really? Manzno didn't get caught. Frankie didn't get caught.
And JVs point was in relation to anti-doping efforts - what have Riis and Zabel ever done.
JV (not me) mentions Riis in one breath with Landis, Hamilton and Jaksche.
(to be fair, he's quoted only indirectly as saying that, so I can't be fully sure JV actually said it)

The reaction to Riis (or a guy like Zabel) wasn'T "amazingly negative", as JV says it.
It was perhaps amazingly positive, I'd say, owing of course to the fact that they didn't blow the whistle (like Manzano and Frankie did).
So this JV statement is not even half of the story:
“And basically, that person, in whatever capacity they might have had to improve the overall situation by being honest, they were immediately pushed aside.
JV is a quick learner and has learned a very important lesson from guys like Manzano, Landis and Frankie on the one hand, and guys like Riis, Zabel and Millar on the other: if you admit to doping without publicly blowing the whistle, you won't be outcasted.
 
Ney the Viking said:
Maybe the clinic can pat itself on the back for having made him think a bit more about what should be said in public media :p
I don't know. It's more about posting here what he already said, or what will be made public in the future anyway (depending on the date of the last linked interview).
 
Aug 27, 2010
970
0
0
roundabout said:
I don't know. It's more about posting here what he already said, or what will be made public in the future anyway (depending on the date of the last linked interview).
The smiley kinda hinted at sarcasm. But would be cool to know what came first
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
sniper said:
JV (not me) mentions Riis in one breath with Landis, Hamilton and Jaksche.
(to be fair, he's quoted only indirectly as saying that, so I can't be fully sure JV actually said it)

The reaction to Riis (or a guy like Zabel) wasn'T "amazingly negative", as JV says it.
It was perhaps amazingly positive, I'd say, owing of course to the fact that they didn't blow the whistle (like Manzano and Frankie did).
So this JV statement is not even half of the story:


JV is a quick learner and has learned a very important lesson from guys like Manzano, Landis and Frankie on the one hand, and guys like Riis, Zabel and Millar on the other: if you admit to doping without publicly blowing the whistle, you won't be outcasted.
Again, you are all over the place trying to get things to fit.
Landis? He only blew the whistle in 2010, he had already been outcast. Manzano had no intention of hanging around. Frankie didn't name anyone else.
Then you bring up Millar who named people.

JV learned fast alright, but that was by reading his emails - not just on what happened others.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Interesting read that new JV article. The most interesting part was his use of SRM in 1995 when he was clean. How did his numbers relate to for example LeMonds' or other pre oxigen vector superstars? Using SRM and VAM nowadays and stating 'cycling is clean' doesn't mean a thing when u don't have any references.

Anyways, the wheels keep on spinning.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Again, you are all over the place trying to get things to fit.
Landis? He only blew the whistle in 2010, he had already been outcast. Manzano had no intention of hanging around. Frankie didn't name anyone else.
Then you bring up Millar who named people.

JV learned fast alright, but that was by reading his emails - not just on what happened others.
why you reply only to the bold face?

in the rest of the post I said JV mentions Riis in one breath with Jaksche, Landis and Hamilton and then goes on to assert how their confessions were received "amazingly negatively" and how they were subsequently "pushed aside". Riis doesn't belong in that list, that's all.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
sniper said:
why you reply only to the bold face?

in the rest of the post I said JV mentions Riis in one breath with Jaksche, Landis and Hamilton and then goes on to assert how their confessions were received "amazingly negatively" and how they were subsequently "pushed aside". Riis doesn't belong in that list, that's all.
Because the other part of your post yet again makes little sense as you acknowledge that JV never mentioned Riis or Jascke - Joe did.
 
sniper said:
JV (not me) mentions Riis in one breath with Landis, Hamilton and Jaksche.
(to be fair, he's quoted only indirectly as saying that, so I can't be fully sure JV actually said it)

The reaction to Riis (or a guy like Zabel) wasn'T "amazingly negative", as JV says it.
It was perhaps amazingly positive, I'd say, owing of course to the fact that they didn't blow the whistle (like Manzano and Frankie did).
So this JV statement is not even half of the story:


JV is a quick learner and has learned a very important lesson from guys like Manzano, Landis and Frankie on the one hand, and guys like Riis, Zabel and Millar on the other: if you admit to doping without publicly blowing the whistle, you won't be outcasted.
Frankie didn't blow any whistles don't try to lump him in with Landis and Manzano.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Dr. Maserati said:
And JVs point was in relation to anti-doping efforts - what have Riis and Zabel ever done.
Admitted it a lot sooner than JV for one.

What has JV done for anti-doping? Talk about it, so has McQuaid, so has Brailsford, ffs Brailsford wrote a tome about anti-doping and transparency.
 
Apr 23, 2009
121
0
0
You think Zabel and Riis admitted it because they thought it was the right thing to do???

A ha ha ha ha haaa
 
The best thread I've seen in the clinic. More common sense and realism in this one exchange than I can recall seeing in a year's worth.

Kudos and thanks to JV for the thoughtful responses to the many good questions. Some quite deft handling of the 5 or 6 loons that live in here too.
:D
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
JV goes there: marginal gains!

Race Radio said:
A couple of important points of critique that deserve to be on the discussion table:

First:
hrotha said:
(...)
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.
+1
Who's JV fooling? He can't honestly believe that himself. With Fränk's positive we had the nr. 3 of last years TdF busted. 2010's TdF winner stripped of the title. 2012 Olympics winner's name is a certain Vino. And is Bruyneel's doped-to-the-gills Radioshack really getting their asses kicked by clean riders?

Second, and most importantly:
the big ring said:
It's all about marginal gains now. Cool.

:rolleyes:
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)... (...)
+1

So more marginal gains talk coming from JV.
Pretty stunning imho coming from a guy who testified (or is about to testify) against Bruyneel and Lance, two guys who once laid the foundations for the "marginal gains" talk.

If Lance's seven year dominance was based on marginal gains (as he and Bruyneel have often made us believe), can anybody (or JV himself) please tell me how Sky is beating the sh*t out of Bruyneel's Radioshack all season based on marginal gains?

More generally, can please somebody tell me how JV's talk of marginal gains is consistent with a serious ant-doping stance? "Marginal gains" is Brailsford's mantra and we all, including JV, know that Yates and Leinders are at the spine of that team.

(To be sure, JV did, thank god, acknowledge that Leinders' appointment by Sky is highly troublesome, though he refused to connect the remaining dots).
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
42x16ss The Clinic 8

ASK THE COMMUNITY