JV talks, sort of

[JV1973]

Hey JV, a question if I may?

Where did Brad train for the 2009 Tour, and who trained him?

he trained in Girona and Manchester, mainly. He was coached by Rod Ellingworth (sp?)

 

[Tyler'sTwin]

What was your threshold powah with and without doping?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

As you are back JV - could you answer the question that we asked and you never answered last time.

As I understand it convicted dopers have to speak to the anti-doping authorities about their doping as part of joining the team.

Two part question:

i) What happens to unconvicted dopers? Those riders you signed who had been at USP/Disco/Gerol? If not - why did you operate different standards between convicted and unconvicted riders?

ii) Riders who joined your team years after being banned but who subsequently rode for teams with doping problems - were they compelled to talk to the anti-doping authorities about their doping and also doping at teams they had ridden on post-ban, or did this just cover the doping for which they were banned. Millar is a case in point - did you compel him to talk about his time at SD?

 

[JV1973]

Thanks again, Dr Maserati. While I'm happy to defend myself, I appreciate your lines of logic, as opposed to some of the emotional garbage we see here.

Sorry i don't get to all of the questions. It isn't intentional PR manipulation, it's time constraints and undiagnosed ADD, on my part,

See you guys later, JV

 

[DirtyWorks]

No idea who, but would have been around 1990, I think.

FYI This is old news for many.

This article notes riders dying as soon as 1987 not 12 months after clinical trials. http://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/19/u...to-athletes-deaths.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

I don't know if Amgen really was the first to make it to trial, but the same article drops Amgen's name. Funny how the personalities around Amgen keep popping up in cycling.

During that era, I recall Hein claiming there was nothing to investigate and generally denying all of it for years.

 

[JV1973]

What was your threshold powah with and without doping?

For me, it didn't make such a huge difference, as my hct% was quite high anyway (47-51% range naturally). roughly, I was around 360 watts at 1 hour power, at sea level, without doping. With EPO, I was around 375 watts at 1 hour power. My weight was pretty consistent in the 60-62kg range.

My biggest problems had to do with glycogen resythesis and protein degradation, not 02 consumption. Otherwise: I didn't recover too well after day 7-8 or so. Maybe that would have been solved with insulin or something, but I didn't try.

And there you go, JV

 

[DirtyWorks]

... is willing to be forthright

You may be missing my point. Judging by his past actions, we have no assurances he is being forthright. None! He's a clever guy though and uses honest replies strategically. So, his responses or lack thereof are far more sophisticated than those of say a Verbruggen or McQuaid.

he carries a high profile and has a lot more to lose from giving up the anonymity of the internet than the average joe.

Along the same angle, he has quite a bit to gain by using the anti-doping cause to his benefit. It goes both ways.

 

[JV1973]

For me, it didn't make such a huge difference, as my hct% was quite high anyway (47-51% range naturally). roughly, I was around 360 watts at 1 hour power, at sea level, without doping. With EPO, I was around 375 watts at 1 hour power. My weight was pretty consistent in the 60-62kg range.

My biggest problems had to do with glycogen resythesis and protein degradation, not 02 consumption. Otherwise: I didn't recover too well after day 7-8 or so. Maybe that would have been solved with insulin or something, but I didn't try.

And there you go, JV

As I look at some old SRM files, there's one 45 min effort at 381 watts. So, maybe a bit more.

 

[JV1973]

As you are back JV - could you answer the question that we asked and you never answered last time.

As I understand it convicted dopers have to speak to the anti-doping authorities about their doping as part of joining the team.

Two part question:

i) What happens to unconvicted dopers? Those riders you signed who had been at USP/Disco/Gerol? If not - why did you operate different standards between convicted and unconvicted riders?

ii) Riders who joined your team years after being banned but who subsequently rode for teams with doping problems - were they compelled to talk to the anti-doping authorities about their doping and also doping at teams they had ridden on post-ban, or did this just cover the doping for which they were banned. Millar is a case in point - did you compel him to talk about his time at SD?

1. Don't quite understand? I think i've treated convicted vs non convicted quite similarly. I don't differentiate.

2. Millar spoke out re Saunier Duval to UCI. It's documented somewhere, I don't remember where. He was livid about the situation there, which I think added to their out of comp controls, quite significantly. At that time, going to the UCI seemed the most logical route. So, there was no need to compel him to do that, he'd already done it well before he was with me.

 

[JV1973]

OK, I have answered everyone's questions, for now. No picking and choosing.

 

[thehog]

1. Don't quite understand? I think i've treated convicted vs non convicted quite similarly. I don't differentiate.

2. Millar spoke out re Saunier Duval to UCI. It's documented somewhere, I don't remember where. He was livid about the situation there, which I think added to their out of comp controls, quite significantly. At that time, going to the UCI seemed the most logical route. So, there was no need to compel him to do that, he'd already done it well before he was with me.

Which makes the Armstrong comeback all the more worrying. How could the UCI let him comeback like he did and fire up the old game. It’s very sad when the UCI listened to some but blatantly avoided controlling another. I wonder why they were so scared and intimidated by Lance.

 

[Mishrak]

You may be missing my point. Judging by his past actions, we have no assurances he is being forthright. None! He's a clever guy though and uses honest replies strategically. So, his responses or lack thereof are far more sophisticated than those of say a Verbruggen or McQuaid.

Along the same angle, he has quite a bit to gain by using the anti-doping cause to his benefit. It goes both ways.

I fail to see how he gains anything from coming on an internet forum and lying about this stuff. In the media, OK, there's some potential gain. In pro Cycling, obviously we're dealing with a LA / US Postal conspiracy, so there's an incentive there and you can't ever write that off for anyone in this environment (but I don't doubt Garmin's stance and I appreciate/cheer for their goals and desires), but why here? I'm just not buying it. Why go through the effort and trouble of trying to convince people who, for the most part, don't even really matter to him or the sport? Outside of the handful of people who post here that have legitimate insight and influence within the sport, I'm willing to bet that most of us are just fans or (justifiably so) tin hatters.

Call me a fanboy or whatever, I just don't see why he'd come to an internet forum in the first place if he didn't want to be honest. It's not like he's obligated to at all.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

1. Don't quite understand? I think i've treated convicted vs non convicted quite similarly. I don't differentiate.

2. Millar spoke out re Saunier Duval to UCI. It's documented somewhere, I don't remember where. He was livid about the situation there, which I think added to their out of comp controls, quite significantly. At that time, going to the UCI seemed the most logical route. So, there was no need to compel him to do that, he'd already done it well before he was with me.

Did the USP riders and Gerol riders have to speak to the anti-doping authorities before you signed them (even though they had not been convicted)? Did CVV for example have to speak to the anti-doping authorities about doping at USP when he was signed in 2008. (Did he also have to talk about doping at CSC and LS as well, two equally dirty teams?)

Do unconvicted dopers who you know to have been involved in doping have to speak to the authorities before you sign them?

 

[DirtyWorks]

I fail to see how he gains anything from coming on an internet forum and lying about this stuff.

There's a finer point here. He's honest about some things that have no bearing on his current situation and the future. For example powah output doped/not-doped. As I said, he's a sophisticated guy. He doesn't need to straight-up lie like a Verbruggen's "Wonderboy never, never, never doped" or McQaid's junk.

Further to another comment, one of the bigger question out there is Wonderboy has something so bad on Verbruggen the UCI embarrasses themselves to ensure it stays hidden. What could be so bad? It's got to be huge. Any clues JV1973? <cricket> <cricket>

 

[Dr. Maserati]

There's a finer point here. He's honest about some things that have no bearing on his current situation and the future. For example powah output doped/not-doped. As I said, he's a sophisticated guy. He doesn't need to straight-up lie like a Verbruggen's "Wonderboy never, never, never doped" or McQaid's junk.

Further to another comment, one of the bigger question out there is Wonderboy has something so bad on Verbruggen the UCI embarrasses themselves to ensure it stays hidden. What could be so bad? It's got to be huge. Any clues JV1973? <cricket> <cricket>

There is a finer point to your finer point.

Firstly, he may not know anything about the deals of HV &LA. While I believe Tyler in his book he has no details on HV & LA, just the one time it was mentioned that LA flunked the test. Tyler was much closer to LA then JV ever was.

And the finer point would be would you expect him to admit those details here even if he knew something for sure?

 

[DirtyWorks]

There is a finer point to your finer point.

Firstly, he may not know anything about the deals of HV &LA. While I believe Tyler in his book he has no details on HV & LA, just the one time it was mentioned that LA flunked the test. Tyler was much closer to LA then JV ever was.

And the finer point would be would you expect him to admit those details here even if he knew something for sure?

No, I wouldn't expect him to post it for many reasons. One of the less obvious ones that fits my crackpot idea is he wouldn't know the consequences to his goals by posting it.

 

[sniper]

JV, if an investigation into Weltz isn't necessary, you think an investigation into Leinders is necessary? If so, why? If not, why did Brailsford launch one?

 

[Gregga]

You know how sometimes there's leftover pizza in the fridge?

Reading "the secret race" I know Edgar was often in the fridge

Very pleased to see you back here, indeed.
I found you great when I read your story in the NYT.
A part of me would love to believe you were clean in 2000/2002 as I would love to believe in Ryder H and all your clean team.

So, franckly, being 'paniagua', was it really possible to follow Tyler H in Ventoux ?

 

[sniper]

Did the USP riders and Gerol riders have to speak to the anti-doping authorities before you signed them (even though they had not been convicted)? Did CVV for example have to speak to the anti-doping authorities about doping at USP when he was signed in 2008. (Did he also have to talk about doping at CSC and LS as well, two equally dirty teams?)

Do unconvicted dopers who you know to have been involved in doping have to speak to the authorities before you sign them?

don't think you'll get a straightforward answer from JV on this one.
the truth isn't pretty.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

don't think you'll get a straightforward answer from JV on this one.
the truth isn't pretty.

I'll just have to keep asking.

 

[Benotti69]

1.Here, I'll answer: None/No one. What a stupid baseless question.

2.Michael Aschenden has done blood analysis for our team before. Please see his remarks in Wall Street Journal regarding public posting of Vandevelde and Millar blood profiles. He analyzed the profiles.

3. Ouch... Man, sucks to have to eat the foot and the shoe, eh?

I am surprised Dr Maserati is not taking you up on delfecting the question.

Garmin are a so called 'new age team', jeezuz you have spouted it often enough and Ashenden is quoted as saying there is highly sophisticated doping going on in new age teams, which you have not answered.

I guess his latest article comes after the WSJ so maybe you can call him and ask him to clarify it for you. Best to do that before he publishes another naming names.

As for his analysis, maybe he isn't talking about VdV or Millar. I thought their were 20+ riders on a team and Ashenden does 2 and you are off scot free. Did he do a seasons worth on the whole team?

 

[JV1973]

I'll just have to keep asking.

Wrong! I'll answer. If you look to our May 27, 2010 statement, I think it's pretty clear what our answer is here. Now, the problem is, i can't compel CVV to go be honest about any of his previous teams, if no one is asking the question, or investigating them. If there is a LS or CSC investigation, at some point, I'll make it clear to CVV(or whoever) that his employment w slipstream is dependent on his honesty.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I am surprised Dr Maserati is not taking you up on delfecting the question.

Garmin are a so called 'new age team', jeezuz you have spouted it often enough and Ashenden is quoted as saying there is highly sophisticated doping going on in new age teams, which you have not answered.

I guess his latest article comes after the WSJ so maybe you can call him and ask him to clarify it for you. Best to do that before he publishes another naming names.

As for his analysis, maybe he isn't talking about VdV or Millar. I thought their were 20+ riders on a team and Ashenden does 2 and you are off scot free. Did he do a seasons worth on the whole team?

Hi Benotti,
I thought his answer was quite unequivocal when he said: "Here, I'll answer: None/No one."

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Which was the superior expression of Prince's musical vision, Purple Rain or Sign O' The Times?

 

[ToreBear]

No idea who, but would have been around 1990, I think.

Thanks for your input. I hope the real history of cycling will come out.

I would like to know who first started to use it so it would perhaps be possible to trace epos effect on that cyclists career. How it compared to the non users and so on. Then see it spread through the peleton. Find out who refused doping and rode clean, alternately how long they rode clean before starting to use it. Perhaps even identify the real winners. Your idea of of a Wada managed database would be a great step in understanding the what when and how.

I don't expect you to know all these things of course, I'm sure you could speculate, but with your real name and role, that might be difficult until some more layers of omerta in cycling have been peeled off.

I saw a documentary with David Millar today, you were in it too. One interesting thing Millar talked about was Miguel Indurain. Millar said he thought he doped, but that he was clean for one of his titles.

Weather Millar was telling what he really thinks or is being diplomatic is of course another question.

It was a mix of Spanish and English. I don't speak Spanish past some tourist basics, so I might have missed something. You were talking in Spanish. I think you were saying something about having to just use blood transfusions and steroids at Garmin due to your team not having the budget to pay off the UCI like sky do. And that due to all the drugs you took as a cyclist, you were now forced to smoke pot and crack in order to sleep at night....

FYI This is old news for many.

This article notes riders dying as soon as 1987 not 12 months after clinical trials. http://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/19/u...to-athletes-deaths.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

I don't know if Amgen really was the first to make it to trial, but the same article drops Amgen's name. Funny how the personalities around Amgen keep popping up in cycling.

During that era, I recall Hein claiming there was nothing to investigate and generally denying all of it for years.

I think this is discussed in an other thread somewhere. (first users in the peleton thread IIRC)I think the problem is that when looking, it was very hard to find out who died, and were the numbers stated came from, let alone their connection to EPO.

As for the Amgen connection and Weisel, it is a very interesting link. Perhaps in the future more people will talk. Of course there might be other companies involved with similar drugs.