JV talks, sort of

[JV1973]

JV, what is your take on the amnesty proposed to dopers by UCI a few days back?
Have you had any discussions with Pat Macquaid on that issue?

I know you have wanted a Truth & reconciliation commission, Have you discussed with UCI on that? and is their suggestion as a result of any discussions with pro Tour teams.

The UCI MC already voted against such measures. The idea originates from WADA, not the UCI. So.....I guess they don't much like it.

 

[AcademyCC]

Yeah, I understand. No doubt there are reasons to be a doubter. But let me ask you this: How many times did the folks that lied to you for years just pop in on a forum to chat?

I'm happy to give the answers you're looking for, but my voice gets overpowered by folks on here that have already made up their mind, no matter what information is given to them. So, the whole thing unravels in stupid arguments over Girona (as an example, as it's one of many)...So, to say that I am currently being dissuaded from trying to give straight answers is an understatement, because no matter what I (or anyone) say or do, it's pointless to argue with people that already have made up their mind.

Arguing with a 'Stop' sign bears little fruit.

I'm delighted you take time to post here and have posted before that battering you when you post achieves nothing.

My doubts are not about Garmin,the doubts are about cycling in general.

To be honest you coming on here to answer the questions is like a breath of fresh air but then you say - maybe i should be like the other teams.

No- that's what I pray you will never do.

 

[The Hitch]

Maybe you missed Ashenden writing the dark era is not gone it has a new guise.

Garmin is not the only new guise team (or new age, or whatver mike called it), but it is the only one whose ds comes on here and answers questions direct like this.


I would say that Garmin takes a very different guise from the other teams who claim to be clean. Ashenden was probably talking more about them.

Its also a lot less of a conspiracy theory to say that guys who merely claim to be clean, could still dope, than it is to say that the guys who are actally going out of their way to prove they are clean, are doping.

 

[Benotti69]

Yeah, I understand. No doubt there are reasons to be a doubter. But let me ask you this: How many times did the folks that lied to you for years just pop in on a forum to chat?

I'm happy to give the answers you're looking for, but my voice gets overpowered by folks on here that have already made up their mind, no matter what information is given to them. So, the whole thing unravels in stupid arguments over Girona (as an example, as it's one of many)...So, to say that I am currently being dissuaded from trying to give straight answers is an understatement, because no matter what I (or anyone) say or do, it's pointless to argue with people that already have made up their mind.

Arguing with a 'Stop' sign bears little fruit.

Well you have done your best in ignoring some pretty serious questions.

Easier to label post trolls. In fact the sport of cycling has been name calling those who dared ask the hard questions for a long long time. Nothing new there.

You have done lots of name calling recently.

Mrs Murphy asked some interesting questions which you ignored.

You have done little to placate those who doubt the sport is cleaner.

Thoma Frei's admission to micro doping proves how easy it is to beat the testers.

And the most interesting piece of info is that Ahenden stillthink sthe sport is in a dark era, which you have conveniently ignored except to point to an older WSJ article rather than address his most recent writings.

You dont come i here with any plain speaking, you try to give nods and winks and let the clinic debate their true meanings and then you cry tha you feel you are being ill treated.

Sad.

 

[hrotha]

Yeah, I understand. No doubt there are reasons to be a doubter. But let me ask you this: How many times did the folks that lied to you for years just pop in on a forum to chat?

I'm happy to give the answers you're looking for, but my voice gets overpowered by folks on here that have already made up their mind, no matter what information is given to them. So, the whole thing unravels in stupid arguments over Girona (as an example, as it's one of many)...So, to say that I am currently being dissuaded from trying to give straight answers is an understatement, because no matter what I (or anyone) say or do, it's pointless to argue with people that already have made up their mind.

Arguing with a 'Stop' sign bears little fruit.

The bit about Girona is super stupid, but there's some genuinely good, intelligent questions being asked. If you haven't bludgeoned Pat McQuaid to death yet, I'm sure you can live with a few loonies in a forum and just skip their stuff.

 

[mikkemus23]

In Susan`s voice: The next mentioning Girona is is farked!

 

[JV1973]

fact or possibility? Which is it?

No need to to convince me that Wiggo can be very daft. I can confirm that for you. I just don't see any compelling data that shows evidence of him doping. Climbing speeds, blood profile, etc... to me, all of this looks very promising for clean cycling. But that's just my opinion. My opinion based on the physiological capabilities observed during his time with us.

But I don't particularly like the guy, nor do I like many of his public statements.

 

[D-Queued]

Yeah, I understand. No doubt there are reasons to be a doubter. But let me ask you this: How many times did the folks that lied to you for years just pop in on a forum to chat?

I'm happy to give the answers you're looking for, but my voice gets overpowered by folks on here that have already made up their mind, no matter what information is given to them. So, the whole thing unravels in stupid arguments over Girona (as an example, as it's one of many)...So, to say that I am currently being dissuaded from trying to give straight answers is an understatement, because no matter what I (or anyone) say or do, it's pointless to argue with people that already have made up their mind.

Arguing with a 'Stop' sign bears little fruit.

Hi JV,

Huge props to you for your continued interest and contribution.

One important message is that your participation is indirectly endorsing the dialog here.

Fortunately, you are not alone, and there are many other pros and notable cycling figures that are active. Every wise voice provides welcome input into a critical challenge in cycling.

Your involvement right now is notable particularly when this forum has launched a couple of Malcolm Gladwell-like potential Tipping Point initiatives recently.

These include the poll asking for McQuaid's resignation and the runaway success of the Kimmage defense fund.

You do not have to support either one, of course. But, your involvement helps move the dialog forward.

The more that the dialog on doping in cycling becomes an open one, the sooner we will actually address the problem.

Dave.

 

[D-Queued]

No.

...

Here is a foto I took recently - you may not recognize the area.... but I think JV would.

...

Ummm... I know exactly where that is...

Just saying...

Dave.

 

[Benotti69]

Garmin is not the only new guise team (or new age, or whatver mike called it), but it is the only one whose ds comes on here and answers questions direct like this.

I would say that Garmin takes a very different guise from the other teams who claim to be clean. Ashenden was probably talking more about them.

Its also a lot less of a conspiracy theory to say that guys who merely claim to be clean, could still dope, than it is to say that the guys who are actally going out of their way to prove they are clean, are doping.

Ashenden used plural, teamS.

If it aint pointing at Sky and Garmin who could he be pointing at?

Most other teams are long established teams in the sport as far as I know.

Greenedge are the only other new team but harldy a team proclaiming what it does is clean in a similr manner to Garmin and Sky.

This could be easily put to bed if Ashenden qualified which new age teams he wasn't talking about, as he is doing a big disservice to those who he has heard nothing or has nothing to suspect.

Ashenden could also have said SOME new age teams, but didn't.

 

[mikkemus23]

JV, why, in your opinion, was this Wiggins` year? Did he have the numbers for it earlier?

And care to shed some light on the possibility of bans for you and your ex-doped riders?

Thanks for spending time here!

 

[The Hitch]

Why should I believe Ashenden anymore than I believe JV?

For the record, i do not believe, nor ever have that people who doped before are untrustworthy.

You however do, so by your own logic, you should trust Ashenden over JV (if there is such a conflict, which there isnt neccesarily)

imagine if el bisonte and piti helped by costa and kiryienka had done what sky did with an 1 2 on gc and costa and kirienka destroying the field.

.

Well Wiggins has not betrayed my trust in him just yet, I cant say the same about some of those names..

Care to give some consistency to your principles?

 

[JV1973]

Well you have done your best in ignoring some pretty serious questions.

Easier to label post trolls. In fact the sport of cycling has been name calling those who dared ask the hard questions for a long long time. Nothing new there.

You have done lots of name calling recently.

Mrs Murphy asked some interesting questions which you ignored.

You have done little to placate those who doubt the sport is cleaner.

Thoma Frei's admission to micro doping proves how easy it is to beat the testers.

And the most interesting piece of info is that Ahenden stillthink sthe sport is in a dark era, which you have conveniently ignored except to point to an older WSJ article rather than address his most recent writings.

You dont come i here with any plain speaking, you try to give nods and winks and let the clinic debate their true meanings and then you cry tha you feel you are being ill treated.

Sad.

This is just funny.... Benotti, you need to stop following cycling, it is pointless. You don't like the sport and this is just pointless.

Moving along... Mrs John Murphy, I agree, your questions are good, could you write your questions in shorter format? I will answer them, but you're overcooking it for me a bit in the complexity department. keep it simple and short, and I'll answer.

(ps- I don't scroll back through this endless mess to figure out which questions I missed. Sorry!)

 

[hrotha]

No need to to convince me that Wiggo can be very daft. I can confirm that for you. I just don't see any compelling data that shows evidence of him doping. Climbing speeds, blood profile, etc... to me, all of this looks very promising for clean cycling. But that's just my opinion. My opinion based on the physiological capabilities observed during his time with us.

But I don't particularly like the guy, nor do I like many of his public statements.

Don't you think it's odd he's at his absolute best at the same time as Rogers, Porte and Froome?

It's often like this when connecting the dots. One piece of info is not significant by itself. It's when the data starts piling up.

 

[sniper]

Why on earth would Ashenden have any idea? He's presented with a few anomalous passport cases a year and is asked to render opinion on them. What does this have to do with a dark era continuing or not?

Sorry, but while I respect Michael and our doctors have a good working relationship with him, I don't think he's qualified to make an overarching judgement on professional cycling's current state.

I also think you are focusing on comments of his and creating your own context. Michael is ****ed at the UCI, as many of us are. That's where his venom is aimed. I seriously doubt he would have much negative to say about Garmin if directly asked.

I am arguing with a Stop sign, I know. Need to stop.

ashenden spoke of sophisticated doping programs. so is he spinning or what?

if not Garmin, then who are the new age teams ashenden referred to? Sky? UHC? Greenedge? You are more or less invested in all three of those teams, so would you be disillusioned to hear any one of those is not as clean as they pretend?

Contador still seems to be rocking it hard, but Saxo is hardly a new age team.

And can you still beat those sophisticatedly doping teams by means of marginal gains? sounds like an unfair battle to me.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Here! Here!

Here's two very safe questions for JV1973.

Can you post a memorable the short term side effects of your doping experiences? For example, what were the unpleasant side effects of getting off a doping cycle, if any?

Do you have any long-term health complications due to doping? Rarely do we hear of long-term consequences to doping and I'm just wondering if there were any in your case.

For both questions there are no specifics necessary, just some general information.

The answer might be a version of no ill effects at all too. It is what it is..

 

[The Hitch]

Ashenden used plural, teamS.

If it aint pointing at Sky and Garmin who could he be pointing at?

.

You do know that the plural can be used when one is trying to deliberately avoid naming the subject?

For example I can say, there are some managers in football who tested positive for nandrlone in 2002 but are allowed to get away with it no problem and coach in the sport today.

Of course i am talking about 1 specific manager, but to avoid, or limit the outrage from idiot barcelona fans i use the plural to imply i am talking about a common practise rather than adress the 1 person directly.

Ashenden cant use the singular anyway, even if he is only talking about 1 team, because that would be a far more direct accusation and bring about far more controversy.

 

[JV1973]

Don't you think it's odd he's at his absolute best at the same time as Rogers, Porte and Froome?

It's often like this when connecting the dots. One piece of info is not significant by itself. It's when the data starts piling up.

I see your point. And many a jealous DS would agree with you, off the record. However, I also see Sky as having a team that had a lot of momentum, from a psychological standpoint, this year. You would be amazed at how much further you can push yourself when riding on the front, as opposed to sitting 30 guys back, given the same physical condition. It's just a rule of thumb in cycling, better to cause yourself pain than have others cause it for you.

Now, of course, I can see you rolling your eyes thinking about the TdF's of the early 2000's and how similar this year's appeared. So, as opposed to a psychological intangible, let me give you something more real:

Sky bought a whole crew of guys that would be outright leaders on any other team to be support riders. I do not see that as the case with USPS, with the exception of Heras. Remember Aczevedo finishing 5th at the Tour de France? Who? Yeah, exactly. While the comparison is visually compelling, the reality is not. I still think it;s unfair what Sky has done, but from the payroll perspective, not the doping one.

 

[the asian]

JV, you are rating Porte and Rogers too highly

 

[The Hitch]

No need to to convince me that Wiggo can be very daft. I can confirm that for you. I just don't see any compelling data that shows evidence of him doping. Climbing speeds, blood profile, etc... to me, all of this looks very promising for clean cycling. But that's just my opinion. My opinion based on the physiological capabilities observed during his time with us.

But I don't particularly like the guy, nor do I like many of his public statements.

Im grateful and honored to see that you responded to my post, but i was actually continuing a bit of personal banter with the 13 year old who made the other post, and for once in the clinic, not talking about wiggins at all

 

[sniper]

I see your point. And many a jealous DS would agree with you, off the record. However, I also see Sky as having a team that had a lot of momentum, from a psychological standpoint, this year. You would be amazed at how much further you can push yourself when riding on the front, as opposed to sitting 30 guys back, given the same physical condition. It's just a rule of thumb in cycling, better to cause yourself pain than have others cause it for you.

Now, of course, I can see you rolling your eyes thinking about the TdF's of the early 2000's and how similar my answers to doping questions are to those of a certain texan-belgian tandem in those days. So, as opposed to a psychological intangible, let me give you something more real:

Sky bought a whole crew of guys that would be outright leaders on any other team to be support riders. I do not see that as the case with USPS, with the exception of Heras. Remember Aczevedo finishing 5th at the Tour de France? Who? Yeah, exactly. While the comparison is visually compelling, the reality is not. I still think it;s unfair what Sky has done, but from the payroll perspective, not the doping one.

fixed that post for you!

 

[roundabout]

Actually, my "Azevedo, who?' experience happened when I was following the 2001 Giro.

By the time Postal snapped him up he had very much proved himself. At a dirty team, sure, but he had results.

Edit: well, forgot about the spring of 2001 as well.

 

[JV1973]

fixed that post for you!

Don't be so lame. There are no similarities. Not just few similarities, none. Starting with the fact those kids would never post here in the first place!

 

[D-Queued]

...

Sky bought a whole crew of guys that would be outright leaders on any other team to be support riders. I do not see that as the case with USPS, with the exception of Heras. Remember Aczevedo finishing 5th at the Tour de France? Who? Yeah, exactly. While the comparison is visually compelling, the reality is not. I still think it;s unfair what Sky has done, but from the payroll perspective, not the doping one.

Sure, team stacking is an age-old strategy with plenty of successful examples.

But, you don't have to look past the Yankees, and the Mitchell Report, to realize that even a stacked team can benefit from bending the rules on doping substances.

Your confidence is inspiring, but history is not.

Dave.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

JV.

Care to comment on Pat and Hein and their case against Kimmage?

And- perhaps one to mull over.
Cycling is going through some turbulent times (again) and it has the potential for significant changes - where would you like to see the sport be, when or if this clears?