• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

JV talks, sort of

Page 63 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Parker said:
It's not a 'never-seen-before' run. Evans did more or less the same last year. 1st at TA, 1st at Romandie, 2nd at Dauphine, 1st at Tour (also 7th at Catalunya).

People who say Wiggins had some sort of unprecedented run of form must have the attention span of a housefly.

(If you want a real run of form, look at some of the top guys in the 80s, they were competitive in everything)

Evans palmares was also infitely better than Wiggo. There was absolutely no reason to think Wiggo could pull off something like he has this year.
 
veganrob said:
Evans palmares was also infitely better than Wiggo. There was absolutely no reason to think Wiggo could pull off something like he has this year.

That's not my point. My point was people trying to make out that Wiggins had some sort of unprecedented season - which it wasn't. (Refer to the quote I was actually responding to).
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Visit site
Mrs John Murphy said:
There are always lots of specious reasons as to why omerta can't be broken and lots of people looking for reasons to justify why people don't break omerta, and very few people looking at ways in which riders can and should be encouraged to break omerta. . . .
What has not been explored (in part because of omerta) is the degree to which a rider who was still active would be covered by whistleblower legislation within the EU and also North America. Thus far, all whistleblowers have with the exception of Simeoni been out of the sport by and large when they blew the whistle.

Garmin under JV could provide an environment which encourages riders to break omerta. At the moment Garmin are reactive rather than pro-active when it comes to breaking omerta. . . .

I disagree with you that it would be so easy. And, obviously, most of the peloton feels the same way - which is why we don't see more ppl speaking out. I think a history of 'whistleblower protections' would show they are not worth much.

Mrs John Murphy said:
. . . The point remains - if riders are banned for breaking omerta, Garmin would be able to keep them on the books and keep paying them.
. . .
Garmin still has to balance it's books, although it is not a necessarily in the business of making a profit like most companies. Keeping somebody on the payroll would lead to questions about the quality of the management. Not likely.

Here is a paradox for you - you assume that no rider is willing to break omerta and be banned for 6-12 months, and yet you assume that a rider would be willing to switch from riding doped to riding clean (with the potential drop in performance). The argument for why riders won't break omerta is exactly the same as the argument put forward about why riders won't ride clean. But somehow or other, JV has managed to persuade riders to do this.
Huh? The reasoning for not breaking omerta is the same as not riding clean? What are you thinking? Breaking omerta, even today, entails risk. Riding clean, in today's environment, reduces risk. Entirely different payoff. In 2001, yes, riding doped reduced a riders risk. Today it does not. Additionally, you do not take human nature into account in this statement. The motivations for omerta are different from the motivations for winning and doping.

. . .
Not a whistleblower suit but whistleblower protection. For example if I work in a steelmill and I blow the whistle on anything from unsafe working, to sexual harassment by senior management then I can not be punished (sacked, demoted etc) by my employers, if I am then I can sue them. So the question would be whether a whistleblower would be protected from punishment (ie bans) for blowing the whistle (as opposed to riders who co-operate with an investigation).

Garmin can lead the way - and if you blow the whistle on CSC, etc then that might actually start to remove some of the stauncher defenders of omerta. You kill two birds with one stone.

Read some news reports of how well whistleblowers got treated. Then, to bring a suit, you have to be able to prove your case. No half-decent manager or upset group of co-workers is going to do anything so obvious as make your life easy by giving you material for a legal suit. If you can afford to bring a suit. Who's gonna pay the lawyer? Oh, the lawyer is gonna work for a portion of the settlement, just like an accident case, right? So what's that these days, 50%? Maybe 35% if you can find somebody cheap who needs work? And will that cheap lawyer be good enough to WIN? Your chance for a payoff would have to be BIG in the first place to get a lawyer to invest his time.

I think your scenario that this could be easy is not realistic. I think it is pie-in-the-sky dreaming. However, you have noticed that the tide IS turning. So maybe in a couple years, people can do something closer to what you suggest.

Also, I think it would give us more payback to pat ppl like JV on the back for doing what he has already done. Honey and vinegar, all that.
 
@JV I think this forum actually has an ignore feature, so that certain posters posts don't show up when you browse the threads.

Thats a perfect way to skip over posts without having to feel bad about not answering.

Alternatively you could change the settings in the User CP and show more posts per page, that way it's easier to scroll past posters that usually add little to the threads contents.

I tend to do this frequently with certain posters here.
 
JV1973 said:
I want to clarify something real quickly:

I don't really give a rat's **** about SKY. I don't know what goes on there and I don't really care. And I'm really sick of defending them.

When you guys ask me about them, I give my honest appraisal, but I really have no skin in the game. If they are doping, I hope they get caught. Make my life easier.

Well if your critics on here cannot see the plain truth in that statement, they will never be swayed.

hiero2 said:
I will see if I can find that radio interview or a transcript. If I remember correctly, the interviewer asked him if he ever doped. The reply was "let's not discuss that". It was a friendly interview, but not softball. The interviewer responded eventually with a comment to the effect - "if you tell me we don't want to discuss that, you are admitting doping, yes?" and the response is "Let's not discuss that".

The words alone do not convey the full impact.

When I can find it, I'll post a link. Don't hold your breath, though.

Not to worry. I have heard these stories before...

Dave.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Just for you: From Ryanair - the largest carrier in Europe.

Perpignan airport:
nd5umb.jpg


Girona:
2m3h0mv.jpg

This is one of my favourite posts on this forum.
 
May 25, 2010
149
0
0
Visit site
Question about timing

Jonathan,

Wondering about investigation from USADA and a sporting one.

Three quick questions;

Last time you talked to Travis or someone at USADA? Regarding what maybe? Additional info?

Have your riders talked to USADA recently (wondering about your comments here in the clinic and/or investigation).

Or any new riders still waiting to be announced?
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
JV1973 said:
1. How did it come about that CaptainBag had an email from you with Ryder's blood values? Did he ask you for them, or did you volunteer them? If you volunteered them, why through CaptainBag and not just release them as you did with Brad's values?

Nobody else wanted them.

Weird. The Giro winner's blood values and noone else wanted them. Do you think there may have been more interest if they were released earlier?

JV1973 said:
You have released the blood values for 2 riders in 3 races: Brad 2009 Giro and Tour, Ryder 2012 Giro. 4 riders, 4 races: VDV, Millar, Wiggins, Hesjay

Yeah I saw that after I had posted the question and had my eyes bleeding from OT Girona posts. The graphs I saw online were about this big [ ] and had too little detail. So even if I knew about them, I would mention them with the caveat that they are far too small (at least the ones I found) to be of real "value".

JV1973 said:
3. Why are you releasing the values of only your best results? Do ABP values prove cleanliness?

Nobody seems too interested in other values. Also, if I'm trying to prove you can win GT clean, it isn't so interesting to see the results from the guy who got 123rd.

I get you're trying to show you can win a GT clean. I am very interested in seeing if a rider can simply finish a GT clean.

You seem to be implying that winning is the only thing and I would respectfully disagree. #123 is closer to what the conti or pro-conti rider is aspiring to, at least initially. I am not a huge fan of cyclingtips, but his Tour Down Under project each year to select an unknown rider and give them a fanclub for the race is pretty darn popular. To some extent I would argue you are attributing an arbitrary "value" to that rider #123, a valuation I do not share. Given there have only been a few ABP datasets released, I also believe any data released would be of interest. I'll acknowledge I am a nerd, however.

Releasing a couple of domestique's passport values would also support the notion that your entire team is clean.

Question: does the ABP prove cleanliness?

JV1973 said:
4. Have you considered releasing the blood values of a domestique from the same races - as a baseline, if you like and if not, why not? You would not even have to provide their name, just their numbers.

Sure. But not via the clinic.

Cool. I'll keep an eye out.

JV1973 said:
5. If there was, as you suggest, "systemic high readings at the Giro", you could release up to 8 other riders' values - from your team alone. You don't have to prove anything to me or anyone else, but are you prepared to do this to show us the veracity of your claim? Again - no names need even be shown, just the values. Is it difficult to get a rider's values?

Sure, but it's really not something I think i need to prove. Ryder's hct was 46% at the start of the Giro. Probably without slight lab error it would have been 45%. I don't really see this as terribly significant, unless it was part of an overall profile that was consistently elevated, which it is not. I was just giving you guys background. But let's say i was lying...OK...it's a 46% hct. That's still not very remarkable.

You and others have stressed how complex the ABP is, but I will respectfully disagree.

The issue Captain raised that you are avoiding is this: 16g/dl is an anomalous value, and your explanation for it is "systemic lab error", "agreed to by other team medics". A rule of thumb calc gives an estimate of Hct at 48% with 16 g/dl Hgb.

Saying Ryders Hct was 45% or 46% is irrelevant at best. Given you pay money for the ABP, you will surely know that

Only the HGB and Off-hr score are taken into account by the Bayesian model in order to define a possible anti-doping rule violation.

It is possible to have a Hct of 45% and Hgb of 18 g/dl - it just means you have to stuff lots of additional plasma in there at the same time. The problem then would be the ret% was down.

I didn't mention the elephant in the room regarding your "systemic lab error" explanation which is this: team medics (from memory) are typically not accessible to the general public (ie us, the receivers of your explanation).

Team owners are. You are a team owner - not the team medic. Are you saying other team medics knew the values tested were high and not the team owners? And if the team owners knew as well, why mention the team medics, when surely the team owners are who you interact with, not their medics. If my whole team tested high, as the team owner I would be bloody insistent on knowing these things asap.

I am not saying you were lying, JV, just trying to understand.

You could probably very easily show a couple of other passports from the same time period that support your explanation. Saying Ryder's Hct was fine just doesn't cut it for me. Especially when I read things like this:
Remember that hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers, like Oxyglobin, are red and are measured as hemoglobin with the cyanmethemoglobin method. This will always result in a high Hgb (compared to the HCT).

JV1973 said:
6. As pointed out previously, there is a consistent pattern of a bump in the 3rd week of all 3 datasets you have released. Is this something we would see in all passports, or only riders who perform top 5 in a GT?

Bump in third week? I don't see that. I see on stage 14 Ryder's hct went from 43.4 to 43.8. As I linked earlier, that could be because his head was tilted slightly differently or he had a glass of water. Please see my link to plasma shifts. If you see a hct bump with a corresponding drop in retics and increase in off-score, then look more carefully, but that's not the case here. You guys haven't seen so many blood bag profiles. They are way more interesting.

please read my link re plasma shifts .

I have only posted Hgb values in those graphs, so you are not seeing Hct in those graphs anywhere. As for Ryders Hct, according to the values you sent CaptainBag, we have:


May 14 (Stage 9): Hb 14.1, Hct 42.3, Ret 1.56
May 18 (Stage 13): Hb 14.4, Hct 42.6, Ret 1.74
May 27 (Stage 21): Hb 14.1, Hct 43.4, Ret 1.34
May 27 (Stage 21): Hb 14.1, Hct 43.4, Ret 1.71

There are no values from stage 14 whatsoever, and the number 43.8 does not appear anywhere in the dataset he has published on his website.

The Hgb bumps. Based on a rule of thumb, we would expect Hct of 42.3 (yep), 43.2 (nope) and 42.3 (nope). Rule of thumb, note, not iron clad at all.

Now that you mention the Hct though, what's up with that? It's constantly going up.

And there are only 2 theories for the final blood values, where Hb and Hct remain static on the same day, but Ret increases by 27% from 1.34 to 1.71:
1. lab error
2. the number of blood cells that died exactly matched the increase in new blood cells.

Are you saying that's what happened? "Normal" ret% is 1% +/- 0.5% - ie 0.5% to 1.5%.
 
the big ring said:
May 14 (Stage 9): Hb 14.1, Hct 42.3, Ret 1.56
May 18 (Stage 13): Hb 14.4, Hct 42.6, Ret 1.74
May 27 (Stage 21): Hb 14.1, Hct 43.4, Ret 1.34
May 27 (Stage 21): Hb 14.1, Hct 43.4, Ret 1.71

The Hgb bumps. Based on a rule of thumb, we would expect Hct of 42.3 (yep), 43.2 (nope) and 42.3 (nope). Rule of thumb, note, not iron clad at all.

Now that you mention the Hct though, what's up with that? It's constantly going up.

And there are only 2 theories for the final blood values, where Hb and Hct remain static, but Ret increases by 27% from 1.34 to 1.71:
1. lab error
2. the number of blood cells that died exactly matched the increase in new blood cells.

Are you saying that's what happened?

The numbers for Hct all look the same to me. I can't believe that the small changes seen there do not fit within the error for the test. Also, my quick reading of a text and article on this suggest that +/- 25% for reticulocytes isn't unusual.
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
Willy_Voet said:
The numbers for Hct all look the same to me. I can't believe that the small changes seen there do not fit within the error for the test. Also, my quick reading of a text and article on this suggest that +/- 25% for reticulocytes isn't unusual.

Rob Hayles was suspended for 2 weeks for having a 50.3% Hct - purely for violating the 50% Hct rule. In 2008, the year the ABP was released. If it was 49.9% he would have been left alone.

Hct of 42.3% looks the same as 43.4% to you? Still doesn't discount the fact there is no 43.8% nor stage 14 blood value.

I'd like a link to the +/- 25% ret not unusual article if you have it handy.
 
Parker said:
It's not a 'never-seen-before' run. Evans did more or less the same last year. 1st at TA, 1st at Romandie, 2nd at Dauphine, 1st at Tour (also 7th at Catalunya).

People who say Wiggins had some sort of unprecedented run of form must have the attention span of a housefly.

(If you want a real run of form, look at some of the top guys in the 80s, they were competitive in everything)

It was a 'never seen from Wigans before' run, while no one can argue that Evens has not shown (and mind you I am not saying he isn't doping) promise of that sort of thing before, if the stars aligned properly.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
the big ring said:
Weird. The Giro winner's blood values and noone else wanted them. Do you think there may have been more interest if they were released earlier?



Yeah I saw that after I had posted the question and had my eyes bleeding from OT Girona posts. The graphs I saw online were about this big [ ] and had too little detail. So even if I knew about them, I would mention them with the caveat that they are far too small (at least the ones I found) to be of real "value".



I get you're trying to show you can win a GT clean. I am very interested in seeing if a rider can simply finish a GT clean.

You seem to be implying that winning is the only thing and I would respectfully disagree. #123 is closer to what the conti or pro-conti rider is aspiring to, at least initially. I am not a huge fan of cyclingtips, but his Tour Down Under project each year to select an unknown rider and give them a fanclub for the race is pretty darn popular. To some extent I would argue you are attributing an arbitrary "value" to that rider #123, a valuation I do not share. Given there have only been a few ABP datasets released, I also believe any data released would be of interest. I'll acknowledge I am a nerd, however.

Releasing a couple of domestique's passport values would also support the notion that your entire team is clean.

Question: does the ABP prove cleanliness?



Cool. I'll keep an eye out.



You and others have stressed how complex the ABP is, but I will respectfully disagree.

The issue Captain raised that you are avoiding is this: 16g/dl is an anomalous value, and your explanation for it is "systemic lab error", "agreed to by other team medics". A rule of thumb calc gives an estimate of Hct at 48% with 16 g/dl Hgb.

Saying Ryders Hct was 45% or 46% is irrelevant at best. Given you pay money for the ABP, you will surely know that



It is possible to have a Hct of 45% and Hgb of 18 g/dl - it just means you have to stuff lots of additional plasma in there at the same time. The problem then would be the ret% was down.

I didn't mention the elephant in the room regarding your "systemic lab error" explanation which is this: team medics (from memory) are typically not accessible to the general public (ie us, the receivers of your explanation).

Team owners are. You are a team owner - not the team medic. Are you saying other team medics knew the values tested were high and not the team owners? And if the team owners knew as well, why mention the team medics, when surely the team owners are who you interact with, not their medics. If my whole team tested high, as the team owner I would be bloody insistent on knowing these things asap.

I am not saying you were lying, JV, just trying to understand.

You could probably very easily show a couple of other passports from the same time period that support your explanation. Saying Ryder's Hct was fine just doesn't cut it for me. Especially when I read things like this:




I have only posted Hgb values in those graphs, so you are not seeing Hct in those graphs anywhere. As for Ryders Hct, according to the values you sent CaptainBag, we have:


May 14 (Stage 9): Hb 14.1, Hct 42.3, Ret 1.56
May 18 (Stage 13): Hb 14.4, Hct 42.6, Ret 1.74
May 27 (Stage 21): Hb 14.1, Hct 43.4, Ret 1.34
May 27 (Stage 21): Hb 14.1, Hct 43.4, Ret 1.71

There are no values from stage 14 whatsoever, and the number 43.8 does not appear anywhere in the dataset he has published on his website.

The Hgb bumps. Based on a rule of thumb, we would expect Hct of 42.3 (yep), 43.2 (nope) and 42.3 (nope). Rule of thumb, note, not iron clad at all.

Now that you mention the Hct though, what's up with that? It's constantly going up.

And there are only 2 theories for the final blood values, where Hb and Hct remain static on the same day, but Ret increases by 27% from 1.34 to 1.71:
1. lab error
2. the number of blood cells that died exactly matched the increase in new blood cells.

Are you saying that's what happened? "Normal" ret% is 1% +/- 0.5% - ie 0.5% to 1.5%.


Sorry, the stage 14 and 43.8 is my own error. You are correct, in that the increase is from may 14 to may 18, going from 42.3 to 42.6. But that's well within the margin of error just from a minute to minute analysis and not significant.

Also, i think you'll find it is actually impossible to have a 46% hct and 18 hb. or very rare. And no, adding plasma doesn't change this. It dilutes both hb and hct% Do your research, please.

46% hct and 16hb are well within Ryder's normal rested parameters. Even though I opine that there was a systemic error, even if that's BS, it's still within his norms, especially before the race has even begun. Sorry, but saying 16 hb=48% hct is not taking into account individual hematological finger prints. Again, do your research.

And if you think that a 45 to 46 lab error (or more likely transport) issue isn't something that happens quite often, then you've never worked in this field.

You can write a book, if you want. end of the day, for anyone who's seen many blood profiles, this is an amazingly stable and natural profile. You won't find an expert that says anything different.

Again, sorry for my error. i was just going by memory.

JV
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
JV1973 said:
Sorry, the stage 14 and 43.8 is my own error. You are correct, in that the increase is from may 14 to may 18, going from 42.3 to 42.6. But that's well within the margin of error just from a minute to minute analysis and not significant.

Also, i think you'll find it is actually impossible to have a 46% hct and 18 hb. or very rare. And no, adding plasma doesn't change this. It dilutes both hb and hct% Do your research, please.

46% hct and 16hb are well within Ryder's normal rested parameters. Even though I opine that there was a systemic error, even if that's BS, it's still within his norms, especially before the race has even begun. Sorry, but saying 16 hb=48% hct is not taking into account individual hematological finger prints. Again, do your research.

And if you think that a 45 to 46 lab error (or more likely transport) issue isn't something that happens quite often, then you've never worked in this field.

You can write a book, if you want. end of the day, for anyone who's seen many blood profiles, this is an amazingly stable and natural profile. You won't find an expert that says anything different.

Again, sorry for my error. i was just going by memory.

JV

Oh, and you will find retics bounce around considerably more than 25% in natural context.
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
0
0
Visit site
Quoting the captain:

may 3rd hgb 16.0

or hgb just before giro start

nearly equals his season high 16.1

not normal

(at this point in the season , yuh’d expect some volume expansion and a lower hgb)

explanations

a. Altitude camp ?

vaughters says no

b. lab error

vaughters says yes

hct at giro start was high across the board

during the giro hgb drops from 16 to 14.1

or 11.8% down

remeber 11.5% down is expected based on published lit

again normal

problem is yuh start explainin stuff then you create bigger problems, ex if the16 ain't real then yuh lose the nice hgb decline

Thoughts?
 

the big ring

BANNED
Jul 28, 2009
2,135
0
0
Visit site
JV1973 said:
Oh, and you will find retics bounce around considerably more than 25% in natural context.

Due to error, or due to actual changes in new blood cell %? If due to changes in new blood cell %, does that "bounce" occur within same-day readings, for a rider doing a TT to win a GT, given neither of the other parameters changed AT ALL?

Did the team owners know their riders had all tested higher than usual at the start of the Giro, or just their team medics?

You said this in 2010: http://velonews.competitor.com/2010...he-tour-of-california-and-win-it-clean_117464

“We have a race to win,” he said. “We will win this race clean, and we can withstand any level of scrutiny that anyone wants to place on that (result), period. I have no doubt in my mind, whatsoever. In fact I invite the world to put more scrutiny, more controls, more surveillance on us, to verify what I’m saying.”

Is it still true today, or did your willingness to be placed under more scrutiny only apply to that one race?

Would you prefer I not repeat the questions I have asked, and you still have not answered?
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
the big ring said:
Due to error, or due to actual changes in new blood cell %? If due to changes in new blood cell %, does that "bounce" occur within same-day readings, for a rider doing a TT to win a GT, given neither of the other parameters changed AT ALL?

Did the team owners know their riders had all tested higher than usual at the start of the Giro, or just their team medics?

You said this in 2010: http://velonews.competitor.com/2010...he-tour-of-california-and-win-it-clean_117464



Is it still true today, or did your willingness to be placed under more scrutiny only apply to that one race?

Would you prefer I not repeat the questions I have asked, and you still have not answered?

I'd prefer you just give me a call. Honestly, it would save us both time. I'm happy to discuss this, but I never learned how to type, so it's hard for me to write long answers.

But...I think I've answered all your questions. are there more?

Yes, it still applies. I would prefer that the bio passport cost each team
$750,000 and not $150,000. This might enable it to be robust enough to prevent me from having to do this crap!


JV
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
the big ring said:
Due to error, or due to actual changes in new blood cell %? If due to changes in new blood cell %, does that "bounce" occur within same-day readings, for a rider doing a TT to win a GT, given neither of the other parameters changed AT ALL?

Did the team owners know their riders had all tested higher than usual at the start of the Giro, or just their team medics?

You said this in 2010: http://velonews.competitor.com/2010...he-tour-of-california-and-win-it-clean_117464



Is it still true today, or did your willingness to be placed under more scrutiny only apply to that one race?

Would you prefer I not repeat the questions I have asked, and you still have not answered?


I'm happy to say the only thing inaccurate about that article is the fact that we didn't win the race :)
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
Tyler'sTwin said:
Quoting the captain:







Thoughts?


Yeah, if you reduce 46% to 45%, you end up with a smaller decline. But not by much.

I think the Captain gave this profile a clean bill of health. of course there are questions he needs to raise. that's the way hematology is. IT IS NOT BINARY.

But why the f I would give anyone an anomalous profile is beyond me. I wouldn't. Id fire the guy.
 
Aug 13, 2012
17
0
0
Visit site
JV, thanks for taking the time to post. I appreciate your insight. As others have said, try the ignore button for some of the members.
It seems you can never make them happy!
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
the big ring said:
Due to error, or due to actual changes in new blood cell %? If due to changes in new blood cell %, does that "bounce" occur within same-day readings, for a rider doing a TT to win a GT, given neither of the other parameters changed AT ALL?

Did the team owners know their riders had all tested higher than usual at the start of the Giro, or just their team medics?

You said this in 2010: http://velonews.competitor.com/2010...he-tour-of-california-and-win-it-clean_117464



Is it still true today, or did your willingness to be placed under more scrutiny only apply to that one race?

Would you prefer I not repeat the questions I have asked, and you still have not answered?


Oh, and since I see you are a meticulous type, I'll answer the first one.

I doubt many team owners were aware of this. They rely on docs to tell them what's what...I'm a bit of an anomaly, in that I study this stuff and follow it.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
huntelk said:
JV, thanks for taking the time to post. I appreciate your insight. As others have said, try the ignore button for some of the members.
It seems you can never make them happy!

Will do!!

btw - I hunt elk too.

Good night all.
 

Latest posts