JV talks, sort of

[D-Queued]

Thanks JV.

And, thanks for showing up here right away after this was released.

That takes a lot of guts and honesty.

Dave.

 

[mikkemus23]

Yes, that's all correct. Legeay did say that and I had some great results with him, clean, but there were other times when I was not clean. Hence my story above, but that doesn't mean i didn't totally freak myself out doing that and quit for the rest of 2001.

Your only reading it as inconsistent as I never went into super detail publicly. And don't really intend to, as there's nothing I can do about it. Well...except make sure it doesn't happen in my team.

How can you pretend to be "clean" or "doped" during a short period of time? I say, if you dope then quit, you still have effect of that for a long time, compared to those, if any, that never took anything.

Morally you are not clean even if the tests say so IMHO - if you have doped the last 12-18 months.

But thanks anyway. It is all good to have it the most part of the truth out there.

So, anybody thinks every fuc*** result from ca 1992 to 2006 should be erased? Who can find a clean winner?

 

[Maxiton]

How can you pretend to be "clean" or "doped" during a short period of time? I say, if you dope then quit, you still have effect of that for a long time, compared to those, if any, that never took anything.

Morally you are not clean even if the tests say so IMHO - if you have doped the last 12-18 months.

But thanks anyway. It is all good to have it the most part of the truth out there.

So, anybody thinks every fuc*** result from ca 1992 to 2006 should be erased? Who can find a clean winner?

You'd have to erase the entire sport starting with the late nineteenth century, and ending with whatever race was run today somewhere. What would be the point?

I say blow up the UCI - and most of the national federations, too. Insist on a police investigation of the organization, in France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, and of Hein and Pat in particular. Then (and only then), establish a Truth and Reconciliation process. Start over.

 

[goggalor]

Understandable. I'm still catching up myself.

I agree with Tyler's Twin that JV's affidavit doesn't sound like the story he told us about finally giving in and doping one last time at CA before calling it quits.

I've always had the impression that Vaughters was clean during the 2001 Tour, and that Lance mocked him when he couldn't even take cortisone for a swollen bee sting. But apparently he'd been chatting to Lance about Aranesp earlier that year.

 

[sniper]

I don't think JV c/should care to lie about being clean or not at CA. He c/should save his energy for more fundamental issues such as Wiggo 2009, Hesjedal 2012, White-Lowe, Del Moral-Marti, marginal gains, Weltz, etc., i.e. issues that more seriously undermine Garmin's credibility.

edit: and damn, those personal statements by VDV and co sucked bad. not credible.

 

[skidmark]

To me, the semantics about how confessions were handled isn't what's important, really. (even though I don't really see anything inconsistent)

The context is that a) someone who operated within that USPS model quit the sport because of it, b) they started a team with the very explicit purpose of being a clean team, which invites insane scrutiny and pressure which no one has disproven on any level greater than easy internet speculation of 'everyone must do it and they get results sometimes!', and c) they directly respond to people questioning their sworn affidavits the day it becomes public in the biggest doping case in cycling, if not sports, history. With specifics.

Seriously, what more do you people want? The dude wants clean cycling. I'm convinced.

 

[peterst6906]

Seriously, what more do you people want? The dude wants clean cycling. I'm convinced.

+1, but you can't please all the people all of the time, so better just getting on with it, though I'm glad JV spends time in here to connect with people interested in the sport.

 

[hrotha]

Yes, that's all correct. Legeay did say that and I had some great results with him, clean, but there were other times when I was not clean. Hence my story above, but that doesn't mean i didn't totally freak myself out doing that and quit for the rest of 2001.

Your only reading it as inconsistent as I never went into super detail publicly. And don't really intend to, as there's nothing I can do about it. Well...except make sure it doesn't happen in my team.

In that case, you should bear in mind that not going a bit more into detail probably gave 99.9% of your readers a completely wrong impression.

 

[sniper]

..
Seriously, what more do you people want? The dude wants clean cycling. I'm convinced.

I'm convinced of that as well.
In fact, I'm convinced that guys like Bruyneel and Riis, if they could choose, would also prefer clean cycling. But then the reality is that earning some money remains a priority to most of us humans, and that you are unlikely to earn a lot of it if you race clean.

 

[Benotti69]

Ahhh... Yeah, last time I doped was 2002. But yeah, there were a few instances that I doped in between USPS and the end of my career. 2001, when I won a flat TT in the Dauphine beating David Millar....should have won the whole race, but I freaked out about maybe testing positive and blew up in the alps due to lack of sleep!!! and being a nervous wreck!

Doping doesn't always pay off!

Will the riders on Garmin/Slipstreamsports be returning their winnings from doping?

Did you?

 

[Catwhoorg]

Will the riders on Garmin/Slipstreamsports be returning their winnings from doping?

Did you?

Not to answer for JV, but isn't that the normal situation, any prizes must be returned for results that were voided, before they can resume racing ?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

In that case, you should bear in mind that not going a bit more into detail probably gave 99.9% of your readers a completely wrong impression.

You're straying in to 'sniper' territory with a post like this.
99.9%?

If you read something in to his statements then it is because you found something that was not there. All through the years JV has alluded to his doping, he never went in to specifics.
In the NYT piece he finally admitted in public that he had doped - again without specifics. And rightly so, because that audience would not know or care for those details. It was a general piece to portray the mindset of someone who doped, the motivations, guilt, worry, remorse etc.

In the Bicycling piece for the first time he goes in to a lot more detail on the specifics, because of good questions from Joe, but even then it was the focus of that piece.

I don't think JV c/should care to lie about being clean or not at CA. He c/should save his energy for more fundamental issues such as Wiggo 2009, Hesjedal 2012, White-Lowe, Del Moral-Marti, marginal gains, Weltz, etc., i.e. issues that more seriously undermine Garmin's credibility.

edit: and damn, those personal statements by VDV and co sucked bad. not credible.

You mean stuff that he has already come on here and talked about and that you then misrepresent to fit your own viewpoint? Are you running out of material to lie about?

 

[sniper]

..
You mean stuff that he has already come on here and talked about and that you then misrepresent to fit your own viewpoint? Are you running out of material to lie about?

he talked about it, so it's ok?
Those are issues JV's framework of clean cycling cannot account for, as his evasive responses (or lack of responses) and odd rants have abundantly shown.

 

[roundabout]

I am not 99.9%, but I wouldn't have known from the bicycling interview that he was intermittently doping while on Credit Agricole.

It wouldn't be a stretch to guess that he may have been doping because of certain results, but that would have been speculation and cycling world doesn't like speculations.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

he talked about it, so it's ok?
Those are issues JV's framework of clean cycling cannot account for, as his evasive responses (or lack of responses) and odd rants have abundantly shown.

He responded to what he could - but because it does not fit your warped view you are not happy.
I don't remember an odd rant - I do vaguely remember he called you an idiot or clueless, which you confirm with every keystroke.

 

[sniper]

I know I'm supposed to drop Girona, but the Pharmstrong file has nicely revealed that there was a well-developed PED trafficking network between Valencia and Girona.

At present we have
Girona: Garmin and Greenedge residencies
Valencia: Del Moral, Pepe Marti, and Matt White residencies
Then, we have Quod who works for both Garmin and Greenedge.
Ah, almost forgot to mention White sending Lowe to uncle Luis.

And you know, the world is big place. One is hard-pressed to see this as mere coincidences, especially when much more straightforward explanations are available.

I'll be posting a "Told you so" thread one of these days.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I am not 99.9%, but I wouldn't have known from the bicycling interview that he was intermittently doping while on Credit Agricole.

It wouldn't be a stretch to guess that he may have been doping because of certain results, but that would have been speculation and cycling world doesn't like speculations.

At the end of page 7 and continued on page 8 of that interview while talking about riding at CA:

....
I quit because I was just so psychologically tormented that I couldn’t deal with it. That doesn’t mean I have a halo that, ‘I’m not going to dope.’ I had a frickin’ fridge stocked with every doping element known to mankind and I just was like, ‘I can’t do it.’

So you bought it and didn’t use it?
Correctly, no, I used some of it. I started to build for the Tour and a quarter of the way I was just like, ‘I…can’t…DO this anymore.’

 

[hrotha]

At the end of page 7 and continued on page 8 of that interview while talking about riding at CA:

That's the part I referred to when I said "relapse during your last few months at CA before you called it quits". But ok, I know how you like to argue for the sake of it.

 

[roundabout]

At the end of page 7 and continued on page 8 of that interview while talking about riding at CA:

Without you acting as Vaughters' press secretary I would have assumed from the context that it was about 2002 which he talked about in the other interview.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

That's the part I referred to when I said "relapse during your last few months at CA before you called it quits". But ok, I know how you like to argue for the sake of it.

Ach please.

Your the one who is arguing. Not me. I am trying to show people what he said - not what they think he said.

People have said there are inconsistencies in JVs different interviews - I am actually showing what he actually said.
If he said "I never doped at CA' - and his affidavit shows he did - that would be a lie.
But he didn't.

Without you acting as Vaughters' press secretary I would have assumed from the context that it was about 2002 which he talked about in the other interview.

What?

You wrote this - "but I wouldn't have known from the bicycling interview that he was intermittently doping while on Credit Agricole".

 

[ScienceIsCool]

The emotions I went through were in 2002, when i walked away, at 29, because I couldn't live with myself anymore. But that's a long time ago.

Also, my emotions were when I sat and watched Floyd get fried and said nothing. I didn't much like that. But, I had a mission and a team to protect. I couldn't commit suicide. Luckily there was a time for me to correct this cowardly BS. Floyd and I remain good friends.

It takes a lot of guts to admit that. I really appreciate you doing so in a public way. I'm wondering if you would comment on something that's been bothering me.

The situation you were in; watching "Floyd get fried" and not saying anything because of your situation, having "a team to protect". Wouldn't that be a common dilemma for any ex-doper who runs a team? The word I would use is compromised. Such a person would be compromised and prevented from doing the morally and ethically correct things when it comes to truth and doping. In a lesser person it might even lead to further compromises.

John Swanson

 

[roundabout]

What?

You wrote this - "but I wouldn't have known from the bicycling interview that he was intermittently doping while on Credit Agricole".

I know what I wrote. Maybe you should come out and say what's wrong with it so we can have a discussion?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I know what I wrote. Maybe you should come out and say what's wrong with it so we can have a discussion?

Sure:
You wrote: "but I wouldn't have known from the bicycling interview that he was intermittently doping while on Credit Agricole".

Then

Without you acting as Vaughters' press secretary I would have assumed from the context that it was about 2002 which he talked about in the other interview.

2002 - JV was riding for Credit Agricole.

 

[hrotha]

Sure:
You wrote: "but I wouldn't have known from the bicycling interview that he was intermittently doping while on Credit Agricole".

Then

2002 - JV was riding for Credit Agricole.

Sigh.

That's his final relapse, which we have mentioned already. That's what we already knew about.

What we didn't know is that he doped at CA before that, and from what he had told us the vast majority of people would have come to the conclusion he didn't dope before that.

 

[roundabout]

Yes, I was under the mistaken impression that Vaughters only doped once/during one period while with Credit Agricole.

I wouldn't have guessed that he was doping in 2000 and 2001 as well.

But those are meaningless details apparently.