JV talks, sort of

[hrotha]

You're being way too literal about "truce" IMO.

 

[sniper]

You're being way too literal about "truce" IMO.

JV decided to throw in the term without defining it. Sounds like cheap PR if it isn't specified any further. Does JV really believe "most others" decided to ride clean? or was it about doping marginally? Why is he singling out Ricco, not e.g. Contador? And whatabout Armstrong 2009/10? He was still doped to the gills. Was he beaten by clean riders?
How many of the top 10 of 2009 TDF were clean in JV's opinion?

 

[theyoungest]

Dekker was tested extensively because his doping was much more recent and extreme than any other member of my team. I wanted to know if his talent was real. I think it is, but the jury is still out.

More extreme? You mean he was more successful with it? What's the difference with Vande Velde, for instance?

 

[sniper]

also, I haven't heard JV waste a single word on Contador other than "I don't know". The plasticizers in Contador's sample leave little room for doubt: Contador was still blooddoping in 2010. Yet JV ignores this and prefers to spout PR about clean cycling.
He's entitled to do so, but the Clinic IMO is not the right place for deliberatly sticking one's head in the sand.

 

[JV1973]

also, I haven't heard JV waste a single word on Contador other than "I don't know". The plasticizers in Contador's sample leave little room for doubt: Contador was still blooddoping in 2010. Yet JV ignores this and prefers to spout PR about clean cycling.
He's entitled to do so, but the Clinic IMO is not the right place for deliberatly sticking one's head in the sand.

That's a willfully wrong and untruthful characterization. I come here to spar/chat with people who are curious, not to deal with those that have already made up their minds or those that get some sort of odd self gratification over being overly critical.
You are a waste of time. Sorry, that's not personal, just factual. I don't understand why you follow cycling at all? But apparently you're totally obsessed with it. Makes no sense to me.

 

[JV1973]

More extreme? You mean he was more successful with it? What's the difference with Vande Velde, for instance?

Thomas was using rather sophisticated blood doping up until 2008. It was materially changing his performances in a large way. VDV was not. He used lower doses with lower frequency and stopped earlier. And never blood doped. So, while ethically, it's the same, from a +/- standpoint on performance he gained less than Dekker. Therefor, I never doubted VDV's ability to compete clean. Thomas was more in doubt, for me. I could be wrong. That's why we tested him more.

I do have high hopes for TD's 2013 season. We'll see...

JV

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Thomas was using rather sophisticated blood doping up until 2008. It was materially changing his performances in a large way. VDV was not. He used lower doses with lower frequency and stopped earlier. And never blood doped. So, while ethically, it's the same, from a +/- standpoint on performance he gained less than Dekker. Therefor, I never doubted VDV's ability to compete clean. Thomas was more in doubt, for me. I could be wrong. That's why we tested him more.

I do have high hopes for TD's 2013 season. We'll see...

JV

What were your other riders using in 2008 or before you signed them?

 

[JV1973]

JV decided to throw in the term without defining it. Sounds like cheap PR if it isn't specified any further. Does JV really believe "most others" decided to ride clean? or was it about doping marginally? Why is he singling out Ricco, not e.g. Contador? And whatabout Armstrong 2009/10? He was still doped to the gills. Was he beaten by clean riders?
How many of the top 10 of 2009 TDF were clean in JV's opinion?

I was asked to give an example. I did.... Jeezus. You don not understand PR. Good PR is not engaging here at all. Anything I do here is just damaging, but i feel an obligation, so I occasionally engage. But it's not for PR. Good grief.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

But isn't Ricco a fairly easy and obvious target who is already out of the sport. What about those who are currently involved in the sport - who should have no future?

 

[JV1973]

Hey JV,

Given that you had been doping for a while already by the time you won on Mont Ventoux, could this mean you were given A-class treatment for the Dauphiné to act as a sort of tester for the team leaders' program for the Tour? And that therefore the questions it answered was, essentially, "What could I accomplish on an A-class program"?

You see, there's a bit of a legend around Dauphiné being the traditional testing grounds, where a team's dop domestiques would step up on the program to see how it was holding up, and I'd like to know if that was a real thing that happened.

EPO is the game changer. The rest is just a waste of time. My opinion regarding my experiences. Anyhow, in 1996, I used EPO, but in such small doses it would be questionable if it helped much. Our doctor was intent on just keeping our hct% level, not increasing it. 1999 was larger doses with the intent of increasing, not just maintaining.

That's the difference.

 

[Scorpius]

Hello JV. There are quite a number of doping related questions on this thread. Here is one, non-doping related. What was Your VO2 max measured at during your career ?

 

[JV1973]

I am having a little trouble squaring the first and second paragraphs here.



Which seems to suggest that you don't ask your riders yourself if they doped on their former teams.




The question would be 'how do you know his doping was more recent and extreme than other members of your team if you haven't asked them?'

Lets say you sign Mr X, he's come up from the US domestic circuit where he is the next big thing. How do you make sure his talent is real? Or what happens if you sign Mr Y from a European WT team - how do you make sure his talent is real? What steps do you take to make sure that they aren't products of the syringe?

Ive spoken to all my riders regards to their past. Not sure why you'd think otherwise?

Here's a story about Ramunas Navardauskas:

So, this kid was winning everything in the u23 ranks in france. So, what happens? everyone says he's doping. I decide to find out for myself.

So, I tell him that at some point I'm going to need to see him in girona, to chat, but I don't know when. I wait until he wins a fairly big race, send him a plane ticket and say "you need to be here tomorrow to talk"...

He arrives. Immediately off the plane we give him a blood and urine test. Then wait 4 hours, have lunch, chat, etc.... Then do a very extensive and long power test which focuses on lactate metabolism over vo2 max. Then another blood/urine test.

Results? Consistent 40% hematocrit, no traces of anything in urine. Power test reached 6w/kg. won a race the day before.... triangulation of physiological testing, hematological testing, and same time frame as race result would lead one to the conclusion that the guy was just really talented.

That's how you weed out BS performers in the conti/u23 ranks.

It cracks me up to listen to all these conti riders *****ing about how they were robbed by doping. Believe me, none of them, not one, would come close to Ramunas' test results. I get tired of guys that max out a 4.75w/kg saying they could have been great if they chose to dope, but their morals kept them from doing it. Sorry, but I doubt a guy that has a 4.75w/kg engine ever gets presented with the choice of doping, because no one would bother. So, we can't really say what their decision would have been.

Now, a guy like Darren Baker? Or Bassons? Or Scott Mercier? That's different. Those guys tested like race horses and had the correct physiology, but they were mediocre (not bad) at the top level because of prevalent doping. They were robbed. Absolutely.

 

[JV1973]

Hello JV. There are quite a number of doping related questions on this thread. Here is one, non-doping related. What was Your VO2 max measured at during your career ?

I was measured between 78ml/kg (16yrs old, test done at 2000m altitude) to 90ml/kg (23 yrs old, sea level)... I have never been tested while doped, but one could imagine some big numbers!!

 

[sniper]

I was asked to give an example. I did.... Jeezus. You don not understand PR. Good PR is not engaging here at all. Anything I do here is just damaging, but i feel an obligation, so I occasionally engage. But it's not for PR. Good grief.

the cancer shield, the youth cycling shield, the "I engage in doping forums"-shield

in the meantime, your claim that "most others called for a truce in 2008" continues to sound odd (to say the least) in the light of Armstrong 2009/10, Contador 2008/9/10, Vino, Bruyneel, Riis, the Schlecks, Rabobank, the Ferrari-files, and so on. (not mentioning Sky's incredible GT year and their USPS-like TdF train that you believe to be clean.)

 

[JV1973]

I was measured between 78ml/kg (16yrs old, test done at 2000m altitude) to 90ml/kg (23 yrs old, sea level)... I have never been tested while doped, but one could imagine some big numbers!!

Actually, I forgot, I did knock off one 92ml/kg as well.

But, remember, lactate metabolism and the ability to sustain power is much more important than maximum cardiovascular capacity....

 

[JV1973]

the cancer shield, the youth cycling shield, the "I engage in doping forums"-shield

in the meantime, your claim that "most others called for a truce in 2008" continues to sound odd (to say the least) in the light of Armstrong 2009/10, Contador 2008/9/10, Vino, Bruyneel, Riis, the Schlecks, Rabobank, the Ferrari-files, and so on. (not mentioning Sky's incredible GT year and their USPS-like TdF train that you believe to be clean.)

It's like arguing with a stop sign.

 

[Scorpius]

Actually, I forgot, I did knock off one 92ml/kg as well.

Impressive figure !!

 

[BroDeal]

How about a word on Team Sky's new approach? They are setting themselves up to be the "clean team" beyond Slipstream. It is ironic because they are using a policy which encourages omerta but gives the team the appearance of being more hardline than yours. It steals much of your team's claim to fame, which you used to good effect when growing your organization to a World Tour team, even as it may be a step backward in the fight against doping.

Even as they release a few staff members who were honest enough to admit their pasts, the team is still loaded with staff and riders who have very sketchy pasts. To the casual fan who does not know about the shady reputations of the remaining people, this may look good, but to the cynical it looks really suspect.

 

[Netserk]

Hi JV.

How do you feel about Paul Kimmage and his fight against UCI?
I know it is sensitive (to say the least), but I would really like a comment from you about it. Also what do you think about Rabobank leaving the sport, and their reasons for doing so?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Ive spoken to all my riders regards to their past. Not sure why you'd think otherwise?

Here's a story about Ramunas Navardauskas:

So, this kid was winning everything in the u23 ranks in france. So, what happens? everyone says he's doping. I decide to find out for myself.

So, I tell him that at some point I'm going to need to see him in girona, to chat, but I don't know when. I wait until he wins a fairly big race, send him a plane ticket and say "you need to be here tomorrow to talk"...

He arrives. Immediately off the plane we give him a blood and urine test. Then wait 4 hours, have lunch, chat, etc.... Then do a very extensive and long power test which focuses on lactate metabolism over vo2 max. Then another blood/urine test.

Results? Consistent 40% hematocrit, no traces of anything in urine. Power test reached 6w/kg. won a race the day before.... triangulation of physiological testing, hematological testing, and same time frame as race result would lead one to the conclusion that the guy was just really talented.

That's how you weed out BS performers in the conti/u23 ranks.

It cracks me up to listen to all these conti riders *****ing about how they were robbed by doping. Believe me, none of them, not one, would come close to Ramunas' test results. I get tired of guys that max out a 4.75w/kg saying they could have been great if they chose to dope, but their morals kept them from doing it. Sorry, but I doubt a guy that has a 4.75w/kg engine ever gets presented with the choice of doping, because no one would bother. So, we can't really say what their decision would have been.

Now, a guy like Darren Baker? Or Bassons? Or Scott Mercier? That's different. Those guys tested like race horses and had the correct physiology, but they were mediocre (not bad) at the top level because of prevalent doping. They were robbed. Absolutely.

Some obvious points:

1. Joe Papp would have presented doping products to his mother if she were racing, so I am guessing that you sweeping statement was a rhetorical vendetta against certain people who like to proclaim their cleanliness. Maybe they deserve it, maybe they don't.

2. According to you and others, doping is most beneficial to people with lesser physiological capabilities, so wouldn't those continental guys you are hammering on be more likely to gain an advantage?

3. You're trying to be a positive force for change, I believe that. Statements like that are counterproductive because you don't have any idea of what those people's morals are. You made a choice, don't slag on others because of what you GUESS about their personal traits when they quite possibly made the opposite choice.

 

[pmcg76]

the cancer shield, the youth cycling shield, the "I engage in doping forums"-shield

in the meantime, your claim that "most others called for a truce in 2008" continues to sound odd (to say the least) in the light of Armstrong 2009/10, Contador 2008/9/10, Vino, Bruyneel, Riis, the Schlecks, Rabobank, the Ferrari-files, and so on. (not mentioning Sky's incredible GT year and their USPS-like TdF train that you believe to be clean.)

You must have a very sad and lonely life. Your obsession with Garmin and JV is surely worthy case material for psychologists.

Why would anyone bother inter-acting with you when regardless of what they say, you twist it to fit your own agenda. You have no idea how when reading your posts, its comes across as though you have some really deep issues.

 

[JV1973]

How about a word on Team Sky's new approach? They are setting themselves up to be the "clean team" beyond Slipstream. It is ironic because they are using a policy which encourages omerta but gives the team the appearance of being more hardline than yours. It steals much of your team's claim to fame, which you used to good effect when growing your organization to a World Tour team, even as it may be a step backward in the fight against doping.

Even as they release a few staff members who were honest enough to admit their pasts, the team is still loaded with staff and riders who have very sketchy pasts. To the casual fan who does not know about the shady reputations of the remaining people, this may look good, but to the cynical it looks really suspect.

I'm not a fan of their approach. Clearly. But, they are trying, which is more than can be said for many. Our approach makes sense to the hardcore fan, but less so to the casual fan. Theirs is opposite of this. I don't think Brailsford has a choice. It's a corporate policy.


Complicated.

 

[maltiv]

Actually, I forgot, I did knock off one 92ml/kg as well.

But, remember, lactate metabolism and the ability to sustain power is much more important than maximum cardiovascular capacity....

On a related note, what's the highest VO2 max test you've heard about? (doped or not). Do you know if anyone have scored higher than Oskar Svendsen's 99,5 ml/kg? I assume someone on EPO must have scored higher at some point, but chosen not to reveal so. From the sounds of it, you were probably over 100 ml/kg yourself with PEDs.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Hi JV,

Back in the days when Slipstream were ProContinental, I recall you doing the Volta a Portugal. I think it was 2007-8 kind of time. It was mentioned at the time that it was a good developmental step for riders towards riding Grand Tours, as it's the longest European race outside of the GTs, features good length TTs, mountain stages and the blistering heat increases the fatigue factor.

Now, obviously the race is a shadow of what it was then, both participation-wise and parcours-wise, as the economic crisis has led to a massive decline in the Portuguese and Spanish calendars and the number of teams there, and the routes have become a bit passé, with the Senhora da Graça stages becoming progressively easier before the final climb and the number of medium hill stages declining too.

I note that the Development team were at the race in 2011, but not 2012. Given the praise that you or your team (I forget the exact quotes) have given the race as preparation for riding the Grand Tours and for judging riders' recovery potential, is there any intention to continue to participate in the event? Or does the US short-stage-race calendar in August take precedence?

 

[JV1973]

Some obvious points:

1. Joe Papp would have presented doping products to his mother if she were racing, so I am guessing that you sweeping statement was a rhetorical vendetta against certain people who like to proclaim their cleanliness. Maybe they deserve it, maybe they don't.

2. According to you and others, doping is most beneficial to people with lesser physiological capabilities, so wouldn't those continental guys you are hammering on be more likely to gain an advantage?

3. You're trying to be a positive force for change, I believe that. Statements like that are counterproductive because you don't have any idea of what those people's morals are. You made a choice, don't slag on others who didn't regardless of what you GUESS about their personal traits.

1. true

2. true, but not to the point of being successful in the World Tour.

3. I didn't say what the choice would have been, just saying there's no way to determine. No judgement from me.