• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. 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 82 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
Too many times pro cycling has declared itself to be clean and lied.

There are definitely less amounts of PEDS being consumed but to declare it clean with the same protagonists controlling it and the teams full of the same enablers and doctors when it was so dirty is asking us to believe night is day.

Edit: I am thinking of a Nico Roche radio interview when he accused Kimmage and Walsh of having a vendetta and when asked what did he mean he quickly retracted it, but said they appeared bitter.

Nico Roche is part of bike pure, now why on earth would he consider the 2 journalists over the last 20 years who have consistently called for a cleaner sport of cycling be accused of having a vendetta?

This word is to me peloton speak to describe the atitude of Walsh and Kimmage. The sport is still a closed rank and those who flow against it are bitter, jealous and have a vendetta. That is the modern pro cyclists feeling about the Walsh's, Kimmage's, Bassons, Ballesters and others who so called spat in the soup!

Now N Roche is on the bike pure website, why? PR, it appears that they will do anything to appear what they are not.

I get this feeling when I read JV and Millar or Sky and Brailsford 'speak'. They are trying to cast shields over themselves to deflect the reality that the only change has been in the amounts being used, which can be seen by some as a good thing and might be comparable to cycling before epo became the dope fo choice but for me it is not enough. To cross the line to dope whether with 1 pill or 100 is still doping.

This is only my opinion and I have no evidence but what I think is based on what is in the public arena, on forums, by the PR speak of teams, by the doctors still working in the sport, by the ridiculous statments issued by top riders, by the silence of the majority of riders, by the silence of nearly all the team onwers and DS, by the pictures broadcast of unbelievable performances, by the performance of ex dopers in this years Vuelta and on and on and on...
B

Cycling is NEVER going to be clean.

NEVER.

Neither will athletics, swimming, skiing, football, baseball; any sport where PEDs can provide a boost, there will be boosting, from here till evermore.

That's life, because people are people; flawed, selfish, greedy, scared, human. People cheat in marriages, in business, in hobbies. It's part of the DNA.

So I repeat. Cycling will NEVER, NEVER, be clean.

If that's the standard you want to hold it's future to, do yourself a favour, and find something else to care about. Only disappointment awaits you in this sport.

But while it can never be clean - in the spotless sense - it CAN be cleanER, much cleaner ...

I'm not sure Cycling, between fans, sponsors, media, and yes even riders and teams, has ever had a greater critical mass dedicated on principle to cleaning up the sport. Not when Tommy Simpson suffocated on the Ventoux. Not when the Festina boot opened. Not when riders were dying in their sleep.

So if you are interested in cleanER cycling, we have to learn the difference between skepticism, and cynicism. - the former is an example of wisdom; the latter is a parody of wisdom.

And if you're not - then why are you here?
 
JV1973 said:
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.

Well I asked the question before and you never answered.

So to clarify, you know the doping histories of all your riders, and so you can to a certain extent 'plan' should a scandal start to blow in the direction of their former teams.

Excluding performance grounds (and age) - which 5 'big name' riders would you never sign and why? (I'm thinking of guys like Schleck, Valverde, Cavendish, Cancellara, Gilbert, Contador, Evans, Menchov, Froome etc)
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
martinvickers said:
B

Cycling is NEVER going to be clean.

NEVER.

Neither will athletics, swimming, skiing, football, baseball; any sport where PEDs can provide a boost, there will be boosting, from here till evermore.

That's life, because people are people; flawed, selfish, greedy, scared, human. People cheat in marriages, in business, in hobbies. It's part of the DNA.

So I repeat. Cycling will NEVER, NEVER, be clean.

If that's the standard you want to hold it's future to, do yourself a favour, and find something else to care about. Only disappointment awaits you in this sport.

But while it can never be clean - in the spotless sense - it CAN be cleanER, much cleaner ...

I'm not sure Cycling, between fans, sponsors, media, and yes even riders and teams, has ever had a greater critical mass dedicated on principle to cleaning up the sport. Not when Tommy Simpson suffocated on the Ventoux. Not when the Festina boot opened. Not when riders were dying in their sleep.

So if you are interested in cleanER cycling, we have to learn the difference between skepticism, and cynicism. - the former is an example of wisdom; the latter is a parody of wisdom.

And if you're not - then why are you here?

I dont believe anything will be completely clean where humans are involvd but i want to see the sport arrive to where it is the minority doping and the majority within the sport are anti doping and seen to be anti doping..

I look forward to that day. Not today when the talk is of a cleaner sport, which is not true, but the actions are of a cleaner sport.
 
JV1973 said:
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.
So from that I gather the question Mont Ventoux gave you the answer for was "How much of a difference a proper doping program makes". But you didn't say anything one or way or the other about certain races serving as testing grounds for teams to put their programs to the test with less risk than at the Tour. Is that a myth, or was it something US Postal did at the time?

Using Formula 1 parlance, the Spanish-speaking hardcore cycling fanbase refers to those riders who would pull incredible performances at the Dauphiné while their leaders were clearly below their normal level "test drivers". It's such a hilarious term I'd love to know if it was actually a thing. :p
 
hrotha said:
So from that I gather the question Mont Ventoux gave you the answer for was "How much of a difference a proper doping program makes". But you didn't say anything one or way or the other about certain races serving as testing grounds for teams to put their programs to the test with less risk than at the Tour. Is that a myth, or was it something US Postal did at the time?

Using Formula 1 parlance, the Spanish-speaking hardcore cycling fanbase refers to those riders who would pull incredible performances at the Dauphiné while their leaders were clearly below their normal level "test drivers". It's such a hilarious term I'd love to know if it was actually a thing. :p

Will that include Suisse 2012? :p :D
 
I don't get this obsession with VO2 max

As JV stated, far more important is lactate metabolism and w/kg at lactate threshold.

Similarily, w/kg at VO2 max is more relevant than just VO2 max the number, as different people have different efficiencies, and nature is clever in the sense that, generally speaking, people with higher VO2 max's have relatively lower efficiencies and vice versa.

JV has stated that in peak form he could hit 360w at FTP at 60-62kg. If we take 60kg that is 6 w/kg. I would guess his VO2 max power would be around 7 w/kg, or around 420 watts at a mass of 60kg. This jives well with a VO2 max of 90 ml/kg/min and assuming he only gets 78w per L of O2 (22.2% efficiency assuming burning 100% glycogen at this point), a fair assumption given his high relative VO2 max.

It sounds like Garmin has their own protocol based on Inigo San Millan (and I would be curious to hear more - this could be considered my "question for JV"), but perhaps one "realistic" test is to have a rider ride 4-5 hours at a tempo over several Cols and then do a one-off, ~30 min effort up a finishing climb. This way efficiency, economy, lactate metabolism, and VO2 max (through lactate threshold as a percentage of VO2 max) are all taken into account in the final performance.
 
V3R1T4S said:
It sounds like Garmin has their own protocol based on Inigo San Millan (and I would be curious to hear more), but perhaps one realistic "test" is to have a rider ride 4-5 hours at a tempo over several Cols and then do a one-off, ~30 min effort up a finishing climb. This way efficiency, economy, lactate metabolism, and VO2 max (through lactate threshold as a percentage of VO2 max) are all taken into account in the final performance.

Thats what Ferrari had Cadel Evans doing wasnt it?
 
Frosty said:
Thats what Ferrari had Cadel Evans doing wasnt it?

Yeah, sort of. The problem is how do you objectively measure the performance. Ferrari was using lactate readings and VAM. However, a lot of riding both dehydrates the rider (causing higher VAMs) and reduces lactate output (admittedly, for reasons I do not 100% understand, but Coggan brought up this issue in a thread of his on "Ferrari's Magic" or similar).

So you would *expect* to both have a higher VAM and a lower lactate reading for the same power output every time, assuming the rider didn't crack during the effort.

I would think just straight up wattage and w/kg is a repeatable and objective output to measure.

I am a scientist but not an exercise physiologist, so perhaps acoggan or krebs or someone else who is can fill in the gaps and point out errors in this reasoning.
 
JV1973 said:
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
Thomas Dekker did blood doping? Ah, that's news, to me at least. I thought just (dyn)EPO.
 
Jul 1, 2009
320
0
0
Visit site
pmcg76 said:
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.

This is a stupid post, sorry. Imho you dont have to be mental to not believe JV, so no need for such words. That post has no class :(

Thanks for answering, JV :)
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
JV1973 said:
It's what evil and shadowy monsters like myself do. Along with trying to take over the [cycling] world!!!

Fixed that for you.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/report-uci-offered-stake-in-breakaway-league
The UCI has created its own race organising company, Global Cycling Promotion SA, to run the Tour of Beijing and President Pat McQuaid has always rubbished reports of a breakaway league. However, Garmin-Sharp team manager and head of the AIGCP team's association Jonathan Vaughters believes teams should get a share in television revenue to help them survive loss of sponsorship.

http://road.cc/content/news/68089-uci-reportedly-offered-stake-world-series-cycling-breakaway-league
The idea behind it lies in a longstanding dispute between leading professional teams, represented by the AIGCP which is chaired by Slipstream Sports CEO and Garmin-Sharp manager Jonathan Vaughters, and the UCI, with teams wanting a greater say in how the sport is run.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19956995
British cyclist David Millar says it is in the "back of my mind" to become the president of the International Cycling Union (UCI) in the future to help clean up the sport.


JV1973 said:
Btw - as I've asked before, please do some research on reticulocyte variations before commenting. Your comments on the topic, as usual, demonstrate ignorance.

Did that weeks ago. I started by asking you - as you appear to speak from experience and / or knowledge on the subject. You offered 2 suggestions, from around a dozen you claimed to have, and ended by saying "I don't know" - which I took to mean you didn't know which of the dozen reasons it was. So my research was asking you. Then I asked the Internet. Now I am coming back and saying "hypoxia? really? from a 34 minute TT?"

Here is one way to explain static Hct / Hgb but increasing retics for a rider between morning and evening - what we saw with Ryder:

Merckx index said:
However, when a rider transfuses for PE, there is no preceding withdrawal. As a result, HT increases and simultaneously, retics decrease--a sure fire way to trigger a passport positive. To avoid this, as I noted in my earlier post, riders a) transfuse saline, to reduce the HT, and b) take EPO, to raise retics.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
Dear Wiggo said:
Really.

No comment from you about JV's claim that a 15W saving via a skinsuit saves a rider in a 6 hour race [cough] 1000 calories?

Let's start with something nice and simple like that.

Please explain to everyone how zero knowledge on my part leads me to show that 15W for 6 hours is ~324cal for someone with 25% efficiency, or 351 for someone with 22% efficiency. Assuming the race averaged 48km/hr. JV mentioned 7 hours for the race, but it was won in 6:09 (258km).

Then perhaps you can explain how JV can even make the claim, when it requires the condition of a rider riding at 48km/hr, but the race in question averaged 43km/hr, and the rider in question only rode solo for 22 minutes of the race, at an average of 40km/hr.

Go.

Or is it true because JV is a maigcal unicorn and everything he says is true?


Ok, hot shot: 15w is equal to 15 Newton meters! Hey wow!

I could care less about a 6 hour calorie savings or whatever you're trying to demonstrate. yes, I can do math too. Whooopee!

15 watts is an estimate of what 1g/dl of hemoglobin would increase power (average) by during a 30 minute to 1 hour maximal effort. While it would be impossible for a skin suit or better aerodynamics to save 15 watts of effort at 20kph on a men climb, it is very possible to make this sort of savings at 50kph.

So, saying that 15w increase due to micro dosing type blood doping could be replaced by a 15 w savings due to better aerodynamics is completely plausible in a high speed situation, which is what i was using as an example in Bermuda.

Once again, stop trying to play expert. It's just insulting to the people who actually know their stuff, of which there are quite a few on this forum.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
Dear Wiggo said:
Fixed that for you.










Did that weeks ago. I started by asking you - as you appear to speak from experience and / or knowledge on the subject. You offered 2 suggestions, from around a dozen you claimed to have, and ended by saying "I don't know" - which I took to mean you didn't know which of the dozen reasons it was. So my research was asking you. Then I asked the Internet. Now I am coming back and saying "hypoxia? really? from a 34 minute TT?"

Here is one way to explain static Hct / Hgb but increasing retics for a rider between morning and evening - what we saw with Ryder:


Hypoxia is one possible explanation, but not from the TT, from the Stelvio stage. End of the day, retics bounce around more than hb does. All of Ryder's retic counts are well within natural fluctuations. It's an extremely stable blood profile, but then you would know that, as you've seen 2 or 3 blood profiles in your life. I've seen a few hundred. So, not to be an ***, but you are, again, out of depth, and commenting on items you do not have knowledge of.

Go get your blood, with retics, tested for 6 weeks, once a week. I will bet you $10,000 that you show greater or equal fluctuations than Ryder with regards to retics. We on?

Im in.

JV
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
Tyler'sTwin said:
Didn't Frei say he shot 500 iu IV when he tested positive?

Yes. Clearance time isn't always predictable....and what if you miss the vein???!! glow time just went from 16-20 hrs to 72 hrs-96hrs...

That would suck.

See Roberto Heras, 2004.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
JV1973 said:
Ok, hot shot: 15w is equal to 15 Newton meters! Hey wow!

I could care less about a 6 hour calorie savings or whatever you're trying to demonstrate. yes, I can do math too. Whooopee!

15 watts is an estimate of what 1g/dl of hemoglobin would increase power (average) by during a 30 minute to 1 hour maximal effort. While it would be impossible for a skin suit or better aerodynamics to save 15 watts of effort at 20kph on a men climb, it is very possible to make this sort of savings at 50kph.

So, saying that 15w increase due to micro dosing type blood doping could be replaced by a 15 w savings due to better aerodynamics is completely plausible in a high speed situation, which is what i was using as an example in Bermuda.

Once again, stop trying to play expert. It's just insulting to the people who actually know their stuff, of which there are quite a few on this forum.

In your TEDx talk you said:
* we designed this skinsuit. it saves the rider (Johan Van Summeren) 15W at 30 mph.
* Sumi won the race
* the skinsuit saved him [cough] 1000 calories

I am not playing expert. I am calling you out as a continual bender of facts.

6 hours at 15W savings - the exact scenario where you claimed someone saved 1000 calories - actually netts somewhere around 300 calories tops. Only if they were doing 48km/hr, which they weren't.

This was in a prepared TEDx talk, available for viewing on youtube.

Are you saying that you, the expert in all this compared to ignorant me made a simple mistake and carried the one too far or something?

The only person claiming my expertise is you. It's getting old.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
Dear Wiggo said:
Fixed that for you.

Btw - thank you for providing the Merckx index quote. It perfectly demonstrates Ryder's profile stability.

No change in HB, slight change in retics. This isn't accomplishable via saline/epo in an 8 hour window. The retics would be high unstable after a transfusion and then a shot of epo to try and combat the suppressive qualities of the transfusion. They'd be down, then up, then who knows... and would not stabilize until the next morning. AND that's not even to mention the fact that an 8 hour window, with 2 urine tests in that window, would still result in an EPO positive.

Sorry. Nice try.









Did that weeks ago. I started by asking you - as you appear to speak from experience and / or knowledge on the subject. You offered 2 suggestions, from around a dozen you claimed to have, and ended by saying "I don't know" - which I took to mean you didn't know which of the dozen reasons it was. So my research was asking you. Then I asked the Internet. Now I am coming back and saying "hypoxia? really? from a 34 minute TT?"

Here is one way to explain static Hct / Hgb but increasing retics for a rider between morning and evening - what we saw with Ryder:


Enjoy your sunday.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
Dear Wiggo said:
In your TEDx talk you said:
* we designed this skinsuit. it saves the rider (Johan Van Summeren) 15W at 30 mph.
* Sumi won the race
* the skinsuit saved him [cough] 1000 calories

I am not playing expert. I am calling you out as a continual bender of facts.

6 hours at 15W savings - the exact scenario where you claimed someone saved 1000 calories - actually netts somewhere around 300 calories tops. Only if they were doing 48km/hr, which they weren't.

This was in a prepared TEDx talk, available for viewing on youtube.

Are you saying that you, the expert in all this compared to ignorant me made a simple mistake and carried the one too far or something?

The only person claiming my expertise is you. It's getting old.

Yes, thats right. The calorie savings is around 300. My mistake. Touche'

But, that's still irrelevant to the overall theory of 15w savings is equal to 1g/dl increase in hb. So, I messed up, but premise of the argument is still correct.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Visit site
Dear Wiggo said:
Fixed that for you.










Did that weeks ago. I started by asking you - as you appear to speak from experience and / or knowledge on the subject. You offered 2 suggestions, from around a dozen you claimed to have, and ended by saying "I don't know" - which I took to mean you didn't know which of the dozen reasons it was. So my research was asking you. Then I asked the Internet. Now I am coming back and saying "hypoxia? really? from a 34 minute TT?"

Here is one way to explain static Hct / Hgb but increasing retics for a rider between morning and evening - what we saw with Ryder:

Btw - thank you for providing the Merckx index quote. It perfectly demonstrates Ryder's profile stability.

No change in HB, slight change in retics. This isn't accomplishable via saline/epo in an 8 hour window. The retics would be high unstable after a transfusion and then a shot of epo to try and combat the suppressive qualities of the transfusion. They'd be down, then up, then who knows... and would not stabilize until the next morning. AND that's not even to mention the fact that an 8 hour window, with 2 urine tests in that window, would still result in an EPO positive.

Sorry. Nice try.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dearwiggo.blogspot.com.au
JV1973 said:
Hypoxia is one possible explanation, but not from the TT, from the Stelvio stage.

Uh huh.

JV1973 said:
Wait! sorry! missed the retic question. I have no idea why retics would bounce a bit before and after the final TT. We could hypothesize that hypoxia created due to the effort of the TT caused some retics to show up. It could also just be the pulsitile nature of all human hormones... it could be a lot of things.

I don't know.


JV1973 said:
End of the day, retics bounce around more than hb does. All of Ryder's retic counts are well within natural fluctuations. It's an extremely stable blood profile, but then you would know that, as you've seen 2 or 3 blood profiles in your life. I've seen a few hundred. So, not to be an ***, but you are, again, out of depth, and commenting on items you do not have knowledge of.

Retics don't bounce 27% within 12 hours.

JV1973 said:
Go get your blood, with retics, tested for 6 weeks, once a week. I will bet you $10,000 that you show greater or equal fluctuations than Ryder with regards to retics. We on?

Im in.

JV

How about you release someone else's profile from pre-Giro first - you know, where everyone tested high?