JV talks, sort of

[skidmark]

Yes, the only person who he doesn't want involved in cycling is Ricco. Who is i) out of the sport and ii) other than Rasmussen, about the easiest target in cycling.

He is very reluctant to break omerta about currently active members of the peloton and that is frustrating for people, because what they see with their eyes when they see Dertie Cont, Piti and Froome riding up mountains as if on motorbikes does not square with what JV is telling us. By refusing to confirm what is 'obvious' to many, he appears to be 'maintaining omerta' and his comments about clean cycling appear to be blatantly unsustainable and untrue.

I get what you're saying, but essentially you're asking someone with a high position in the sport to call out people he has nothing but suspicion about. Like, how is JV more qualified to talk about Froome than anyone here? What is he supposed to say, go to cyclingnews and say 'Froome must be doping'? That's not only unprofessional, but if he's wrong it's tantamount to libel. I think journalists and blood testers are in a much better position to do that than someone who runs a different team than he's even on. Like, if Froome was positive for something, it would be the UCI and his team's job to out him. If his blood profile was suspicious, I would expect Ashenden, Morkenberg etc to be qualified to analyze and talk about that, more than a team manager (even though he seems to understand blood profiling better than most team managers). And if it's nothing more than "Froome has come out of nowhere to be a GT contender", I don't see how it'd be productive to make accusations in a public setting.

I want a clean sport, but I don't see airing every suspicion in public as a productive way of going about that.

edit: this is not to say that I don't appreciate your line of questioning. The 'three obstacles to clean cycling' is interesting; I was more thinking of the 'name 5 riders you wouldn't hire' question.

 

[sniper]

I am not aware of the doping allegations. Since 2007 I've only seen Ramunsas off and on at the start or finish of an odd pro race (recently I saw him at the Giro before a stage).
(...snipped...)
I've pretty much summed up most of my opinions about doping in these two articles I penned:

http://www.podiuminsight.com/2012/09/06/gregg-germer-why-i-didnt-dope/

and

http://www.thechainstay.com/blog/2012/10/breaking-point-lets-fix-cycling/

nice informative post, much obliged.

I won't vouch for Ramusas's being clean (or ANY other rider) as I can't.

Would have been nice to hear something similar from JV or Millar in reference to Wiggo 2009/12 and Hesjedal 2012.
Instead, JV and Millar somehow miraculously 'know for sure' that those results were obtained on paniagua. As GreggGermer points out, you by definition cannot vouch for that, yet JV and Millar somehow can.

 

[JV1973]

I get what you're saying, but essentially you're asking someone with a high position in the sport to call out people he has nothing but suspicion about. Like, how is JV more qualified to talk about Froome than anyone here? What is he supposed to say, go to cyclingnews and say 'Froome must be doping'? That's not only unprofessional, but if he's wrong it's tantamount to libel. I think journalists and blood testers are in a much better position to do that than someone who runs a different team than he's even on. Like, if Froome was positive for something, it would be the UCI and his team's job to out him. If his blood profile was suspicious, I would expect Ashenden, Morkenberg etc to be qualified to analyze and talk about that, more than a team manager (even though he seems to understand blood profiling better than most team managers). And if it's nothing more than "Froome has come out of nowhere to be a GT contender", I don't see how it'd be productive to make accusations in a public setting.

I want a clean sport, but I don't see airing every suspicion in public as a productive way of going about that.

edit: this is not to say that I don't appreciate your line of questioning. The 'three obstacles to clean cycling' is interesting; I was more thinking of the 'name 5 riders you wouldn't hire' question.

BINGO!!! Thank you.

It's not that I wouldn't answer these questions if you came over for dinner. But I'm not touching them on a public forum. You guys don't get quoted from what you say on a forum in mainstream media. I do.
Unless I'm prepared to legally and publicly defend my position that "I think xyz doped" then I say nothing. I don't have hard evidence and I'm not one to go accusing people without hard evidence. That is just as immoral as doping.

When I say "i don't know" it means "I don't know"... It does not mean I don't have a private opinion.

And this applies to contract talks with Contador... We never got to the point of the talks that i saw his blood values. So, I can't say one way or the other on the guy. I'd be happy to give you my opinion on this, if you want to come over for dinner. But not here. I'm not going to publicly judge someone who I have never even seen their blood profile or medical records.

But I have my opinion. just not for here.

I only give my opinion on items/riders that I have hard facts about.

In the end, what maybe you guys don't get, I don't care as much as you might think about if rider xyz doped or not. I don't claim the sport is totally clean, what i claim is that clean riders are winning more than at any other point in cycling's history. That's all.

 

[hrotha]

We could talk about a hypothetical rider instead. Say, Adalberto Cantador.

 

[sniper]

I get what you're saying, but essentially you're asking someone with a high position in the sport to call out people he has nothing but suspicion about. Like, how is JV more qualified to talk about Froome than anyone here? What is he supposed to say, go to cyclingnews and say 'Froome must be doping'? That's not only unprofessional, but if he's wrong it's tantamount to libel. I think journalists and blood testers are in a much better position to do that than someone who runs a different team than he's even on. Like, if Froome was positive for something, it would be the UCI and his team's job to out him. If his blood profile was suspicious, I would expect Ashenden, Morkenberg etc to be qualified to analyze and talk about that, more than a team manager (even though he seems to understand blood profiling better than most team managers). And if it's nothing more than "Froome has come out of nowhere to be a GT contender", I don't see how it'd be productive to make accusations in a public setting.

I want a clean sport, but I don't see airing every suspicion in public as a productive way of going about that.

edit: this is not to say that I don't appreciate your line of questioning. The 'three obstacles to clean cycling' is interesting; I was more thinking of the 'name 5 riders you wouldn't hire' question.

Very well, but JV proactively propagates that cycling is so much cleaner now (viz. since 2008), also on this forum. So either he has no suspicions regarding the likes of Contador, Valvi, Wiggins, Froome, Riis, Bruyneel, the Schlecks, etc., or he is simply not being very truthful.

 

[GreggGermer]

nice informative post, much obliged.

Would have been nice to hear something similar from JV or Millar in reference to Wiggo 2009/12 and Hesjedal 2012.
Instead, JV and Millar somehow miraculously 'know for sure' that those results were obtained on paniagua. As GreggGermer points out, you by definition cannot vouch for that, yet JV and Millar somehow can.

I think I should slightly amend my comment:

I can vouch for two riders who rode for the cyclocross team I put together last year, Gabby Day and Craig Richey, during last year. As both raced for me, lived at my house and having spent numerous hours getting to know each rider I can, and would, go to bat against any forum weasel who tried to bring them down with doping accusations.

That said, if JV has access to the power data of his rider, blood profiles, and other information it is reasonable to develop an opinion on a riders cleanliness. You should be able to parse out a bad seed amongst your riders. The question then becomes do you trust JV's opinion and words, which I have a feeling for most in the Clinic would be a no.

I know Brailsford has said at the end of the season they would open up the data for Wiggo to anyone who wanted to see it, but has anyone taken him up on the offer?

 

[JV1973]

Very well, but JV proactively propagates that cycling is so much cleaner now (viz. since 2008), also on this forum. So either he has no suspicions regarding the likes of Contador, Valvi, Wiggins, Froome, Riis, Bruyneel, the Schlecks, etc., or he is simply not being very truthful.

I think I've addressed that for your highness above.

 

[JV1973]

We could talk about a hypothetical rider instead. Say, Adalberto Cantador.

Legally that solves it. Being quoted is still possible, although at legal jeopardy to the journalist.

Anyhow, I have no idea what rider you are referring to. There is a rider that I would opine, not more, that probably doped in his career. But when hiring any rider, the question I ask is not "did they dope?" its instead "can they win clean?".... The rider that I'm talking about probably fits into this category, despite past doping. But, since I've never tested them nor seen any test results of theirs, I cannot say this conclusively and it's just a guess.

 

[maltiv]

Very well, but JV proactively propagates that cycling is so much cleaner now (viz. since 2008), also on this forum. So either he has no suspicions regarding the likes of Contador, Valvi, Wiggins, Froome, Riis, Bruyneel, the Schlecks, etc., or he is simply not being very truthful.

There's a deference between cleaner and fewer people doping. Cleaner can mean that roughly the same amount of riders are doping, but they have to dope a lot less due to better testing, which then again results in clean people (hopefully) being competitive.

If we're now at a level where clean riders can win GT's, then that's a huge improvement, regardless of whether the amount of dopers has decreased or not.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Very well, but JV proactively propagates that cycling is so much cleaner now (viz. since 2008), also on this forum. So either he has no suspicions regarding the likes of Contador, Valvi, Wiggins, Froome, Riis, Bruyneel, the Schlecks, etc., or he is simply not being very truthful.

While you can shout accusations about riders here based on supposition, hearsay, insinuation, character assassination and by shouting really, really loudly, and have people believe you, in the real, very litigious world if you are in a position of responsibility and you voice suspicions based on the above reasons then you tend to need a very good lawyer.

And there is a difference between lying and not saying anything

 

[GJB123]

Very well, but JV proactively propagates that cycling is so much cleaner now (viz. since 2008), also on this forum. So either he has no suspicions regarding the likes of Contador, Valvi, Wiggins, Froome, Riis, Bruyneel, the Schlecks, etc., or he is simply not being very truthful.

There is a distinct difference between not giving your opinion and lying or not being truthful. You do see that don't you?. Can you even begin to contemplate the sh!t storm of he came on a public forum stating that riders X, Y and Z doped? What's there to win for him by doing that? Do you actually think that will stop those riders from doping of they do? In the worse case scenario it will probably leave JV out of cycling. But perhaps that makes you happy?

We may not like the fact that cycling getting cleaner is a revolution in slow motion with setbacks every now and then , but I am certain it is the best we can hope for and personally have more confidence of it finally yielding better results the JV-style than the Brailsford-style or the Clinic cynics-style.

 

[thirteen]

We may not like the fact that cycling getting cleaner is a revolution in slow motion with setbacks every now and then , but I am certain it is the best we can hope for and personally have more confidence of it finally yielding better results the JV-style than the Brailsford-style or the Clinic cynics-style.

moi aussi.

 

[thirteen]

It's not that I wouldn't answer these questions if you came over for dinner.

you are officially invited to dinner next time you're in Ghent

 

[theyoungest]

We could talk about a hypothetical rider instead. Say, Adalberto Cantador.

Is this a Godwin's law thing?

 

[workingclasshero]

When I say "i don't know" it means "I don't know"... It does not mean I don't have a private opinion.

why didn't you just say "I don't know" then

And this applies to contract talks with Contador... We never got to the point of the talks that i saw his blood values. So, I can't say one way or the other on the guy. I'd be happy to give you my opinion on this, if you want to come over for dinner. But not here. I'm not going to publicly judge someone who I have never even seen their blood profile or medical records.

But I have my opinion. just not for here.

I only give my opinion on items/riders that I have hard facts about.

I think there are enough hard facts out there about Alberto Contador for us - and you! - to say "he doped"! He only just returned from a doping ban for crying out loud

 

[Netserk]

Hi JV.

You say that one of the proofs that cycling is cleaner now than in the past, is that you can win a GT clean.

For how long has that been the case?

 

[JV1973]

Hi JV.

You say that one of the proofs that cycling is cleaner now than in the past, is that you can win a GT clean.

For how long has that been the case?

My hope is that carlos sastre in 2008 was clean. From there forward, I have hopes. Not definitives, just reasonable hope.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

So you just confirmed that it's Moncoutie . Did you try to sign him?

 

[Benotti69]

I think I've addressed that for your highness above.

Always with the condescending tones and name calling against critics.

Those is the sport of cycling have been consistent in 1 thing. Always treating the critics with disdain and name calling. You obviously learnt something from your days at USPS.

You're an ex doper turned DS that has done some good in the sport. But some might cast Riis in the same light.

You come on here because you say you have to 'do this crap' but if every team paid $750K for bloodpassport testing you wouldn't be bothered doing this so dont pretend anything different like it is doing fans a favour.

The sport of cycling is still very much under a dark cloud yet you keep hammering on about it being clean.

UCI have not changed, teams are still the same with 1 exception (Bruyneel is gone) doctors are still there working away, performances this year were as suspicious as any year. Boonen, Wiggins, Froome, Contador, Hesjedal to name some.

 

[Galic Ho]

I think it is Moncoutie because even Bennoti thinks he is clean


ish.

Or Chavanel. They are pretty much the only two guys who have been labelled clean.

I've been reading both the JV threads and I honestly don't like what I see. It's funny reading Tyler's book, one would get the impression JV was ostracised for being a choad, to use Lance's terms. But then I see the manner in which he posts. Strikes me as being very elitist, arrogant and self aggrandizing. And the bashing on Ricco? Oh so that was how the entire sport justified it? Only he was doping! Right, guess that explains the anger towards Contador and Lance? Oh snap, it doesn't. It just deflects questioning. Look at Sastre and name me one clean rider in history who climbed Alpe d'Huez that fast clean like he did in that gloriously clean Tour in 2008? There are none. There was no need to bash conti riders either. None at all. In fact, I'd say JV has a ton in common personality wise with Lance.

As for intelligence. I have no doubt both Lance and JV consider themselves bright. Just like a few psuedo intellectual wannabees on this forum (we all know who they are, they're the crotch riders who are here to beat off to their own words). Short story, if I met JV, I am about 90% certain my impressions would be confirmed. No, JV, you wouldn't have a clue who a great deal of the forumists were if they walked up to you and started talking (you're not bright enough to discern who would be playing you given the manner in which you've represented yourself on here). You present yourself in pretty much the same way as Armstrong does, the only difference is context.

You guys think I am wrong. Ok, fair enough. But ask yourself this. Does JV go to extended lengths to champion himself? When granted the opportunity to sprout some ego boosting stats, does he? You bet. I mean, Coggan's first posts on this forum were to toot his own horn and surprise, surprise, JV was slinging his test numbers too...albeit with a few things missing so he could be called out on. Numbers so high in fact, they're akin to Bernard Hinault's. But nobody sits back and says, hey wait a second, is JV saying if he was born a decade earlier, he'd have been a potential GT winner or challenger at the least? I mean seriously!!! His numbers are supposedly in the elite range. Uber elite percentile. But wait, we have a forumist, a newbie, who goes to fill in the blanks and gives some absurd numbers that don't correlate. Does all of this not strike anyone here as super arrogant? What kind of person does this? The type I see all the time. It starts as a kid. Small time boasting. Then it progresses and gets worse.

Sorry JV, I've seen enough educated and some what smart BS artist's to spot a seasoned pro BS artist, and my BS indicator is buzzing. I believe some of what you say, but not all of it. I'd sure as hell love to here the answer to Hrotha's questions pertaining to AC. But granted I accept that won't happen. Why? Good question. Ryder Hesjedal opened his gob at the Tour presentation. Either he is clean and was lying through his teeth about thinking he could keep up with Contador (Ashenden said that boy is certifiably dirty, BioPassport pretty much screamed it) or cycling ain't as clean as JV says and well...run the numbers and fill in the blanks.

My opinion is that hearing JV denigrate those who don't believe in clean cycling is damn disgusting. If you did this to the face of any fan, I'd warrant getting the nine shades of *** kicked out of you would be high on the cards such is the damage your generation has done to fans world wide. You wouldn't stand a chance BTW. Small upper body cyclist on the wrong side of 30. See why I think you're like Armstrong? You attack those who oppose you and from what I see, you gain pleasure from it. Worse, they only want the truth and clean cycling. It does not matter they aren't cyclists, or involved internally, I could drop half a dozen business theories stating why their input is SUPERIOR in a business sense than yours. End of the day, they buy products which in turn profits from the preceding sale are used by a company to put you in a plushy job.

I don't see Tyler and Floyd going onto forums and getting snappy at people who don't believe every word they say and they have copped some very, very abusive stuff. Worse for you, they aren't pushing a team chock of block filled with ex dopers, some like Millar who really take the pi$$ every time they open their mouth. Perhaps you need a history lesson? You are historically a weak man. Weak man. You neither had the nads to stand up and tell Lance and Bruyneel to F$&K OFF (which there are stories of others doing unless you care to tell us all you grew a pair). Floyd and Tyler both did to his face. You raced on what is regarded as the dirtiest team in recent history and you doped. Tyler painting a nice picture of you in his book does not cut it. It does not justify it.

You profited immensely off your doping, moved to a new team (because you were bullied, yes, the irony is not lost on me) and CONTINUED doping. You also learnt the ropes well enough to be in your current position. Like many ex dopers. You're not slumming it like Floyd is. Oh but you acted in the shadows to help anti-doping helping since 2004. Post ad hoc justification. Good for you if it makes you sleep better at night. You gave some guys a second chance (which I will put forward as a strong thing). You see, Floyd is the strongest of you ex Postal guys. By far. Mentally and morally, he is more dialed in than the rest of you. I actually pity you guys. Why? Well as I said, it is a weakness what you allowed to transpire. The strong ones were Bassons. Or a guy like Obree. Go check the main page for his article. A few hours on a team that doped...he walked instantly. And that was in 1995, when Lance was far from in the swing of things with Ferrari. Catching on yet? Cycling deserves this criticism. You deserve this, because you doped and cycling did even more. You will never, ever, reverse that. Some humility when dealing with those who say you're full of it is needed. Some contrition, empathy and understand, because God knows, you've gotten a lot of it. The worst part is, I've pretty damn certain those riders on Garmin who rode at Postal, they show this. So why don't you? Oh that's right...Tyler said you had more in common with Lance than you realised. You read like an open book. Psychology ain't your strong point is it?

 

[Galic Ho]

Oh, and those so called 'cynics' they know what accountability and transparency mean. I'd suggest you study auditing basics. I don't think you know much about auditing, but then again I don't think anyone in cycling does. What needs to be done has been listed many, many times on this forum. But it never happens. Your sport, doesn't even come close. FFS, you are suggesting here, you spend $500K of 'your' money on anti-doping. No, your sponsors do. Your employer. And where is the tranparency in this? Having to take the unconfirmed word of an ex-doper who does have an agenda (albeit business agenda) to push! Comes with a massive pinch of salt. But wait...you a few months back suggested the UCI budget for anti-doping was inadequate and was as low as $100K!!! Care to qualify that type of madness for those of use in the forum who can count without using our fingers and toes?

As for the auditing part...it's funny how you mentioned Greenedge and their little PR act. When EY, PWC or Deloitte do a full financial audit of ANY pro cycling team, and publish all the numbers, then and only then should fans believe in them. Because Michelli Scarponi, the guy your rider beat in the Giro, well, the Italians have said some colourful things about him now haven't they and his financial position? Same goes for your testing internally. Nobody with an IQ over 120 would buy that your internal testing is good enough on word alone. Nobody. Want to know who the forum believes? Ashenden. Want to change the doubt man, show us you are not weak, that you aren't a sheep like well over half of cycling, one who follows the status quo, show us you really do regret doping and get his scientific group to run the numbers fully. Then publish them freely and educate the public. Having Kimmage sit on a bus ain't enough. The fact we have numbers getting thrown out about physiology on the forum proves it. They are all unqualified. Quantify and qualify it for people. Then the doubt will disappear and then you will be remembered for your efforts towards clean cycling. You literally have to go above and beyond what you think is enough because that is how far cycling has fallen.

As for your $500K figure...got a link to some financial documents? Stuff the US govt would see? Stuff the IRS would see? That'd go a way to proving the transparency part. Heck, you were the head of the anti-UCI breakway league. Along with BRUYNEEL!!! Lol Do you not understand how that makes you look? He's practically the devils henchman! And you think you have a right to dictate where dialog goes, least of all on a public forum? That guys who disagree need to be labelled and vilified? As I said, disgusting on your part given your history. Your history does not afford nor grant you such luxuries. Such is a commodity that you have not warranted. You literally need to be the polar opposite of what Lance was. And that requires patience. Actually, your words to the 'cynics' could be labelled cowardly. So are you that type of person JV, who is here to amend for past ills or are you just writing a bad script and getting emotional?

Now here is my opinion: Want to know the only riders on Garmin I think are clean? Ok. Farrar. If he is doping, he's doing something wrong. Haussler, but he is gone. Zabriskie, Danielson and Vande Velde. I can make a case for them. Talansky? Not after what he said about LA...either a brain dead idiot, or a doping apologist, aka doper. Dan Martin...I can't help but shake the idea that if cycling were clean, he'd be winning a lot more. No, I don't think his cousin is clean. Not even close. Hesjedal...Tour placing, I'd buy it, Giro??? Granted I think Scarponi and Basso toned it down compared to 2010 and 2011, but Rodriguez...yeah, need I say anymore? I will...what is your opinion regarding the statements of other former Postal riders who stated to USADA they doped between periond X and Y, but we all know, were killing it afterwards in period Z? You don't have to name anybody. Or if it is easier to answer in a different manner, do you believe everyone fully disclosed the whole truth to USADA regarding their doping? Because some people conveniently appear to have left some periods blank and dope free...results and performances relative to others state otherwise. And we all know the peleton talks non stop...loose lips sink ships. As for your selective ego boosting figures...I call BS on them. Don't believe them for a second. Nothing personal, but the manner they were given and logic behind doing so...ego boosting. Boasting coupled with bashing those who didn't reach your level. I have never heard Hinault of LeMond talk smack about lower level guys like that...but we've heard LA do it. Not classy at all. If you know better than the Conti guys, educate them and the public. Oh but that is why you're here...snap? With a massive dash of uber attitude tucked on as well. If your numbers were clean, you'd have been stating for a long time you were a potential big time winner if racing was clean. I don't recall hearing such words.

I'll even give you the chance to answer another question you bucked. Doing so will clarify your personal claims. Who without dope, at Postal, was the best? It's pretty simple. Because your figures, indicate you, if they are correct. Don't forget this forumists...JV indicated very subtly, he is uber elite and nobody questioned it. Nobody. Lance's figures aren't even close enough to warrant comparison, regardless of whether JV swings it to a dismissive claim about lactate threshold being of more merit. Actually JV, I'll make it easier for you...riding clean, were you better than Lance? Because at 23 Lance never had numbers that high. Few people ever will. Even now in the peloton. I've heard of none that have figures that high. So enlighten us...

One last thing. If you have been dishonest, lied or with held info about doping, or have dopers on your team, then I pray to God they are found, all is revealed and such people are run from the sport for life. May they reap the full fury that Armstrong has faced and will come to face. Because lets face it, if this is the truth, plain as day, then it is on merit worse than Armstrong. At least he still maintains his punch line, albeit it ignorantly. Lumping on the Janus mask is far worse.

And no, I don't personally give a toss, but the hypocrisy and parallels to Armstrong I am seeing here is alarming. Worse, it's being applauded. And no, this doesn't surprise me at all. That man has had a very deep affect on many people.

 

[JV1973]

Always with the condescending tones and name calling against critics.

Those is the sport of cycling have been consistent in 1 thing. Always treating the critics with disdain and name calling. You obviously learnt something from your days at USPS.

You're an ex doper turned DS that has done some good in the sport. But some might cast Riis in the same light.

You come on here because you say you have to 'do this crap' but if every team paid $750K for bloodpassport testing you wouldn't be bothered doing this so dont pretend anything different like it is doing fans a favour.

The sport of cycling is still very much under a dark cloud yet you keep hammering on about it being clean.

UCI have not changed, teams are still the same with 1 exception (Bruyneel is gone) doctors are still there working away, performances this year were as suspicious as any year. Boonen, Wiggins, Froome, Contador, Hesjedal to name some.

Hey, I'm all in favor of $750k per team going to blood passport. !00%.

That's the first well thought out and unbiased thing you've ever said on this forum.

Yes, thats a condescending statement about you. Why? Because I do not have respect for those that have already made up their mind before the debate begins. None.

it's not limited to you or sniper or anyone. i just have a disdain for people that assume they are always correct. In any argument.

 

[JV1973]

Oh, and those so called 'cynics' they know what accountability and transparency mean. I'd suggest you study auditing basics. I don't think you know much about auditing, but then again I don't think anyone in cycling does. What needs to be done has been listed many, many times on this forum. But it never happens. Your sport, doesn't even come close. FFS, you are suggesting here, you spend $500K of 'your' money on anti-doping. No, your sponsors do. Your employer. And where is the tranparency in this? Having to take the unconfirmed word of an ex-doper who does have an agenda (albeit business agenda) to push! Comes with a massive pinch of salt. But wait...you a few months back suggested the UCI budget for anti-doping was inadequate and was as low as $100K!!! Care to qualify that type of madness for those of use in the forum who can count without using our fingers and toes?

As for the auditing part...it's funny how you mentioned Greenedge and their little PR act. When EY, PWC or Deloitte do a full financial audit of ANY pro cycling team, and publish all the numbers, then and only then should fans believe in them. Because Michelli Scarponi, the guy your rider beat in the Giro, well, the Italians have said some colourful things about him now haven't they and his financial position? Same goes for your testing internally. Nobody with an IQ over 120 would buy that your internal testing is good enough on word alone. Nobody. Want to know who the forum believes? Ashenden. Want to change the doubt man, show us you are not weak, that you aren't a sheep like well over half of cycling, one who follows the status quo, show us you really do regret doping and get his scientific group to run the numbers fully. Then publish them freely and educate the public. Having Kimmage sit on a bus ain't enough. The fact we have numbers getting thrown out about physiology on the forum proves it. They are all unqualified. Quantify and qualify it for people. Then the doubt will disappear and then you will be remembered for your efforts towards clean cycling. You literally have to go above and beyond what you think is enough because that is how far cycling has fallen.

As for your $500K figure...got a link to some financial documents? Stuff the US govt would see? Stuff the IRS would see? That'd go a way to proving the transparency part. Heck, you were the head of the anti-UCI breakway league. Along with BRUYNEEL!!! Lol Do you not understand how that makes you look? He's practically the devils henchman! And you think you have a right to dictate where dialog goes, least of all on a public forum? That guys who disagree need to be labelled and vilified? As I said, disgusting on your part given your history. Your history does not afford nor grant you such luxuries. Such is a commodity that you have not warranted. You literally need to be the polar opposite of what Lance was. And that requires patience. Actually, your words to the 'cynics' could be labelled cowardly. So are you that type of person JV, who is here to amend for past ills or are you just writing a bad script and getting emotional?

Now here is my opinion: Want to know the only riders on Garmin I think are clean? Ok. Farrar. If he is doping, he's doing something wrong. Haussler, but he is gone. Zabriskie, Danielson and Vande Velde. I can make a case for them. Talansky? Not after what he said about LA...either a brain dead idiot, or a doping apologist, aka doper. Dan Martin...I can't help but shake the idea that if cycling were clean, he'd be winning a lot more. No, I don't think his cousin is clean. Not even close. Hesjedal...Tour placing, I'd buy it, Giro??? Granted I think Scarponi and Basso toned it down compared to 2010 and 2011, but Rodriguez...yeah, need I say anymore? I will...what is your opinion regarding the statements of other former Postal riders who stated to USADA they doped between periond X and Y, but we all know, were killing it afterwards in period Z? You don't have to name anybody. Or if it is easier to answer in a different manner, do you believe everyone fully disclosed the whole truth to USADA regarding their doping? Because some people conveniently appear to have left some periods blank and dope free...results and performances relative to others state otherwise. And we all know the peleton talks non stop...loose lips sink ships. As for your selective ego boosting figures...I call BS on them. Don't believe them for a second. Nothing personal, but the manner they were given and logic behind doing so...ego boosting. Boasting coupled with bashing those who didn't reach your level. I have never heard Hinault of LeMond talk smack about lower level guys like that...but we've heard LA do it. Not classy at all. If you know better than the Conti guys, educate them and the public. Oh but that is why you're here...snap? With a massive dash of uber attitude tucked on as well. If your numbers were clean, you'd have been stating for a long time you were a potential big time winner if racing was clean. I don't recall hearing such words.

I'll even give you the chance to answer another question you bucked. Doing so will clarify your personal claims. Who without dope, at Postal, was the best? It's pretty simple. Because your figures, indicate you, if they are correct. Don't forget this forumists...JV indicated very subtly, he is uber elite and nobody questioned it. Nobody. Lance's figures aren't even close enough to warrant comparison, regardless of whether JV swings it to a dismissive claim about lactate threshold being of more merit. Actually JV, I'll make it easier for you...riding clean, were you better than Lance? Because at 23 Lance never had numbers that high. Few people ever will. Even now in the peloton. I've heard of none that have figures that high. So enlighten us...

One last thing. If you have been dishonest, lied or with held info about doping, or have dopers on your team, then I pray to God they are found, all is revealed and such people are run from the sport for life. May they reap the full fury that Armstrong has faced and will come to face. Because lets face it, if this is the truth, plain as day, then it is on merit worse than Armstrong. At least he still maintains his punch line, albeit it ignorantly. Lumping on the Janus mask is far worse.

And no, I don't personally give a toss, but the hypocrisy and parallels to Armstrong I am seeing here is alarming. Worse, it's being applauded. And no, this doesn't surprise me at all. That man has had a very deep affect on many people.

You should write a book. Oh, wait, you just did.

Again, condescending towards you? Absolutely. Not because I have disdain for you, personally, how could I? i don't know you. But, apparently, you know me quite well. No, no disdain for you, disdain for the "by being an unbending skeptic unwilling to look at anything other than my own thoughts as being truthful, I am somehow being helpful to the sport of cycling"

It's pathetic and self aggrandizing. As was your novel above.

Not a personal attack. A statement of opinion.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Hey, I'm all in favor of $750k per team going to blood passport. !00%.

That's the first well thought out and unbiased thing you've ever said on this forum.

Yes, thats a condescending statement about you. Why? Because I do not have respect for those that have already made up their mind before the debate begins. None.

it's not limited to you or sniper or anyone. i just have a disdain for people that assume they are always correct. In any argument.

Is that the reason http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1073833&postcount=1779

 

[workingclasshero]

You should write a book. Oh, wait, you just did.

the galic ho loves the sound of his fingers tapping the keyboard doesn't he