JV talks, sort of

Page 89 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
ScienceIsCool said:
Mr. Vaughters, I have a question. Do you feel that social media (such as a forum like this one) is an effective tool in promoting a viewpoint and shpaing public perception?

The reason I ask is that there is a pattern to your posting style. Long absence, followed by a flurry of engagement. This is in contrast to a lot of posters who have a more consistent profile. Also, I have noticed that on a few occasions, your presence is preceded by some noteworthy cycling news.
FYI: http://www.irishpeloton.com/2011/03/jonathan-vaughters-pr-battle/
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Galic Ho said:
Here's a better way of framing Ricco. David Millar rode for Saunier Duval in 2007 did he not? Do you really think he didn't or wouldn't have heard a peep about Ricco, Piepopli or Cobbo? Now do you think that came up in discussion at Garmin some time? I do. Perhaps this reasoning explains JV's perspective on Ricco. I can accept that from people who know. I can live with it. What I don't stomach is the journalists who were all over Lance and the way they sunk the boot into Ricco, but not Lance. That is disgusting and absolutely vile. I still remember Mike Tomolaris after Ricco was popped...most disgusting journalist commentary I have ever heard. Yet where are they now? So I do understand to a degree JV even David Millar slating Ricco, but not everyone. If anyone warrants some understand, it's the people who rode with him and knew and lost out because of it.
I heard mail on Saunier that is different to Millar. I did here from a rider there, that he was encouraged, and told to see a doc, but another DS, told him to keep up his platform, it would/was getting better. He was not doping, never touched it. He tested equal to Millar in pre-season testing as a neo.

Then Millar found some <cough, cough> "reserves". Millar got his strength back.

Ricco is tooooo easy to slate. No one would slate a hardcore doper who wins regularing in the peloton, as he is too big to bring down.

Too big to fail.

Is Cark Mavendish, the AIG or Goldmans, of the #too_big_to_fail GFC peloton?

Is Wrad Bigans Merril?

Who is Lehmanns? Ricco or Armstrong?
 
JV, I don't always agree with you, but your continued contributions to this forum are a breath of fresh air. Here's a suggestion: could you persuade some of your riders to post here occasionally as well, answer questions, debate members, etc., the same way you do? It might help break down the mistrust many have for anything riders say. It wouldn't automatically make them credible in the eyes of everyone here, of course. Dopers can lie on a forum as well as anywhere else--Floyd on DPF following his positive was an excellent example of that--but it's easier to give someone the benefit of the doubt when he's speaking directly to you, in a more personal, informal setting, as opposed to hearing his statements in the media. I don't see how their coming here could not help your program in the long run.
 
May 20, 2010
8
0
0
JV1973 said:
6 hours of hard racing would induce hypoxia, which would increase EPO production.... Guess what happens when EPO production is increased? More retics. And actually, I was originally referring to hypoxia from the day before and the TT. What you don't get is that it's not marketing spiel, it's that I do not know. I know that his retic count is very stable and a small increase from morning to afternoon is nothing unusual. That's why I've asked you to go test yourself.

I don't tell my team not to dope. I spend over $500,000 annually to make sure they don't. I set up a truth and reward policy to make sure there is clarity as to what is going on AND I allow any journalist any access they desire.

In addition Ive worked actively with WADA and USADA since 2004 to help improve their testing methods and execution and volunteered my team to try new testing methods.

The 1000 calorie thing is a genuine screw up. I went to Bermuda to go fishing, as I've done for many years. I did Tedx as a favor for my friend and I prepared a slide show. The 1000 calorie thing was just me doing the 15 watts over 6 hours math in my head wrong. I'm admitting I did it wrong. Is there something else?

there is no bump in Ryder's Hb. It falls as the 3 weeks progress. Is it linear? No. I have never witnessed a perfectly linear fall in Hb over 3 weeks. Ever.
Millar shows no plasma increase. the decrease in his performance is the best evidence of his failure to adapt to the stresses. I don't make these judgements in a test tube. they are made in context, judging performance and blood values.

What you're failing to see, is that this is not an area of science that has been exhaustively researched. It is, as Aschenden will tell you, more art than science. It's recognizing patterns from experience.

the statistically worst blood profile I have ever seen was from a rider that this forum constantly refers to as "clean"... Did he dope at the time of his profile blip? No, I doubt it, as his performance was sub par, not suspiciously over par. Context.

End of the day, I cannot convince you. So, I need to give up. There is nothing I can say, show or do that will alter your opinion. Since this is true, can we just not debate and come to the conclusion that our opinions will never be the same?

What you fundamentally underestimate is my earning power outside the world of cycling. It's not marketing spiel because I don't care enough about my position in cycling to be compromised by that crap. When I was a rider, yes, I allowed it to compromise me. That was a BIG mistake. But as one of my closest friends said to me "The biggest financial mistake you ever made in your life was being involved with cycling, as a rider or a manager"

evidence of me not caring? please see my quotes re UCI, re USADA, and actions over the last year. Not the actions of someone covering their ****. Maybe the actions of someone trying to get booted out of the sport!!

That is my best and final argument.

JV
JV
I never saw anything askance with Ryders blood values at the Giro based on what has been published about blood values during stage races and my own knowledge of hematopoiesis.
I do have a question that you may or may not feel comfortable answering.
Have you ever noticed any anomalies in your team that made you suspect someone had "fallen off the wagon" so to speak? If so how did you deal with it and if not how would you deal with it?
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
will10 said:
On that note I'd say make your posts more concise...seriously, half the time if someone posts a huge block of text like you tend to I scroll straight past.
Here I was under the impression you'd blocked me.:)

Big block of text, hmnnnn. When you have a lot to say about a lot of pages, well that is how I post. Few people around here have ever altered their posting style. I also don't operate under the assumption that everyone reads every post in a thread, least of all from a particular forumist. I know I read most of the posts in a particular thread, but that is just me. I also don't block people. Reeks of censorship IMO. Of course if the same point and tactic is used for 2+ pages, or worse 10 pages, like some have been doing, then I have an issue with it and just ignore the posts from said forumist.
 
blackcat said:
I heard mail on Saunier that is different to Millar. I did here from a rider there, that he was encouraged, and told to see a doc, but another DS, told him to keep up his platform, it would/was getting better. He was not doping, never touched it. He tested equal to Millar in pre-season testing as a neo.

Then Millar found some <cough, cough> "reserves". Millar got his strength back.

Ricco is tooooo easy to slate. No one would slate a hardcore doper who wins regularing in the peloton, as he is too big to bring down.

Too big to fail.

Is Cark Mavendish, the AIG or Goldmans, of the #too_big_to_fail GFC peloton?

Is Wrad Bigans Merril?

Who is Lehmanns? Ricco or Armstrong?
The only neo-pro at Saunier Duval in 2007 was Raul Alcoron. Unless you are talking about 2006 when we know that Millar didn't ride for the first 6 months of the season.

Or could it be that you are twisting facts to fit your agenda. Oh yeah, you guys never do that one here:rolleyes:
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
skidmark said:
Okay, next question - when can you have the clinic over for dinner?
Ya - there is only 12 of us :D


Mrs John Murphy said:
The problem is that when you look at i) what cycling fans have been told in the past - after Festina, after Puerto, after Rasmussen etc that cycling was getting cleaner and ii) who is also telling us cycling is getting cleaner, you can understand why there is such a high degree of mistrust from fans.

There are also a lot of fellow-travellers and sell-outs when it comes to anti-doping. Damsgaard is a great example - someone who was held up as a pillar of anti-doping, and he ends up going and working for CSC and Astana. Should we really trust David Millar, a man whose primary interest, is and always have been promoting David Millar. And there are countless others who are now jumping on the anti-doping bandwagon, but whose commitment to it is negligible, but who are doing so because i) it takes the heat off them, ii) it is the popular thing to do, iii) they think it will make them more money, but who will as in 1999, go straight back to the syringe.

You are telling us that cycling is getting cleaner, but we were told that in 1997, 1999, 2006 and we're being told the same thing now.

...<snipped for brevity>
The above is a real good point - particularly from a fans perspective.

But it does not fall on JV to have all the answers, solutions or to be able to point fingers at others.
I often think that here people look at cycling as one big (happy) family where everyone knows everyone's business or that they share some unified approach. The reality is a sport in turmoil, full of mistrust with no leadership.

Add to that the genuine bullying from some (not just Armsrongs mob) and it is difficult to get disclosure and the full picture.
Unfortunately it needs all anti-doping taken out of the hands of the UCI (& the replacing of the boys club).

While I agree that JV (& all other stakeholders) needs to understand the fans perspective - the fans also need to understand his and theirs.
Ultimately, all JV can do is attempt to run a clean team.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
acoggan said:
To what post are you referring?
One from mid 2009. I have time on my hands, but not that much time to go back and look over very old threads for a singular post. I apologised and said I wouldn't discuss it anymore.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,553
0
0
Galic Ho said:
One from mid 2009. I have time on my hands, but not that much time to go back and look over very old threads for a singular post. I apologised and said I wouldn't discuss it anymore.
You made the accusation - I'd say that the onus is on you to back it up.
 
Merckx index said:
JV, I don't always agree with you, but your continued contributions to this forum are a breath of fresh air. Here's a suggestion: could you persuade some of your riders to post here occasionally as well, answer questions, debate members, etc., the same way you do? It might help break down the mistrust many have for anything riders say. It wouldn't automatically make them credible in the eyes of everyone here, of course. Dopers can lie on a forum as well as anywhere else--Floyd on DPF following his positive was an excellent example of that--but it's easier to give someone the benefit of the doubt when he's speaking directly to you, in a more personal, informal setting, as opposed to hearing his statements in the media. I don't see how their coming here could not help your program in the long run.
Oh god, that would be both awesome and a nightmare. I mean, half of these guys can't even tweet in a 140-character limit without inducing facepalms. I'd definitely love to see more riders post here, but (just like any humans) there are a lot of riders who are not the most erudite and patient and cogent folks out there. But (unlike many humans) if they say stupid things it could have bad consequences for them in the public eye, so I'm not sure how many riders would wanna step through that minefield. I'd sure love it if some of them did, though, especially the more outspoken ones. I gotta say that getting stuff straight from the horse's mouth is great, even through they eyes of a skeptic. I'm totally in support of the idea, just not sure how many riders would wanna wade into that.
 
Sep 11, 2012
31
0
0
You are telling us that cycling is getting cleaner, but we were told that in 1997, 1999, 2006 and we're being told the same thing now.
yes we were. But look, there is a diference.

There may still be doping going on in the peleton. Ok. Could be. But we have a team like Garmin. Guys who do everything they possibly can to prove that you can do it without drugs.

You say: Gerolsteiner also talked about fighting doping. Others also did.

Ok. But here is the difference. Today we have riders and managers like JV who start with a strong anti-doping stance. We Have Taylor Phinney who considers painkillers to be performance-enhancing.

Look at Twitter. Which one of the team managers uses it? Like regularly? Here is the hero of this thread - JV. I can remember him agruing with unknown dudes about doping, anti-doping policies. You don't believe him?

Not ok. Which one of the managers talked so widely about his past? What he used, what was the psychological mechanism behind all this? Who proposed solutions? Explained how this system works? Admitted to his mistakes and worked to do something?

In my opinion if we want to watch cycling and have fun from it, we have to have faith in something. In change. And that's optimistic that there are people who wnat to change the sport, the culture.

Or we may say: "we were told that, bla, bla, no more playing this tricks on me, everyone dopes". We may. But what's the point in watching cycling then?
 
Aug 9, 2012
2,223
0
0
Merckx index said:
JV, I don't always agree with you, but your continued contributions to this forum are a breath of fresh air. Here's a suggestion: could you persuade some of your riders to post here occasionally as well, answer questions, debate members, etc., the same way you do? It might help break down the mistrust many have for anything riders say. It wouldn't automatically make them credible in the eyes of everyone here, of course. Dopers can lie on a forum as well as anywhere else--Floyd on DPF following his positive was an excellent example of that--but it's easier to give someone the benefit of the doubt when he's speaking directly to you, in a more personal, informal setting, as opposed to hearing his statements in the media. I don't see how their coming here could not help your program in the long run.
I wonder how a young rider will react to posts from certain members here. It might not get pretty. I don't expect them to handle them selves as well as JV.

I can see only down sides for the rider in question to be honest. It would need to be someone with a strong psyche and an eagerness to engage.

But I would love some anonymous Garmin fanboys in the clinic. Say about 25 of them all singing from the same tune arguing with Sniper and telling Dear Wiggo how clean sky really is.:D
 
Oct 16, 2012
75
0
0
Baldwin said:
But what's the point in watching cycling then?
Don’t make this mistake. Don’t tell us, that we can only watch pro-cycling if we quit being a critical public.

Maintaining criticism is vital for cleaning up. And remember: you need to clean your home frequently, not just only once.
 
Sep 11, 2012
31
0
0
fat_boy_fat said:
Don’t make this mistake. Don’t tell us, that we can only watch pro-cycling if we quit being a critical public.

Maintaining criticism is vital for cleaning up. And remember: you need to clean your home frequently, not just only once.
hey man, why are you quoting it out of context? I didn't say that, you're trying to convince everyone that I did.

Read it once again, nobody says that we have to quit being a critical public.
 
Baldwin said:
yes we were. But look, there is a diference.

There may still be doping going on in the peleton. Ok. Could be. But we have a team like Garmin. Guys who do everything they possibly can to prove that you can do it without drugs.

You say: Gerolsteiner also talked about fighting doping. Others also did.

Ok. But here is the difference. Today we have riders and managers like JV who start with a strong anti-doping stance. We Have Taylor Phinney who considers painkillers to be performance-enhancing.

Look at Twitter. Which one of the team managers uses it? Like regularly? Here is the hero of this thread - JV. I can remember him agruing with unknown dudes about doping, anti-doping policies. You don't believe him?

Not ok. Which one of the managers talked so widely about his past? What he used, what was the psychological mechanism behind all this? Who proposed solutions? Explained how this system works? Admitted to his mistakes and worked to do something?

In my opinion if we want to watch cycling and have fun from it, we have to have faith in something. In change. And that's optimistic that there are people who wnat to change the sport, the culture.

Or we may say: "we were told that, bla, bla, no more playing this tricks on me, everyone dopes". We may. But what's the point in watching cycling then?
The point of watching cycling is that it is the most beautiful sport in the world. Unfortunately it has been rather spoiled in the last few decades (actually since the start of the sport). Being positive only doesn't help that. It is vital for the sport to have critical fans, in fact, it distinguishes cycling from a sport like football where fanboyism is present in such a degree that any kind of change will never be achieved.

With only positive fans, Walsh, Kimmage et al would be without a job, even on a freelance basis. We need people to keep asking questions, to give incentives to the media and the teams.

I agree with you that some hardcore posters in the clinic can be a bit delusional, using arguments like he beat him and him there and then, and him and him were doping so he must be too. I am glad that Bassons and Moncoutie were there and were proving that even clean, good performances were attainable in one of the darkest eras of the sport. For me, it means I can at least believe some achievements and I am not of the opinion that 95% of the peloton dopes, like some are.

I also agree that JV is treated a bit harshly on here sometimes: if he answers questions, he is called out for being here for PR only. If he doesn't, he is keeping omerta intact. In fact, I think many here have fallen victim to a trap we often see when things are not exactly to their liking. It means everything is bad now and everything that is in the system now must be removed before we can start making progress. It is a characteristic of many of the ideologies like communism or Randism that are understandable, but also unattainable. The result though is that they will not approve of any change in current cycling, as they are afraid the change will not be a complete change.

Not without reason, as the fans have been cheated lots of times. However, there is progress. There are some, admittedly not many, current riders calling out fellow riders for not disapproving of doping. This would be impossible ten years ago, there is empirical evidence for this. Many more examples can be given.

Still, in the end we have to doubt every winner, because of the past. Can I believe that Hesjedal won the Giro clean? Possibly. The weird way of distributing his blood values and such makes it harder though.

Also, if the riders of today are really clean, is it their task to provide evidence that they are clean, because their predecessors were not clean? I can see both sides of the coin: they have an obligation to the fans of the sport to prove they are clean. However, we don't blame the current generation of Germans for the 2nd world war either.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
acoggan said:
You made the accusation - I'd say that the onus is on you to back it up.
It would be if I could give a flying f$#k about looking at threads from 2009. I remember what you posted. The only debate here is the reason why you mentioned what you did. You had at least two posts from memory where you went into detail about your stats from your youth. Hence why I said I don't care. Take it or leave it, an apology is what you get for questioning your intent, but not a retraction that you posted your own stats on this site. Lots of people know you posted your own data. VO2max, low 80s right? Around 82 ml/kg sound right? You posted the power numbers else where this year...in the power thread.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
He is a 'victim' in the sense that everyone piles into Ricco. The same with Rasmussen. He is the obvious whipping boy and an easy target - he is annoying, a doper and very stupid.
Some might think that combination is a pretty good reason to pile in!

However, there are lots of annoying, doped and stupid members of the peloton. The only difference is they haven't been caught.
And here I come back again to evidence - firstly, if they haven't been caught, how are they stupid?

Secondly, who gives a **** if they are 'annoying' - lots of innocent people are annoying, lots of crooks are great craic. Ullrich was a party dude. Pantani had charisma coming out of his eyeballs - both were still cheating s***s. Just because Lance was both a cheat and a functioning sociopath doesn't mean one must follow the other.

And finally, and most importantly, without EVIDENCE, this is pure conjecture.

Do you not accept it is possible that Ricco, is, you know, worse than 'the average'? not alone by any means - but not exactly just 'middle of the pack' either?

It is very easy to call out Ricco. Why not call out someone who is richer, more powerful and smarter, but also a doper/enabler. Why not call out Riis, or Brailsford, or Contador?
Again, again, again. Evidence!!! Sticking Brailsford in the middle there is not clever - a 'Clinic' consensus does not Evidence make.

For the record? I loathe Riis with a passion only surpassed by Bruyneel, and maybe Vinik... I loathe him as much as I loath Armstrong. He should be drummed out of the sport.

Contador saddens me, but also angers me. In my view the Puerto links (which a spanish court disgustingly weedled him out of), then the Clen bust is two strikes - and really should mean life ban. I have zero trust in his 2012 Vuelta. (I have little trust in the Vuelta full stop)

On the other hand, as a rider he is undeniably talented and exciting to watch - I suspect even clean Berti is probably a top tier rider - so it makes me angry to be 'robbed' of enjoying him because's he's a cheat.

As for Brailsford - I'm sorry, there simply IS NOT THE EVIDENCE that there is on the other two - but let me equally clear - if any ever genuinely comes to light, get him the f*** out of the sport, and do it with plenty of kicks to the balls. and if people want to advance the cause of even greater anti-doping measures to catch him if he's guilty - I'm all ears, ready to join.

Because, believe it or not, I've no skin in that game; on a very serious level, I don't give a toss if Sky get booted - I just get tired of witch-hunts based more on animus than evidence. And some of the anti-sky and anti-millar and anti-JV stuff seems more informed by pure animus.

When Ricco got popped, Frodo Cavendish said that he hoped that Ricco was raped in jail,
I hate cheats, but I draw the line at that, personally - Cav has a colourful mouth on him when he gets started.

I do agree there are some worrying signs that Berti is getting the 'Patron' treatment - whatever Wiggins sins, both sporting and personal, i find it hard not to conclude that Berti's have disturbing LA like qualities - the 'friendly' spanish authorities, the drug bust all but wished away. But I can only reiterate, Berti has been popped, and is up to his neck in Puerto - Wiggins has never popped (yet) and I'm not aware of his being cited in any court cases - though I stand happy to be corrected...
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
GreggGermer said:
Thanks Greg for the balanced articles and posts. I think your 5 points for improvements are spot on. It's not rocket science but rather few people seem to conclude & go on record similarly. I have copied them below for the broader Clinic audience.

I am interested to hear whether you see anti doping control move away from UCI or remain as is, as you did not list this.

"1) Doping Suspensions start at 4 years and can be adjusted as necessary given the level of deceit and circumstance. Longer bans are needed because the long-term benefits of doping, be it through changes in body type, muscle fibers or through access to better teams and support give doped riders an advantage. Just look at the easy return of several “reformed” dopers. They saw little negative consequence to their actions.

2) Financial penalties imposed against riders. I know this one has been tried before by the UCI, but it needs to happen again, and with enforceability. The penalty should be twice what your last salary was, plus prize money with all money paid into an anti-doping trust that uses the money to directly pay for more testing. This way dopers help catch dopers

3) Points and Financial Penalties for Teams. Teams need to hold some more responsibility for their riders. Why? Because at the moment teams have limited repercussion from a positive (yes they have some sponsor liability, but overall, no sporting liability). Teams should be expected to pay a fine, a fixed amount of cost, plus a “per-UCI point” gained fine; paid toward the anti-doping trust. They should also be docked all the points of the rider, plus a set amount of points to be carried over a two year period. This gives the teams more incentive to be more self-policing in their hiring and managing of riders. (also, a mechanism should be put in place for teams to out someone who is doping within the team and allows them to suffer less liability than a direct positive).

4) If you have been caught doping you can not work in any respect with cycling teams. We need to close the door to dopers and their continued presence. Riders like Andy Schleck keep repeating that it’s all in the past, but all the dopers of past are still in the sport, they just aren’t racing. They are managing teams like Rijs, directing professional development teams like Adriano Baffi, providing sprint and technical consulting like Erik Zabel, and building bike brands like Johan Museeuw. I could keep going but the list of ex-dopers in the sport would be a several part series. Sorry, but the doping past of cycling is not gone from the sport, it’s managing it.

5) More controls, at all levels of the sport. There needs to be more doping controls of the sport at all levels from the elite-amatuer (guys who are on the cusp of joining the professional ranks) to the World Tour. Riders need to be subject to more random out of competition tests, at non-specified times and true non-biased targeted testing. This is probably the hardest to do as the logistics of doing more testing and the cost would be rather difficult to achieve, but it will send a signal to riders that the net just become that much harder to slip past."
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Baldwin said:
yes we were. But look, there is a diference.

There may still be doping going on in the peleton. Ok. Could be. But we have a team like Garmin. Guys who do everything they possibly can to prove that you can do it without drugs.
Define everything? JV says lab error made Ryder test high. I asked to see corroborating evidence. *crickets*

JV says Millar is a "non-GT rider", with Hgb going UP in a GT - Captaintbag asks to see Zabriskie's blood profile as corroborating evidence of another "non-GT" rider. *crickets*

I ask to see a domestique's blood profile from a GT. *crickets*

No power files from any of these riders.

Baldwin said:
You say: Gerolsteiner also talked about fighting doping. Others also did.

Ok. But here is the difference. Today we have riders and managers like JV who start with a strong anti-doping stance. We Have Taylor Phinney who considers painkillers to be performance-enhancing.
JV started with a pro-doping stance, then went to an anti-doping team and kept doping. Then quit the sport.

At a guess, he now gets paid more as a manager than he ever did as a rider.

The only way he was going to get that gig with Ellis is if he had a truly unique USP. Rock racing had already done the "hire ex-dopers" schtick, so JV added the "we are clean" schtick, and convinced Ellis to part with the dough.

Find a clean rider and put them in charge of the team. Have JV consult to catch the riders doping and give him a bonus if he manages to. His role has dire conflict of interest right now. He can't advertise too much his team is clean, or the peloton will turn on him. He can't out any riders on his team after 12 months coz he looks stupid then.

Fact is, Danielson legend goes he was doping at a Garmin training camp. Showed up in tests. JV didn't fire him. Told him to tone it down.


Baldwin said:
Look at Twitter. Which one of the team managers uses it? Like regularly? Here is the hero of this thread - JV. I can remember him agruing with unknown dudes about doping, anti-doping policies. You don't believe him?
And blocking them when they don't agree with him. Big deal.

Here's another way to look at Twitter use: http://www.irishpeloton.com/2011/03/jonathan-vaughters-pr-battle/

Baldwin said:
Not ok. Which one of the managers talked so widely about his past? What he used, what was the psychological mechanism behind all this? Who proposed solutions? Explained how this system works? Admitted to his mistakes and worked to do something?
I think it went the other way around:
doped
left for a clean team for better money
kept doping
quit
formed a new team
proclaimed they were clean
got subpeona'd to the Grand Jury (?)
won a GT with the clean team
admitted his doping in WSJ
outed his riders on CN forums
submitted an affidavit full of holes and half-truths regarding his own doping

Baldwin said:
In my opinion if we want to watch cycling and have fun from it, we have to have faith in something. In change. And that's optimistic that there are people who want to change the sport, the culture.

Or we may say: "we were told that, bla, bla, no more playing this tricks on me, everyone dopes". We may. But what's the point in watching cycling then?
Haters. Bitter and jealous ex-team mate. 500 tests. Millions for cancer research.

Now we can add to the list: WHY WATCH THE SPORT IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CLEAN(ER)?

Does this sound like someone whose primary concern is a clean sport?

"The best PR for us right now is to do well in the race."
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,553
0
0
Galic Ho said:
It would be if I could give a flying f$#k about looking at threads from 2009. I remember what you posted. The only debate here is the reason why you mentioned what you did. You had at least two posts from memory where you went into detail about your stats from your youth. Hence why I said I don't care. Take it or leave it, an apology is what you get for questioning your intent, but not a retraction that you posted your own stats on this site. Lots of people know you posted your own data. VO2max, low 80s right? Around 82 ml/kg sound right? You posted the power numbers else where this year...in the power thread.
Context is everything, ho.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Define everything? JV says lab error made Ryder test high. I asked to see corroborating evidence. *crickets*

JV says Millar is a "non-GT rider", with Hgb going UP in a GT - Captaintbag asks to see Zabriskie's blood profile as corroborating evidence of another "non-GT" rider. *crickets*

I ask to see a domestique's blood profile from a GT. *crickets*

No power files from any of these riders.



JV started with a pro-doping stance, then went to an anti-doping team and kept doping. Then quit the sport.

At a guess, he now gets paid more as a manager than he ever did as a rider.

The only way he was going to get that gig with Ellis is if he had a truly unique USP. Rock racing had already done the "hire ex-dopers" schtick, so JV added the "we are clean" schtick, and convinced Ellis to part with the dough.

Find a clean rider and put them in charge of the team. Have JV consult to catch the riders doping and give him a bonus if he manages to. His role has dire conflict of interest right now. He can't advertise too much his team is clean, or the peloton will turn on him. He can't out any riders on his team after 12 months coz he looks stupid then.

Fact is, Danielson legend goes he was doping at a Garmin training camp. Showed up in tests. JV didn't fire him. Told him to tone it down.




And blocking them when they don't agree with him. Big deal.

Here's another way to look at Twitter use: http://www.irishpeloton.com/2011/03/jonathan-vaughters-pr-battle/



I think it went the other way around:
doped
left for a clean team for better money
kept doping
quit
formed a new team
proclaimed they were clean
got subpeona'd to the Grand Jury (?)
won a GT with the clean team
admitted his doping in WSJ
outed his riders on CN forums
submitted an affidavit full of holes and half-truths regarding his own doping



Haters. Bitter and jealous ex-team mate. 500 tests. Millions for cancer research.

Now we can add to the list: WHY WATCH THE SPORT IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CLEAN(ER)?

Does this sound like someone whose primary concern is a clean sport?

"The best PR for us right now is to do well in the race."
Please call Francesca Rossi for corroborating evidence. I don't have any. I asked her the same question.

to the rest: What exactly would you like to see me do Mr. Wiggo?

I am all ears.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Define everything? JV says lab error made Ryder test high. I asked to see corroborating evidence. *crickets*

JV says Millar is a "non-GT rider", with Hgb going UP in a GT - Captaintbag asks to see Zabriskie's blood profile as corroborating evidence of another "non-GT" rider. *crickets*

I ask to see a domestique's blood profile from a GT. *crickets*

No power files from any of these riders.



JV started with a pro-doping stance, then went to an anti-doping team and kept doping. Then quit the sport.

At a guess, he now gets paid more as a manager than he ever did as a rider.

The only way he was going to get that gig with Ellis is if he had a truly unique USP. Rock racing had already done the "hire ex-dopers" schtick, so JV added the "we are clean" schtick, and convinced Ellis to part with the dough.

Find a clean rider and put them in charge of the team. Have JV consult to catch the riders doping and give him a bonus if he manages to. His role has dire conflict of interest right now. He can't advertise too much his team is clean, or the peloton will turn on him. He can't out any riders on his team after 12 months coz he looks stupid then.

Fact is, Danielson legend goes he was doping at a Garmin training camp. Showed up in tests. JV didn't fire him. Told him to tone it down.




And blocking them when they don't agree with him. Big deal.

Here's another way to look at Twitter use: http://www.irishpeloton.com/2011/03/jonathan-vaughters-pr-battle/



I think it went the other way around:
doped
left for a clean team for better money
kept doping
quit
formed a new team
proclaimed they were clean
got subpeona'd to the Grand Jury (?)
won a GT with the clean team
admitted his doping in WSJ
outed his riders on CN forums
submitted an affidavit full of holes and half-truths regarding his own doping



Haters. Bitter and jealous ex-team mate. 500 tests. Millions for cancer research.

Now we can add to the list: WHY WATCH THE SPORT IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CLEAN(ER)?

Does this sound like someone whose primary concern is a clean sport?

"The best PR for us right now is to do well in the race."

Btw - I am happy to give profiles and other info to experts. Not a pre-decided, anonymous, angry dude on a forum. Sorry, its not *crickets*, its "NO"...

When you show the ability to be objective and have expertise, I'm happy to be as transparent as you want. But you exhibit neither.

Lastly, you resort to "legends" pretty quickly. Why? Because tantalizing stories are more fun to you that reality. Me too. that's why I love Star Wars.

JV
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Define everything? JV says lab error made Ryder test high. I asked to see corroborating evidence. *crickets*

JV says Millar is a "non-GT rider", with Hgb going UP in a GT - Captaintbag asks to see Zabriskie's blood profile as corroborating evidence of another "non-GT" rider. *crickets*

I ask to see a domestique's blood profile from a GT. *crickets*

No power files from any of these riders.



JV started with a pro-doping stance, then went to an anti-doping team and kept doping. Then quit the sport.

At a guess, he now gets paid more as a manager than he ever did as a rider.

The only way he was going to get that gig with Ellis is if he had a truly unique USP. Rock racing had already done the "hire ex-dopers" schtick, so JV added the "we are clean" schtick, and convinced Ellis to part with the dough.

Find a clean rider and put them in charge of the team. Have JV consult to catch the riders doping and give him a bonus if he manages to. His role has dire conflict of interest right now. He can't advertise too much his team is clean, or the peloton will turn on him. He can't out any riders on his team after 12 months coz he looks stupid then.

Fact is, Danielson legend goes he was doping at a Garmin training camp. Showed up in tests. JV didn't fire him. Told him to tone it down.




And blocking them when they don't agree with him. Big deal.

Here's another way to look at Twitter use: http://www.irishpeloton.com/2011/03/jonathan-vaughters-pr-battle/



I think it went the other way around:
doped
left for a clean team for better money
kept doping
quit
formed a new team
proclaimed they were clean
got subpeona'd to the Grand Jury (?)
won a GT with the clean team
admitted his doping in WSJ
outed his riders on CN forums
submitted an affidavit full of holes and half-truths regarding his own doping



Haters. Bitter and jealous ex-team mate. 500 tests. Millions for cancer research.

Now we can add to the list: WHY WATCH THE SPORT IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CLEAN(ER)?

Does this sound like someone whose primary concern is a clean sport?

"The best PR for us right now is to do well in the race."

Oh wait! one more fallacy in your drivel:

Neither myself nor any member of my team have ever been subpoenaed. Please check your facts.

JV
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
42x16ss The Clinic 8

ASK THE COMMUNITY