JV talks, sort of

Page 91 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
GJB123 said:
He has been very clear on that. You expect him to pull the pin from the grenade and lovingly blow himself and his team up so you get the feeling he is indeed fighting the good fight. Okay, he is dead after that and can do zilch for cleaner cycling anymore, but he keeps the likes of you happy. It doesn't help cycling one little bit, he would just be the next dead hero/martyr, but you would be a happy chappy though.

I have stated before that I think he is seeking a slow revolution and picking his battles, he knows he can win or he knows he can afford to lose them without losing the war. That means he will have to be overly diplomatic while biding his time and sometimes not provide public support for those he doe support (e.g. Landis) or say nice things about people he might guess are not so nice at all (e.g. Armstrong in the past, Contador, Riis, Sky, McQuaid, etc.).

In other words he might be fighting the same battle you want to see fought (make no mistake you are in no way in the front line of that battle, no matter how much you like to think you are), but he fights it in a way you do not approve of. Now, I might be proven wrong in the future, but I feel confident enough that cycling needs more JV's right now than a load of self-proclaimed martyrs pulling the pin on a grenade for no use at all.

Regards
GJ
Well articulated. I subscribe, and I hope. Sometimes it gets hard to see the trees through the forest. thanks.
 
sniper said:
don't disagree.

but it's JV's and Millar's proactive defence of Sky (i.e. even when not asked) that I find troublesome.

Also, I'm not only judging JV's words from a PR perspective.
From a PR perspective they are clever and comprehensible, I no doubt agree with you.
I'm also judging them in terms of truthfulness.
They don't sound very truthful when it comes to Sky in particular and clean cycling in general.
While he can say that crap in public interviews, on here in the Clinic we should be allowed to expect a bit more openness. It's his choice to come on here, not mine. On here, he should be held to Clinic-standards, which are a bit more exigent than your average newspaper interview.
Are you really that naive? :eek: :rolleyes:

Come on, no, he can't be open on a forum. Did you see what happened when he outed DZ, CvV and TD? Did you see what happened in Dutch media when he outed Dekker yesterday? He is not anonymous and so yes he needs to choose his words carefully and needs to pick his battles carefully. Instead of criticizing him for that, you need to criticize the state of cycling, the omerta, libel laws around the world and the UCI for the fact that he can't be that open without losing his war altogether. The sooner you start realizing that, the more you will appreciate what he is saying on here.

Regards
GJ
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
It
In simple terms - Ricco is no worse than anyone else in the peloton when it comes to doping. However, his personality and lack of power makes him easier for the pro-peloton to abuse, than someone like Contador, Brailsford etc.

It is that the peloton displays with regard to Ricco the kind of pile on mentality that you'd expect in school yard bullying - find the weakest person in the group and pile on and ignore the others.
took the words right outta my mouth.

How is he different to Cark Mavendish?

Mavendish, is 2008 GFC AIG too big too fail now.

But how many Italians and Spaniards hate Frodo's guts? Cos he hangs on up HC climbs, and even cat 2 cols, then gets back on, and wins sprints in big races, important victories off others like Farrar, in the Giro. And tour!!!

How is Ricco fundamentally different to Mavendish. He aint. And Frodo is just as an abrasive personality in the peloton too, I imagine much more so, for the non anglophiles, even tho he lives in Italy.

Plays a much smarter political game tho.

But Ricco was funny when he gives himself a nickname, and talks about himself.

Ricco transcends the third person. And we know the third person is reserved for actors and sports stars. Ricco can transcend the third person. Gotta respect someone like this.

He is too foolish to even understand how foolish he is. But funnier for it.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
My view is that JV's anger ought to be more directed at those who cause him to be mistrusted than the people who don't trust him.
very well put.

Same with wiggo and why his recent outburst against critics was completely misplaced imo.
And the funny thing is that wiggo did in fact understand back in 2007/8, when he was still critical of dopers and could understand the general scepticism towards cycling. At some point wiggo mysteriously ceased to understand and started ranting.

Now even Millar comes out in defence of Wiggo's outburst:
"Why the **** should Brad be empathetic to the critics. He spent most of his career thinking that winning the Tour de France was a dream that would never happen because you have to dope. And then the last four years the sport has changed. Basically he got to where he is now through hard work and sacrifice. So when he wins the Tour and people doubt him? No wonder he's angry. He's thinking: '**** you – you haven't worked like I did. How dare you be on your phone in a café critiquing me?'

"Brad had every right to lash out. It's what any clean guy would do.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/nov/05/david-millar-cycling
big eyebrow-raising here. wasn't Wiggo also clean in 2007/8 when he spoke completely differently about PEDs and the critics?

And JV shows much of the same characteristics, i.e. attacking the critics by using gratuite oneliners such as 'you just hate cycling',or 'you've already made up your mind so I don't talk to you', to name just two.
Doesn't spell much good for Garmin's credibility, imo.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
GJB123 said:
Are you really that naive? :eek: :rolleyes:

Come on, no, he can't be open on a forum. Did you see what happened when he outed DZ, CvV and TD? Did you see what happened in Dutch media when he outed Dekker yesterday? He is not anonymous and so yes he needs to choose his words carefully and needs to pick his battles carefully. Instead of criticizing him for that, you need to criticize the state of cycling, the omerta, libel laws around the world and the UCI for the fact that he can't be that open without losing his war altogether. The sooner you start realizing that, the more you will appreciate what he is saying on here.

Regards
GJ
Still doesn't explain why he and Millar proactively, voluntarily climb into the top of the tree to scream to the world how clean Sky are.
If Sky are actually dirty, is it in clean-Garmin's favor that the whole world thinks Sky are clean? Because that is what JV and Millar are trying to accomplish. Why?
They could just shut up about Sky.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
blackcat said:
Brad had every right to lash out. It's what any clean guy would do.

#Socratic_method_fail
Yes, but according to Millar, don't forget Contador's consistency is a sign of cleanliness.

So remember, angry, consistent riders are clean riders as approved by Rev Millar.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
sniper said:
Still doesn't explain why he and Millar proactively, voluntarily climb into the top of the tree to scream to the world how clean Sky are.
If Sky are actually dirty, is it in clean-Garmin's favor that the whole world thinks Sky are clean? Because that is what JV and Millar are trying to accomplish. Why?
They could just shut up about Sky.
Because Millar likes being on TV and in the media and the centre of attention. Because he's a self-promoting attention *****?
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
sniper said:
Now even Millar comes out in defence of Wiggo's outburst:
big eyebrow-raising here. wasn't Wiggo also clean in 2007/8 when he spoke completely differently about PEDs and the critics?

And JV shows much of the same characteristics, i.e. attacking the critics by using gratuite oneliners such as 'you just hate cycling',or 'you've already made up your mind so I don't talk to you', to name just two.
Doesn't spell much good for Garmin's credibility, imo.
clean by the peloton's standards. (ergo, cleaner but ok by the norms)

You dont just pull the killswitch one day, and say "root this, lets win the Tour and lets dope". It is a big hurdle that one. That is just not plausible. He was clean by the standards of the peloton. But to think anyone inside GB Cycling is on bread and water, yagottabefugginkiddinme. (shout out to CaptainBag and BTHB)

If you have not noticed, English speakers get a much easier time in the peloton regarding da dope. But with Tygart and StrongArm, things might have had a significant and material, irreversible shift. No one is gonna give the benefit of the doubt to the anglophones. Thanx Prance.

No more lbw
 
sniper said:
Still doesn't explain why he and Millar proactively, voluntarily climb into the top of the tree to scream to the world how clean Sky are.
That is a bit of a hyperbole, isn't it. You get asked a question and you give an answer. I have already explained why it is plausible for them to keep schtumm about it but they cannot just day "no comment" nor can they say "we think they are doped to the gills", because that would get them in a **** storm. They look at the numbers and feel that it could be achieved clean, so that's what they say. Are they playing PR games? You bet, they are. And so should they do. You need to pick your battles and for them it is not as easy for you in the comfort of a nickname on a forum somewhere to be all judgemental and righteous about it. You have it easy, remember that.

If Sky are actually dirty, is it in clean-Garmin's favor that the whole world thinks Sky are clean? Because that is what JV and Millar are trying to accomplish. Why?
They could just shut up about Sky.
Explain why it would be in their favor to go around saying Sky is dirty without a shred of proof? I assume we are in agreement that they need to say something because saying nothing can be as telling and if they say no comment you would probably be on his case for him being part of omerta. You see, f*cked if he does, f*cked if he doesn't. You are always on riders' cases of they play the ignorant card or no comment card.

So he does the smartest thing he can do without proof and that he saying he believes they are clean and live to fight another day, should that be necessary. Is that how I would like to see it? No, it isn't but I am a realist so I accept it for what it is.

Regards
GJ
 
Jan 11, 2010
12,582
0
0
GJB123 said:
Are you really that naive? :eek: :rolleyes:

Come on, no, he can't be open on a forum. Did you see what happened when he outed DZ, CvV and TD? Did you see what happened in Dutch media when he outed Dekker yesterday? He is not anonymous and so yes he needs to choose his words carefully and needs to pick his battles carefully. Instead of criticizing him for that, you need to criticize the state of cycling, the omerta, libel laws around the world and the UCI for the fact that he can't be that open without losing his war altogether. The sooner you start realizing that, the more you will appreciate what he is saying on here.

Regards
GJ
What did he say that could jeopardize his own team? Apart from the stuff that his team members had already shared with USADA, and was going to come out anyway?

I admire JV's frankness, but come on, he's not some kind of martyr. And he doesn't pretend to be.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
sniper said:
goodness me. He "took the opportunity afterwards" to explicitly state he thinks Wiggo is clean. He wasn't even asked!. He proactively comes out in defence of Sky.

Please, GJB123, tell me why?
You'll agree with me that it smells like gratuite PR, rather than something he truly believes. I think JV senses that Sky are onto something, yet his and Millar's proactive defence of Sky suggest they actually don't care too much that Sky might be doping.

If Garmin were clean and if JV's intentions were noble, you'd expect them to be much tougher on Sky, especially after the Leinders debacle.
But instead, they're more than happy to defend Sky and publicly and proactively vouch for their cleanliness.

Try and explain that.
If I was getting cheated out of results, I would be diplomatic, but leave few questions about what I thought. So perhaps they might not think they are getting cheated. It does not necessarily mean Sky are on gluten free bread and water.

Too many mealy mouthed responses that the tests are working, the authorities are weeding out the cheaters, only a few bad apples, the sport is getting cleaner...

name you talking point.
 
theyoungest said:
What did he say that could jeopardize his own team? Apart from the stuff that his team members had already shared with USADA, and was going to come out anyway?

I admire JV's frankness, but come on, he's not some kind of martyr. And he doesn't pretend to be.
I think you have totally misunderstood what I was saying.

Where did I say I think he is a martyr? Quite the opposite, I don't want him to be a martyr because that would mean he is out of cycling, while I think we need more people like him not less. I don't think he said anything to jeopardize his team. Quite the opposite. He has been very economical with his words and has been very circumspect about making bold statements so as to safeguard his own and his team's interests. Quite justifiably so.

He is been quite clear that sometimes he has to mind his words for a variety of reasons. because the powers that be at the UCO wouldn't like him to be more outspoken (remember Verbruggen saying he can have anybody test positive), because of sponsors walking away, because he might p!ss off someone like LA (one of the reasons he was quiet about Landis).
 
The irony, the irony.

It is funny how the core critical posters of JV, Garmin, Millar etc accuse them of PR spin but they themselves are quite happy to twist facts, twist statements, misquote, take things out of context and make things up all in the name of their agenda. If that is not PR spin, then I don't know what is.

They are no better than those they criticise but boy do they like to feel all entitled and righteous.
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
Well done JV for taking the lead via AIGCP on pushing that the teams fund an independent doping agency directly.

“I think (UCI’s) Francesca Rossi’s and Mario Zorzoli’s work has been excellent. My desire is that you should take those components, people like Rossi and Zorzoli, and separate them out from (the UCI),” added Vaughters. “They shouldn’t be under the same roof.”

Vaughters wants to see that group moved to a different office, funded directly by teams and race organizers, with WADA having the ultimate authority and auditory power.

The 18 first-division teams each pay 120,000 Swiss francs annually to the UCI for its anti-doping system. Vaughters said that teams could fund the new group directly.

“(It would be) a separate company, the ultimate executive control is with WADA, but with the same execution and process that the UCI has now. It’s the case of not wanting to throw the baby out with the bathwater, because there are some excellent people working at the UCI on the biological passport.”


http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/11/news/vaughters-calls-for-uci-to-split-with-its-anti-doping-division-suggests-teams-fund-their-own-wada-managed-program_263968
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
I'm not sure about Rossi either.
She called the "lab error" on Hesjedal's data, but couldn't corroborate it.
Convenient.
 
blackcat said:
the guy came 11th in the Dauphine prologue that year. Ex-jnr world tt'er, Basically a bottom age too when he won it, cos a December birthdate.

Beat Hushovd by a coupla secs, then Thor wins the prologue in the Tour, the one where it was just an up an back, think it was only 5km. Or I might be mixing up the DL prologue, with the TdF prologue. Also a material amount of time, ahead of Wiggins. In a prologue. When Wiggins was hitting this distance for his objectives. Think DZ was second, George third, who the heck won, the memory is failing this. Could not have been Vino could it. It may have.

All this comes off memory JV. So, no, I think most guys who read my posts, know I can reel off esoterica re:results from the period 02-09, off by memory. Some like Libertine Seguros, will correct me if I am wrong, or conflate a rider, or detail. But dont follow the results page on CN now, nor the sport really. Definitely not a CQ watcher.

So, might wish to ask the forum at large, if I am making up facts to fit my agenda. Lend it over to others to decide this. I am confident others will answer in my favour.
No you are correct I checked the facts but I too was also correct in that the season in question was 2006. So the training camp you mention would be when Millar had just been sat on the sidelines for 18 months with another 6 months of suspension to serve.

I hardly doubt Millar was in tip-top condition at that time and when he came back improved as you suggest, that was actually 6 months later at the Tour not a few weeks or months later. Millar was of course focused on being in condition at the Tour, not the pre-season training jaunt when he knew he wasn't racing for another six months.

Once again another example of selective fact usage to push the agenda. Of course if nobody checks, then it all looks great for you. Too bad I know how you guys actually operate in twisting facts.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
pmcg76 said:
No you are correct I checked the facts but I too was also correct in that the season in question was 2006. So the training camp you mention would be when Millar had just been sat on the sidelines for 18 months with another 6 months of suspension to serve.

I hardly doubt Millar was in tip-top condition at that time and when he came back improved as you suggest, that was actually 6 months later at the Tour not a few weeks or months later. Millar was of course focused on being in condition at the Tour, not the pre-season training jaunt when he knew he wasn't racing for another six months.

Once again another example of selective fact usage to push the agenda. Of course if nobody checks, then it all looks great for you. Too bad I know how you guys actually operate in twisting facts.
well. that is fair enough. I had mail. It could be incorrect. Yes, I have an agenda.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
I think you have completely misunderstood my point to the point.

In simple terms - Ricco is no worse than anyone else in the peloton when it comes to doping.
So the answer to my question is, no, you don't accept that Ricco is not just middle of the pack when it comes to doping.

Any evidence?
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
martinvickers said:
So the answer to my question is, no, you don't accept that Ricco is not just middle of the pack when it comes to doping.

Any evidence?
Puerto files, USADA evidence, Festina affair, Voet's evidence, Polti evidence, the Jalabert evidence, Humaplasma, Joe Papp's evidence... and probably every other doping affair that has emerged has shown that Ricco is not on the outer reaches of doping.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
martinvickers said:
So the answer to my question is, no, you don't accept that Ricco is not just middle of the pack when it comes to doping.

Any evidence?
oh, I dont think he meant that. It is plainly obvious Ricco will use everything under the sun.

We are on the same field, that Ricco is not worse than other riders who are still pursuing an edge. Say, Cark Mavendish. Shlank Freck. etc. They charge big time, to win, with no conscience, and regret.

But compare Ricco to say, Dan Martin, well, he has it (doping regimen) over in spades on a comparible grimpeur in the peloton.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
blackcat said:
oh, I dont think he meant that. It is plainly obvious Ricco will use everything under the sun.

We are on the same field, that Ricco is not worse than other riders who are still pursuing an edge. Say, Cark Mavendish. Shlank Freck. etc. They charge big time, to win, with no conscience, and regret.

But compare Ricco to say, Dan Martin, well, he has it (doping regimen) over in spades on a comparible grimpeur in the peloton.
You do know spoonerising a name won't protect you from a libel suit, yes?

Hard to ignore the fact both Ricco and Franck have popped, and Cavendish never has, to my knowledge.

It's that merging of known fact and mere accusation drives somebody doollaly.

As for Dan, well being Stephen Roche's nephew can't be easy in these sort of debates...
 
Jan 11, 2010
12,582
0
0
GJB123 said:
I think you have totally misunderstood what I was saying.
This is never a good opening for a discussion.

Where did I say I think he is a martyr? Quite the opposite, I don't want him to be a martyr because that would mean he is out of cycling, while I think we need more people like him not less. I don't think he said anything to jeopardize his team. Quite the opposite. He has been very economical with his words and has been very circumspect about making bold statements so as to safeguard his own and his team's interests. Quite justifiably so.
So we agree about that.

He is been quite clear that sometimes he has to mind his words for a variety of reasons. because the powers that be at the UCO wouldn't like him to be more outspoken (remember Verbruggen saying he can have anybody test positive), because of sponsors walking away, because he might p!ss off someone like LA (one of the reasons he was quiet about Landis).
And this is where we disagree. But since it's a discussion about someone else's intentions, it's rather pointless.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
not some nice hgh androgens going thru that forehead. They could be natural, endogenous. The pituitary gland could be spurting growth hormone like an oil geyser outside riyadh. I would go see my endocrinologist. could be a native acromegaly. thats dangerous.

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

ASK THE COMMUNITY