JV talks, sort of

[Fortyninefourteen]

Try this on for size, in early 1996 I was tested at University of Pamplona. Vo2 max was 91ml/kg, threshold was 6w/kg, max power was 7.5 w/kg... i should have been kicking ***, right? I went to Vuelta Pays Basque that year. If I made a selection of 60 guys on a 2nd category climb, I was ecstatic! I would sit on 80th wheel, all day, and just suffer. I didn't even know what was going on in the race, I was just a spectator on wheels, with my heart rate at 180. It was ridiculous.

Was this scenario all a matter of the level of doping at the time, or were there other factors?
With the numbers you put out at testing, just being able to hang on sounds like other things were afoot.....

 

[JV1973]

We need to wait for the Tour to see what he will be. He's a bit older now and won't pop into form like in 2007. But, your point is valid.

I have no idea re Contador in 2009-2010. I don't have enough baseline information to say one way or another.

With Wiggo, I have baseline info, so I can argue. But I can't do that with Contador.

well, I do have some testing info from his neo pro years. Which was very, very impressive.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

We are back to 1999. Just you wait!

Doping and anti-doping evolve.
There is a more robust system since then, eg: no EPO test in 99, people only scared of cops.

Most new products will flag up through traditional tests or set off alarms on the BP. But it's here the Dodgy Docs like Ferrari etc earned their corn as they set about finding a way to get around this. I am hoping there are less Docs like that around, the old guard are retired (or close to it) so it depends on if there are new people to take their place. To be fair the risk reward for these people has changed a lot in the last 10 years.

As for the riders, it's like anything else - a system is in place, there is a period of hesitation and then the system will be tested, weak points found and abused.
Things are a lot more difficult for dopers then back in 99 - but the sports biggest difficulty is that it's the same idiots in charge, and they refuse to fund it adequately or allow it be proactive.

 

[sniper]

We need to wait for the Tour to see what he will be. He's a bit older now and won't pop into form like in 2007. But, your point is valid.

I have no idea re Contador in 2009-2010. I don't have enough baseline information to say one way or another.

With Wiggo, I have baseline info, so I can argue. But I can't do that with Contador.

you wisely admit that you don't know, yet you're stating that it's all clean(er).
doesn't add up.

 

[sublimit]

the JV disclaimer after spouting what you know is BS.
What did they need Leinders for? You're really asking us to list all the dodgy stuff, results, staff-members, evasive answers, etc.? To pretend Sky doesn't stink. Wow. So it's all down to the budget, clever recruitment, marginal gains? A couple of Brits with hardly any tradition in cycling re-inventing the wheel? Head in the sand stuff.

We have a live one here folks.

 

[JV1973]

You should talk to Michael Boogerd man, you could establish a support group. Do you know what Edwig van Hooydonk was capable of? He was quite the one of a generation.
It should, the clean cycling guru told us

Where did JV get Chris numbers from?
Oh lala, that is a nice question.

Guess Conti just got lazy.

I have my spies and sources re Froome.

Evil. remember, evil.

 

[webvan]

This whole thread is becoming appalling...I can't understand how JV can put up with some of the crazy "burn the witch" zealots here who have no leg to stand on other than their hatred for those who win. Oh and to be perfectly clear I called Armstrong on the day of the '99 Prologue.

To me, and to anyone who follows cycling seriously without any bias, the Sky situation is very reminiscent of the La Vie Claire team in 85/86, biggest budget, best talent, you get 4 in the TOP 8 at the TDF and 5 in the TOP 12 (without looking it up). Yes I could be wrong, but how anyone can say with no hesitation that Sky are cheating is beyond me, honestly.

Having said that I'm worried to read that JV thinks the structures aren't in place to prevent an EPO 2.0 situation, that needs to change.

 

[JV1973]

the JV disclaimer after spouting what you know is BS.
What did they need Leinders for? You're really asking us to list all the dodgy stuff, results, staff-members, evasive answers, etc.? To pretend Sky doesn't stink. Wow. So it's all down to the budget, clever recruitment, marginal gains? A couple of Brits with hardly any tradition in cycling re-inventing the wheel? Head in the sand stuff.

Dude. Stop it. I'm not denying any of that. I'm just giving you my perspective from a recruitment perspective. Sky kick my ***.

Don't take it for more or less.

 

[Benotti69]

in defense of this. we never gonna get clean cycling and a clean peleton, their never was and never will be.

as long as we get no salanson and kim kirchen avoidable OD's ok. but like Dr Jason Mazanov and Prof Julian Savulescu say, pro sport is not the pursuit of health, nor is it a safe enterprise.

Pedro Horillo, Wouter Weylandt, Mauricio Soler... Pantani, VDB

I dont expect it to be clean ever. That is what is galling about Sky and people who defend it.

Selling the idea that clean can win now and we look at the joke of Sky, autobus to podiums, zigzagging a climb to winning mtfs.

Why does JV not ask for Sky to be transparent with as much info that they have if they are doing it clean? Becuase they aren't and it will at this time sink the psort deeper and cause more sponsors to pack up and go.

Did JV make a presentation to ASO or RCS about their team? Why not? Sky did.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I have my spies and sources re Froome.

Evil. remember, evil.

Okay, I will file that under 'I take the fifth'. You are entitled to.

Cleaner cycling, we have a deal on that. No way in hell it is clean.

To me, and to anyone who follows cycling seriously without any bias, the Sky situation is very reminiscent of the La Vie Claire team in 85/86, biggest budget, best talent, you get 4 in the TOP 8 at the TDF and 5 in the TOP 12 (without looking it up). Yes I could be wrong, but how anyone can say with no hesitation that Sky are cheating is beyond me, honestly.

Having said that I'm worried to read that JV thinks the structures aren't in place to prevent an EPO 2.0 situation, that needs to change.

Go and brush your teeth for a week.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

you wisely admit that you don't know, yet you're stating that it's all clean(er).
doesn't add up.

Please point out where JV uses the word all.
And JV did not see ACs numbers, San Milan did - c'mon sniper even a stopped clock is right twice a day, keep up.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Excellent, another Sky thread. We are lucky

Just to remind everyone, JV runs a different team

FYI

 

[Catwhoorg]

I have my spies and sources re Froome.

Evil. remember, evil.

You forgot the Mwa hua hua ha.


Evil geniuses should never forget to cackle insanely.

 

[Alesle]

you wisely admit that you don't know, yet you're stating that it's all clean(er).
doesn't add up.

Well, it isn't particularly difficult to see that the peloton is moving significantly slower than in years past, from which the only reasonable conclusion I can see is that the peloton is cleaner. However, to comment on any individuals without knowing all the circumstances would be just speculation.

The only thing JV can do is offer his opinion based on what he knows and sees himself. Granted, he does have a self interest in promoting clean cycling, but I generally find his opinions and comments to match well with what I can see with my own eyes, and as such I appreciate reading his opinions. I find it a lot more productive than reading the "rider x is winning, he must be doping" that most of this forum seem to consist of.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I think if anyone thinks that Vaughters is going to say that he thinks Sky are doped to the gills, that person is mistaken.

You don't sh!t near the campfire.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Dude. Stop it. I'm not denying any of that. I'm just giving you my perspective from a recruitment perspective. Sky kick my ***.

Don't take it for more or less.

Just hire a swimming coach. And no more wind tunnels. Froomebot doesn't do that stuff.

Also, remember WARM UP, WARM DOWN.

Pity you didn't know this stuff when you had Wiggins on your team, or he would have won the Tour back then.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

This whole thread is becoming appalling...I can't understand how JV can put up with some of the crazy "burn the witch" zealots here who have no leg to stand on other than their hatred for those who win. Oh and to be perfectly clear I called Armstrong on the day of the '99 Prologue.

To be fair - most (but not all) of his main detractors look nothing more than angry old men, they are not scoring any points.

To me, and to anyone who follows cycling seriously without any bias, the Sky situation is very reminiscent of the La Vie Claire team in 85/86, biggest budget, best talent, you get 4 in the TOP 8 at the TDF and 5 in the TOP 12 (without looking it up). Yes I could be wrong, but how anyone can say with no hesitation that Sky are cheating is beyond me, honestly.

Hold on - LaVC bought the 2 best GT riders, and added some top rank doms.
Sky bought some real good doms, and their GT hopes are Froome & Wiggo.

Having said that I'm worried to read that JV thinks the structures aren't in place to prevent an EPO 2.0 situation, that needs to change.

For a guy who knew LA doped from prologue 99, I am surprised that this is any type of revelation.

 

[JV1973]

I don't think regression is taking place, now. But imagine you get a Gewiss 1994 type situation in the peloton with some new, undetectable, drug. You think Sky look good now? Go look at Gewiss in Flèche Wallone in 1994. They not only road tempo, but they kept riding to the line to finish 1st, 2nd, 3rd...

Anyhow, if that type of event happened again in cycling (while many used EPO pre Gewiss, I see that event as the milestone from individuals using it to entire teams using it. It's the change from Andy Hampsten getting 8th in LeTour in 1993, beaten by individuals on EPO, to him getting 53rd in the 1995 Giro, whole teams using EPO. Use went to "obligatory" if you want to be competitive in 1994)...So, if that happened again, with a totally undetectable substance that was easily used and massively effective, then I don't see the structure changes in place that would prevent it. I see a lot of guys (most) that I parade around as being clean, today, being drawn into the arms race and doping.

If you look at Pat's quotes from yesterday, "look at Mark Cavendish and Brad Wiggins..." Now, these riders may be clean. I think they are. But, as president of the UCI, he should show ZERO bias towards any rider. He doesn't know and I can sure as **** tell you he can't make nuanced scientific arguments like I do. He has no clue, yet he holds these individuals up because he likes them and they are anglo. That, to me, says that if we had Gewiss 2.0, he'd hold them up as well. He shouldn't disparage the sport, he should say nothing about any individual. So, to my point, this shows me the structure does not exist to prevent the whole thing from happening again.

BUT... I think we've got a nice period of cleaner (hopefully) racing, right now. Enjoy.

And pray that structural changes come into place that have a hope of keeping it that way.

OK, I need to stop talking here, because I'm defending Sky, which is incredibly ironic, considering the disagreements I've had with them over the years. i don't care about Sky, go burn them at the stake, bring me a marshmallow from the fire. My point above is where i should have left it.

 

[Franklin]

Less hostility towards someone who is actually willing to put up with this angry mob would be nice.

 

[JV1973]

You know, maybe the reason i get you guys in a huff about being so positive about racing now, isn't that I think it's perfect, it's that i lived through a time that was so much worse. 1995-1996 were ludicrous.

Try this on for size, in early 1996 I was tested at University of Pamplona. Vo2 max was 91ml/kg, threshold was 6w/kg, max power was 7.5 w/kg... i should have been kicking ***, right? I went to Vuelta Pays Basque that year. If I made a selection of 60 guys on a 2nd category climb, I was ecstatic! I would sit on 80th wheel, all day, and just suffer. I didn't even know what was going on in the race, I was just a spectator on wheels, with my heart rate at 180. It was ridiculous.

Maybe our misunderstanding is that I've experienced things, first hand, when they were really bad. Really, really, really bad. So, to me, now is such a stark contrast, I can't help but be a bit giddy (to your annoyance)...

Actually, this point...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I think if anyone thinks that Vaughters is going to say that he thinks Sky are doped to the gills, that person is mistaken.

You don't sh!t near the campfire.

It's the ultimate strawman - JV is pretty honest and open to most q's, and anyone with a brain in their head knows there are some things he cannot say in public. So they ask him about SKy, and Pat, etc and when he does not answer howl that he does not slam Sky's doping policy - ps did you know Sky have this new genetic drug, I read it here. Must be true, right?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

i don't care about Sky

I bet Talansky does.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Bizarre that when the clinic has an opportunity to talk with someone who as much influence and insider knowledge as JV and it's wasted by sneering constantly about Sky. Not his team, not his problem.

 

[thehog]

Actually, this point...

Have you spoken to Ashenden recently? He disagrees with you. He has been reliably informed that doping is still on-going. On a large scale. Give him a call sometime.

 

[JV1973]

I bet Talansky does.

Not that I've heard. He's obsessed with beating them.