JV talks, sort of

[Dr. Maserati]

JV would do less harm to cycling and more good to anti-doping if he'd say nothing.
The cleaner-message is for his wallet and nothing else.

the only thing vaughters is achieving is he keeps journalists from digging deeper, rather than inviting them to do their job.
Not clever, unless that's exactly what he wants of course.

Just briefly recall Walsh.
In one of his first interviews wrt Team Sky, he said he believed in Sky because Vaughters had told him they were clean. (sorry no time to look for link). If that's what vaughters hopes to achieve, well kudos.

This is your fourth edit to this post in the last hour - yet you do not have time to get a link. It took me less than 2 minutes.

So - JV said to Walsh Sky were clean. You sure on that? Thats what JV said?
No need to edit your post again - a new post clarifying what you meant will suffice.

 

[Netserk]

This is your fourth edit to this post in the last hour - yet you do not have time to get a link. It took me less than 2 minutes.

So - JV said to Walsh Sky were clean. You sure on that? Thats what JV said?
No need to edit your post again - a new post clarifying what you meant will suffice.

If you have/know the proper quote, then link/quote it and leave things at that. No need asking for a response and eventually clog up the thread.

EDIT: Meta posts will either be deleted or moved.

 

[sniper]

I see you have edited your original post... But anyway. It is complex process, lot of people are involved - optimists, pessimists, sceptics, critics etc - you need all of them.
Walsh is adult and Vaughters is not his nanny, he can think with his own head and if sees new evidence, can change his mind.

of course walsh is grown up. no arguing. and that's not the point.

my question is: what's the purpose of vaughters' cleaner-cycling message? (other than the obvious: his wallet)
honest question.
the walsh example i gave merely goes to show that vaughters message doesn't achieve anything, and least of all critical thinking on the anti-doping front.

if he aims to encourage more critical thinking on the anti-doping front, he could start by questioning some of the recent performances, including Sky 2012/13. Instead we're made to believe that doping 'is not what the cool kids do anymore', and dopers are being 'ostracized'. oh well.

Look, of course he's not gonna question Sky, and I don't blame him, nota bene.

All I'm asking him to do is to please be so kind and remove the "dedicated my life to anti-doping" line from his twitter account.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If you have/know the proper quote, then link/quote it and leave things at that. No need asking for a response and eventually clog up the thread.

EDIT: Meta posts will either be deleted or moved.

Do NOT delete my on topic and relevant post.


I have "A" quote/link.

I am allowing the poster to post their link, in case it is different and shows their point or the opportunity to clarify/amend their remarks.

No need to respond to this post and clog up the thread.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If you have/know the proper quote, then link/quote it and leave things at that. No need asking for a response and eventually clog up the thread.

EDIT: Meta posts will either be deleted or moved.

(You moved my post to the mod thread (hmm, interesting) although it is perfectly on topic and appropriate to the posts on this thread and your response on this thread)

I have "A" quote/link.

I am allowing the poster to post their link, in case it is different and shows their point or the opportunity to clarify/amend their remarks.

No need to respond to this post and clog up the thread.

 

[Von Mises]

my question is: what's the purpose of vaughters' cleaner-cycling message? (other than the obvious: his wallet)
honest question.

Maybe he doesnt have a purpose. Maybe he genuinely thinks and believes that cycling is cleaner? Have you considered this option?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Maybe he doesnt have a purpose. Maybe he genuinely thinks and believes that cycling is cleaner? Have you considered this option?

I considered this possibility, but rejected it. Vaughters is not stupid. He knows what's going on in cycling. He's just an opportunist. If he exposes the carcass, sponsors may freak out again. It's hard enough to get sponsors as it is.

 

[sniper]

Maybe he doesnt have a purpose. Maybe he genuinely thinks and believes that cycling is cleaner? Have you considered this option?

if present day cycling were 50% sqeeky clean (which by all standards would indeed be cleaner than before), you'd still want that other 50% of dopers to be rooted out, wouldn't you? JV certainly would, as he's dedicated his life to anti-doping.
And think about it: what are the chances that that 50% of cheats is riding up front collecting the prizes, whilst the clean 50% are down there filling the bus.

and to be sure, no, i don't think he genuinely believes there's been a '180 degrees' cultural turnaround in cycling, or that 'doping is not what the cool kids do anymore', or that dopers are being 'ostracized' from the peloton.

EDIT: and this:

I considered this possibility, but rejected it. Vaughters is not stupid. He knows what's going on in cycling. He's just an opportunist. If he exposes the carcass, sponsors may freak out again. It's hard enough to get sponsors as it is.

 

[Von Mises]

Vaughters is not stupid.

Many people here share more or less his views, if you consider them all stupid, why enagage?

 

[Von Mises]

if present day cycling were 50% sqeeky clean (which by all standards would indeed be cleaner than before), you'd still want that other 50% of dopers to be rooted out, wouldn't you? JV certainly would, as he's dedicated his life to anti-doping.
And think about it: what are the chances that that 50% of cheats is riding up front collecting the prizes, whilst the clean 50% are down there filling the bus.
EDIT: and this:

I dont know what are the cahnces, you dont know either. We do not know how clean or not clean peloton is. Lest not pretend. We are speculating here and best we can do is bring some rationale when estimating different pieces of information.

 

[del1962]

Didn't Betsy thank JV for his support?

 

[sniper]

Many people here share more or less his views, if you consider them all stupid, why enagage?

well, yeah, the sky fanboys indeed share most of his views.

 

[sniper]

Didn't Betsy thank JV for his support?

she did yeah.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Many people here share more or less his views, if you consider them all stupid, why enagage?

Just because somebody presents a bad argument, I shouldn't help them see why it is a bad argument?

 

[William H]

If you believe that there are clean riders out there, then it's important to defend them. Saying that everyone who wins in Cycling is doping is basically encouraging any young rider with ambitions to dope themselves - it says they aren't going to succeed any other way, and gives them the moral cover of "everyone else is doing it".

It's a difficult balancing act between allowing the clean riders a fair chance to be believed and encouraging young riders to believe that they can do it clean, and living in la-la land of course, but I certainly don't think Vaughters would be doing Cycling any favours if he adopted the ironclad cynicism popular in The Clinic.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I certainly don't think Vaughters would be doing Cycling any favours if he adopted the ironclad cynicism popular in The Clinic.

Let's all remember that Vaughters was a contributor to this current "ironclad cynicism", being a former doper himself.

It's his burden to convince the sporting public.

 

[Benotti69]

If you believe that there are clean riders out there, then it's important to defend them. Saying that everyone who wins in Cycling is doping is basically encouraging any young rider with ambitions to dope themselves - it says they aren't going to succeed any other way, and gives them the moral cover of "everyone else is doing it".

I wouldn't advise anyone to become a professional sportsperson unless they were prepared to cheat to win. And if they were prepared i wouldn't want to know them.

It's a difficult balancing act between allowing the clean riders a fair chance to be believed and encouraging young riders to believe that they can do it clean, and living in la-la land of course, but I certainly don't think Vaughters would be doing Cycling any favours if he adopted the ironclad cynicism popular in The Clinic.

Who is doing the balancing act? Is the UCI allowing a certain amount of doping and only to those who have less talent to allow clean riders win?

That is la la land. If anyone wanted to be a pro and did not read Hamilton, Walsh, Kimmage and others well they will be in for a shock!

JV is out for JV.

 

[Benotti69]

Hey JV, can you put to bed, in your own inimitable style who 'Rider 15' is?

 

[Froome19]

Let's all remember that Vaughters was a contributor to this current "ironclad cynicism", being a former doper himself.

It's his burden to convince the sporting public.

---Temporarily edited by mod whilst waiting for poster to rewrite without insulting and attacking. Poster is free to rewrite without the insult. ---

 

[Benotti69]

JV tried to convince the world the sport is cleanER with talk of speeds being down on the EPO era. So guys were not taking the huge Armstrong, Cipollini or Jiminez amounts of dope but guys were coming from the gruppetto to podiums like Riis and Armstrong of the so called dark era. But the dopers were winning the majority of races.

The so called 'dorks' were not believing JV because of many things. No change at UCI, testing still a joke, team structures still the same, doping docs still employed by teams, soigneurs getting caught with dope, Italian investisgations naming many many riders as being invloved in doping.......etc

 

[sniper]

hiphip hurray if the bus is now cleaner while the cheating segments in the sport still rule and divide.

two things make me believe jv is disingenuous: 1. the fact that he is content and happy under these circumstances and 2. his vouching for sky.

 

[Benotti69]

Hey JV, you going to be happy to see Armstrong back competing after Cookson(if elected) lets him off with the T&R?

 

[Benotti69]

Doping doesn't pay does it JV?

Ride with 2 dopers for $10,000

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2013/0...esort-spa-offers-performance-cycling-retreat/

Sends out a great message to the young'uns.

 

[D-Queued]

Doping doesn't pay does it JV?

Ride with 2 dopers for $10,000

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2013/0...esort-spa-offers-performance-cycling-retreat/

Sends out a great message to the young'uns.

It used to cost that much to get Armstrong to join you for five minutes before he split to do something that was apparently more important. Thus, this suggests that doping has reduced the value of celebrity rides.

Dave.

 

[sniper]

Doping doesn't pay does it JV?

Ride with 2 dopers for $10,000

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2013/0...esort-spa-offers-performance-cycling-retreat/

Sends out a great message to the young'uns.

Doping is not what the cool kids do anymore, thanks to oldies like VdV and Hincapie, JV himself of course, and other former dopers who saw Jesus somewhere in 2006 and subsequently decided to guide the youngsters, seeing to it that they don't have to make that choice.

Owing to these veterans the mentality just changed overnight, whoppa, 180 degrees, out of the friggin blue, somewhere in 2007 i think it was, from an omerta doping cesspit into a fairplay peloton in which young, clean riders such as froome, wiggins, horner, nibali, hesjedal (you name them) can now excell and win GTs.

I'm happy.