JV talks, sort of

[jens_attacks]

JV,

is thomas dekker the subject of an experiment we don't know about yet? are you proud of him, do you respect his decision?


i've always thought that turbo diesel will come back full-in but people are full of surprises i guess.

 

[froooome]

Well let's be honest Lance is the youngest world champion ever. Compared to Froome Armstrong is a hugeee talent.

Naah, Armstrong doped already at the age where froomey was just having fun with his friends and some lions.

 

[djpbaltimore]

I think JV tried hard to push the rest of the peloton into better managing the sport by encouraging them to adapt the 'being seen to be doing the right things' rather than doing the right things. MPCC is probably the outcome of that.

I totally agree with this opinion. Anti-doping is more about managing the public's perception of the sport than actually fixing the problem.

 

[sniper]

...
I may not go to every race these days, but you might be surprised as to how much I've tried to study and analyze all of the factors you guys discuss here.
JV

ow i bet you do.
one wonders, though, why all the lies and contradictions coming from Sky and Froome, discussed plentifully on this forum, do not seem to bother you at all.
dedicated your life to antidoping? pull the other one.

 

[blackcat]

pull the other one.

such


a

great



sledge

 

[Benotti69]

such


a

great



sledge

Oi BC, sniper could probably sledge for his native country, but that is not in Eeengliiiish something an Aussie would appreciate

 

[blackcat]

Oi BC, sniper could probably sledge for his native country, but that is not in Eeengliiiish something an Aussie would appreciate

no, i luved it, dry wildean drollery

 

[Benotti69]

no, i luved it, dry wildean drollery

well it didn't lower the tone of the thread...

 

[Granville57]

You guys are missing the point. I'm not asking him to say "Yep, he's doped". But he made a post where he didn't accuse Froome of doping, and THEN added another one that unambiguously said he believed Froome to be clean.

It's likely he simply thought to himself, "Oh christ, before I know it, Benson will splash that all over the CN homepage (again). I don't need the aggravation that might come from this. I should go back and post an addendum."

At the end of the day JV gives very little insight into pro cycling in here.

The only problem with that statement, of course, is that it isn't true.

Here's a simple exercise that anyone playing along at home can try for themselves:

From The Clinic main page, click on the "Replies" column that corresponds to this thread.

Fortunately, as of this posting, JV's name is at the top of the list (which make him very easy to find). It's only appropriate that that is the case, I suppose.

Click on his name to see all of his posts in this thread.

Read them. Read every, single one of them.

Amongst those post are bits of information that, prior to his posting here, were not available to anyone else who posts here. PERIOD.

Some have since become common knowledge, so in retrospect it can be very easy to dismiss them as not being all that significant. That would be a mistake.

Other bits of info that he has provided are perhaps not as unique, but are certainly beyond what most contributors here are capability of.

He has actually participated at the very highest level of the sport.
He has actually made a personal study of human physiology as it applies to cycling.
He has actually doped, successfully, within the ranks of the pro peloton.
He has willingly volunteered information about those exploits.

IS THERE SOME LONG LIST OF OTHERS WHO FIT THAT SAME BILL WHO ARE POSTING HERE?

FFS. You don't have to believe or buy into everything he says here, or elsewhere for that matter. But would it be such grave sacrifice for some of you to just STFU and let the man express himself in whichever way he is most comfortable with?

Try that exercise. I dare you. Go back and read every, single one of JV's posts in this thread. Some of them contain nuggets well worth considering. Read between the lines. Use common sense. Let your imagination wander. Whatever it takes. Since you can't possibly know which questions or answers will lead to such nuggets, the very least you could do would be to encourage a civil dialogue.



Unless you expect Johan to join in here. And what, be more cooperative?

 

[blackcat]

stfu PERIOD civil dialogue i dont like posts who invoke the term period for rhetoric best just use a full stop and STFU

 

[Hugh Januss]

Other bits of info that he has provided are perhaps not as unique, but are certainly beyond what most contributors here are capability of.

He has actually participated at the very highest level of the sport.
He has actually made a personal study of human physiology as it applies to cycling.
He has actually doped, successfully, within the ranks of the pro peloton.
He has willingly volunteered information about those exploits.

And he is actually making a (most likely) very good living running a "clean team" that gets results as good as the other teams. Rice cakes!

 

[Granville57]

And he is actually making a (most likely) very good living running a "clean team" that gets results as good as the other teams. Rice cakes!

Perhaps you missed this part:

He has actually doped, successfully, within the ranks of the pro peloton.

There. Is that better?


Seriously though, I'm not suggesting that anyone has to buy into what he's selling. But there's no need to stifle the "sales pitch." I don't own a ShamWow or a SlapChop, but you do think for one second I ever turned down the volume or (god forbid) changed the channel when my boy, Vince, was doin' his thing?!

Hell no!

Don't touch that dial! Just sit back and enjoy the show.


(I just wish some folks would quite messin' with the antennae and disrupting the broadcast.)

 

[Big Doopie]

It's likely he simply thought to himself, "Oh christ, before I know it, Benson will splash that all over the CN homepage (again). I don't need the aggravation that might come from this. I should go back and post an addendum."


The only problem with that statement, of course, is that it isn't true.

Here's a simple exercise that anyone playing along at home can try for themselves:

From The Clinic main page, click on the "Replies" column that corresponds to this thread.

Fortunately, as of this posting, JV's name is at the top of the list (which make him very easy to find). It's only appropriate that that is the case, I suppose.

Click on his name to see all of his posts in this thread.

Read them. Read every, single one of them.

Amongst those post are bits of information that, prior to his posting here, were not available to anyone else who posts here. PERIOD.

Some have since become common knowledge, so in retrospect it can be very easy to dismiss them as not being all that significant. That would be a mistake.

Other bits of info that he has provided are perhaps not as unique, but are certainly beyond what most contributors here are capability of.

He has actually participated at the very highest level of the sport.
He has actually made a personal study of human physiology as it applies to cycling.
He has actually doped, successfully, within the ranks of the pro peloton.
He has willingly volunteered information about those exploits.

IS THERE SOME LONG LIST OF OTHERS WHO FIT THAT SAME BILL WHO ARE POSTING HERE?

FFS. You don't have to believe or buy into everything he says here, or elsewhere for that matter. But would it be such grave sacrifice for some of you to just STFU and let the man express himself in whichever way he is most comfortable with?

Try that exercise. I dare you. Go back and read every, single one of JV's posts in this thread. Some of them contain nuggets well worth considering. Read between the lines. Use common sense. Let your imagination wander. Whatever it takes. Since you can't possibly know which questions or answers will lead to such nuggets, the very least you could do would be to encourage a civil dialogue.



Unless you expect Johan to join in here. And what, be more cooperative?

Excellent post.

It boggles the mind that some here have decided that jv is public enemy number one.

Un-freakin'-believable.

 

[gooner]

The only problem with that statement, of course, is that it isn't true.

Here's a simple exercise that anyone playing along at home can try for themselves:

From The Clinic main page, click on the "Replies" column that corresponds to this thread.

Fortunately, as of this posting, JV's name is at the top of the list (which make him very easy to find). It's only appropriate that that is the case, I suppose.

Click on his name to see all of his posts in this thread.

Read them. Read every, single one of them.

Amongst those post are bits of information that, prior to his posting here, were not available to anyone else who posts here. PERIOD.

Some have since become common knowledge, so in retrospect it can be very easy to dismiss them as not being all that significant. That would be a mistake.

Other bits of info that he has provided are perhaps not as unique, but are certainly beyond what most contributors here are capability of.

He has actually participated at the very highest level of the sport.
He has actually made a personal study of human physiology as it applies to cycling.
He has actually doped, successfully, within the ranks of the pro peloton.
He has willingly volunteered information about those exploits.

IS THERE SOME LONG LIST OF OTHERS WHO FIT THAT SAME BILL WHO ARE POSTING HERE?

FFS. You don't have to believe or buy into everything he says here, or elsewhere for that matter. But would it be such grave sacrifice for some of you to just STFU and let the man express himself in whichever way he is most comfortable with?

Try that exercise. I dare you. Go back and read every, single one of JV's posts in this thread. Some of them contain nuggets well worth considering. Read between the lines. Use common sense. Let your imagination wander. Whatever it takes. Since you can't possibly know which questions or answers will lead to such nuggets, the very least you could do would be to encourage a civil dialogue.



Unless you expect Johan to join in here. And what, be more cooperative?

Good post.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Personally could not care less if we find out something from Race Radio or JV or don't. It comes out in the news at some stage. Do we gain something, some value because maybe we heard it here earlier? Does it lend The Clinic or its posters credibility because certain other posters post here? Do we get the full story from JV? Does he tell you the full truth? Ever?

I don't think so.

 

[D-Queued]

Personally could not care less if we find out something from Race Radio or JV or don't. It comes out in the news at some stage. Do we gain something, some value because maybe we heard it here earlier? Does it lend The Clinic or its posters credibility because certain other posters post here? Do we get the full story from JV? Does he tell you the full truth? Ever?

I don't think so.

Now we are going for absolute, complete honesty? About everything?

Is that even possible? Who has that kind of memory and omniscient insight?

Just asking.

Dave.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Now we are going for absolute, complete honesty? About everything?

Is that even possible? Who has that kind of memory and omniscient insight?

Just asking.

Dave.

Not quite what I am saying. Specifically things that he does know - like 6 month bans, etc, where what he is saying is ambiguous or unclear.

I mean. Granville clearly a big fan, and defending JV to the death, says, "like, read between the lines of JV's posts for all these nuggets yo".

Meh.

 

[D-Queued]

Not quite what I am saying. Specifically things that he does know - like 6 month bans, etc, where what he is saying is ambiguous or unclear.

I mean. Granville clearly a big fan, and defending JV to the death, says, "like, read between the lines of JV's posts for all these nuggets yo".

Meh.

I can only speak for myself, but I am impressed with what he has shared.

I'd love to know more, of course.

We all have our own communication styles, and it isn't always clear whether what JV shares is simply how he communicates or if he is, as you suggest, holding some things back.

At the end of the day, though, we only need one finger to count how many ex-pros, and or owners/managers are on here sharing what they know with us.

Maybe if we were a bit more tolerant of JV, others might be encouraged to provide their insights.

And, if that seems like overly optimistic wishful thinking, then it is in that light that we arguably should judge whatever JV is willing to share.

Dave.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

What do we lose if he never posts again? That's what I don't understand: the vociferous defense of JV because. Ex-pro. Team DS / owner.

Shrug.

For me, if someone says something that reeks of BS, posters should be allowed to call them on it. No matter who they are or what they do.

I'm probably just way weird or something in this regard, no question (re: what do we lose if JV or Race Radio never post again). Not to say I want them gone, no way. Just. Why the kid gloves on egg shells around some of these guys who have an inside line?

 

[blackcat]

Personally could not care less if we find out something from Race Radio or JV or don't. It comes out in the news at some stage. Do we gain something, some value because maybe we heard it here earlier? Does it lend The Clinic or its posters credibility because certain other posters post here? Do we get the full story from JV? Does he tell you the full truth? Ever?

I don't think so.

Now we are going for absolute, complete honesty? About everything?

Is that even possible? Who has that kind of memory and omniscient insight?

Just asking.

Dave.

wrt cycling, doping, cycling and doping, armstrong, armstrong and doping, doping and armstrong, the tomes, really they should be tombs, the tomes of literature over the last 24 months on armstrong and cycling and doping...

i think the most insightful perspective is an anamorphic view. you need to take in the entre spectrum, but not the individual details of facts or anecdotes in all the books, or from JV, or RR, or Betsy.

I have followed the chronology from the infancy of Armstrong's tour reign. I picked up enough details, to have a multitude of the anecdotes, and enough scurrilous innuendo and rumour, i picked up a decent handle on d'affaire armstrong so i did not have to reed albergotti et al

focusing on the small details, can detract from the greater truth, and wider perspective.

i still hold firm, professional cycling, and cycling as a professional business, holds little relationship to authentic sport. if you want a definition of authentic sport, then that is another rabbit hole discussion

its been entertaining tho, and now the politics and doping affairs, they provide the laffs in prosperity

 

[blackcat]

JV, would you do me a favour and grow a hipster mustache for the tour please

something like this.

it is not necessary to get the ink. that would not help when raising VC or an IPO innit

 

[Granville57]

Personally could not care less if we find out something from Race Radio or JV or don't. It comes out in the news at some stage.

But I'm not referring only to gossip or those things that will "come out in the news at some stage." JV has offered plenty of scientific analysis of doping, as well as very frank discussions on issue that will never "come out in the news" because, in and of themselves, they may not be headline grabbing, but still leave us more informed in the end.

Although I would further argue that for those things that do eventually come out in the news, isn't the very reason most of us are here is to get a jump on on those things, to be ahead of the curve? Time and time again, we know most of the details of news stories long before the press is capable of taking a stand. Being informed ahead of the game gives us a better perspective, and allows for a more insightful assessment of the nature of the media coverage.

Specifically things that he does know - like 6 month bans, etc, where what he is saying is ambiguous or unclear.

Let's use the famous Kimmage interview as an example. JV essentially admitted to doping to achieve his Mt. Ventoux record. Did he explicitly state that? No way, José. Kimmage tried to corner him on it, but JV was taking the bait. So what? JV admitted to doping in that interview long before most would even touch the subject. Was he ambiguous? Damn straight. Did that diminish, in any way, the underlying facts that he was revealing in his classic style? In my opinion, No. I found that interview to be fascinating. I learned things that I hadn't previously known. Did he raise his right hand and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? No. And I couldn't care less. He conveyed everything I needed to know.

I mean. Granville clearly a big fan, and defending JV to the death...

Nope. That's both the easy way out, and the predictable response. I honestly don't feel the need to defend JV. His career, and accomplishments within the sport, speaks for itself. But he posts some interesting things, and also exhibits a pretty good sense of humor, so...

What do we lose if he never posts again?

Several clever blackcat retorts.

For me, if someone says something that reeks of BS, posters should be allowed to call them on it. No matter who they are or what they do.

I couldn't agree more, but JV gets trolled harder than others who actually contribute nothing to this forum.

Why the kid gloves on egg shells around some of these guys who have an inside line?

Personally, I'm more interested in extracting the info than holding the hard line that some have adopted. Critical analysis can still be done without the actual criticism.

i picked up a decent handle on d'affair armstrong so i did not have to reed albergotti et al

One of your finer moments, right there, sir.

 

[Granville57]

i think the most insightful perspective is an anamorphic view. you need to take in the entre spectrum, but not the individual details of facts or anecdotes in all the books, or from JV, or RR, or Betsy.

focusing on the small details, can detract from the greater truth, and wider perspective.

But is not the wider the view, the entire spectrum, forged from those individual details, facts and anecdotes? Without the latter, I fail to see how one could acquire the former.

Some seek to squelch the details. To what end, I've no idea.

 

[blackcat]

But is not the wider the view, the entire spectrum, forged from those individual details, facts and anecdotes? Without the latter, I fail to see how one could acquire the former.

Some seek to squelch the details. To what end, I've no idea.

well, ofcourse, if you wish to point out the logical fallacy.

i am just saying, i got a better perspective than anyone who has come in over the last 18 months and read all the literature and books released over the past two years

 

[Zam_Olyas]

well, ofcourse, if you wish to point out the logical fallacy.

i am just saying, i got a better perspective than anyone who has come in over the last 18 months and read all the literature and books released over the past two years

you should apply for a job at sky cycling.