JV talks, sort of

[Granville57]

And what happens to Millar's stake in the Garmin team?

I asked JV about that, similarly, upthread.

I seem to remember that when you first recruited Millar for Garmin, he presence was key to lending credibility to this new, pro squad, and that part of the arrangement was that he had some ownership stake, or something similar, in the team.

Is my memory flawed? Is there anything to this?

Yes, but the ownership has been diluted to basically nothing, as we've had repeated capital calls. I thought hiring DM was a move saying "I'm not going to pretend doping didn't happen"... that was the thought behind it. I didn't want a team pretending everyone was a saint. Figured it was better to tackle head on by hiring an ex-doper as the first guy to recruit.

 

[Irondan]

whatver m8, i will allow the posters and fellow Clinic 12 decide my fate.

And an isotope test

I'm new so I've never heard this term. What exactly is the "Clinic "12" ?

 

[pmcg76]

Does a breakaway being let go because Lance was leading ring a bell....where Floyd was in it.

Yes, Landis might have earned his 2nd place due to a break, but even without the break, he still would have been Top 10 on GC and he finished Top 10 on Ventoux and the other mountain stage over the Joux Plane. For someone totally clean, that is a mighty impressive performance in 2002.

I am willing to believe Floyd, the question is, do you really believe that?

People are putting forward Ryder finishing 16th at the Dauphine as proof of doping but you are telling us Floyd went Top 10 a few years previous totally clean.

 

[pmcg76]

JV being a poor communicator and a bit of a ****** is old hat by now. As I have pointed out many times before, any number of riders have left the team under a cloud in regards to how they were treated. Many of them were the lesser known US riders who quit or went back to racing on the US domestic scene. There is plenty of info to this effect in the public domain.

Having talked to a few people who knew some of the riders at Garmin and heard podcasts etc, there is a general theme that comes through re Garmin. JV is a ******, the team doesn't quite match the PR of the super fun/happy team, they are deadly serious about the anti-doping.

Garmin have passed around 80 riders through their ranks by now, many who didn't leave on good terms. You would think at some point, there would be rumours coming from somewhere, especially from the US. Surely the likes of Steve Tilford would know someone, who knows someone who heard something dodgy about Garmin.

So far, all we have had was the Trent Lowe case and 2 half-rumours which if anything would suggest that Garmin were serious about anti-doping.

In this forum, we already have had posters talking about stuff they heard on the grapevine about SKY being unethical if not illegal in what they are doing and cortisone usage at the team. Garmin have been around 7 seasons now and we are yet to hear anything similar about.

JVs biggest skill would seem to be keeping all his former employees from talking about doping even though many have badmouthed him in other ways.

 

[sniper]

Yes, Landis might have earned his 2nd place due to a break, but even without the break, he still would have been Top 10 on GC and he finished Top 10 on Ventoux and the other mountain stage over the Joux Plane. For someone totally clean, that is a mighty impressive performance in 2002.

I am willing to believe Floyd, the question is, do you really believe that?

People are putting forward Ryder finishing 16th at the Dauphine as proof of doping but you are telling us Floyd went Top 10 a few years previous totally clean.

fair points.

one guess i expressed earlier is that Floyd may still be (have been) in a salary dispute with Mercury. If he'd admit he doped in that period then he can probably kiss that salary good bye.

Perhaps anyone in the know if that dispute is still a dispute?

 

[Digger]

Yes, Landis might have earned his 2nd place due to a break, but even without the break, he still would have been Top 10 on GC and he finished Top 10 on Ventoux and the other mountain stage over the Joux Plane. For someone totally clean, that is a mighty impressive performance in 2002.

I am willing to believe Floyd, the question is, do you really believe that?

People are putting forward Ryder finishing 16th at the Dauphine as proof of doping but you are telling us Floyd went Top 10 a few years previous totally clean.

Firrst yes I do...because aside from anything what difference does it make for him to lie about it...he admitted he started doping a couple weeks later....people say landis held back or told half truths yet can't give one example (not you btw)
Not once since he confessed has landis been caught out..indeed all that's happened is that he has been vindicated over and again.
Regarding Ryder I have never ever used his 16th as evidence of doping, I have used other things. His timeline is ridiculous. But again I have my reasons for not believing in Ryder. That 16th isn't one of them.

 

[roundabout]

Did he dope for the 2002 Tour? I thought he was rather underwhelming there.

 

[pmcg76]

Did he dope for the 2002 Tour? I thought he was rather underwhelming there.

He said he started doping at the training camp in St.Moritz between the Dauphine and Tour in 2002 so I guess he was doping at the 02 Tour.

Thing is doping cannot fully make up for poor form, it might mean less of a negative impact but if you are in poor form, you are in poor form. Maybe he went too deep at the Dauphine in 02.

 

[pmcg76]

Firrst yes I do...because aside from anything what difference does it make for him to lie about it...he admitted he started doping a couple weeks later....people say landis held back or told half truths yet can't give one example (not you btw)
Not once since he confessed has landis been caught out..indeed all that's happened is that he has been vindicated over and again.
Regarding Ryder I have never ever used his 16th as evidence of doping, I have used other things. His timeline is ridiculous. But again I have my reasons for not believing in Ryder. That 16th isn't one of them.

I know you were not drawing conclusions on Ryder based on the Dauphine result, more if you believe it was possible to achieve such a result clean in 2002. My primary interest has always been what is achievable by a clean rider, thus the interest in what Lanids claims.

I don't see why Floyd would lie about the timeline either but then other riders have talked about their doping timelines but a lot claim they are lying. David Millar is one.

Why did the Garmin riders(VDV, Dave Z) claim they stopped in 06 when they were still within SOL. That makes little sense either.

 

[roundabout]

clean as whistle

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/jun07/dauphinelibere07/?id=results/dauphinelibere077

 

[roundabout]

He said he started doping at the training camp in St.Moritz between the Dauphine and Tour in 2002 so I guess he was doping at the 02 Tour.

Thing is doping cannot fully make up for poor form, it might mean less of a negative impact but if you are in poor form, you are in poor form. Maybe he went too deep at the Dauphine in 02.

Did he say that he was in poor form?

 

[sniper]

because aside from anything what difference does it make for him to lie about it..

you got me on ignore?

I don't see why Floyd would lie about the timeline either

you too?

one guess i expressed earlier is that Floyd may still be (have been) in a salary dispute with Mercury. If he'd admit he doped in that period then he can probably kiss that salary good bye.

 

[Benotti69]

..........snipped..........


JVs biggest skill would seem to be keeping all his former employees from talking about doping even though many have badmouthed him in other ways.

JV's father is a lawyer. It wouldn't surprise me if every rider as part of their contract signs an agreement that bounds them to complete silence or face the wrath of JV's lawyers and big $$$$s.

 

[D-Queued]

I'm new so I've never heard this term. What exactly is the "Clinic "12" ?

...
Regarding Ryder I have never ever used his 16th as evidence of doping, I have used other things. His timeline is ridiculous. But again I have my reasons for not believing in Ryder. That 16th isn't one of them.

I have suggested that Ryder's Dauphine performance was questionable.

Typically it is hard to pick out a Domestique as having charged up, but that particular race gave us an interesting glimpse.

It isn't that he placed 16th, or that he placed top 20 on Ventoux. It was how Ryder accomplished his finish on the Ventoux stage that was beyond impressive.

The leaders already had ~3 min gap at the bottom, and Ryder was being loyal domestique to Floyd who started to fail badly, losing minutes to the leaders. And quickly.

Floyd then gave Ryder the all clear and Ryder bridged like nobody's business.

He almost certainly had the fastest time up Ventoux, let alone after starting with a huge handicap by hanging around with Floyd on the lower slopes.

Meanwhile, there were already rumors floating about his doping.

Then, Floyd pulled off the miracle Tour.

So, put 1+1+1 together.

Dave.

 

[roundabout]

Did it really happen?

I mean if a guy probably did the fastest time up Ventoux, shouldn't he have done better in other mountain stages after?

 

[More Strides than Rides]

Did it really happen?

I mean if a guy probably did the fastest time up Ventoux, shouldn't he have done better in other mountain stages after?

Going too deep one day will punish you the next, drugs or not. Think Porte's blow up (as long as you don't go "its a conspiracy! He was sandbagging!): doped to the gills, but still has limits. Professional riders can still make immature racing decisions.

 

[roundabout]

Thing is he was placed about the same in all mountain stages of that Dauphine.

 

[D-Queued]

Thing is he was placed about the same in all mountain stages of that Dauphine.

We know he is/was a decent climber.

He was riding domestique for Floyd. So as long as Floyd was competitive, Ryder should have been there with him. That was his job/responsibility.

Up to that stage, Floyd was in contention for the lead. Thus, Ryder should have consistently placed fairly well in the classification to that point.

Ryder's performance once Floyd released him on Ventoux, however, was more like Froome having to dial it back while pacing Wiggo when Wiggo won the Tour. Extraterrestrial.

Ventoux is not a little boy's climb. Ryder didn't close the gap on little boys. Where would he have placed if he could have ridden with the front group? If he could have come into the climb with fresh legs like Leipheimer, Menchov, etc.?

Where would Ryder have placed if Phonak had not been driving the front of the Peloton to catch the early break coming into Ventoux? In so doing, they cut a couple of minutes out of the break's lead in the last 20km to the base of the climb while every other team was sitting in.

Unlike Ryder, who had to hang with Floyd while they rode away, pretty much everyone that finished ahead of him at the top would have been able to save themselves for the climb.

Between Operacion Puerto and the Reasoned Decision, there are quite a few folks that were ahead of Ryder that are now confirmed as doped for that race.

Not normal.

Dave.

 

[Granville57]

Between Operacion Puerto and the Reasoned Decision, there are quite a few folks that were ahead of Ryder that are now confirmed as doped for that race.

Not normal.

I dunno, Dave. That's sounds pretty "normal" to me.

 

[Granville57]

JV talks, just not to the riders he is letting go.

Some back-and-forth on Twitter between JV and Shane Stokes about this very issue.
https://twitter.com/SSbike/status/554056725897412608

Some more conversations:
https://twitter.com/Vaughters/status/554071515533037568

Jonathan Vaughters
@dimspace @daveno7 @SSbike guys, the agent was on my ass every day from June on. And he was shopping other teams full speed.

Twitter is such a convoluted mess when trying to follow a "conversation."
Some other interesting and relevant tweets buried in the muck.
https://twitter.com/SSbike/status/554056464118345729


Shane Stokes, as usual, is putting in the effort to make sense of it all. I expect to hear more from him on this matter.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Thanks Granville.

Twitter is such a convoluted mess when trying to follow a "conversation."
Some other interesting and relevant tweets buried in the muck.
https://twitter.com/SSbike/status/554056464118345729

Yeah twitter rhymes with its value IMO, beginning with the letters "sh".

Shane Stokes, as usual, is putting in the effort to make sense of it all. I expect to hear more from him on this matter.

For some reason not much of a CT fan, but Shane was a good move for both, IMO.

@dimspace @daveno7 @SSbike guys, the agent was on my *** every day from June on. And he was shopping other teams full speed.

JV writes that like it's offensive? As if it's not the agent's fricken job? And how the feck would he know unless those teams were all getting in contact with him?

 

[thehog]

Firrst yes I do...because aside from anything what difference does it make for him to lie about it...he admitted he started doping a couple weeks later....people say landis held back or told half truths yet can't give one example (not you btw)
Not once since he confessed has landis been caught out..indeed all that's happened is that he has been vindicated over and again.
Regarding Ryder I have never ever used his 16th as evidence of doping, I have used other things. His timeline is ridiculous. But again I have my reasons for not believing in Ryder. That 16th isn't one of them.

The story of Ryder may never have seen the light of day if not for Rassmussen. It was also likely that the story may not ever be told. There was no reason to believe that Chicken would tell that particular doping story in his book.

My view is Vaughters could hardly sack Ryder after he had won the Giro and they claimed it was clean. Couldn't be done. Better to keep him with the BS story.

Vaughters did deny Millar riding the Tour last year, so he did do something right

 

[Ferminal]

Can never forget Vaughters magical claim that Dekker tested as the best of the best, leading to this great discussion:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=729212&postcount=88

"We've done 18 months of testing on him to determine this," Vaughters said. "That included power tests every month and corresponding blood tests. His power should go up as his training increases, but his blood values shouldn't. That's exactly what happened, and his last tests when he won Duo Normand were world class."

The amount of talent in the Dutch rider coupled with his relative bargain contract price after his suspension gave Dekker the edge over other riders who were without contracts.

"Should I turn down an athlete who's in the top five per cent of guys from a physiological standpoint because he got caught [doping] when many others in his generation didn't get caught? That's a wrong decision.

 

[Ferminal]

I guess the questions that arise out of this are...

Was Dekker doping when Vaughters tested him? If that is the case then the magic dope detection test in Girona might not be as good as advertised...

Did his tests truly show he was a top performing specimen? If that is the case it doesn't mean much if you're not going to dope...

 

[roundabout]

Would it be an appropriate place for a machine calibration error joke?