JV talks, sort of

[roundabout]

Vaughters tweeted several times about Chris Froome, firstly stating he did want him before the 2011 Vuelta, but his performances priced him out of Garmin's range. He also tweeted calling for financial equality of some kind for teams, to prevent the top teams 'hoarding talent' and avoiding the debate we saw over the relative strengths of Wiggins and Froome.

I would suggest he saw him as a GC contender more than anything.

I would suggest that Vaughters answers that question himself.

And of all people looking to put the pieces together you would be in the bottom half of the list.

 

[Cloxxki]

What's the URL for that? I tried a google search and all that came up was a site that's "reserved".

I should say domains, not sites. I did the same type of searching you did.

With many things, intent/money is usually not in the hands of those with time, and vice versa. Setting up a website can be quite a challenge even to geniuses in other fields.
Just let the word out that it's easy to leak. Leaking doesn't need to be exclusive either. Even in a Clinic thread, we could make a list of anonimous email addresses leading to different anti-doping crusaders. An informant can leak to the bunch, of which each can do with the evidence as they choose. Ideally a panel would be formed of respected posters, perhaps even public faces, to interpret, verify and put in context whatever copy they receive or decide to work on. Really, a Clinic thread might serve well enough.

Cloxxki - New Thread "look at this I received today"
OtherPoster - "Yeah I got that too, am already researching it, will post when I have connected some possible dots."

Hope this is all possible within CN's limitations. Else, it will need to be done elsewhere.

 

[sniper]

I am with you on applauding him being here as I stated upthread. If he was anonymous he would get dog-piled by saying Wiggins is clean.

But, aren't actions like "sucking up" to get a few morsels that cannot be verified one way or the other pretty pathetic? It's like what the press does...regurgitate BS and nuthug to maintain access.

Applauding what he says, instead of applauding him being here and putting stuff out for critical appraisal, is what I find nauseating. We have no idea if he is being "honest" or not; all we can do is hold up what he says and does vs the environment and undeniable reality of cycling and sport in general.

to the bold.

fully agree with this post. Although I probably would have used more eufemisms to say the same (suggestions: "somewhat odd" instead of "pretty pathetic", or "slightly surprising" instead of "nauseating" ), I like how you call a spade a spade.

 

[ChrisE]

to the bold.

fully agree with this post. Although I probably would have used more eufemisms to say the same (suggestions: "somewhat odd" instead of "pretty pathetic", or "slightly surprising" instead of "nauseating" ), I like how you call a spade a spade.

Thanks for the suggestions, but I use up my quota of mealy-mouth eufamisms in my day job.

And one more thing, not only would he get dog-piled for saying Wiggins is clean, he would then get banned for fighting back.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I would suggest that Vaughters answers that question himself.

And of all people looking to put the pieces together you would be in the bottom half of the list.

Unlikely he will, hence I was just sharing some observations.

And I am flattered to be in the bottom half of the list. Mid-table mediocrity is ever my goal. I'm guessing you're top 5, even top 3. Wow

 

[roundabout]

I am with you on applauding him being here as I stated upthread. If he was anonymous he would get dog-piled by saying Wiggins is clean.

But, aren't actions like "sucking up" to get a few morsels that cannot be verified one way or the other pretty pathetic? It's like what the press does...regurgitate BS and nuthug to maintain access.

Applauding what he says, instead of applauding him being here and putting stuff out for critical appraisal, is what I find nauseating. We have no idea if he is being "honest" or not; all we can do is hold up what he says and does vs the environment and undeniable reality of cycling and sport in general.

Starting from a premise that people usually not tell the full truth because they want to make themselves look better, one can get a certain idea about the public persona.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Interesting... Sky, who had him, didn't seem to think of him that way. (Until he showed he was a GC contender in the Vuelta.)

Supposition. Something this forum exceeds at.

Basically his tweets at the time during the tour, when Froome was showing his strengths on the climbs, said he did definitely wanted to sign him, and suggested he considered him talented. He also complained of the hoarding of talent by Sky/monied teams in reference suggesting that if he was at Garmin he would be leader on the road.

 

[roundabout]

Unlikely he will, hence I was just sharing some observations.

And I am flattered to be in the bottom half of the list. Mid-table mediocrity is ever my goal. I'm guessing you're top 5, even top 3. Wow

Not really, I am a bad judge of my own character. I let other people decide how trustworthy I am.

But here's more supposition for you. Saronni claimed that he was close to signing Froome before the Vuelta. Let's see how you can twist it to fit into the known talent Froome narrative .

 

[JimmyFingers]

Not really, I am a bad judge of my own character. I let other people decide how trustworthy I am.

Strange. I know my motives and the truth of my words when I speak them, and I certainly know when I'm worthy of trust.

 

[JimmyFingers]

But here's more supposition for you. Saronni claimed that he was close to signing Froome before the Vuelta. Let's see how you can twist it to fit into the known talent Froome narrative .

I wasn't really trying to twist anything. The constant ebb and flow of argument in here is exhausting, but it has taught me a lot, like mainly not to get too involved. I was merely making an observation based on a series of tweets I had read from the man.

 

[ChrisE]

I wasn't really trying to twist anything. The constant ebb and flow of argument in here is exhausting, but it has taught me a lot, like mainly not to get too involved. I was merely making an observation based on a series of tweets I had read from the man.

And that leads us back once again to look at the situation critically, instead of just taking what somebody says at face value.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Again - you make little sense.
Doping remains in the peloton when people don't get caught.

That's my point. JV's not caught, no penalites. In fact, just the opposite. This is well-played politics on JV's part. If that's ambiguous or confusing, then that pretty much sums it up.

When was he supposed to admit? Or is your preference that he didn't?

There's no good answer to this question. I don't have to go through the history we generally agree upon to see why there's no good answer. If that's ambiguous or confusing, then that pretty much sums it up.

I noticed you conveniently snipped out where I asked how did he benefit and where I said he would have benefited more by staying in the game. That alone is telling.

That was more for brevity. I think it's pretty obvious how he's benefited. He's got some nice results, has a big-budget cycling team and is pretty much at the top tier of entertainment cycling. It's obviously not all fun and games. With all that comes great pressure and responsibility.

There are always consequences for doping -

And what are JV's? He feels bad? He can cry in his beer that others will buy for him because he strategically confessed. That seems like a pretty nice consequence.

but you appear to mix up people being appreciative of someone acknowledging their mistakes or past to somehow condoning it.

You are probably right. Hopefully, I've tried to make a case such that I'm not attacking him personally. It's not rewarding to be 'that guy' who disagrees for obtuse reasons. If anyone wants to reply, then PM me.

 

[red_flanders]

i also agree it's a bit at odds with the spirit of the Clinic that in order to get an answer from JV you have to compromise by watering down the criticism and do a bit of sweet-talking. Although most (including me) seem to find his presence here exciting and seem happy to make that little sacrifice, it would perhaps be more fruitful if he'd log in under an anonymous account.

I don't think any posterior kissing is required, but when someone identifies themselves and is a public figure I'd expect to treat them with the same decorum here I'd treat them with in person. Ask difficult questions but be respectful and reasonable. Just my opinion, he's certainly asked for nothing that I'm aware of, and seems to be posting here of his own volition.

 

[sniper]

I don't think any posterior kissing is required, but when someone identifies themselves and is a public figure I'd expect to treat them with the same decorum here I'd treat them with in person. Ask difficult questions but be respectful and reasonable. Just my opinion, he's certainly asked for nothing that I'm aware of, and seems to be posting here of his own volition.

definitely my thoughts.

 

[hrotha]

I don't think we're holding any punches. The divide between supporters and skeptics regarding Slipstream is exactly the same we see when JV is not around, and I believe some very tough questions have been asked in this thread. But at some point you realize you're not going to get a more detailed answer to your question, so you move on to the next one and see what kind of info you can get from it.

If you word your questions in a way that makes it impossible for JV to answer without either creating a huge storm or having to spend a pretty long time here debating back and forth, you won't get anything. I don't think that's unreasonable, as long as people keep asking the relevant questions.

Me, for example, I'd love to have an off-the-record conversation about Sky, but I feel there's not much else I can get here on that topic, so I'm thinking of what Garmin-related stuff I would like to ask JV about.

Like, for example, to what degree could you choose which Cervélo riders you were taking in? Were they subject to the exact same standards as other riders you sign, or did they come in a pack with no much room to negotiate?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

That's my point. JV's not caught, no penalites. In fact, just the opposite. This is well-played politics on JV's part. If that's ambiguous or confusing, then that pretty much sums it up.


There's no good answer to this question. I don't have to go through the history we generally agree upon to see why there's no good answer. If that's ambiguous or confusing, then that pretty much sums it up.

Of course it is ambiguous and confusing when you cannot back up what you are saying and flip flop rather easy questions.

That was more for brevity. I think it's pretty obvious how he's benefited. He's got some nice results, has a big-budget cycling team and is pretty much at the top tier of entertainment cycling. It's obviously not all fun and games. With all that comes great pressure and responsibility.



And what are JV's? He feels bad? He can cry in his beer that others will buy for him because he strategically confessed. That seems like a pretty nice consequence.

Are you suggesting JV has a "big budget cycling team" because he doped? Or is it because he runs this marketing clean team?
Which is it?

You are probably right. Hopefully, I've tried to make a case such that I'm not attacking him personally. It's not rewarding to be 'that guy' who disagrees for obtuse reasons. If anyone wants to reply, then PM me.

So, you are just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing?
If so, we may have found something we agree on.

 

[Mr Pumpy]

Starting from a premise that people usually not tell the full truth because they want to make themselves look better, one can get a certain idea about the public persona.

Hmm, are you thinking that JV has anything to gain in PR terms from posting here? For those of us who have the luxury of being on the outside looking in through the barred windows of this subforum I'd say merely posting here is likely to have the opposite effect.

Whilst JV's overt admission of PED use, rather that the tacit one, preempts what may be revealed in the USADA case, if it is premises that you want to start from how about the obvious one that in cycling simply saying as little as possible about drug use seems, historically, to be the smoothest path to follow?

 

[mewmewmew13]

I don't think any posterior kissing is required, but when someone identifies themselves and is a public figure I'd expect to treat them with the same decorum here I'd treat them with in person. Ask difficult questions but be respectful and reasonable. Just my opinion, he's certainly asked for nothing that I'm aware of, and seems to be posting here of his own volition.

Yes, exactly.
No need to act like an @$$ in order to ask a pointed question.

 

[Dalakhani]

Supposition. Something this forum exceeds at.

Basically his tweets at the time during the tour, when Froome was showing his strengths on the climbs, said he did definitely wanted to sign him, and suggested he considered him talented. He also complained of the hoarding of talent by Sky/monied teams in reference suggesting that if he was at Garmin he would be leader on the road.

If it wasn't clear from my question for JV, I meant whether he had a pre-Vuelta interest in Froome, and how he saw Froome fitting into the team prior to having seen the Vuelta.

Once the Vuelta hit the mountains, it was obvious that Froome could be a contender. So that's not really that interesting.

I'm interested in how he was seen before then.

 

[roundabout]

Hmm, are you thinking that JV has anything to gain in PR terms from posting here? For those of us who have the luxury of being on the outside looking in through the barred windows of this subforum I'd say merely posting here is likely to have the opposite effect.

Whilst JV's overt admission of PED use, rather that the tacit one, preempts what may be revealed in the USADA case, if it is premises that you want to start from how about the obvious one that in cycling simply saying as little as possible about drug use seems, historically, to be the smoothest path to follow?

I can post a long reply, but I'll be brief. That's not not what I am really interested in. Neither the PR perspective of posting here, nor the admission.

 

[Mr Pumpy]

Oh ok. Must have misunderstood your post, could you clarify what you meant?

 

[roundabout]

It's a reference to how "honest" a discussion can be.

Especially as you say, when a person on the inside is talking to people on the outside.

 

[ChrisE]

Yes, exactly.
No need to act like an @$$ in order to ask a pointed question.

Exactly. So I guess that means if you ran across him in public you would faint like the teeny-boppers did when the Beattles landed in NY.

Nobody is being disrespectful. People like you mistake pointed questions with being disrespectful, if you hold the one being questioned in some god-like position. This is human nature.

BTW, you have thanked him enough for being here. I too thank him, though I think he is foolish for doing so. Now, perhaps we can move on from all the pleasantries and hopefully he can return and address some of the issues that have been brought up recently. Thanks.

 

[python]

Yes, exactly.
No need to act like an @$$ in order to ask a pointed question.

Exactly. The post just above is a perfect illustration. I suggest everyone report the flaming and batingg so that we could get the interesting thread back on track.

 

[will10]

Vaughters tweeted several times about Chris Froome, firstly stating he did want him before the 2011 Vuelta, but his performances priced him out of Garmin's range. He also tweeted calling for financial equality of some kind for teams, to prevent the top teams 'hoarding talent' and avoiding the debate we saw over the relative strengths of Wiggins and Froome.

I would suggest he saw him as a GC contender more than anything.

Hopefully JV will answer this one himself, but JV stated he looked at signing Froome before the Vuelta. At which point Froome had shown very limited TT and climbing ability. Why on earth with several riders on his team who have placed in the top 10 in GTs, would you expect JV to see Froome as a potential team leader?