Proposal to JV --

Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Jonathan:

Just read your editorial on cyclingnews ("connecting the dots"). Apparently you are hurt by folks who have only incomplete information and thus make sometimes inappropriate leaps of logic and assumption. You express your frustration.

Fair enough. Let me propose a way to clear up all of this hurt and resentment:

1. Just tell us exactly what you've done (PED-wise) during your career.
2. Just tell us exactly what your current riders have done in the past.
3. Just tell us which of your guys talked to Kimmage, and what they said to "shock" him?

Would that be so difficult? We already have a decent picture of what has gone on. Anybody w/ some curiousity can read Kimmage's writings, Floyd's interviews, listen to audiotapes online, etc. But unless you just come out and BE HONEST with us, then yes OF COURSE we will only have a muddled picture of actual events, based on INCOMPLETE information.

You seem like a very intelligent guy. This cannot be too hard for you to grasp. We will look forward to your post in this regards.

PS: While I make this posting in complete sincerity, please don't insult us by suggesting that our reasoning skills are any less than the cycling media's "journalists who have researched the story". C'mon man. C'mon. The state-run media of most Arab dictatorships has more integrity.
 
Mar 11, 2009
5,841
3
0
I'm just gonna re-post what I said in the last JV thread:

As for the question "Why doesn't Vaughters talk about his past", which pops up all the time here and seems to usually be code for "Why doesn't Vaughters tell us everything he ever saw Lance Armstrong do", he has a very good reason for not answering it and I am pretty sure he has said as much before now.

Vaughters runs a pro cycling team, and he claims he is trying to run a clean one. If he, apropos of nothing, tells the world that he did all of the things we suspect he did in his racing career, the headlines here and on every other sports news website will be "Boss of super-clean Garmin squad admits doping past". That helps no-one: not JV, not his team, CERTAINLY not his riders, and not the sport. I know 'protecting the image of the sport' gets used a lot to mean 'cover up doping' by powerful people in cycling, but unless we have a genuine and widespread process of truth and reconciliation the impact of individuals owning up to their past does not seem to be positive. All that Bjarne Riis got for owning up was the confiscation of his yellow jersey and a ban from the team car at the Tour de France.

Vaughters has another much more immediate reason to keep his mouth shut, and that is the ongoing US investigation into doping at US Postal. It would be nearly impossible for JV to talk openly about whatever doping history he may have without wandering in to dangerous legal territory, and we all know how lawyer-happy a certain testicularly challenged cycling star can get when he is under pressure.

I think our sport is in desperate need of truth and reconciliation, to help draw a line under the era of organised doping and move forward to a cleaner sport, but it has to be all-encompassing for it to be worth anything at all. If Vaughters and everyone who rides for him came out tomorrow and listed in meticulous detail everything they had ever taken or seen done at other teams, they would be shunned by the sport and more likely than not sued to hell and back.

MAYBE, if Armstrong is forced to face the music AND something can be done about the corruption and denial that runs rife through the upper echelons of the sport AND we see top-down comprehensive reform, maybe then riders and managers could come clean about the past without being lambasted and pilloried like so many Floyd Landises.
 
Nashbar, I think you missed the bit where Vaughters says no matter what he does, he's screwed - either by withholding information, or by releasing it and having it analyzed by non-experts and taken out of context. You aren't really addressing his concerns here.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
NashbarShorts said:
Jonathan:
1. Just tell us exactly what you've done (PED-wise) during your career.
2. Just tell us exactly what your current riders have done in the past.
3. Just tell us which of your guys talked to Kimmage, and what they said to "shock" him?.
Id be willing to bet that all three of those are information he will not divulge at the moment due to the current federal enquiry.

And rightly so.

We'd all love to know if DZ has said anything to the feds, just as we would love to know if Hincapie etc has, but I think we'd rather not know right now if it jeopordised the case against armstrong in any way.

I also think this thread is a) pointless and b) just rehashing what has already been said and another excuse for the forum to deteriorate into a JV bashing v JV defending session. And the guy wont be able to win, if he says nothing hes "witholding things, not being transparent" etc, if he answers questions his every word gets analysed and used against him.

Thats my input and ONLY input into this thread.
 
Jun 11, 2010
28
0
0
TeamSkyFans said:
Id be willing to bet that all three of those are information he will not divulge at the moment due to the current federal enquiry.

And rightly so.

We'd all love to know if DZ has said anything to the feds, just as we would love to know if Hincapie etc has, but I think we'd rather not know right now if it jeopordised the case against armstrong in any way.

I also think this thread is a) pointless and b) just rehashing what has already been said and another excuse for the forum to deteriorate into a JV bashing v JV defending session. And the guy wont be able to win, if he says nothing hes "witholding things, not being transparent" etc, if he answers questions his every word gets analysed and used against him.

Thats my input and ONLY input into this thread.

+1

Lets just see what happens, I do think his hands are tied right now.
 
Seriously just give the JV routine a rest. Its boring now. Like I've always said. Vaughters is anti-doping not anti-Lance. Don't use him to get the big Lance exclusive you're all looking for. We're not here for that reason. If you are you just as bad as those who dope. Willing a downfall based on cheap comments doesn't give anyone the victory. Move on.
 
Jan 27, 2010
921
0
0
Good post Team Sky Fans,

I think we need to be patient with JV. It will take until after the LA evisceration to see where the cards fall, what we have learned about JV and his players and what he plans for the future within his Garmin Team.

Hopefully, he has mapped out the transformation and help bring us out of this abyss. Recently, JV appears to be apart of the solution...I hope he keeps it up.

NW
 
hrotha said:
Nashbar, I think you missed the bit where Vaughters says no matter what he does, he's screwed - either by withholding information, or by releasing it and having it analyzed by non-experts and taken out of context. You aren't really addressing his concerns here.
Vaughters' concerns are that he wants it both ways, and he can't.

He should either be transparent or just stop talking about the situation, because nothing he says helps. It's just more vagueness and pseudo-intellectual ramblings that wind up being misunderstood and over-analyzed.

He really is getting tiresome.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
I do feel JV is shedding crocodile tears here.

he's making a living out of the sport thanks to the fans.
how can he expect us to not connect dots (read: to be uncritical)?

Of course, there are exceptions to the rule (e.g. Tondo, though we don't know much about him really).
Surely, JV doesn't seriously think LA and AC, the dominators of the last decade, belong to these exceptions, does he?
In other words, if you connect the dots, you're gonna be right 9 times out of 10.

I'm not saying JV should spit it all out. I just don't agree with his piece in the CN, and I particularly agree with Nashbar's PS
 
NashbarShorts said:
Jonathan:

Just read your editorial on cyclingnews ("connecting the dots"). Apparently you are hurt by folks who have only incomplete information and thus make sometimes inappropriate leaps of logic and assumption. You express your frustration.

Fair enough. Let me propose a way to clear up all of this hurt and resentment:

1. Just tell us exactly what you've done (PED-wise) during your career.
2. Just tell us exactly what your current riders have done in the past.
3. Just tell us which of your guys talked to Kimmage, and what they said to "shock" him?

Would that be so difficult? We already have a decent picture of what has gone on. Anybody w/ some curiousity can read Kimmage's writings, Floyd's interviews, listen to audiotapes online, etc. But unless you just come out and BE HONEST with us, then yes OF COURSE we will only have a muddled picture of actual events, based on INCOMPLETE information.

You seem like a very intelligent guy. This cannot be too hard for you to grasp. We will look forward to your post in this regards.

PS: While I make this posting in complete sincerity, please don't insult us by suggesting that our reasoning skills are any less than the cycling media's "journalists who have researched the story". C'mon man. C'mon. The state-run media of most Arab dictatorships has more integrity.
FFS give it a rest. Just because JV made the mistake of posting on here occasionally, doesn't mean he's now your confidant.
This post reaches a whole new level of nauseating indignation.
 
I read the piece and must say I don't feel good at all about my criticisms of him. Not that my opinion counts. I do believe him when he says how sensitive he is about criticism he has received. In fairness, the fact that he comes on here does show that he cares what people say. Do I agree with certain things he has said or done? No I don't, but for now I am going to keep my mouth shut about him in terms of any negative comments. I wish him the best for the year ahead. (I suppose I am reminded of Race Radio's comments about criticising JV being akin to crushing a kitten). Ultimately i am here to debate, to learn and because I am interested in these issues. Seeing someone hurt by our comments is not what this is about for me. So yeah I am sure plenty of people will call my a hypocrite etc for this post, but that's where I am at with JV.

One final thing - I would like him to sit down in July and have another interview with Paul Kimmage. Not about whether or not he doped, but other stuff. Things like AC, Floyd, Lim etc etc. And I would genuinely be interested to hear his opinion on those subjects.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,263
1
0
Jonathan didn't have to do this.
So, honour it at least for that.

If you followed the comedy of cycling, then it is clear that Tondo will be caught this year or next year at latest. :D
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
The best part out of this piece by him is the fact that he himself is as guilty of many of the things we do against him and that he acknowledges that. But it does make me wonder, is Tondo the only rider with whom he has 'connected the dots'. Mainly because there are a fair share of riders that have similar backgrounds, so it would be odd that this would only be the case with Tondo. Are there more riders that have not received a fair judgment by Vaughters? And could this perhpas change in the future, giving more people a chance.
 
Sep 14, 2010
212
0
0
NashbarShorts said:
Jonathan:

Just read your editorial on cyclingnews ("connecting the dots"). Apparently you are hurt by folks who have only incomplete information and thus make sometimes inappropriate leaps of logic and assumption. You express your frustration.

Fair enough. Let me propose a way to clear up all of this hurt and resentment:

1. Just tell us exactly what you've done (PED-wise) during your career.
2. Just tell us exactly what your current riders have done in the past.
3. Just tell us which of your guys talked to Kimmage, and what they said to "shock" him?

Would that be so difficult? We already have a decent picture of what has gone on. Anybody w/ some curiousity can read Kimmage's writings, Floyd's interviews, listen to audiotapes online, etc. But unless you just come out and BE HONEST with us, then yes OF COURSE we will only have a muddled picture of actual events, based on INCOMPLETE information.

You seem like a very intelligent guy. This cannot be too hard for you to grasp. We will look forward to your post in this regards.

PS: While I make this posting in complete sincerity, please don't insult us by suggesting that our reasoning skills are any less than the cycling media's "journalists who have researched the story". C'mon man. C'mon. The state-run media of most Arab dictatorships has more integrity.





I think most of us agree that he is holding info back. I would go so far as to say he would not come clean without a gun to his head. Still, I do think the Feds have the truth from him and he "can't" comment for the moment.

But the very best part......

You know he read the post. And he knows we all are aware of what is eating him inside as he runs his young team.
 
Mar 8, 2010
3,263
1
0
Barrus said:
The best part out of this piece by him is the fact that he himself is as guilty of many of the things we do against him and that he acknowledges that. But it does make me wonder, is Tondo the only rider with whom he has 'connected the dots'. Mainly because there are a fair share of riders that have similar backgrounds, so it would be odd that this would only be the case with Tondo. Are there more riders that have not received a fair judgment by Vaughters? And could this perhpas change in the future, giving more people a chance.
Who decides what is "fair" or "unfair".

Clearly, if someone like Tondo does such things he was probably treated "unfair".
JV can only speak about Tondo.
In the end, no one will put his hand into fire for any rider, and probably Tondo is "clean".
You can also say, that it was not hero-like - he only did what a healthy person should do. It's like helping an old grandma with putting her case of beer into her car. Self-evident.

I can't get myself out of the fact, that all this has a smell.
Or just coincidence that it was just Tondo ? ;)

Problem is, that the same people who laugh about JV now, are the same people that would have screamed up louder than loud, if JV had hired Tondo.
Like he says - you can not make anything right - whatever you do.
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Who decides what is "fair" or "unfair".
Well, JV himself said that he did not treat Tondo fairly so I'm going by what he stated. That he did not given Tondo a chance because he presumed he could not be clean, nor could he be a good rider clean. So I was wondering with which other riders he has had the same presumption and which he did not even give a chance because of this presumption. Now, I'm not saying Tondo is necessarily clean, nor that any of the other riders with such a background is clean, however if you follow what Vaughters says and has said they should at least deserve a chance at Garmin. (not saying they should immediately ride there or hired or anthing, but should not be put to the side just because of their background and this is what Vaughters stated has happened with Tondo and Vaughters himself sees that this partially was hypocritical, although understandably so)
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
JV Wrote:

Not by the journalists that have researched the story, no, rather the massacre occurs in the comments and forums that follow the story. The chattering, anonymous fans hurling comments and critiques are so hurtful. I can’t imagine saying such things to anyone, not even my worst enemy. I try to argue my point, but of course any argument is vulnerable to misinterpretation and can easily be shot down by the hardened critic.
OK, clearly this is leveled at us, right here. We're by far the most prolific and vocal of the online JV critics, and he even stops by to address us personally.

JV is asking us to walk a mile in his shoes. And that's fine. So JV: It's time to show us your shoes. I can't walk in them if you won't reveal them.

SO, as I've been saying for close to 6 months... It's time to talk, and to talk a lot. You've been asked some very direct questions, and you've only answered them with witty dodges. It's time to get real and stop writing such editorials designed to get people feeling sorry for you.

All of this doubt about you and your team is 100% due to your own obfuscation and direct unwillingness to be direct and honest.

So Mr. Vaughters, what are you willing to do to meet us halfway?
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Everyone keeps "connecting the dots" between Novitzky and Vaughters. People keep assuming that the reason he doesn't "come clean" for us is (at least partially) due to the current investigation.

Do any of you know that he's even been asked to help in the investigation?

This contention is bunk. We know for a fact that Floyd Landis has participated in the investigation and that he has spoken out publicly since. And I've not heard anyone (yet) come out and and blast him for potentially jeopardizing the case.
 
I thought it was a pretty darn good piece JV wrote. He's giving the forum a lot of play, and clearly he's affected in some manner by what happens on these forums and others.

I don't need him to state the obvious. I'd like to see him hire Tondo at some point.
 
Barrus said:
The best part out of this piece by him is the fact that he himself is as guilty of many of the things we do against him and that he acknowledges that. But it does make me wonder, is Tondo the only rider with whom he has 'connected the dots'. Mainly because there are a fair share of riders that have similar backgrounds, so it would be odd that this would only be the case with Tondo. Are there more riders that have not received a fair judgment by Vaughters? And could this perhpas change in the future, giving more people a chance.
But isn't this the big dilemma? How can you give riders a chance when the parallel world many (most?) pros live in only seems to know doping while refusing to acknowledge it? Why not give Di Luca, Schumacher, Rebellin a chance – why should they be different. Ricco got a chance, that worked out just great! Basso got half a chance, but he was just half a doper. Ullrich was quoted as saying something about 1+1, he could have said connect the dots and meant the same thing. While we are at it, let’s give chances to Saiz, Gianetti, and all the other cycling managers that have doping built into their DNA. And the "doctors" too, after all Ferrari and Del Moral insist that they have never even seen doping much less aided and abbetted. So why are the faceless forum posters so cynical? Maybe, just maybe it's because they see their passion being dragged through the mud by a never ending parade of doping pros and their all too willing facilitators.

Of course this isn't JV's fault, and I think it's great he is doing what he is doing to move cycling in the right direction. On the other hand I don't think it is unfair of me to judge the overall situation not only by JV's actions and optimism, but on all the rest as well. And the rest isn't pretty - that's a fact.

If I understand correctly, JV would like us to believe that things are going in the right direction, when much of what we see would suggest otherwise. I'll make a deal, I won't criticise him if he doesn't criticise me when I do nothing but point out the truth.
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
frenchfry said:
But isn't this the big dilemma? How can you give riders a chance when the parallel world many (most?) pros live in only seems to know doping while refusing to acknowledge it? Why not give Di Luca, Schumacher, Rebellin a chance – why should they be different. Ricco got a chance, that worked out just great! Basso got half a chance, but he was just half a doper. Ullrich was quoted as saying something about 1+1, he could have said connect the dots and meant the same thing. While we are at it, let’s give chances to Saiz, Gianetti, and all the other cycling managers that have doping built into their DNA. And the "doctors" too, after all Ferrari and Del Moral insist that they have never even seen doping much less aided and abbetted. So why are the faceless forum posters so cynical? Maybe, just maybe it's because they see their passion being dragged through the mud by a never ending parade of doping pros and their all too willing facilitators.

Of course this isn't JV's fault, and I think it's great he is doing what he is doing to move cycling in the right direction. On the other hand I don't think it is unfair of me to judge the overall situation not only by JV's actions and optimism, but on all the rest as well. And the rest isn't pretty - that's a fact.

If I understand correctly, JV would like us to believe that things are going in the right direction, when much of what we see would suggest otherwise. I'll make a deal, I won't criticise him if he doesn't criticise me when I do nothing but point out the truth.

You might not have gotten that, but I meant from JV's perspective that he could perhaps give more riders a chance, those riders with whom he perhaps, like he did with Tondo, already has a preconceived notion that they are doping, without really having any real indication that this is the case. Because that would be the logical follow up on what Vaughters is stating
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
I do find it very easy to find respect for how JV tries to handle his "damned if I do, damned if I don't" seat.

In the end he's gonna have to judge for himself what he feels is productive or counter productive, and where it is appropriate to do what, given the situation he is in and the responsibilities he has.

But he is engaging in discussion with people that are easily ignored, and often are. That graces him, for sure.

Something tells me that if we had more folk like him in key positions, we wouldn't be where we still are. JV's real time and place will still come, I think. And when it does, I think I will be glad he used his own judgement to figure out how to get to that place, and be most effective en-route, and not that of people with equally good intentions, but less hands on insight.

Part of taking responsibility is making your own mind up, and knowing that if you made mistakes, at least you made your own. And JV sounds more than capable to owe up in a way that is honest and constructive. Or at appears to be trying. And that I find easy to respect.
 
Jul 5, 2009
2,440
3
0
J. Vaughters re: Tondo

To start, I find today's article by Mr. Vaughters to be very personal and full of true human emotion. We all make judgements about other people, and almost always based on flawed or incomplete information. To admit this in such a public way shows a lot of humility. In return, it is humbling to know that such public judgements reflected back upon Mr. Vaughters affects him.

I'm not sure how to start what I want to say next. I suppose that the problem I see is not the fact that we make judgements of other people. It's the fact that there is usually not enough information to make reasonable assumptions. In Mr. Vaughter's case, the limited information about Mr. Tondo led him to make a judgement - and it was the only reasonable judgement given the situation.

And what is that situation? The climate in cycling is heavy with doping at the athlete level, complicity at the team/ds/doctor level, and outright corruption at the federation level. In such a climate, the only reasonable judgement was that yes, Mr. Tondo could not be trusted to be clean. I don't see how you could fault Mr. Vaughters (and the fans of cycling here in the forums and elsewhere) for coming to such a conclusion.

The only difference I see is that in a forum we talk about it frankly and openly with much gossip and malice.

If Mr Vaughters feels guilty about his judgements based on incomplete understanding of the person invovled, I would suggest the following: Talk publicly and openly. Confront the Xavier Tondos of the world and tell them they won't get a ride because they are on a team with a dirty doctor. Afterwards give an interview to that effect. Shine light on all the dirty doctors, directeurs sportif, team owners, riders and confront them openly. Do it publicly.

If you're wrong, you will know very quickly and may have to issue some apologies. If you are right, you will set riders like Mr. Tondo free - giving them the ability to ride and do it cleanly with the full support of your moral weight.

If you did that, Mr Vaughters, then we in the forums of the cycling world will also be able to make better judgements about you based on a more complete understanding of who you are.

And one last thing: Just because Mr. Tondo exposed what appears to be an amateurish drug ring, what makes you think he rides clean Mr Vaughters? Is it this single act that can eliminate your suspicions? Why does Mr Tondo ride on a team with a dirty doctor? Why doesn't he publicly expose this doctor and remove himself from his association? Why doesn't he publicly condemn the riders who recieve treatment from this doctor? Or is he simply making quiet judgements the way you did. As you can see, that's not very effective at curing what ails your profession.

John Swanson
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
BotanyBay said:
All of this doubt about you and your team is 100 due to your own obfuscation and direct unwillingness to be direct and honest.

So Mr. Vaughters, what are you willing to do to meet us halfway?
You can also argue it is despite his willingness to meet you halfway, it is your expectations of halfway (not budging half an inch, demanding JV divulges everything to you) that is contributing to your doubt.

He doesn't owe you an explanation or justification for what he is doing how, you don't need to believe him.

At the moment I still trust "an attempt at sound judgement" more than the "loud judgement" of those that cannot guarantee how their approach will play out, and who have nothing to lose, and no responsibilities to others. All the more when I see differing abilities to self-reflect and admit shortcomings.

By all means, be loud, and try to keep people honest. "We" need those voices too. But also, be fair. You are good at the first. I think you come up short on the second.

And fairness comes in play when you talk about "let's meet halfway". Maybe it is you who needs to show up, not JV?
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Francois the Postman said:
You can also argue it is despite his willingness to meet you halfway, it is your expectations of halfway (not budging half an inch, demanding JV divulges everything to you) that is contributing to your doubt.

He doesn't owe you an explanation or justification for what he is doing how, you don't need to believe him.

At the moment I still trust "an attempt at sound judgement" more than the "loud judgement" of those that cannot guarantee how their approach will play out, and who have nothing to lose, and no responsibilities to others. All the more when I see differing abilities to self-reflect and admit shortcomings.

By all means, be loud, and try to keep people honest. "We" need those voices too. But also, be fair. You are good at the first. I think you come up short on the second.

And fairness comes in play when you talk about "let's meet halfway". Maybe it is you who needs to show up, not JV?
Are you willing to personally broker a compromise? If so, I'll tell you what I need to know. But to just stand on his side and say "He owes you nothing", doesn't sound like someone who's even remotely interested in making peace.

I understand that there are things JV can't say. But there is much that he can say. He chooses to say almost nothing except that he's "on our side" and we're supposed to just believe him.

I need more than that, and so do others.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY