• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Talansky on Vuelta, Wiggins and calling out Andy Jacques-Maynes

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
JimmyFingers said:
Well if you are a supporter of Sky then you do a very good job of hiding it.
I am a supporter of clean cycling - not of any team.


JimmyFingers said:
I think I have addressed your second point really. Clearly clean riders won't like being viewed as a dopers, and the problem is there's no real way of proving your not. This a good quote for JV:
And I addressed that by saying the 'fans' have lost faith in the system.
That is what is letting clean riders down - and what they should be angry at.

JimmyFingers said:
He also talks about 'connecting-the-dots', that association with anyone with a suspicious past automatically taints you. I know from engaging people here exactly what he means: assertions are made, theories formed, only to be changed and re-formed as different scenarios unfold on the road. At first Sky were doping like US Postal, then they were doping to lose weight, then they were doping just enough to be better than everyone else but not so their numbers would be excessive, then it was a designer drug that no-one knew about but only they could afford, then it was state-sponsored doping like east Germany and the entire British team were guilty of it, then it was doper's fatigue.

The accusations keep twisting and changing. TheHog made an assertion recently that Froome would have his last blood bag on the rest day and rally and still make the podium. He asked people to mark it and remind him of it. It hasn't come to past but no doubt there are further explanations why, more twists, more theories. Suspicion of doping is like a particularly agile, fast chicken: once it is out it's a real ****** to catch and get back inside.
Don't care about Sky, don't care about other posters views.

JimmyFingers said:
Cycling's past and its fans place the onus of proof on the riders, but here is a rider saying he can't prove it, so why should he try? Whatever information is released there will be a way of twisting it again, perpetuatating the innuedo, the debate, the snide remarks. I hope perhaps you can see that.
Thats not true.
(Most) Fans want a clean(ish) sport - it is the anti-doping system run by the UCI that people have lost faith in.
Thats why Talansky cannot prove it - we do not trust the results.
Which is where any anger should be directed at - including yours (if you have any) about Sky.
Thats the point.
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
I agree the UCI are the real target, which makes me wonder why so much time is spent targeting riders here. Sort out the giverning body and the sport will follow. At the moment it seems to be doing inspite of them, that I do believe. But we were talking about Talansky and his interview, so the point, while taken, seems a little superfluous

I am angry, I really want a clean sport but I choose to assume innocence before I am convinced at someone's guilt.
 
JimmyFingers said:
I am angry, I really want a clean sport but I choose to assume innocence before I am convinced at someone's guilt.
Doesn't it make you angry to hear the new generation of supposedly clean riders uttering the same talking points that turned out to be completely bogus when they were used by the previous generation?
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
Doesn't it make you angry to hear the new generation of supposedly clean riders uttering the same talking points that turned out to be completely bogus when they were used by the previous generation?

This sort of proves his point, doesn't it? What should he be saying exactly? As I said there seems to be this desire for sackcloth-and-ashes contrition from the pros, its only that might slake your thirst for revenge. Talansky know what has happened but states he's not involved and would never dope, then questions how he can prove it to people that won't take anything as proof.
 
JimmyFingers said:
This sort of proves his point, doesn't it? What should he be saying exactly? As I said there seems to be this desire for sackcloth-and-ashes contrition from the pros, its only that might slake your thirst for revenge. Talansky know what has happened but states he's not involved and would never dope, then questions how he can prove it to people that won't take anything as proof.
No, you're missing the point: the talking points are BS. Repeating them in an attempt to give himself extra credibility is dishonest because they mean zilch, and he knows it (JV explained the whole story to him, or that's at least what he told us).
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
No, you're missing the point: the talking points are BS. Repeating them in an attempt to give himself extra credibility is dishonest because they mean zilch, and he knows it (JV explained the whole story to him, or that's at least what he told us).

I agree. Talansky is another mouth repeating the mantra we have heard for too long.

Imagine quoting testing in this day and age. How pathetic is that after we have heard all the BS about Armstrong 'never failed a test' and the proof of Marion Jones never testing positive, never mind Ullrich, Basso, Valverde etc etc!
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
JimmyFingers said:
I agree the UCI are the real target, which makes me wonder why so much time is spent targeting riders here. Sort out the giverning body and the sport will follow. At the moment it seems to be doing inspite of them, that I do believe. But we were talking about Talansky and his interview, so the point, while taken, seems a little superfluous

I am angry, I really want a clean sport but I choose to assume innocence before I am convinced at someone's guilt.
So, you acknowledge that the UCI are the problem - that you want a clean sport.....and then say you you "choose" to assume innocence?
How has that worked out for you?

JimmyFingers said:
This sort of proves his point, doesn't it? What should he be saying exactly? As I said there seems to be this desire for sackcloth-and-ashes contrition from the pros, its only that might slake your thirst for revenge. Talansky know what has happened but states he's not involved and would never dope, then questions how he can prove it to people that won't take anything as proof.

I'll ignore the blue - as you just made that up.
Talanskys 'question' is fine - and understandable yet he completely misses the answer.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
JimmyFingers said:
This sort of proves his point, doesn't it? What should he be saying exactly? As I said there seems to be this desire for sackcloth-and-ashes contrition from the pros, its only that might slake your thirst for revenge. Talansky know what has happened but states he's not involved and would never dope, then questions how he can prove it to people that won't take anything as proof.

Well, compare the reaction of Talansky compared to Van Garderen, who basically keeps his mouth shut. Keep in mind I have no problem with someone speaking his mind, but when a lot of nonsense comes out, expect to be called on it. Ultimately, it's not what Talansky didn't say but what he said which makes him sound like a doping apologist:

-Lance is awesome, it was a witch hunt, this is all in the past (to his credit it looks like he finally ditched the Livestrong bracelet)

-Sky is awesome, they do intervals

-Contador is awesome, worthy of so much respect

-the best riders in the US just don't understand what it's like, we're just SO much better than they are (even though they were dropping me 2 years ago....)

-we all train SO HARD. we're SO MUCH MORE COMMITTED than anyone who questions us

-why won't the fans just trust us?

-"we'll never have to make those choices"... sorry, but that's just a lie, plain and simple. No one is that dumb to believe that line of crap.

For those who are claiming naivete is the reason for his delusional comment above, I just don't see it. Hell, he rode on Amore & Vita with Gaggioli as the DS and a large percentage of his Garmin teammates were professional dopers at some point in their careers! Despite his age, if he doesn't know what's been going on in cycling he is the dumbest human being on the planet. Little Lance doesn't really strike me as dumb, so I'm left feeling that he sounds a lot like Professional Dopers who get really defensive and angry when someone dares to question them. No that's not "proof" of doping, but that's the impression it leaves with me. Couple that with his performance a couple of years ago, and I'm going to reach my own conclusions.
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
So, you acknowledge that the UCI are the problem - that you want a clean sport.....and then say you you "choose" to assume innocence?
How has that worked out for you?

you're miss-quoting me: I am aware of what has happened in the past, and that the UCI's complacence and possible complicit stance let the rot set very deep indeed, but that doesn't mean I look at the current peloton and assume guilt based on performance, or associations or any other innuendo and hearsay.
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
131313 said:
Well, compare the reaction of Talansky compared to Van Garderen, who basically keeps his mouth shut. Keep in mind I have no problem with someone speaking his mind, but when a lot of nonsense comes out, expect to be called on it. Ultimately, it's not what Talansky didn't say but what he said which makes him sound like a doping apologist:

-Lance is awesome, it was a witch hunt, this is all in the past (to his credit it looks like he finally ditched the Livestrong bracelet)

-Sky is awesome, they do intervals

-Contador is awesome, worthy of so much respect

-the best riders in the US just don't understand what it's like, we're just SO much better than they are (even though they were dropping me 2 years ago....)

-we all train SO HARD. we're SO MUCH MORE COMMITTED than anyone who questions us

-why won't the fans just trust us?

-"we'll never have to make those choices"... sorry, but that's just a lie, plain and simple. No one is that dumb to believe that line of crap.

For those who are claiming naivete is the reason for his delusional comment above, I just don't see it. Hell, he rode on Amore & Vita with Gaggioli as the DS and a large percentage of his Garmin teammates were professional dopers at some point in their careers! Despite his age, if he doesn't know what's been going on in cycling he is the dumbest human being on the planet. Little Lance doesn't really strike me as dumb, so I'm left feeling that he sounds a lot like Professional Dopers who get really defensive and angry when someone dares to question them. No that's not "proof" of doping, but that's the impression it leaves with me. Couple that with his performance a couple of years ago, and I'm going to reach my own conclusions.

Does the fact he races for Garmin temper your suspicions at all? Or do you put no truck with Vaughters' ethos at the team?
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
JimmyFingers said:
Does the fact he races for Garmin temper your suspicions at all? Or do you put no truck with Vaughters' ethos at the team?

Actually, it does. What also tempers my suspicions is the fact that he's coached by Jesse Moore, whom I don't believe is doping up his riders. So, he has those 2 things going for him. But a coach and DS aren't with you 24/7, and at a certain point how can they tell between "natural" and "unnatural" progression? I really don't know. What I do know is that every time he opens his mouth, I have less and less faith in him.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
JimmyFingers said:
you're miss-quoting me: I am aware of what has happened in the past, and that the UCI's complacence and possible complicit stance let the rot set very deep indeed, but that doesn't mean I look at the current peloton and assume guilt based on performance, or associations or any other innuendo and hearsay.
Firstly - I did not misquote you.
In fact I quoted you and showed the rather obvious contradiction in your stance.

You are free to come up with any criteria you wish - I don't automatically "assume guilt" either, but I do look at performance, associations etc because of the lack of faith in the current testing process.
 
Apr 28, 2009
493
0
0
Visit site
131313 said:
Well, compare the reaction of Talansky compared to Van Garderen, who basically keeps his mouth shut. Keep in mind I have no problem with someone speaking his mind, but when a lot of nonsense comes out, expect to be called on it. Ultimately, it's not what Talansky didn't say but what he said which makes him sound like a doping apologist:

-Lance is awesome, it was a witch hunt, this is all in the past (to his credit it looks like he finally ditched the Livestrong bracelet)

-Sky is awesome, they do intervals

-Contador is awesome, worthy of so much respect

-the best riders in the US just don't understand what it's like, we're just SO much better than they are (even though they were dropping me 2 years ago....)

-we all train SO HARD. we're SO MUCH MORE COMMITTED than anyone who questions us

-why won't the fans just trust us?

-"we'll never have to make those choices"... sorry, but that's just a lie, plain and simple. No one is that dumb to believe that line of crap.

For those who are claiming naivete is the reason for his delusional comment above, I just don't see it. Hell, he rode on Amore & Vita with Gaggioli as the DS and a large percentage of his Garmin teammates were professional dopers at some point in their careers! Despite his age, if he doesn't know what's been going on in cycling he is the dumbest human being on the planet. Little Lance doesn't really strike me as dumb, so I'm left feeling that he sounds a lot like Professional Dopers who get really defensive and angry when someone dares to question them. No that's not "proof" of doping, but that's the impression it leaves with me. Couple that with his performance a couple of years ago, and I'm going to reach my own conclusions.


Nice list. Doesn't he also train with Levi?
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
Visit site
Great posts

131313 said:
Well, compare the reaction of Talansky compared to Van Garderen, who basically keeps his mouth shut. Keep in mind I have no problem with someone speaking his mind, but when a lot of nonsense comes out, expect to be called on it. Ultimately, it's not what Talansky didn't say but what he said which makes him sound like a doping apologist:

-Lance is awesome, it was a witch hunt, this is all in the past (to his credit it looks like he finally ditched the Livestrong bracelet)

-Sky is awesome, they do intervals

-Contador is awesome, worthy of so much respect

-the best riders in the US just don't understand what it's like, we're just SO much better than they are (even though they were dropping me 2 years ago....)

-we all train SO HARD. we're SO MUCH MORE COMMITTED than anyone who questions us

-why won't the fans just trust us?

-"we'll never have to make those choices"... sorry, but that's just a lie, plain and simple. No one is that dumb to believe that line of crap.

For those who are claiming naivete is the reason for his delusional comment above, I just don't see it. Hell, he rode on Amore & Vita with Gaggioli as the DS and a large percentage of his Garmin teammates were professional dopers at some point in their careers! Despite his age, if he doesn't know what's been going on in cycling he is the dumbest human being on the planet. Little Lance doesn't really strike me as dumb, so I'm left feeling that he sounds a lot like Professional Dopers who get really defensive and angry when someone dares to question them. No that's not "proof" of doping, but that's the impression it leaves with me. Couple that with his performance a couple of years ago, and I'm going to reach my own conclusions.

131313 said:
Actually, it does. What also tempers my suspicions is the fact that he's coached by Jesse Moore, whom I don't believe is doping up his riders. So, he has those 2 things going for him. But a coach and DS aren't with you 24/7, and at a certain point how can they tell between "natural" and "unnatural" progression? I really don't know. What I do know is that every time he opens his mouth, I have less and less faith in him.

along with some others in the thread. I read his interview and all of the thread before I decided to pop off but my initial impressions are confirmed.

Talansky should just keep his mouth shut if he's going to spew stupidity like the, 'I feel sorry for you if you can't believe' type of insulting bs.

Anyone who praises AC, AV, and armstrong, is one of a number of things and none of them are good.

There's no excuse for that insane interview and he should be strongly discouraged by JV from giving any in depth interviews. The interviews and JV's reaction to them hurt his credibility also.

Talansky is a ****** and his youth is no excuse.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
2
0
Visit site
JimmyFingers said:
Yes he says he doesn't feel like he has to prove him, but I can see why: he's young, he wasn't part of the earlier dirty era.

I seriously question this. The dirty era isn't in a far distant past! And there isn't a clear break. Andrew has been cycling at a high level for a few years and has been trained/coached by experienced people.

I'm definitely not implying this means he dopes, but I do not know (and thus question!) if his environment is squeaky clean and new.
 
AntiGravityCycling said:
So....Talansky calls out AJM. Who has an even better TWIN.

Tyler had...an even better twin too, right?


Is Talansky just seeding the clouds against a possible storm here?

lmfao! brilliant. you sir, have a great sense of humor.

AT is a **********************.

hrotha said:
Well it mostly establishes that he's an ignorant, self-entitled **** with a ridiculous Anglo-Saxon bias. That, or he's a huge hypocrite, which could open up the gates to his being a doper.

Considering his tweets about Armstrong after JV had supposedly told him the story, I can't rule out the latter, but as of now the signs points towards the former.

What's that saying about too much protesting?

diorgen said:
The more he talks the more he sounds like a doper to me. He doth protest too much. Seems like quite the *** as well.

Oh yeah, there it is.

I don't know how anyone at that age, in his position, especially on that team could have anything but a sophisticated understanding of how the media works and the interplay b/w pro cyclists, journalists, the anti-doping "system" and its administrators, and the fans of pro/clean-cycling in the post-Armstrong era - so his interview is either the most epic troll of the Clinic ever or perhaps evidence of previously un-diagnosed head injuries?
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
JV1973 if you read this thread do yourself and your team a massive favour and muzzle this little stray dog whilst you can.

All I hear is the idiocy and self entitled clap-trap of a goose. Pitbull hey? Anyone know how to get a Pitbull to let go once it's jaws are locked? Stick a finger up its poo shoot. JV1973, do the honours before someone else does. I leave the forum for a few days and return to find this thread and the one on Ryder's blood values. Your team just looks more suss every time a thread opens. Perhaps adopting the approach of some other young American riders is in order...aka, keeping one's trap SHUT. It's not like your team isn't getting enough spotlight as it is regarding doping.

Oh, my bad...controlled media and PR releases. Check. Except for the stray dog on the team.

I like the Clinic's take on this. Apart from the Sky troll who wandered in here by mistake. Or was it a mistake? My thought processes led me to think of a possible motive for such drivel and entitled nonsense. Simple answer. The peloton have their own moral code and operating procedures. Talanksy is sowing the seeds for future growth. Big ideals and an over inflated sense of self importance (that was present all through his little speech) need big backing. Big races require big programs. You need to get noticed on the road. Check.

But you also need to be TRUSTWORTHY. So spin some PR on your own. Let Wiggo, Contador and whoever may be looking, know that you're cool with how the game is played. "The public owe US the cyclists." That they're being unfairly questioned. Spin the omerta PR, cover yourself in the bile and you'll pass as one of the group.

So one day down the road when he gets the chance and someone offers, he can take that job with Brailsford or Riis, or whomever it may be and they can know he'll be a good little retriever for them. Another dog in their kennel. A trusted pitbull, that doesn't bite the hand that feeds it. That is all these statements amount to. He's being tested and he's playing the game. I wouldn't be surprised if a move to another team is on the cards. He's sowing the roots for it to happen. Testing the system for feelers. Seeing if there are any takers. "Hey, I just finished the Vuelta high up on Garmins 'program.' What do you think I could do on yours? Plus you can trust me"
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
Galic Ho, that makes much more sense than I'm comfortable with.

thehog is the one with the big predictions and crystal ball. We should check with him first. He has had a very good strike rate this year.:D Don't mean to upset you, especially with the pitbull lock jaw facts (I wish that one wasn't true, but it sadly is). They really don't let go.

I read his statements and as I said, I agree with most of what everyone else wrote. But I also thought it sounded off. Off in the sense of who the words were directed at. Especially for Garmin at this moment in time in cycling. Much wiser to shut ones mouth. Then the obvious struck me. Messages have multiple recipients and here in the Clinic, we are prone to assumption. I don't think the message was for any fan, least of all the Clinic. Talansky by the sounds of it doesn't give a toss what any fan thinks. It's the peloton who count. Those who will pay his bills down the road. Those who he rides with.

We really don't know what is being said behind closed doors and on the road ATM regarding Armstrong, doping, the UCI and more importantly how Garmin fit into that. Hence why I think he's being tested and this was his chance to respond to those who matter to him. Sadly he doesn't seem to give a damn what fans think as long as they believe him. The message was not for the public or journalists. They were simply tools he used to get the message to it's true recipients in the peloton.

I say good luck to him. It's gonna get real spicy around Garmin in the coming months and next year. Talansky should be ripe for some classic quotes next season. JV needs to have another chat with him seeing he is on his pay role and given what we all think Garmin riders have said to US feds.

On another note, has anyone here thought that perhaps certain riders aren't loved too much ATM given the whole LA fiasco? Basically the ex-Postal boys might be like handling plutonium...LA still has a lot of love in the peloton. Just read Joe_Papp's thread on their quotes. Basically, sides are being made and lines drawn in the sand. I wouldn't be surprised if we see next season a lot of on road conflicts. Particularly revolving around Sky.

Anyway, that is my 50 cents for now.
 

LauraLyn

BANNED
Jul 13, 2012
594
0
0
Visit site
Galic Ho said:
. . . . Simple answer. The peloton have their own moral code and operating procedures. Talanksy is sowing the seeds for future growth. Big ideals and an over inflated sense of self importance . . . .

Isn't this the problem? Even if riders don't sign up to the dope, they sign up to the omerta and all that goes with it.

And then they believe it is their own code. And they look to find honor in it.

But I don't think it is their code and I don't think the riders own it. I think it is a code owned by managers, teams, federations, and sponsors, and supported by many fans.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
LauraLyn said:
Isn't this the problem? Even if riders don't sign up to the dope, they sign up to the omerta and all that goes with it.

And then they believe it is their own code. And they look to find honor in it.

But I don't think it is their code and I don't think the riders own it. I think it is a code owned by managers, teams, federations, and sponsors, and supported by many fans.

Sure this isn't contract law and even though I could, I won't debate who has true ownership of an immaterial concept/thing. I disagree with your wording on ownership as you said everyone bar the cyclists own this code. If you operate within it, you are as much an owner as the rest. Without your participation it wouldn't exist.

It doesn't matter who owns said code of conduct, they operate within it. Thus to understand the whole scope of doping in cycling one must fathom the intricacies and iterations it presents. But you are correct for the most part. Take Bassons as the perfect example. You don't have to partake in doping for the other side (Omerta) to ask of you. There is always a cost. My point was to highlight where that cost may lie ATM and think about Talansky's position in regard to that.

As I said, I don't think his message was for anyone other than those thoroughly and heavily invested in Omerta. Whether he dopes isn't the issue, he has to deal with these people. It's his job and he can either be sidelined, like the guys he was bad mouthing in the USA, or he can join the queue.
 

TRENDING THREADS