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

[DirtyWorks]

The quotes about basically trusting us is very difficult to do in light of everything that has happened. But I do acknowledge that it is also difficult for any clean person to prove that.

It's worth repeating for the casual forum reader, how many times have we heard this line in cycling over the last 20 years. You can go back to Hein's reign in Pat's chair and his "Riders aren't selling races... Anymore.... This time..."

Serious question - what has Wiesel got to do with Talansky?

He's a rider that came out of Weisel's program and it's no secret Weisel doped his bicycle team projects, very, very likely doped himself with Eddie B. Why would he suddenly get a conscience after taking over USAC?

 

[Benotti69]

A serious question I have borne out of curiousity is whether anyone here believes that the article indicates in any way that Talansky dopes?

This is professional cycling where we are told for the umpteenth time the sport is cleaner. He finished top 10 in a gt where the top 2 are (ex)dopers.

What makes you believe he is clean? He is a pro cyclist and we know that the era between 1999-2007 was dirty where epo was the drug of choice. Of that era we are led to believe that Moncoutie and Bassons did not dope. There were a few others too.

Why should we believe this era is clean? Because they tell us it is? Because the racing is slower, maybe they dope less?

Since when did cyclists and those in cycling tell the truth?

Contador denies doping. Valverde denies doping. Vino denies doping. Armstrong denies doping. Why believe a cyclist at the top of the sport when they tell you they are clean, especially one that tells you we should believe based on very very very little evidence?

 

[diorgen]

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

 

[Winterfold]

#41 is an excellent post. Had to say. Well done to Libertine Seguros.

+1 nice post Libertine

 

[workingclasshero]

what a wally


so. he gets results like a doper, he looks like a doper and he talks like a doper. So let's at least consider the possibility he is a doper.

 

[mb2612]

I don't think you can draw any conclusions from rider interveiws about whether they doped, people handle it in such different ways that saying a particular response is indicitave of doping just isn't valid.

If I could ask one question of Talansky, it would be how many current Garmin riders doped in the past? How many of them got sanctioned? How many does he ostracise because of their former indiscretions? Does he think they should be punished? and Given that his answer to the previous question will almost certainly be no, why should we believe that the culture has has changed?

Ok, 5 questions but I would like to see an honest answer from him.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Very nicely put Libertine.

 

[Froome19]

This is professional cycling where we are told for the umpteenth time the sport is cleaner. He finished top 10 in a gt where the top 2 are (ex)dopers.

What makes you believe he is clean? He is a pro cyclist and we know that the era between 1999-2007 was dirty where epo was the drug of choice. Of that era we are led to believe that Moncoutie and Bassons did not dope. There were a few others too.

Why should we believe this era is clean? Because they tell us it is? Because the racing is slower, maybe they dope less?

Since when did cyclists and those in cycling tell the truth?

Contador denies doping. Valverde denies doping. Vino denies doping. Armstrong denies doping. Why believe a cyclist at the top of the sport when they tell you they are clean, especially one that tells you we should believe based on very very very little evidence?

I disagree with this but argued my point in my previous post.

I don't think you can draw any conclusions from rider interveiws about whether they doped, people handle it in such different ways that saying a particular response is indicitave of doping just isn't valid.

Exactly my point.

 

[BroDeal]

It is one big set of inconsistencies, accusatory and defensive at the same time, sitting on a foundation of the usual talking points, and all in the same interview. Talansky might be wise to consider a career in the UCI.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

HaHa: "You'll have to ask JV why he calls me "pitt bull"". Erm, no Andrew, I think it's pretty clear.

Reading that I thought what a stuck up little **** he is. Then I thought how pleased I am that my opinions didn't make it into the press in my early 20s. Young man, you are on probation! If you're not somewhat ashamed of your current 'my **** doesn't stink' attitude by the time you're 28, you really are a c0ck.

Apart from that +1 Libertine Seguros

 

[MarkvW]

All the doping stuff is in the past. Cycling has turned a new leaf. Festina and USPS are history.

And look at the absence of any significant number of positive tests at the Grand Tours! If that's not evidence of a clean peloton, then what is? You ask what these riders are "on" as they pedal at speeds comparable to the Armstrong era? What are they on? They're on the bike! That's what they're on.

I feel sorry for all you people who don't believe in miracles.

The doping smear is all a big witch hunt led by c**ts and bone-idle wan**rs.

Cycling is never going to turn a new leaf unless true fans ignore cycling's filthy history and just start believing in riders like Andrew Talansky. A true fan suspends his or her disbelief when a rider of Talansky's stature tells him or her to stop thinking "wrong" and start thinking "right!" Don't think the worst of Riis and Bruyneel, etc. Be like Talansky (TM)!

And this "Omertà" talk has to stop, and stop now. If someone is thinking wrong thoughts, then they must be corrected until they think right thoughts. That's not Omertà--it is re-education.

And get off Pat McQuaid's back! He must be an honorable man! He wouldn't be suing people for calling him corrupt if he was dishonorable, now would he?

Be like Talansky (TM).

 

[irongrl]

Ah, uh. Err.

While I like Talansky a lot, I get the feeling that every time he opens his mouth I'll like him less and less.

Virtually everything he said on doping (it's all about training harder than all those other lazy bums, look at my controls and biological passport, those watt figures are theoretically within human limits therefore they were achieved cleanly, Millar is the most outspoken anti-doping crusader out there, there's been a cultural shift and now no one's afraid to speak out against doping [Note: hi Lance], Wiggins was exactly right to say sceptics were w****s) was embarrassing to read.

Exactly what I thought when I read this. Kind of disappointing to be honest.

 

[Racelap]

A second part of that is I also believe that fans and journalists owe it to us to believe in us

Nobody owes you jack. What an attitude.

It's the same old song and dance. He may very well be clean but the sense of entitlement is huge. Tyler Hamilton's book made it clear: doping alone does not make you good. You have to train ruthlessly and ride well beyond your limits to extract the benefits offered by EPO or transfusion. So save the "lazy bums" talk.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It's worth repeating for the casual forum reader, how many times have we heard this line in cycling over the last 20 years. You can go back to Hein's reign in Pat's chair and his "Riders aren't selling races... Anymore.... This time..."

What??
(Sorry, but you quoted my post - and then put this as a response? No idea what you are on about here)

He's a rider that came out of Weisel's program and it's no secret Weisel doped his bicycle team projects, very, very likely doped himself with Eddie B. Why would he suddenly get a conscience after taking over USAC?

Weisel's program??
Again please explain. If you are referring to the junior youth development of USAC then yes, thats partly funded by Wiesel - but then, so is everything in USAC.

 

[MarkvW]

I don't get the problem that everybody is having with Wiggins. Wiggins is squarly on the side of those trying to root out doping in cycling. This from an article Susan W. wrote about him:

Bradley Wiggins of Cofidis is ashamed of his sport. "After last year's Tour de France I didn't feel proud to be a professional cyclist," he told the Daily Mirror. "And I feel the same now. Doping problems affect everyone in the peloton," noted the 26 year-old. "I've got children, a wife and a house and I could lose my livelihood because someone who tests positive finishes ahead of me. It's about time someone had some balls and told it how it was. There are enough of us who think the way I do."

"They say it's only one or two but I'm sure more people are doing these things. So it's my role as a role-model to expose it and not pretend it isn't happening," he continued. "I don't think it's right I should come up in front of everyone and put up a smokescreen and say everybody is OK and there are only one or two people doing this. My big motivation this year is to prove that you can win clean."

He was particularly upset at Tour de France winner Floyd Landis, who tested positive for testosterone. "I was really angry with Landis. It sickens me. He tested positive and then he was denying it. He took us riders for fools."

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I don't get the problem that everybody is having with Wiggins. Wiggins is squarly on the side of those trying to root out doping in cycling. This from an article Susan W. wrote about him:

Bradley Wiggins of Cofidis is ashamed of his sport. "After last year's Tour de France I didn't feel proud to be a professional cyclist," he told the Daily Mirror. "And I feel the same now. Doping problems affect everyone in the peloton," noted the 26 year-old. "I've got children, a wife and a house and I could lose my livelihood because someone who tests positive finishes ahead of me. It's about time someone had some balls and told it how it was. There are enough of us who think the way I do."

"They say it's only one or two but I'm sure more people are doing these things. So it's my role as a role-model to expose it and not pretend it isn't happening," he continued. "I don't think it's right I should come up in front of everyone and put up a smokescreen and say everybody is OK and there are only one or two people doing this. My big motivation this year is to prove that you can win clean."

He was particularly upset at Tour de France winner Floyd Landis, who tested positive for testosterone. "I was really angry with Landis. It sickens me. He tested positive and then he was denying it. He took us riders for fools."

Come on... you have been on this forum long enough to know that this was his stance in years gone by and not necessarily is opinion now. People actually seemed appreciative of him speaking out like that which is why the same people find it suspect that he has taken a 180 degrees turn.

If he still feels like he did at Cofidis he should speak out especially since he has such a huge standing in the sport at the moment.

 

[biokemguy]

He missed the point

I was rooting for Talansky in the Vuelta and don't expect pro athletes to be very smart so this interview is only slightly saddening to me.

The part that I find sad is his apparent lack of understanding about the corruption of the governing body of his sport. That should be painfully clear even to a less than intelligent pro athlete.

I think he misses the point completely when he expects us to trust him and his fellow riders. Until the UCI is reformed, there can be no trust of anyone in cycling no matter how much they beg and plead.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Considering Talansky's article I would say that he seems to be, as Libertine correctly stated, aggravated with the situation that he is in.

Then, if he is "aggravated with the situation that he is in" surely he should be aggravated at the dopers (including many of his own team) - not the fans.

Something which many posters on here do not do is look at the situation from the perspective of the rider. Currently Talansky is under doubt, due to the fact he is part of the wider cycling peloton and has top 10 in a GT, when there is suitable evidence to claim that he is innocent. According to him and logically if you do not happen to be a cynic eaten away by anger and frustration then it does seem as if cycling has cleaned itself up. Is there a wide spread doping attitude in the peloton? Are there riders who he knows personally who are achieving great things without doping? Are there significant stats to suggest that doping is at a much lower level? In all it would not be all that hard to imagine it is such and for Talansky to state this is probably because he believes truly that what we have here is a peloton which is not doping and he is angry about the vicious cycle which he is entrenched in.

I am not excusing Talansky in any way, rather just explaining why his comments are pretty logical from where he is in the sport

But you don't explain why this "anger" is directed at fans, bot the dopers.

And finally I would like someone to explain to me why they consider this line to be at all unreasonable.

Which was in relation to this quote from Talansky:
If you’re a true cycling fan, you might believe the riders are on drugs, you have to be open to also believing that we are clean.
While I believe many riders are indeed clean - that is another stupid comment IMO.

To definitively label someone a doper is something which is wrong to do when you simply do not know. To say it with any amount of assurity is wrong. Maybe the peloton do not deserve the trust of fans, but at the same time the current crop of riders who Talansky is reffering to; likes of TJVG, Dombro and Stetina. Why do these riders deserve all the accusation which are levelled at them? They may not deserve the trust which is so rare to come across on this forum. But to totally condemn riders like these, maybe this is what Talansky was expressing when he suggested they deserved trust. He is only young and may have said something whilst meaning something else. It would seem that Talansky keeps coming back to the point that the new riders on the block he trains with dont need to be culpable for the transgressions of their predecessors. In reality I do not think that Talansky is asking for the fans true belief, rather he is asking for them to give this new generation a chance to make amends.

If they are truly clean then maybe the single minded approach which so many posters use is possibly a bit too extreme? They may not deserve to be considered clean because the sport as a whole has no rights to such belief.

But comments such as the ones from Jacques-Maynes even if Talansky read in error, is what I truly believe that Talansky was reffering to. He was basically asking for them all not to be written off and I dont think anyone here however cynical and disenchanted they currently are can blame him for that..

If his comments were solely aimed around what AJM tweeted, then I may agree - but he appears to have taken broader aim then that.

As for the Inconsistencies , get over it he made some dumb mistakes but his viewpoint still remains clear.

No, his inconsistent comments are not clear - they are inconsistent.

I really wish JV has not been scared off by CN and would come and share his views on the matter. Or for that matter Talansky himself who seems to be pretty well informed of views from this forum...

If JV is scared away from here - it is because Fat Pat shot across his bows, and reminded him who is boss.
Which neatly brings us full circle on who Talansky should be angry at for this mess.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Nobody owes you jack. What an attitude.

There's a bit of an obligation to the spectator...

Let's review how sports viewership becomes a business for a moment. In simple terms, if there are no fans, then there is no motivation for a company to spend good money for athletes to do their thing because no one is watching.

Or, maybe I'm misinterpreting your reply?

 

[MarkvW]

Come on... you have been on this forum long enough to know that this was his stance in years gone by and not necessarily is opinion now. People actually seemed appreciative of him speaking out like that which is why the same people find it suspect that he has taken a 180 degrees turn.

If he still feels like he did at Cofidis he should speak out especially since he has such a huge standing in the sport at the moment.

Engage your sarcasm detector.

 

[the big ring]

Ok, I acknowledge that it's not 6.7 w/kg now so it's cleaner.

Says who?

To match Brad Wiggin's speed for the final time trial, 2012 TdF, Chris Anker Sorensen would have needed to do 7.51W/kg.

The estimate from cycling models is Brad did 6.8W/kg for 64 minutes for that final TT.

 

[the big ring]

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.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Nowhere in the interview did they ask Talansky about Lance. IDIOTS!

Go back and read the interview with these thoughts in your mind:

Talansky - LANCE NEVER TESTED POSITIVE, LEAVE HIM ALONE!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

And finally I would like someone to explain to me why they consider this line to be at all unreasonable.

There is nothing wrong with that line at all. After all, plenty of people are willing to take circumstantial evidence and offhand quotes as enough to let them say somebody is doping, so we should be willing to accept those as enough to say somebody is clean too. It was the line about us owing it to the riders to believe in them that has raised the ire.

 

[the big ring]

Engage your sarcasm detector.

To be fair it was missing an emoticon. But I did read it with the tone intended.

Hitch has it as his sig but I am still looking for a transcript of that interview with the UK mag.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

To be fair it was missing an emoticon.

Exactly. There are enough posters on here that are irrational at best so why would you not be one of them?