Vandevelde interview - hope for a clean peloton

[thehog]

Allen Lim is rock solid. They’ll never break him. I saw him deny the Landis allegations. He’ll be last man standing. He had a poker face on when asked about his involvement in arrange blood transfusions. This man will not break. He is too strong. Even the Federal Investigators couldn’t phase him. Wouldn’t be surprise me if he’s the mastermind behind RadioShack’s current run of success.

See Lim here beating up on some journalists:

http://video.bicycling.com/video/ATOC-Allen-Lim-addresses-allega

 

[Benotti69]

If they can't be honest about the past, I can't trust their word in the present.

This is how i feel about pros talking about it being cleaner.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

If a currently clean pro detailed their own past doping, they would be suspended and if they detailed taking a range of drugs over a period they might be suspended for life. If they detailed someone else's doping they would (a) incur extreme enmity of a sort that would jeopardise their professional prospects, (b) would risk being sued and (c) would be terrible hypocrites if they didn't detail their own doping at the same time and so get themselves suspended.

That is a seriously unrealistic standard to set. I'll believe you are riding clean just as soon as you effectively end your career, abandon your income and jeopardise your savings and assets. How on God's Earth do any of you actually expect people to do that?

 

[Race Radio]

If a currently clean pro detailed their own past doping, they would be suspended and if they detailed taking a range of drugs over a period they might be suspended for life. If they detailed someone else's doping they would (a) incur extreme enmity of a sort that would jeopardise their professional prospects, (b) would risk being sued and (c) would be terrible hypocrites if they didn't detail their own doping at the same time and so get themselves suspended.

That is a seriously unrealistic standard to set. I'll believe you are riding clean just as soon as you effectively end your career, abandon your income and jeopardise your savings and assets. How on God's Earth do any of you actually expect people to do that?

No, they would not be suspended. WADA does give immunity for testimony

 

[Cloxxki]

Hasn't Rabobank also consistently been anti doping? First hint of bad breath, Rasmussen was out of the tour in a yellow jersey. We now know what their ethics were.
Garmin, just takes the lying to a new level and into a new era I'm afraid. MIght well be they win everything in 5 years, only because the rest have actually started to dope less due to more severe penalties, while nothing changed at Garmin. Too much talk for me to trust. Clean is the new green.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

No, they would not be suspended. WADA does give immunity for testimony

Is that guaranteed? And what does immunity cover, in return for what testimony?

 

[Polish]

Is that guaranteed? And what does immunity cover, in return for what testimony?

When Lance sent the letter to WADA giving tips on the bovine doping, he was probably given immunity.

 

[Race Radio]

Is that guaranteed? And what does immunity cover, in return for what testimony?

It depends on what you negotiate.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

It depends on what you negotiate.

That, I suspect, wouldn't be particularly reassuring as a starting point.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Presumably it would also be confidential, so as not to prejudice any cases that may be brought as a result.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Really? I barely heard that untill 4 years or so ago. I certainly can't remember anyone claiming cycling was practically clean in the early 00's.

Before EPO, one of the hottest issues for the UCI was race fixing. They claimed to solve that problem too. Vino's actions shows they have done nothing of the kind. And now, we're supposed to believe doping is "fixed" like race fixing was? Really?

You guys should figure out by now that VN is an eternal propaganda machine for USAC/UCI. They did an awesome job turning a couple of stories inside-out to the point they made no sense for the express purpose of making USAC/UCI look good. If VdV broke omerta, VN would have edited it into something UCI friendly.

 

[Caruut]

If a currently clean pro detailed their own past doping, they would be suspended and if they detailed taking a range of drugs over a period they might be suspended for life. If they detailed someone else's doping they would (a) incur extreme enmity of a sort that would jeopardise their professional prospects, (b) would risk being sued and (c) would be terrible hypocrites if they didn't detail their own doping at the same time and so get themselves suspended.

That is a seriously unrealistic standard to set. I'll believe you are riding clean just as soon as you effectively end your career, abandon your income and jeopardise your savings and assets. How on God's Earth do any of you actually expect people to do that?

If a pro currently riding said "I'll come clean about everything I know once my career is over", then I would trust them. I understand that coming clean incurs consequences that, especially for younger athletes, are completely unpalatable. There isn't any of this though. There are all just content with saying "it's cleaner". Cleaner than what? How clean is it now, how clean is it then?

Would anyone trust a politician who said "This government is no longer taking as many bribes as we did, but we won't tell you exactly what bribes we have taken, nor the ones we're still taking"?

 

[Ripper]

If a currently clean pro detailed their own past doping, they would be suspended and if they detailed taking a range of drugs over a period they might be suspended for life. If they detailed someone else's doping they would (a) incur extreme enmity of a sort that would jeopardise their professional prospects, (b) would risk being sued and (c) would be terrible hypocrites if they didn't detail their own doping at the same time and so get themselves suspended.

That is a seriously unrealistic standard to set. I'll believe you are riding clean just as soon as you effectively end your career, abandon your income and jeopardise your savings and assets. How on God's Earth do any of you actually expect people to do that?

That, I suspect, wouldn't be particularly reassuring as a starting point.

I agree with the majority of this.

 

[hrotha]

If a currently clean pro detailed their own past doping, they would be suspended and if they detailed taking a range of drugs over a period they might be suspended for life. If they detailed someone else's doping they would (a) incur extreme enmity of a sort that would jeopardise their professional prospects, (b) would risk being sued and (c) would be terrible hypocrites if they didn't detail their own doping at the same time and so get themselves suspended.

That is a seriously unrealistic standard to set. I'll believe you are riding clean just as soon as you effectively end your career, abandon your income and jeopardise your savings and assets. How on God's Earth do any of you actually expect people to do that?

We've talked about this before, but just to clarify: I'm not asking Vande Velde to come clean, because I understand the enormity of what that would entail. I believe it takes some sort of hero or a madman to do something like that.

No, I'm not asking Vande Velde to come clean. I'm merely pointing out why I don't find his statements particularly credible.

 

[thehog]

We've talked about this before, but just to clarify: I'm not asking Vande Velde to come clean, because I understand the enormity of what that would entail. I believe it takes some sort of hero or a madman to do something like that.

No, I'm not asking Vande Velde to come clean. I'm merely pointing out why I don't find his statements particularly credible.

You're not going down that Landis-half confession path again?

You need to write a doping-confession handbook so these nutjob cyclists get it right.

 

[hrotha]

You're not going down that Landis-half confession path again?

You need to write a doping-confession handbook so these nutjob cyclists get it right.

That was only in your imagination. You need to stop making up stuff, but I guess at least you learned not to attach definite dates to your inventions again.

edit: I'm quite tired of you bringing up your distorted narrative of what I said, and I won't allow you to portray me in a negative light just because you have no reading comprehension or are just that much into strawmanning. My opinion on this matter has always remained consistent. This kind of dishonest debating you so often display is disgusting.

 

[thehog]

That was only in your imagination. You need to stop making up stuff, but I guess at least you learned not to attach definite dates to your inventions again.

edit: I'm quite tired of you bringing up your distorted narrative of what I said, and I won't allow you to portray me in a negative light just because you have no reading comprehension or are just that much into strawmanning. My opinion on this matter has always remained consistent. This kind of dishonest debating you so often display is disgusting.

Calm down. I know what you said and so do you.

I've been clear all along and held my line for over 10 years. You were arguing some complex half truth confession.

Now on this thread you're picking holes in VdV comments in the same style.

It's ok. It doesn't really me stress me a great deal.

But for once just put yourself in the riders shoes when you're dictating how they explain doping.

 

[hrotha]

At the start of this thread you criticised VDV for saying things have improved in cycling without acknowledging what went on in the past. Now you say you are not asking him to come clean at all about the past.

You can sigh and use the word strawmanning all you want but that is a big flip flop from where you stood at the start of this thread. You say you are consistent on this but this proves otherwise.

Not at all.

The usual points about cycling having gone so far and being so clean now, without EVER acknowledging openly where it was, how it changed, why it changed, who changed and who didn't, so that the same kind of talk can be recycled time and time again. And we've been hearing it since 1999.

This doesn't mean I demand him to come clean. I undertand fully why he thinks he can't. This means I don't buy what he's saying, and I'd rather he didn't say it if he's not going to give us a good reason to believe him.

 

[Hugh Januss]

The guys still racing who are making these "cycling is cleaner than before" statements are effectively backing themselves into a corner. They want to be able to say it's cleaner now without going into any detail about how it was dirtier before or about what knowledge they might have of that fact.
In the end it becomes as useful and believable a statement as "Colgate makes your teeth whiter". Whiter than what? Crest? Coal?

 

[blackcat]

The guys still racing who are making these "cycling is cleaner than before" statements are effectively backing themselves into a corner. They want to be able to say it's cleaner now without going into any detail about how it was dirtier before or about what knowledge they might have of that fact.
In the end it becomes as useful and believable a statement as "Colgate makes your teeth whiter". Whiter than what? Crest? Coal?

summed up by the italian pro's peloton, when speaking of Slipstream, referring to them as "those arseholes".

They knew they were preparing, yet they went the burson marstellar type of obfuscation preparatore, the two degrees of separation, the plausible deniability.

It worked for a long time. I admit, it worked on my for a while too.

fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again - George Dubbya

 

[JV1973]

three things, Mr. Cat:

1. You're a sociopath. Truly. One who believes his own created misinformation to a degree that he actually believes it to be reality = You. Not a criticism, just factual.

2. I really dislike the general philosophy of B-M. Would never hire them as a PR agency. you've really got to speculate better going forward.

3. You consistently spread untruthful information. This is ethically repugnant. Perhaps you should consider that in the future.

 

[JA.Tri]

I read this thread and get frustrated with the mess that is doping. I understand and empathise with most of the above sentiments, on both (many) sides of the multi sided fence.

While I believe the peloton "is cleaner" than it has been in years I don't know:

How dirty it was?...yes very dirty...but how many riders (%), how much (dosage), how many (preparations per year), how many drugs/vectors (did each rider use), did they use for a discrete period/majority/all of their career?
How clean is it now?...significantly but how much (repeat points above)?

How will I, we (the forum/interested public) be persuaded/satisfied/convinced:

.that it is cleaner/eventually (effectively) clean?
.that individual/all stakeholders are doing their bit?

For myself I have no idea on the practical/realistic options that address the above.

We know that cyclists have recently been found to have doped. While past performance does not guarantee future outcomes (a la financial investments), reasonably we can assume that a significant minority (at least) of the pro peloton continue to dope/will take up doping.

CVV has asserted a position. I accept he believes what he states however the history of doping and cycling's traditions provide no concrete reference to authenticate his view...hence my rant above.

 

[ElChingon]

Being the new generation of cleanER cycling by knowlegable supposedly smartER policies yet somehow the old dirty doctors still pop up on the payroll. One would think there was a shortage of doctors, well a shortage of certain type of doctors. Gynocologists for men, the rarest.

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

I actually prefer it when riders don't say anything about 'cleaner cycling'. To pretend that the sport has made any kind of moral shift with regards doping does nothing but insult the people who are in some way knowledgeable about the professional milleu.

Professional cycling has been (and still is) about not getting caught. Any sport which is happy to have Johan B. or Riis as a DS is not a sport that's policing itself. To start giving it hi-fives cause you can apparently win clean is a premature - cycling is nowhere near where it needs to be in order to have ANY credibility as a clean sport.

CVV must think we've all just fallen out of a tree. We can't take professional cycling's word for it because professional cycling has done nothing but lie to us for 20+ years.

 

[blackcat]

three things, Mr. Cat:

1. You're a sociopath. Truly. One who believes his own created misinformation to a degree that he actually believes it to be reality = You. Not a criticism, just factual.

2. I really dislike the general philosophy of B-M. Would never hire them as a PR agency. you've really got to speculate better going forward.

3. You consistently spread untruthful information. This is ethically repugnant. Perhaps you should consider that in the future.

and you need to reconcile Contador. Really. And when Ricco was doing funny things back in 2008 or whenever SSChipotle debuted, that first hilltop finish, CvdV was off the front too, before Kirchen and Schumacher were juggling the win.