Vandevelde interview - hope for a clean peloton

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
JV1973 said:
I retract and apologize for my "not a fan" statement. glad to know you're human. Sorry for being such a ***.
admitting it is half the battle.

JV1973 said:
ok - I need to go back into hiding (or not writing here)
And while you're there how about writing an extremely detailed book about your real experiences as a doping cyclist ;) Put it out there and be done with it.

I have said it before. This is pro cycling a sport whose performances have been in the gutter for a long long time, yet we are constantly asked to time and time again to believe in new dawns only for them to be false.

Now we are asked yet again to believe in a new dawn because a bunch of guys who doped in their careers tell us it is clean. There is no innocent until proven guilty in pro cycling and the only people who are to blame are those in the sport. there is plenty that can be done to make us believe a team is clean. It probably would cost a lot of money, but some would believe that would be money well spent.

I believe a lot of the people who post in the clinic are more fans of the sport than those with their heads buried in the sand because they know/suspect about what goes yet continue to follow the sport.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
blackcat said:
But one thing here, we cannot reconcile, is Slipstream's interest in Contador
If I am in JV's position I would do the exact, same thing. Anytime you have a chance to open the kimono with the top rider you do it. You also have to show publicly you are in the game, everyone does it. If we listened to Lefevre we would think he is about to signed every rider who wins a race.
 
I'm new here but I do believe that Garmin doesn't have a patent on "clean cycling". Call me cynical but riding on the back of this mantra only causes tears in the end. Its also a case of being 347 times bitten twice shy. We've heard it all before. To me "clean cycling" is a marketing reference not a sentiment. Never testing positive in the eyes of the fans means "very good at evading tests" and certainly doesn't mean being clean. Sorry.

In terms of confessions and telling all. It would have gone a long way to publicly speak out. A couple of guys were left hanging in the wind for a long time. They were labelled bitter because they tested positive and had nothing left. A short shape sweet statement from someone like you (JV) would have gone a long way to turning a page on that era and helping a lot of guys who were on the back end of some fairly harsh public treatment move forward. Confessions over a beer is just that - pub talk. If you took pub talk as virtue then I'd be the best cyclist in the world along with all of my mates! I'd also be sleeping with models!

We honestly all want to "believe" but an old colleague of yours stole all that belief 7 times over. We have none left.

Its a sad day when Polish joins the coalition of the willing but I believe he stated it perfectly; Being the 'clean team' doesn't mean a "free pass" - you still have to face the questions. I couldn't have put it better myself. Your responses are edging on defensive and why would a bunch of crazies suggest there's doping at Garmin? Take a look what we've been looking at for the last 20 years and there's you're answer. We're not crazy and we're certainly not stupid. We just don't believe it anymore when someone says they're clean. Its not enough.

Watching Sky today and we'll probably also see the remarkable recovery of Andy Shleck at the Tour means little has changed. Its just become more refined a maybe a little less obvious.

A suggestion; If you could follow through on something you told Harmon a few years back. Install an independent auditor in your team and report on everything they see in terms of doping or doping behaviour. A reputable firm which can go beyond thrusting numbers and talk about behaviours and outputs in layman language. Make it public.

You say you want to lead the change... then get innovating and shows us the way!
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
0
0
Polish said:
"Polish" as in Kielbasa. Or Crullers.
Ahemmm. Off-topic, but crullers are not Polish. They are Frenchay! Quebecois!

Mmmhhhmmm, grumble, grumble. Rrrrrgh. grumble.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
thehog said:
I'm new here but I do believe that Garmin doesn't have a patent on "clean cycling". Call me cynical but riding on the back of this mantra only causes tears in the end. Its also a case of being 347 times bitten twice shy. We've heard it all before. To me "clean cycling" is a marketing reference not a sentiment. Never testing positive in the eyes of the fans means "very good at evading tests" and certainly doesn't mean being clean. Sorry.

In terms of confessions and telling all. It would have gone a long way to publicly speak out. A couple of guys were left hanging in the wind for a long time. They were labelled bitter because they tested positive and had nothing left. A short shape sweet statement from someone like you (JV) would have gone a long way to turning a page on that era and helping a lot of guys who were on the back end of some fairly harsh public treatment move forward. Confessions over a beer is just that - pub talk. If you took pub talk as virtue then I'd be the best cyclist in the world along with all of my mates! I'd also be sleeping with models!

We honestly all want to "believe" but an old colleague of yours stole all that belief 7 times over. We have none left.

Its a sad day when Polish joins the coalition of the willing but I believe he stated it perfectly; Being the 'clean team' doesn't mean a "free pass" - you still have to face the questions. I couldn't have put it better myself. Your responses are edging on defensive and why would a bunch of crazies suggest there's doping at Garmin? Take a look what we've been looking at for the last 20 years and there's you're answer. We're not crazy and we're certainly not stupid. We just don't believe it anymore when someone says they're clean. Its not enough.

Watching Sky today and we'll probably also see the remarkable recovery of Andy Shleck at the Tour means little has changed. Its just become more refined a maybe a little less obvious.

A suggestion; If you could follow through on something you told Harmon a few years back. Install an independent auditor in your team and report on everything they see in terms of doping or doping behaviour. A reputable firm which can go beyond thrusting numbers and talk about behaviours and outputs in layman language. Make it public.

You say you want to lead the change... then get innovating and shows us the way!
Independent auditing is something we've already done: Paul Kimmage!

I do agree that it's a good idea, however finding someone to professionally do this has proven difficult. There aren't many people in anti-doping that want to live with a team a la Kimmage!

We have innovated, a lot, on a sociological and scientific level. You just haven't paid very much attention. And, it gets tiresome publicizing this stuff, so maybe you just aren't informed.

On that front, you are right, garmin doesn't have a patent on anti-doping. We were just the first to be loud and proud about it. And that got us a lot of attention, fans, and $$$.... and when that happens, everyone else starts thinking "maybe we should do the same?"... which was exactly the point of doing it in the first place...and that has been one (not the only, but one) driving force of change since 2008. So, nowadays, I'd say the majority of WT teams can say they are anti-doping. maybe begrudgingly, but I don't really care if they like it or not or believe in it or not - just that they do it.

While I do try and debate here and try and show you guys what is actually happening behind the scenes, now, as opposed to 2006, the reality is most fans are very supportive and not as skeptical as the group here. I try and convince the dozen or so folks that post here to look at things from a different point of view because I respect you guys and know you've been burned. I respect the skeptics and it makes me sad that I can't get you to turn the corner. However, you are a vast minority. If it were otherwise, pro cycling would not exist, as no sponsor would want to enter a sport where all fans were skeptics!

JV
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
. . .
Ricco?
He was caught by AFLD because they had a test for CERA and unlike the UCI didn't give the riders a heads up about it.
Second time he was "caught" was because he botched his transfusion.
btw - Doc Maser, great points. But, this thing about Ricco - you aren't catching my meaning. This poor guy almost kills himself because he is trying to do something by himself. The corollary is that he has no support. He has no support because people are not willing to take the risk.

You see? The guy practically self-immolates! He does a doping cyclist version of Vietnamese buddhist priests a la 1961. A little gas, a little match, FOOOOOOSSSSHHHHH. And, up we go, into massive damage territory. What this tells me is that HE CAN'T GET SOMEBODY to help him. He botched the transfusion, but if there were more people willing to help dopage, he would not have been in the position where he had to DIY. THAT was my point with Ricco. Looking forward to your comment.
 
Jan 27, 2010
921
0
0
JV1973 said:
Is that like shoe polish? or nationality Polish?

Anyhow, I agree that fans run the sport. Have stated that publicly. However, I do not consider you a fan. i consider you someone who feels a certain sense of power anonymously writing crap about people who's work ethic, doping or not, that have far outstripped your own. Making harsh critiques about things you'd never have the balls to say in person is a rush for you. That's not being a fan or being helpful to any problem. It's just a self serving addiction to a sense of power. Not being a fan or being constructive in any sense..
JV, too funny Re: Polish. He's probably an ok guy in person but in here he's globus vomitus prolificus. We've all tried to 'talk' to him but it doesn't work.

Anyway, I'd like you thank you for even coming on this site. There are few pros, DS or Owners what would even consider that. I am sure that most here appreciate to hear your side, however infrequent, of the contemporary cycling scene. Clearly doping in Procycling is not black and white, and on a web site like this, in the Clinic, there is no shortage of hyperpartisan opinions... mine included, where I loathe folks like Lance and admire pro's who try to approach cleanliness and honest racing.

You have a difficult path ahead of you, trying to appease everyone, but hopefully in the near future your hard work will take you, and cycling, to a better place.

What is your opinion on working with physiologists to prove biometric relationships (VO2, Vertical ascents, blood values-Hgm, HCT, hormones...) wrt lenght of stages/GTs, pitch and length of climb...all that kind of stuff? Is that a waste of time? Can we not start setting up a Grand tour registry for riders and in 10 years time have amassed a pile of standards based on all or more of the parameters above.

Keep up the good work.

Can you put a HD camera on someone during a switchback descent and sell it to us as a 'guide to better descending'? Just an idea.

NW
 
JV1973 said:
Independent auditing is something we've already done: Paul Kimmage!

I do agree that it's a good idea, however finding someone to professionally do this has proven difficult. There aren't many people in anti-doping that want to live with a team a la Kimmage!

We have innovated, a lot, on a sociological and scientific level. You just haven't paid very much attention. And, it gets tiresome publicizing this stuff, so maybe you just aren't informed.

On that front, you are right, garmin doesn't have a patent on anti-doping. We were just the first to be loud and proud about it. And that got us a lot of attention, fans, and $$$.... and when that happens, everyone else starts thinking "maybe we should do the same?"... which was exactly the point of doing it in the first place...and that has been one (not the only, but one) driving force of change since 2008. So, nowadays, I'd say the majority of WT teams can say they are anti-doping. maybe begrudgingly, but I don't really care if they like it or not or believe in it or not - just that they do it.

While I do try and debate here and try and show you guys what is actually happening behind the scenes, now, as opposed to 2006, the reality is most fans are very supportive and not as skeptical as the group here. I try and convince the dozen or so folks that post here to look at things from a different point of view because I respect you guys and know you've been burned. I respect the skeptics and it makes me sad that I can't get you to turn the corner. However, you are a vast minority. If it were otherwise, pro cycling would not exist, as no sponsor would want to enter a sport where all fans were skeptics!

JV
Thanks for the reply.

Yes I remember the Kimmage expedition. That was positive. But he's a journalist not an independent auditor. But way better than most journalists to the detriment of his own career. Certainly the exercise was better than any other team has done. He did did write glowingly of the experience.

From memory and this was before the financial meltdown you were suggesting that cycling could place "watchers" in each team like the securities commission does at Financial institutions. I assume that these are the types of initiatives that could occur if we got the world cycling breakaway league.

I guess the point I was making was I know you're doing a lot of the anti-doping front but the message is not getting through from a fans point of view. I do pay attention. We're all too jaded and cyclical to believe it anymore - it comes off as marketing. Blood values posted on line and Catlin styled drug programs leaves bitter tastes in ones mouth. Perhaps there's another way?

The reason I say this is when the Garmin Director Johnny Weltz made the following statements when the investigation into Armstrong was dropped:

"You can always bring questions up for everything. We are used to that in our world. You suspect someone if they do well," Weltz said.

"You can't go further when you have a federal investigation for two years and they don't nail him. You have to let the guy go," he said. "He was acting properly in (the) same environment as
everyone else. He won his victories in a credible way."


You think if the Directors in the team continue to push this silliness then how can the fans take the whole thing seriously. Why even comment?

Now edit I know you shot down these statments but to think this let alone say it was bizarrely thoughtless especially from a senior member of the team.


So when (if) Sky rip the legs off this Tour and continue to make references to USPS you can see how us "fans" get cyclical.

One final comment; from my experience the views expressed on this forum are not of a dozen or so posters. Out in the clubs and on the roads there are similar sentiments. People actually have lost the belief and most don't care anymore. They think its all show. Viewership and participation is up but I think you'll find that "sportive" cycling and not racing is where the groundswell is... there's a reason for that. People are sick of the bullsh1t competitiveness via the needle than the purity of riding a bike for enjoyment.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
thehog said:
The reason I say this is when the Garmin Director Johnny Weltz made the following statements when the investigation into Armstrong was dropped:
JV was pretty quick to say

“Yeah, I’m pretty upset by that statement. Really stupid,’’ “It’s a stupid comment. I’ve told him that.’’
We push for Garmin to embed some kind of monitor because they are perhaps the only team that would do such a thing. Far more interesting would be inserting someone in RSNT or SKY. I wonder how open they would be to the idea?
 
Apr 13, 2010
1,238
0
0
thehog said:
I guess the point I was making was I know you're doing a lot of the anti-doping front but the message is not getting through from a fans point of view. I do pay attention. We're all too jaded and cyclical to believe it anymore - it comes off as marketing.
So, you're aware of the anti-doping work by Garmin, but the message doesn't come out? Sounds to me like it does actually...

However - and I think this is JV's point to a high degree - no matter how and how much PR is done on the effort, it's still up to the individual how the choose to receive it.

It's entirely up to the individual to digest anything in the media and evaluate what they find credible and what not so much. Garmin saying they're clean is pretty credible to me, Rabobank saying they had no idea about Rasmussen - not so much.

The same way - if you don't judge all information by the same yardstick - some does indeed come across purely as marketing, some of it less so...
 
Apr 17, 2009
308
0
0
JV1973 said:
However, you are a vast minority. If it were otherwise, pro cycling would not exist, as no sponsor would want to enter a sport where all fans were skeptics!
The vast majority of Joe Public I know think Armstrong is clean.
 
JPM London said:
So, you're aware of the anti-doping work by Garmin, but the message doesn't come out? Sounds to me like it does actually...

However - and I think this is JV's point to a high degree - no matter how and how much PR is done on the effort, it's still up to the individual how the choose to receive it.

It's entirely up to the individual to digest anything in the media and evaluate what they find credible and what not so much. Garmin saying they're clean is pretty credible to me, Rabobank saying they had no idea about Rasmussen - not so much.

The same way - if you don't judge all information by the same yardstick - some does indeed come across purely as marketing, some of it less so...
I think my point got lost slightly.

I'd like to see stats on how many internal tests they conduct and the results.

Are they still testing at Garmin?

They used to post values etc. with explanation and dialogue. These no longer appear to my knowledge. I'm willing to be proved wrong on this front.

Perhaps the anti-doping message was the soft landing entry into the ProTour that Armstrong used with Catlin?

Believe me I want to believe but how many times do I need to keep going back to her to find that she's banged another guy behind my back?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
Race Radio said:
JV was pretty quick to say



We push for Garmin to embed some kind of monitor because they are perhaps the only team that would do such a thing. Far more interesting would be inserting someone in RSNT or SKY. I wonder how open they would be to the idea?
They wouldn't! Kimmage was supposed to be given access all areas for TeamSky at the TdF last year and Wiggins said no.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
JV1973 said:
Independent auditing is something we've already done: Paul Kimmage!
Kimmage got some access, but for how long? I remember he spent a TdF with you.

But is not most of the doping done before races during training.

JV1973 said:
I do agree that it's a good idea, however finding someone to professionally do this has proven difficult. There aren't many people in anti-doping that want to live with a team a la Kimmage!

We have innovated, a lot, on a sociological and scientific level. You just haven't paid very much attention. And, it gets tiresome publicizing this stuff, so maybe you just aren't informed.

On that front, you are right, garmin doesn't have a patent on anti-doping. We were just the first to be loud and proud about it. And that got us a lot of attention, fans, and $$$.... and when that happens, everyone else starts thinking "maybe we should do the same?"... which was exactly the point of doing it in the first place...and that has been one (not the only, but one) driving force of change since 2008. So, nowadays, I'd say the majority of WT teams can say they are anti-doping. maybe begrudgingly, but I don't really care if they like it or not or believe in it or not - just that they do it.

While I do try and debate here and try and show you guys what is actually happening behind the scenes, now, as opposed to 2006, the reality is most fans are very supportive and not as skeptical as the group here. I try and convince the dozen or so folks that post here to look at things from a different point of view because I respect you guys and know you've been burned. I respect the skeptics and it makes me sad that I can't get you to turn the corner. However, you are a vast minority. If it were otherwise, pro cycling would not exist, as no sponsor would want to enter a sport where all fans were skeptics!

JV
"as no sponsor would want to..."

The reality is different, HTC folded, Leopard trek could not get a sponsor so had to amalgamate with Radioshack. Geox went and Gianetti could not get a replacement sponsor! Europcar came in at the last minute to save Madiot's team. Talk of Lampre folding, LiquidGas and another possibly joining together for next season. Hardly a sport where sponsors are falling over themselves to get a team, more like pushing each other out the door to get out.

As for turning corners. When i see similar racing that i saw prior to the EPO era then i might believe that talent is the key to wining, especially in GTs, eg where dimunitive climbers go away at the begining of the HC climbs with apparent ease not hanging on to team 'trains' to try and go a few KM from the end.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
thehog said:
I think my point got lost slightly.

I'd like to see stats on how many internal tests they conduct and the results.

Are they still testing at Garmin?

They used to post values etc. with explanation and dialogue. These no longer appear to my knowledge. I'm willing to be proved wrong on this front.

Perhaps the anti-doping message was the soft landing entry into the ProTour that Armstrong used with Catlin?

Believe me I want to believe but how many times do I need to keep going back to her to find that she's banged another guy behind my back?
Hog,

The reason we haven't posted anything in a while is that NO ONE HAS ASKED. Just posting blood results with no one interested except 12 guys on The Clinic, is a waste of time. You live in a small bubble of like minded folks, if you think that stuff actually helped us.

We still do our thing, we just don't yell about it as much, as there's no point.

You know the biggest negative response I've ever gotten on twitter or otherwise? When I said Astana soft-pedaled a bit in the mtns in 2009 Tour to try and give LA an advantage over Contador. That got me hate in a way no anti-doping stance has even given me love. Even though it was totally true...

Think about that when you claim to know what the public is thinking. I deal every day in studies that address this issue. Sponsors require it. And you could not be further from the mark.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Kimmage got some access, but for how long? I remember he spent a TdF with you.

But is not most of the doping done before races during training.



"as no sponsor would want to..."

The reality is different, HTC folded, Leopard trek could not get a sponsor so had to amalgamate with Radioshack. Geox went and Gianetti could not get a replacement sponsor! Europcar came in at the last minute to save Madiot's team. Talk of Lampre folding, LiquidGas and another possibly joining together for next season. Hardly a sport where sponsors are falling over themselves to get a team, more like pushing each other out the door to get out.

As for turning corners. When i see similar racing that i saw prior to the EPO era then i might believe that talent is the key to wining, especially in GTs, eg where dimunitive climbers go away at the begining of the HC climbs with apparent ease not hanging on to team 'trains' to try and go a few KM from the end.
Bikes don't have 6 speed regina freewheels with a 13-21 anymore either. Wake up and smell the progress.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Neworld said:
JV, too funny Re: Polish. He's probably an ok guy in person but in here he's globus vomitus prolificus. We've all tried to 'talk' to him but it doesn't work.

Anyway, I'd like you thank you for even coming on this site. There are few pros, DS or Owners what would even consider that. I am sure that most here appreciate to hear your side, however infrequent, of the contemporary cycling scene. Clearly doping in Procycling is not black and white, and on a web site like this, in the Clinic, there is no shortage of hyperpartisan opinions... mine included, where I loathe folks like Lance and admire pro's who try to approach cleanliness and honest racing.

You have a difficult path ahead of you, trying to appease everyone, but hopefully in the near future your hard work will take you, and cycling, to a better place.

What is your opinion on working with physiologists to prove biometric relationships (VO2, Vertical ascents, blood values-Hgm, HCT, hormones...) wrt lenght of stages/GTs, pitch and length of climb...all that kind of stuff? Is that a waste of time? Can we not start setting up a Grand tour registry for riders and in 10 years time have amassed a pile of standards based on all or more of the parameters above.

Keep up the good work.

Can you put a HD camera on someone during a switchback descent and sell it to us as a 'guide to better descending'? Just an idea.

NW
These values all exist - and have for over 20 yrs. Luis Herrera used to break 1600VAM quite frequently in mid-80's Giros. I actually use this as a yardstick a bit. There was no oxygen vector doping at the time, and Herrera was the most talented climber out there. Now, he lacked certain things we use in modern cycling, such as lighter equipment, better gearing (guys used to do these climbs at 60-70 rpms! not efficient!) and so on, so the modern rider does have some advantages. However, until bikes are allowed to be 4kgs, I think 1600-1700 VAM is a good speed to see races being won at (assuming no strong tailwind, i.e. Verbier 2009 etc)...AND... That is what we are consistently getting.

Speeds on the flats, in TT's, and overall averages are useless info. Aerodynamics are much improved over the middle of the EPO era, and considering at 53kph, an aerodynamic gain will get you just as much as a 30 watt blood doping gain, I would say av TT speed should still be on the increase.

When I say stuff is cleaning up, I'm not basing that on "the racing looks different" or whatever crap people sometimes spew. It's based on numbers and keeping track of those numbers for a long time.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
JV1973 said:
Bikes don't have 6 speed regina freewheels with a 13-21 anymore either. Wake up and smell the progress.
if it was only so easy. so better gearing makes a guy like Wiggins a better climber, even Sean Kelly doesn;t spout that crap to explain big guys dropping little guys on cols
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
Benotti69 said:
if it was only so easy. so better gearing makes a guy like Wiggins a better climber, even Sean Kelly doesn;t spout that crap to explain big guys dropping little guys on cols
What isn't so simple is saying that little guys climb better. It's a lot more to do with cardiac output, body composition, and mitochondrial density than body size.

And yes, using a 42*21 on a major, steep, col will slow any rider down compared to using a 39*25. muscles are not efficient at 60 rpm under high load. Period.

Don't spew crap you don't understand.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
thehog said:
Thanks for the reply.

Yes I remember the Kimmage expedition. That was positive. But he's a journalist not an independent auditor. But way better than most journalists to the detriment of his own career. Certainly the exercise was better than any other team has done. He did did write glowingly of the experience.

From memory and this was before the financial meltdown you were suggesting that cycling could place "watchers" in each team like the securities commission does at Financial institutions. I assume that these are the types of initiatives that could occur if we got the world cycling breakaway league.

I guess the point I was making was I know you're doing a lot of the anti-doping front but the message is not getting through from a fans point of view. I do pay attention. We're all too jaded and cyclical to believe it anymore - it comes off as marketing. Blood values posted on line and Catlin styled drug programs leaves bitter tastes in ones mouth. Perhaps there's another way?

The reason I say this is when the Garmin Director Johnny Weltz made the following statements when the investigation into Armstrong was dropped:

"You can always bring questions up for everything. We are used to that in our world. You suspect someone if they do well," Weltz said.

"You can't go further when you have a federal investigation for two years and they don't nail him. You have to let the guy go," he said. "He was acting properly in (the) same environment as
everyone else. He won his victories in a credible way."


You think if the Directors in the team continue to push this silliness then how can the fans take the whole thing seriously. Why even comment?

Now edit I know you shot down these statments but to think this let alone say it was bizarrely thoughtless especially from a senior member of the team.


So when (if) Sky rip the legs off this Tour and continue to make references to USPS you can see how us "fans" get cyclical.

One final comment; from my experience the views expressed on this forum are not of a dozen or so posters. Out in the clubs and on the roads there are similar sentiments. People actually have lost the belief and most don't care anymore. They think its all show. Viewership and participation is up but I think you'll find that "sportive" cycling and not racing is where the groundswell is... there's a reason for that. People are sick of the bullsh1t competitiveness via the needle than the purity of riding a bike for enjoyment.

Oh, btw, thank you for noting a potential benefit of a league structure. You are absolutely correct.

Listen, I'm totally for having independent observers. I just don't want to be made a fool for being the only one doing this.
 
Aug 17, 2009
1,196
0
0
thehog said:
Thanks for the reply.

Yes I remember the Kimmage expedition. That was positive. But he's a journalist not an independent auditor. But way better than most journalists to the detriment of his own career. Certainly the exercise was better than any other team has done. He did did write glowingly of the experience.

From memory and this was before the financial meltdown you were suggesting that cycling could place "watchers" in each team like the securities commission does at Financial institutions. I assume that these are the types of initiatives that could occur if we got the world cycling breakaway league.

I guess the point I was making was I know you're doing a lot of the anti-doping front but the message is not getting through from a fans point of view. I do pay attention. We're all too jaded and cyclical to believe it anymore - it comes off as marketing. Blood values posted on line and Catlin styled drug programs leaves bitter tastes in ones mouth. Perhaps there's another way?

The reason I say this is when the Garmin Director Johnny Weltz made the following statements when the investigation into Armstrong was dropped:

"You can always bring questions up for everything. We are used to that in our world. You suspect someone if they do well," Weltz said.

"You can't go further when you have a federal investigation for two years and they don't nail him. You have to let the guy go," he said. "He was acting properly in (the) same environment as
everyone else. He won his victories in a credible way."


You think if the Directors in the team continue to push this silliness then how can the fans take the whole thing seriously. Why even comment?

Now edit I know you shot down these statments but to think this let alone say it was bizarrely thoughtless especially from a senior member of the team.


So when (if) Sky rip the legs off this Tour and continue to make references to USPS you can see how us "fans" get cyclical.

One final comment; from my experience the views expressed on this forum are not of a dozen or so posters. Out in the clubs and on the roads there are similar sentiments. People actually have lost the belief and most don't care anymore. They think its all show. Viewership and participation is up but I think you'll find that "sportive" cycling and not racing is where the groundswell is... there's a reason for that. People are sick of the bullsh1t competitiveness via the needle than the purity of riding a bike for enjoyment.
Oh, and on the Johnny Weltz thing.. I have no idea what the hell he was thinking. He apologized to me quite a bit. Thought he was going to get fired. I'm not that much of an *******.

I couldn't stay angry with him for too long, it's like some knee jerk omertà reaction ground into him over the last 30 yrs. But I think it's clear to him now that our perspective, as a team, is not what he was saying that day. He's a good guy, just doesn't always think.
 
JV1973 said:
Hog,

The reason we haven't posted anything in a while is that NO ONE HAS ASKED. Just posting blood results with no one interested except 12 guys on The Clinic, is a waste of time. You live in a small bubble of like minded folks, if you think that stuff actually helped us.

We still do our thing, we just don't yell about it as much, as there's no point.

You know the biggest negative response I've ever gotten on twitter or otherwise? When I said Astana soft-pedaled a bit in the mtns in 2009 Tour to try and give LA an advantage over Contador. That got me hate in a way no anti-doping stance has even given me love. Even though it was totally true...

Think about that when you claim to know what the public is thinking. I deal every day in studies that address this issue. Sponsors require it. And you could not be further from the mark.

I remember the soft pedal comment well. Back in the day when Lance held the balance of power.... from memory you did shimmy on the comment and rephrased after the backlash. Although I did agree with you. If they soft pedalled any slower the peloton would have ground to a halt. Everyone knew it. Everyone could see it.

Moving on... you need to stop referring to "the 12 guys in the Clinic". Why post here if there's only 12 guys! :roll eyes: You know as well as most here a lot of people read the Clinic as a news site. Its just that many don't post.

So for the record for the fans. How many tests are being conducted at a team level on riders March to November each year? Just out of interest.
 
Dec 30, 2011
3,547
0
0
thehog said:
I guess the point I was making was I know you're doing a lot of the anti-doping front but the message is not getting through from a fans point of view. I do pay attention. We're all too jaded and cyclical to believe it anymore - it comes off as marketing. Blood values posted on line and Catlin styled drug programs leaves bitter tastes in ones mouth. Perhaps there's another way?

So when (if) Sky rip the legs off this Tour and continue to make references to USPS you can see how us "fans" get cyclical.

One final comment; from my experience the views expressed on this forum are not of a dozen or so posters. Out in the clubs and on the roads there are similar sentiments. People actually have lost the belief and most don't care anymore. They think its all show. Viewership and participation is up but I think you'll find that "sportive" cycling and not racing is where the groundswell is... there's a reason for that. People are sick of the bullsh1t competitiveness via the needle than the purity of riding a bike for enjoyment.
I dont post in the clinic much yet I really dont understand what evidence you have to claim that the sport is still riddled with doping.
The doping cases have almost ceased and this is certainly not due to riders being more crafty as the officials will also have picked up their game with the development of more advanced technology.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M The Clinic 34
Similar threads
Tour de Cleans?

ASK THE COMMUNITY