When will JV step up?

[Dr. Maserati]

I dont want nor need a mea culpa for his own doping. He aleady said so much, in as many words.

I am more concerned at the disingenuous on SS Sports. They are not as clean as he contends publicly, and the pursuit of Contador makes the whole premise of the team absolutely risible.

I agree on the SlipStream angle - the whole Trent Lowe incident showed that at the very least they had loose policy's in place.

But a question re Contador - I know you have mentioned it before and there is no doubt JV was trying to get Contador, as he explained it here in the Clinic.
But how do we know that it went beyond mere talk and didn't die when he saw his BP?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Seriously? Has JV lied and lied and lied and put the boot into anyone who *does* take an anti-doping stance? That's about as false a comparison as I can think of.


The only way in which JV doesn't 'occupy his space' is by not pandering to (some) posters on here by doing a very public kiss and tell. The rest of what he does more than makes up for that. If that isn't enough for you that's tough.

Sorry chuffy - to the highlighted, but isn't there a distinction to his own doping and a full 'kiss & tell' (which I assume includes LA?).

To the Blue - isn't that really nothing more than blind faith? What have Garmin done (as opposed to said) to show that they are a clean team?
Thats why I find it difficult to 'trust' someone on what they say, when they are not forthcoming on their own past.

 

[blackcat]

he had sent him some Jim Felts, prior to the 2009 Tour, when the Hog and Gunderson were trying to sideline him an maybe shove him out with Astana.

Not much time to run your strategy, the bikes were FedExed. I reckon that is pretty convincing considering JV's record of due dilligence, with appearances over reality, and ofcourse, the year of Wigans.

 

[Chuffy]

I'm saying let's leave our feelings out of it--has Lance said anything to indicate that he is anything other than opposed to doping? Then that's his public posture. Whether we believe it is another story.

Leaving feelings aside, you need to take things like LA's attitude to Bassons and Simeoni into account here before you deduce his stance on doping. He has never been proactively anti-doping. JV certainly has been, whether or not you believe in him.

I'm just a little uncomfortable grandfathering Vaughters into the putative new era of cycling based on his cryptic statements while expecting a full expose, and subsequent banishment/ostracization of Lance Armstrong--even granting the different magnitude.

I can understand your discomfort, JV is of an era with LA, it's pretty obvious that there are murky aspects to his history as a rider and frankly it's hard to trust anyone these days. However, at least JV is actively promoting something we all want, eg clean cycling. He could easily have run Garmin as just A.N Other team, kept his head down. The grief he gets on here seems to the (unreasonable) price he pays for sticking his head above the parapet.

But you are right in that JV doesn't owe me a thing. I don't take any of it personally. I respect your defense of him, and am perfectly happy to agree to disagree.

Fair enough and I'm happy to leave it there.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

he had sent him some Jim Felts, prior to the 2009 Tour, when the Hog and Gunderson were trying to sideline him an maybe shove him out with Astana.

Not much time to run your strategy, the bikes were FedExed. I reckon that is pretty convincing considering JV's record of due dilligence, with appearances over reality, and ofcourse, the year of Wigans.

Cheers, appreciate that - I thought that might be it - my problem with that story is that it is from Bill Stricklands Tour de Lance!

When you read the way BS portrayed AC in that book and that this story came from an (unnamed) Astana 'source' - I tend to not give that particular story too much credence but YMMV.

 

[Chuffy]

I agree on the SlipStream angle - the whole Trent Lowe incident showed that at the very least they had loose policy's in place.

The Trent Lowe case showed that they *did* have strong policies in place (eg, not going to an unapproved doctor) which is why they were able to sack White without argument. Matt White may not have carried out the policy but the team enforced the consequences of that failure.

Blind faith? Faith, yes, to a certain extent, but not blind. Things like the team policy re: no external medical treatment and their 'no needles' policy mean the faith I choose to place in JV has its basis in reason. I know I'm potentially setting myself up for a fall if he turns out to be a cynical scumbag but I prefer to take the risk and support someone I believe in rather than merely sneering from the sidelines, as some on here do.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The Trent Lowe case showed that they *did* have strong policies in place (eg, not going to an unapproved doctor) which is why they were able to sack White without argument. Matt White may not have carried out the policy but the team enforced the consequences of that failure.

Blind faith? Faith, yes, to a certain extent, but not blind. Things like the team policy re: no external medical treatment and their 'no needles' policy mean the faith I choose to place in JV has its basis in reason. I know I'm potentially setting myself up for a fall if he turns out to be a cynical scumbag but I prefer to take the risk and support someone I believe in rather than merely sneering from the sidelines, as some on here do.

To the highlighted - I appreciate your view and I hope you are right.

But, I think the TL incident showed the opposite. He was sent by a Garmin DS who went against the team rules and TL didn't feel comfortable enough to tell anyone about it, that is not good.
Also JV didn't 'sack' White until the story leaked out and Paul Kimmage got word of it - that is not reassuring.

Ok, I will avoid 'faith' or 'blind faith' - but if JV wants people to place their trust in him then (IMO) he needs to be frank and honest about his own doping and moreso why he stopped which I believe would explain why he set uo a team in the first place.

Again, thanks for the answer.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

If he's stepped up privately, to the authorities (presumably WADA, USADA and the Feds) and encouraged others to do likewise (iirc he advised Landis to do this)...

No, he advised Landis to admit that he doped and not name any names. In other words he advised Landis to maintain omerta. Landis could have received the same advice from McQuaid or Verbruggen. Those two will gleefully tell you that they are against doping and have spent large amounts of time and resources fighting it. What is the difference between those two and Vaughters?

 

[Chuffy]

No, he advised Landis to admit that he doped and not name any names. In other words he advised Landis to maintain omerta. Landis could have received the same advice from McQuaid or Verbruggen. Those two will gleefully tell you that they are against doping and have spent large amounts of time and resources fighting it. What is the difference between those two and Vaughters?

IIRC (without Googling) he advised him to tell the authorities (WADA and USADA, not UCI) all that he knew but without going public. I don't recall there being any 'no names' qualification in his advice. That's very different from the advice that Verbruggen or Pat would have given, which would have been 'tell Uncle Hein all about it and then we'll all forget that any of it every happened'.... It's telling that JV advised Landis to put himself in the hands/mercy of WADA/USADA and not UCI.

Giving the authorities full disclosure is hardly maintaining omerta.

 

[Chuffy]

To the highlighted - I appreciate your view and I hope you are right.

But, I think the TL incident showed the opposite. He was sent by a Garmin DS who went against the team rules and TL didn't feel comfortable enough to tell anyone about it, that is not good.
Also JV didn't 'sack' White until the story leaked out and Paul Kimmage got word of it - that is not reassuring.

I'm not 100% sure of the timeline. With White already on his way to Australia, sacking him was probably more symbolic than anything else, but the fact remains that the policy was already in place and available for team management (eg JV) to call upon if it was broken.

Ok, I will avoid 'faith' or 'blind faith' - but if JV wants people to place their trust in him then (IMO) he needs to be frank and honest about his own doping and moreso why he stopped which I believe would explain why he set uo a team in the first place.

Again, thanks for the answer.

I'd like to hear that too, but I don't *need* to hear it to place my trust in him.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

IIRC (without Googling) he advised him to tell the authorities (WADA and USADA, not UCI) all that he knew but without going public. I don't recall there being any 'no names' qualification in his advice. That's very different from the advice that Verbruggen or Pat would have given, which would have been 'tell Uncle Hein all about it and then we'll all forget that any of it every happened'.... It's telling that JV advised Landis to put himself in the hands/mercy of WADA/USADA and not UCI.

Giving the authorities full disclosure is hardly maintaining omerta.

Landis: "No, I didn’t actually speak to him but I responded to his texts because he was another guy I figured ‘Okay, he knows more than most people. I can talk to him. He’s not going to be too judgemental.’ But here’s the problem; in my head the truth is more complex than in Vaughters head, and I’ve now finally understood that. (Last April), when I was going to tell the story, I had some correspondence with him - because he knew before some other people did - and his advice was, “Just say what you know about you and don’t say anything about anyone else.” And I said, “Yeah, but Jonathan, this story involves other people. How do I tell the story without that? What do I do when they say ‘Who helped you dope on the Postal Service team?” He said “Just say it’s none of your business.” Those were his words. I said, “Vaughters, have you ever talked to the press? Saying ‘none of your business’ is probably the worst thing you can say.” In my mind the truth was complex. In his mind it was ‘Yeah, I doped now just go home.’ That’s what he was trying to tell me to say." --from the Landis/Kimmage interview

Sounds like omerta to me. Sounds like advice he could have gotten from McQuaid.

 

[Maxiton]

Landis: "No, I didn’t actually speak to him but I responded to his texts because he was another guy I figured ‘Okay, he knows more than most people. I can talk to him. He’s not going to be too judgemental.’ But here’s the problem; in my head the truth is more complex than in Vaughters head, and I’ve now finally understood that. (Last April), when I was going to tell the story, I had some correspondence with him - because he knew before some other people did - and his advice was, “Just say what you know about you and don’t say anything about anyone else.” And I said, “Yeah, but Jonathan, this story involves other people. How do I tell the story without that? What do I do when they say ‘Who helped you dope on the Postal Service team?” He said “Just say it’s none of your business.” Those were his words. I said, “Vaughters, have you ever talked to the press? Saying ‘none of your business’ is probably the worst thing you can say.” In my mind the truth was complex. In his mind it was ‘Yeah, I doped now just go home.’ That’s what he was trying to tell me to say." --from the Landis/Kimmage interview

Sounds like omerta to me. Sounds like advice he could have gotten from McQuaid.

And to me, it sounds like sensible advice. Sensible, that is, if you operate in the world of omerta, have something to confess, but want to continue riding afterwards. His telling Landis how to navigate the omerta world is no sign Vaughters isn't working for change. Likewise, his not being willing to fall on his sword is not an indictment of his intentions.

The world of omerta is still there. It is the sea in which the teams move. Or the swamp, rather. The upcoming Armstrong indictments don't mean that Armstrong and his cohorts, or others, won't reach out and crush you if you aren't careful.

I've been critical of Vaughters and his team in the past, but I think we need to give him a break. He's focused on changing the sport while being a part of it, not committing suicide.

 

[Chuffy]

Landis: "No, I didn’t actually speak to him but I responded to his texts because he was another guy I figured ‘Okay, he knows more than most people. I can talk to him. He’s not going to be too judgemental.’ But here’s the problem; in my head the truth is more complex than in Vaughters head, and I’ve now finally understood that. (Last April), when I was going to tell the story, I had some correspondence with him - because he knew before some other people did - and his advice was, “Just say what you know about you and don’t say anything about anyone else.” And I said, “Yeah, but Jonathan, this story involves other people. How do I tell the story without that? What do I do when they say ‘Who helped you dope on the Postal Service team?” He said “Just say it’s none of your business.” Those were his words. I said, “Vaughters, have you ever talked to the press? Saying ‘none of your business’ is probably the worst thing you can say.” In my mind the truth was complex. In his mind it was ‘Yeah, I doped now just go home.’ That’s what he was trying to tell me to say." --from the Landis/Kimmage interview

Sounds like omerta to me. Sounds like advice he could have gotten from McQuaid.

Ok, ok, fair enough.
I'm also slightly wary that there's a 'he said/she said' aspect to Floyd's recollection of how things were. Did anyone ask JV for his side? I'm sure I've read other stuff, besides the Kimmage interview and I'm damn sure JV told him to go to the authorities.

I've been critical of Vaughters and his team in the past, but I think we need to give him a break. He's focused on changing the sport while being a part of it, not committing suicide.

Yup.

 

[ludwig]

The bottom line is JV has done nothing as DS of Garmin to indicate he is anything other than a loyal omerta man. Any indication that Garmin is 'anti-doping' is pure PR. All Garmin riders are loyal omerta men--including many veterans of Postal or CSC. JV has never hired a whistleblower (Millar doesn't count--he only talked because the cops made him and he's been a dependable omerta loyalist since returning to the peloton). It's not a mystery why JV would employ someone like Allan Lim or why he wanted Alberto Contador on his team.

I'm not saying JV is a bad man, or anything about him personally, simply that his team operates within the omerta code just like all other Pro Tour cycling teams. He is not special. Even if JV happens to have anti-doping opinions, there is no evidence his team has a different policy on doping than other pro tour teams.

 

[ElChingon]

I think he knows the dot line is getting very close or have already been marked up his back.

 

[hrotha]

The bottom line is JV has done nothing as DS of Garmin to indicate he is anything other than a loyal omerta man. Any indication that Garmin is 'anti-doping' is pure PR. All Garmin riders are loyal omerta men--including many veterans of Postal or CSC. JV has never hired a whistleblower (Millar doesn't count--he only talked because the cops made him and he's been a dependable omerta loyalist since returning to the peloton). It's not a mystery why JV would employ someone like Allan Lim or why he wanted Alberto Contador on his team.

I'm not saying JV is a bad man, or anything about him personally, simply that his team operates within the omerta code just like all other Pro Tour cycling teams. He is not special. Even if JV happens to have anti-doping opinions, there is no evidence his team has a different policy on doping than other pro tour teams.

Disagree. If JV is actually doing the same stuff other teams do, he'd be the worst of them all. I can hardly fault a doper or even a doping DS from a moral point of view, if doping is widespread enough, but a hypocritical spin doctor and propagandist would be a different matter altogether.

I still have faith in JV but I'm afraid it stems more from my need to believe than from any specific things he's done as opposed to said.

 

[ludwig]

Disagree. If JV is actually doing the same stuff other teams do, he'd be the worst of them all. I can hardly fault a doper or even a doping DS from a moral point of view, if doping is widespread enough, but a hypocritical spin doctor and propagandist would be a different matter altogether.

I still have faith in JV but I'm afraid it stems more from my need to believe than from any specific things he's done as opposed to said.

You are welcome to your faith; much good may it do you. Spin doctor/propagandist is a little harsh...JV did nothing the other DSes aren't doing. It was either spin PR about having a clean team or have no team at all.

I'm interested in evidence. And the evidence indicates complicity in omerta. The evidence indicates association with known dopers and dope enablers (the David Millars and Allan Lims of the world). Which shouldn't be surprising--that's what cycling is and how it works. None of cycling's "good guys" can escape the reality of the system.

 

[Granville57]

I would like to know what happened to that letter allegedly from Landis that was posted on here at the weekend but got pulled down right quick. There were a few responses as I went to bed but next day it had disappeared.

I must've missed something. If anyone wants to clue me in by PM, I'd be interested

I hadnt realsied a previous letter concerning Steffen Prentice had been posted here and JV came on to defend their position, this time the letter got pulled almost immediately. Why? Because there was more serious accusations in the latest letter.

Are you talking about this one?
Internal Garmin Email from Prentice Steffen
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=12374&highlight=prentice+steffan

Edit:
I thought you were suggesting that the above letter had been pulled, but now I read it differently.

 

[131313]

You are welcome to your faith; much good may it do you. Spin doctor/propagandist is a little harsh...JV did nothing the other DSes aren't doing. It was either spin PR about having a clean team or have no team at all.

I'm interested in evidence. And the evidence indicates complicity in omerta. The evidence indicates association with known dopers and dope enablers (the David Millars and Allan Lims of the world). Which shouldn't be surprising--that's what cycling is and how it works. None of cycling's "good guys" can escape the reality of the system.

I know I'll probably been seen as a JV apologist, but I don't see it the same way as you. I understand your opinion and you're certainly welcome to it, but I disagree. My thoughts really aren't based on 'faith' as much as they are observations and in knowing a couple guys who ride on the team.

I'll state up front that I have mixed feelings about JV. I applaud much of what he's done, but at the same time I find some his actions and dealings a bit distasteful.

He's done some very positive things, in my opinion:

-he left a team with an infrastructure of doping and tried to give it a go clean

-he came back to the states and raced basically for fun when he realized Europe was totally charged and he couldn't be competitive over there without dope

-he started what was basically an amateur team with no budget to help a bunch of up and coming cyclists get into the game, and he did it with good intentions, in my opinion

-he legitimately stressed riding clean over results when the team first started, and for the first few years.

Again, this is my view and interpretation of things, but I feel all of the above make him different that "all of the other directors". You're certainly entitled to your view, but this is my take.

Fast forward to today, I have really mixed feelings about the constant "omerta" charge. I simply think it's more complex than people realize. I certainly don't agree with every statement he's made (or didn't make), but I think he's acted in good faith. And I say this as someone who isn't his biggest fan. In particular, I think his comments to Landis to not implicate others was ridiculous. I also think that much of his reticence to speak openly made sense 5 years ago when he was trying to get his team project off the ground. I think it makes much less sense now.

Lastly, I think that the association with "known dopers" is disingenuous. If you're going to have a cyclist over the age of 30 on your team with european palmares, chances are you're going to have a "known doper" on your team, whether they've been sanctioned or not. There are several "known dopers" on Garmin (including JV himself). IMO, what matters now is that they're committed to now riding clean. That doesn't mean "ignore the past", and I certainly tire of that rhetoric as much as the next guy. But ultimately I think it means making a good faith effort to field a clean team, and I believe he's done that in the past, and continues to do so. Their results certainly seem to demonstrate that...

edit: one other thing I think differentiates him from some others was his position regarding his riders with respect to the Landis investigation. While Brailsford came out and said "anyone who admits doping is fired", JV made it clear that he would fully support his guys if the told the truth to the investigators, as long as they were committed to riding clean. To me, that made it pretty clear that Sky was more interested in perception that truth. Again, that's my take. I'm sure plenty of people will disagree, but there it is...

 

[Granville57]

I reserve judgement on JV until after the entire federal case shakes out.
We just don't know yet what JV has said or done in regards to the case, and there very well may be good reasons for him not to elaborate at this time.

As entertaining for us as Tyler's interview and George's supposedly leaked testimony is, I don't like to see anything that gives an advantage to LA's camp. They know what they've done and what they're are guilty of. If a few things catch them off guard or by surprise, all the better.

Viewing it from a different perspective:
If the case runs its course and JV's role is never fully explained, then I could easily see him taking cover behind the sentiment of "Well, the case is over, let's move forward and not look at the past anymore." That would be disappointing.

We also don’t know what’s actually taking place in regards to a possible breakaway league. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt, for now, that he’s following a longer timeline than some may be comfortable with in terms of his transparency.

At SOME point, I'd like to see all the cards on the table.
Do I have the right to ask for that? Well, JV is "selling" and marketing a product--his team. The idea that we will buy Garmin products, Cervelo products, Team gear, and/or "support the cause" and encourage his philosophy is all interwoven.

Since I count myself as a target of that, then yeah, I feel that asking for more clarification is not so far out of line.

 

[ludwig]

131313,

First, I'm not sure where you coming from re. Garmin's results indicating they are clean. If Contador came to ride on Garmin and was no longer able to finish 1st, but rather 5th, would you take that as indication he would be clean? The less experienced cycling fan probably would, while the hard-bitten experienced fan most certainly would not. You don't get the kind of results Garmin got in the Tour on bread and water--Allan Lim and Jonathan Vaughters know this very well.

So bottom line is I see no evidence to indicate his guys are clean. Second, I think it's very significant that JV has not taken any kind of whistle-blower onto his team. Jaksche was looking for a team at the start up of Slipstream...if Slipstream was all that you think it was, why wouldn't Vaughters reward Jaksche's courage and service to anti-doping with a job offer? None of the Garmin riders have ever taken a stand against doping that couldn't be interpreted as simple PR posturing. Instead, Vaughters was all about recruiting former Postals and CSC riders to join his new Pro Tour squad.

I have no doubt that JV's motivations are complex and that he may have some sympathy with anti-doping. But you pretty much have to be a sucker to believe his team is preparing differently from the other teams. It's too bad Contador didn't join Garmin so that this would be more clear.

 

[131313]

131313,

First, I'm not sure where you coming from re. Garmin's results indicating they are clean. If Contador came to ride on Garmin and was no longer able to finish 1st, but rather 5th, would you take that as indication he would be clean? The less experienced cycling fan probably would, while the hard-bitten experienced fan most certainly would not. You don't get the kind of results Garmin got in the Tour on bread and water--Allan Lim and Jonathan Vaughters know this very well.

Well, Contador never road for him so that's a bit of a moot point, don't you think? We don't really know the whole story. One possibility is that he thought Contador was talented enough to win clean if the playing field were level. Another possibility is that he looked at his blood values and said "no way". Fact is, we really don't know. But he never rode for Garmin. As far as my comments regarding their results, my comment was simply that given the size of the team, their budget and a fair number of guys with pedigrees, they just don't win very many races. And as far as results in the Tour, they never really did much (and I don't see that changing any time soon).

So bottom line is I see no evidence to indicate his guys are clean.

Let's face it, it's impossible to prove a negative. I do think the evidence suggest they are clean as a whole, even if there on individuals on the team doping. I say that based on lack of positive tests (yeah, I know...), their overall lackluster results, their overall score on the leaked "suspicion index", and my personal relationship with a few guys on the team, past and present. And I'll fully admit to the last point that's 'belief', not knowledge. I don't 'know' what anyone does, except for me.

Second, I think it's very significant that JV has not taken any kind of whistle-blower onto his team. Jaksche was looking for a team at the start up of Slipstream...if Slipstream was all that you think it was, why wouldn't Vaughters reward Jaksche's courage and service to anti-doping with a job offer? None of the Garmin riders have ever taken a stand against doping that couldn't be interpreted as simple PR posturing. Instead, Vaughters was all about recruiting former Postals and CSC riders to join his new Pro Tour squad.

Was Jaksche really a whistleblower, though? Here's an exact quote from him: "I tried to, but couldn’t get a contract; I talked about what I had done and that ended my career, even although I only ever talked about my own activities."

I'm not being obtuse here. I understand that his confession was different that Millar or Basso's half-baked nonsense. But that said, I wouldn't exactly call him a whistleblower, either. So question, what is "a strong stand against doping that's not simple posturing"? That's hard to quantify in my book.

I have no doubt that JV's motivations are complex and that he may have some sympathy with anti-doping. But you pretty much have to be a sucker to believe his team is preparing differently from the other teams. It's too bad Contador didn't join Garmin so that this would be more clear.

I'm pretty cynical by nature, and as I said (but bears repeating), I'm no huge fan of JV. Still, I do believe the team infrastructure is committed to riding clean. That's not to say they don't have guys boosting on their own, as there may be. As I said before this is my belief based on what I've observed and people I know in the organization, past and present. And I'll fully admit it's just that: belief. Which, at the end up the day is all we have until there's definitive proof. The tough thing is that there's never going to be definitive proof that someone didn't do something.

 

[tubularglue]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/56420890/Drugs-Vaughters

thoughts from yesteryear

 

[Granville57]

Ok, ok, fair enough.
I'm also slightly wary that there's a 'he said/she said' aspect to Floyd's recollection of how things were. Did anyone ask JV for his side? I'm sure I've read other stuff, besides the Kimmage interview and I'm damn sure JV told him to go to the authorities.

OK, there is a bit more to this. For the record, this is also from the Kimmage interview and it seems to represent JV's side of the story.

Kimmage asked Vaughters for his version of the conversation and was emailed the following:
“I told Floyd to be totally honest and upfront about everything that was or could be pertinent information to help USADA and WADA fight doping. I attempted to connect him to Travis Tygart, as I trust Travis to be fair. I did not tell him he should publicly disclose anything about anyone else to media outlets, as media outlets do not serve as enforcement regarding anti-doping regs and public disclosures can actually impede the progress of anti-doping investigators. I felt that the proper authorities were those who needed absolute truth to make meaningful changes in the sport. Not journalists. And that’s what I told him.”

 

[Granville57]

Did anyone ask JV for his side? I'm sure I've read other stuff...

Hi,

I just wanted to be sure that you saw my follow-up to your post. The response you got from "Damiano" was incomplete.

OK, there is a bit more to this. For the record, this is also from the Kimmage interview and it seems to represent JV's side of the story...