# Vaughters airing the dirty laundry...



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

more and more, outing several U.S. riders including Danielson, who I think has largely been passing under the radar.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/vaughters-confirms-past-doping-by-danielson-others-at-garmin


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

Dwayne Barry said:


> more and more, outing several U.S. riders including Danielson, who I think has largely been passing under the radar.
> 
> Vaughters Confirms Past Doping By Danielson, Others At Garmin | Cyclingnews.com



Didn't we talk about this two weeks ago  ?



Edit:
Your article is JV narking on his riders.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

cda 455 said:


> Your article is JV narking on his riders.


Can you nark on guys the cops already have?

I suspect that these guys have all been dealt with by USADA and have suspensions coming their way when it all shakes out, but who know for sure?


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

I am digging the straight talk from Vaughters. About damn time.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

That's about as blunt as it gets. More power to him.


----------



## The Tedinator (Mar 12, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Can you nark on guys the cops already have?
> 
> I suspect that these guys have all been dealt with by USADA and have suspensions coming their way when it all shakes out, but who know for sure?


If they don't get at least a slap on the wrist suspension, it will just fuel the "witch hunt" crowd. After all, the big Kahuna got a "forever" ban.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

Creakyknees said:


> I am digging the straight talk from Vaughters. About damn time.


Ditto. The truth hurts. Kind of embarrassing that Riis still expects us to swallow his crap about not knowing Fuentes when a number of his riders have connections with him. I think we have the two faces of the sport right there. Those who did wrong and are now making amends and those who want to preserve the status quo and pay lip service to cleaning up the sport. Every day Riis and his ilk spend within the sport is a day lost in the fight to improve it's transparency.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

There are not "two faces". JV is no better than Riis or any other doper. Until riders with ZERO suspicion hanging over them come forward and admit to doping (and give up everyone they know), they are all the same. 

JV is looking worse now. He admitted to doping only after he knew there would be no consequences and now he's outed active riders on his own team who still have careers to finish. Nice one JV, you'll be lucky not to get a blanket party from your riders on the bus at the next race.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Can you nark on guys the cops already have?
> 
> I suspect that these guys have all been dealt with by USADA and have suspensions coming their way when it all shakes out, but who know for sure?


I guess narking to the public.

For some reason I must have totally forgot about Danielson or maybe I didn't know about Danielson's doping.


Either way I wonder if JV gave those riders the heads-up before he did the interview.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

sir duke said:


> Ditto. The truth hurts. Kind of embarrassing that Riis still expects us to swallow his crap about not knowing Fuentes when a number of his riders have connections with him. I think we have the two faces of the sport right there. Those who did wrong and are now making amends and those who want to preserve the status quo and pay lip service to cleaning up the sport. Every day Riis and his ilk spend within the sport is a day lost in the fight to improve it's transparency.


Good poast.


I wonder if Riis is concerned about his sponsorship/employment. I don't think he has a bank account like LA so I wonder if he is blowing smoke in order to not tick off his sponsors. :shrugs:


----------



## OldChipper (May 15, 2011)

"Based on this, I knew their transgressions, while ethically the same as JJ’s, were much less in terms of enhancing performance." 

So... they doped but didn't get as much advantage as others so it's OK, sort of. 

Or... "they were like me, they doped but were still losers so, like me, it was OK too as long as I confess after it no longer matters because I'm pissed off that someone else had a better doping program than mine." 

The rationalizations are stunning. Wonder how many riders will be anxious to sign-on with Garmin after this? 

Another interesting question... since we now know that blood/urine tests are a) irrelevant and b) really IQ tests, how does JV know his riders are really clean now? Oh, the extensive, 3rd party testing program. Uh, but wait.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

davidka said:


> There are not "two faces". JV is no better than Riis or any other doper. Until riders with ZERO suspicion hanging over them come forward and admit to doping (and give up everyone they know), they are all the same.
> 
> JV is looking worse now. He admitted to doping only after he knew there would be no consequences and now he's outed active riders on his own team who still have careers to finish. Nice one JV, you'll be lucky not to get a blanket party from your riders on the bus at the next race.


Yikes, he fessed up and wants to stop lying. His riders screwed up by doping. How does he owe them any loyalty if they want to continue with the omerta. Riis is for the status quo, JV isn't, thus two faces, it's not that difficult to work out.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

vaughters is a real hypocrite. He waited until the moment where he knew the information was about to get out to "straight out confess" to the doping past of his riders. 
Then he tries to discredit someone coming out against the omerta in cycling (which exists, remember how Bassons got treated in 1999 ? ) by saying that he wasn't as good as the others, so really it's different.
I've never liked Vaughters, just like I've never liked Millar, all false converts who abused the system when they could and then pretended to be "Clean." At least other dopers who got caught and came back to the sport had the decency to not talk about their past, and accept the reality of who they were, and what the sport is.

For all we know, Garmin could still be doping today. Hesjedal won a hotly contested Giro. There is no doping test outside of the official one, which we all know is a joke. 

I may seem very cynical, but I still love professional cycling. For every doped team leader, there is an anonymous teammate doing his job clean. And I tip my hate off to Moncoutie, who is retiring this year and probably raced a succesfull career clean.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

OldChipper said:


> "Based on this, I knew their transgressions, while ethically the same as JJ’s, were much less in terms of enhancing performance."
> 
> So... they doped but didn't get as much advantage as others so it's OK, sort of.


he is not talking about grades of doping, which is evident if you take the whole paragraph and not just the snip that could be seen to indicate that when taken out of context. 

"CVV, Zabriskie, Danielson, while all clearly have a past, and from an ethical standpoint are no different from JJ, there is a very pragmatic difference," wrote Vaughters. "That difference is performance based. Basically, I knew from what my time at USPS, how "inside" or not those riders were. Based on this, I knew their transgressions, while ethically the same as JJ's, were much less in terms of enhancing performance. Therefore, I knew they could perform close to their enhanced level, clean."

The question was not about grades of ethics but whether they could actually race at a decent level clean.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

cda 455 said:


> I guess narking to the public.
> 
> For some reason I must have totally forgot about Danielson or maybe I didn't know about Danielson's doping.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure it actually came in an interview. I think Vaughters has been posting on the cyclingnews.com clinic forum and that's where the information came from, which leaves open the possibility he was simply drunk or something


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Chris-X said:


> Lance hated JV more than everyone else too!
> 
> That came out in _The Secret Race_.
> 
> Attacking JV isn't going to help your boy "Lance."


Nice job. I was wondering how you would bring Lance into this post too. :thumbsup:


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

den bakker said:


> he is not talking about grades of doping, which is evident if you take the whole paragraph and not just the snip that could be seen to indicate that when taken out of context.
> 
> "CVV, Zabriskie, Danielson, while all clearly have a past, and from an ethical standpoint are no different from JJ, there is a very pragmatic difference," wrote Vaughters. "That difference is performance based. Basically, I knew from what my time at USPS, how "inside" or not those riders were. Based on this, I knew their transgressions, while ethically the same as JJ's, were much less in terms of enhancing performance. Therefore, I knew they could perform close to their enhanced level, clean."
> 
> The question was not about grades of ethics but whether they could actually race at a decent level clean.


That is the problem with PED's though. They don't take a 75% rider and make him 110% rider. The average pro's are 90%-96% riders, and the PEDs give that extra little. When everyone is so close, even fractions make the difference between wins and losses.

They don't make losers into can't lose riders. They take a professional at the top of his sport and make him just a little better than everyone else who was his rival before PEDs.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

spookyload said:


> That is the problem with PED's though. They don't take a 75% rider and make him 110% rider. The average pro's are 90%-96% riders, and the PEDs give that extra little. When everyone is so close, even fractions make the difference between wins and losses.
> 
> They don't make losers into can't lose riders. They take a professional at the top of his sport and make him just a little better than everyone else who was his rival before PEDs.


Right. 
Riis and Kohl are probably the two best examples from pack fodder podiums.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

http://stevetilford.com/?p=21510

Tilford hits hard


----------



## Zombie John (Jul 25, 2011)

"Nark" is spelled n-a-r-c.

Narc.

Nark, is a village in Iran.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

cda 455 said:


> Good poast.
> 
> 
> I wonder if Riis is concerned about his sponsorship/employment. I don't think he has a bank account like LA so I wonder if he is blowing smoke in order to not tick off his sponsors. :shrugs:


Riis isn't exactly a pauper but he's nowhere near Lance's deep pockets. He knows he's lucky to still be in the game and I'm sure he'd like this to go away but he hasn't noticed which way the wind is now blowing. He can't really do anything other than deny, deny, deny lest he end up in a similar predicament to Bruyneel. Interesting to see what future events will mean for the old guard. Up til now the usual suspects are saying the usual things, trying to keep the soup as saliva-free as possible.


----------



## moonmoth (Nov 8, 2008)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I'm not sure it actually came in an interview. I think Vaughters has been posting on the cyclingnews.com clinic forum and that's where the information came from, which leaves open the possibility he was simply drunk or something


Exactly, this was a very bizzarre way for JV to spill the beans. He likes his wine, for sure.


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

He said it was a stupid move, and he just got caught up in the discussion.

Whether it was that or a way to reveal before it comes out in the press, I don't know. I like JV's candidness on twitter, and I like the team, so I'd like to assume the best.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Vaughters Outs Danielson
> 
> Tilford hits hard


I read it pretty quick but didn't see any mention of Rick Crawford as his coach. IIRC, there was a rumor years ago that he got busted coming back into the states from Mexico with a load of EPO and folks were putting 2 + 2 together when it came to Danielson?

Funny I wasn't sure if I got the name right so I looked it up and Tommy D. is on the front page of Crawford's coaching website


----------



## ctrapeni (May 29, 2012)

OldChipper said:


> "Based on this, I knew their transgressions, while ethically the same as JJ’s, were much less in terms of enhancing performance."
> 
> So... they doped but didn't get as much advantage as others so it's OK, sort of.
> 
> :



I think JV's statement means that when they doped they didn't do it effectively and these riders had a ton of natural talent that could still be used. Ie. their results weren't due to the doping. He mentions one case where TommyD was doping to increase his VO2 Max, but that wasn't his limiting factor when racing.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

JV is fraud. Again, once his riders were cleared and given a free pass from the USADA, he outs them. They should get NAS of some sort as well, or the whole thing is a joke. Yeah JV, Garmin is clean now :rolleyes


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

DIRT BOY said:


> JV is fraud. Again, once his riders were cleared and given a free pass from the USADA, he outs them. They should get NAS of some sort as well, or the whole thing is a joke. Yeah JV, Garmin is clean now :rolleyes


I think it is extremely unlikely any of these guys have been given a free pass. The most likely scenario is USADA is waiting to announce their suspensions until the Bruyneel/Marti arbitration is resolved.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

Zombie John said:


> "Nark" is spelled n-a-r-c.
> 
> Narc.
> 
> Nark, is a village in Iran.


Try Google:
Nark
An informer, especially a police informer.
_intr.v._ *narked*, *nark·ing*, *narks* To be an informer.


john

John is also something you defecate in.



<table class="ts"><tbody><tr><td style="padding-bottom:5px;padding-top:5px;color:#666" valign="top" width="100px">
</td><td style="padding-bottom:5px;padding-top:5px" valign="top"><table class="ts"><tbody><tr><td>
</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table>


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I think it is extremely unlikely any of these guys have been given a free pass. The most likely scenario is USADA is waiting to announce their suspensions until the Bruyneel/Marti arbitration is resolved.


Watch, give us LA and you are FREE!


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

That article from Steve Tilford is the bomb. I don't think I've ever seen such straight-talk from a (former) professional cyclist. I'm not sure it's going to go down well with the "initiated" crowd though. It's easier to believe in the clean peloton bs.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

sir duke said:


> Yikes, he fessed up and wants to stop lying. His riders screwed up by doping. How does he owe them any loyalty if they want to continue with the omerta. Riis is for the status quo, JV isn't, thus two faces, it's not that difficult to work out.


No, he didn't "fess up", he would've needed to do that while his results or license as a team director were still in jeopardy. Instead, he waited until the SOL was up and tried to score empathy points. He owes them loyalty as their employer. As for the riders he outed, he owes them loyalty as significant UCI points holders, the same points that place his team in the Pro-Tour level. JV has been doing pretty well for himself with the status quo, we cannot pretend to know what the status quo actually is from out here.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

davidka said:


> No, he didn't "fess up", he would've needed to do that while his results or license as a team director were still in jeopardy. Instead, he waited until the SOL was up and tried to score empathy points. He owes them loyalty as their employer. As for the riders he outed, he owes them loyalty as significant UCI points holders, the same points that place his team in the Pro-Tour level. JV has been doing pretty well for himself with the status quo, we cannot pretend to know what the status quo actually is from out here.


The timing is really the issue here, I agree that waiting for the SOL to expire is self-serving and there's no doubt that JV is looking after No.1. Nothing new there. He's obviously not going to tell all if that means he's putting his DS position in jeopardy and possibly risking the viability of the team (which you might consider a type of loyalty). So yes, JV has done what everyone else has done by protecting his own ass. Selfish? Sure. Understandable? Yes. Commendable? Not particularly. Is he doing right by his riders? Well, they doped, he kept quiet. That sucks, so yes, I'm persuaded that JV isn't the saint he would have us believe. However, one thing that his comments have made clear to me at least is that it's really not a question of black and white. Everything is a shade of grey, there are different ways to dope, the results of doping are not uniform across the board, passing a UCI test means next to nothing, nearly everybody has lied, some, maybe most, are still lying. The 'clean' peloton is really just a chimera, something to be hoped for in the best of all possible worlds, though in practical terms rather less likely to happen. BUT, we have to start somewhere, the sport has to decide if it wants to stay dirty, live a lie, look the other way, keep taking the backhanders and spinning BS dreams to a public who are wiseing up fast. A lot of people will get caught up in the bloodletting, some like Vaughters, who cut the right deals and play ball with USADA, will have a soft landing, but I'd rather reserve my scorn for those who were dirty from day one, have no desire to see anything change if it means uncovering their own guilt, and would willingly point the finger at others no worse than themselves. JV at least, has accepted (belatedly) that the game was crooked and now the game is up.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

sir duke said:


> The timing is really the issue here, I agree that waiting for the SOL to expire is self-serving and there's no doubt that JV is looking after No.1. Nothing new there. He's obviously not going to tell all if that means he's putting his DS position in jeopardy and possibly risking the viability of the team (which you might consider a type of loyalty). So yes, JV has done what everyone else has done by protecting his own ass. Selfish? Sure. Understandable? Yes. Commendable? Not particularly. Is he doing right by his riders? Well, they doped, he kept quiet. That sucks, so yes, I'm persuaded that JV isn't the saint he would have us believe.
> 
> However, one thing that his comments have made clear to me at least is that it's really not a question of black and white. Everything is a shade of grey, there are different ways to dope, the results of doping are not uniform across the board, passing a UCI test means next to nothing, nearly everybody has lied, some, maybe most, are still lying. The 'clean' peloton is really just a chimera, something to be hoped for in the best of all possible worlds, though in practical terms rather less likely to happen.
> 
> BUT, we have to start somewhere, the sport has to decide if it wants to stay dirty, live a lie, look the other way, keep taking the backhanders and spinning BS dreams to a public who are wiseing up fast. A lot of people will get caught up in the bloodletting, some like Vaughters, who cut the right deals and play ball with USADA, will have a soft landing, but I'd rather reserve my scorn for those who were dirty from day one, have no desire to see anything change if it means uncovering their own guilt, and would willingly point the finger at others no better than themselves. JV at least, has accepted (belatedly) that the game was crooked and now the game is up.


Another good poast.




I'll add just one word: Paragraphs  . FIFY


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

cda 455 said:


> Another good poast.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thank.

You.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

In related news, McQuaid/UCI is now looking into JV's statements to see if action will be taken against the riders he named.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

davidka said:


> In related news, McQuaid/UCI is now looking into JV's statements to see if action will be taken against the riders he named.


How funny is it that Fat Pat ignored Armstrong's doping for over a decade but will go after Garmin based on a post on an online forum


----------



## NextTime (Oct 13, 2007)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> How funny is it that Fat Pat ignored Armstrong's doping for over a decade but will go after Garmin based on a post on an online forum


And if he did nothing with that information in hand he'd be criticized for that too. Cycling and its fans (and I'm one of them, gulp) are in the same league as the WWE.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

NextTime said:


> And if he did nothing with that information in hand he'd be criticized for that too. Cycling and its fans (and I'm one of them, gulp) are in the same league as the WWE.


nope, It is not his job. It is WADA's


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> nope, It is not his job. It is WADA's


I'm dying to know what McQuaid's job actually entails. It seems to be a mixture of equivocation, obfuscation and plain old truth evasion.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

sir duke said:


> I'm dying to know what McQuaid's job actually entails. It seems to be a mixture of equivocation, obfuscation and plain old truth evasion.


You forgot raising money for the UCI by putting on "required" races in China.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> How funny is it that Fat Pat ignored Armstrong's doping for over a decade but will go after Garmin based on a post on an online forum


Well at least he's consistent, ignore almost any evidence of doping* unless forced to deal with it simultaneously discourage anyone from coming clean.

*They do get some credit for the Biopassport I must admit, although I suspect the only ones prosecuted are the worst case scenarios and there are probably lots of riders that they are certain are doping and they do nothing about it, especially if it's a big rider.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

robdamanii said:


> You forgot raising money for the UCI by putting on "required" races in China.


Maybe he needs the air miles...


----------

