Lance Armstrong, cylcing’s combination of Brett Favre, Barry Bonds and Cal Ripken, is in third place after the ninth stage of the Tour de France, just 8 seconds behind the leader. You’ll remember that Armstrong retired over 3 years ago amidst accusations that he was taking performance-enhancing drugs. What if he wins the race? He’s already the only person to win it six or seven times; and at 37 he would become the oldest winner ever.
What would a victory do to the accusations of drug use? Does it confirm the accusations because only someone one drugs could win this race eight times, and at the age of 37? Or does it vindicate him because he couldn’t possibly be using something given the scrutiny?
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 8:29 AM
Truly one of my favorite subjects. I was just saying the other day that I think he’s the most overrated cheater – on and off his bike – that I can think of. That he is considered a “national treasure” is completely ridiculous to me. Like baseball throughout the 90′s into this decade, it is so obvious to everyone that he is far from above board. How else could he beat all of the other elite athletes in his sport for so long – most of whom have been caught by now!
Disgusting.
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 10:29 AM
He’s like Barry Bonds in that he was consistently better than everyone else when everyone else was cheating. The question of his doping is therefore somewhat irrelevant for determining his greatness as a sportsman unless he was taking better sh*t than the other guys. It obviously does reflect on his character, however.
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 5:02 PM
Lance Armstrong has NEVER once tested positive for performance enhancing drugs.
Why is he so much more dominant than the rest? He has an unbelievable work ethic, he’s blessed with some amazing genes that gives him great lung capacity, and is surrounded by a stunning team of great riders and those behind the scenes that help find every little advantage they can. (ie. little changes to the bike to make it more dynamic).
Everyone craps on him because no one thought it was possible someone could be so dominant at the Tour de France – well where are these people in regards to Usain Bolt? Why shouldn’t he be under the same microscope?
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 6:07 PM
Lance is awesome. Tested clean all his career.
on Jul 15th, 2009 at 11:03 AM
“Why is he so much more dominant than the rest? He has an unbelievable work ethic, he’s blessed with some amazing genes that gives him great lung capacity, and is surrounded by a stunning team of great riders and those behind the scenes that help find every little advantage they can.”
Please tell me you don’t really believe that.