• Larry @CycleItalia

    Nothing new here folks. Same s__t, different day for BigTex. I hope he loses his shirt (and everything else) in the whistle-blower lawsuit. While that won’t undo all the harm he did to others, at least it might prove that cheaters DO get caught and (sometimes) justice prevails.

  • J Evans

    His sole purpose is to attempt to re-establish his legacy.
    He can never do that.
    Stop reporting anything on him.
    I didn’t read or watch this.

    • Wil

      Then you missed out on some interesting points. He’s a cheat, we all know he’s a cheat so nothing he says here will change that. But it wasn’t Armstrong alone and outside cycling there’s a much bigger question on doping in sport which he does cover here.

      I don’t agree with everything he’s said, but some of the stuff – riders union, the business side – gives an insight that I’d not considered. The fact is that cycling is and was a fringe sport where doping can be brought out and aired in front of the general public with no real repercussions. Try doing that in football, or athletics, or formula one, or basketball and see what happens. As a layman to things like the NFL it’s easy for me to sit here and say they’re all juiced up (look at the size of them!) but were there to be an inquiry similar to WADA it would be blocked/veto’ day/rubbished. Why? Because the sports make millions of dollars and it’s not beneficial to those higher up for it to be outed.

      Recently in the UK there was a lot of fuss over Farrah doping, or at least being associated with doping. If had it escalated there would have been hell to pay. He missed two tests. Imagine if Froome did that. Yet what’s happened? Nothing. Why? Because Farrah does lots of TV adverts, is a household name to a level where Froome doesn’t get close and it would be a publicity nightmare post Olympics if their poster boy gets nailed.

      I’m not a fan of Armstrong but he’s got some interesting (if not always factually correct) views. I’d rather WADA/UCI worked with him and learnt, rather than banishing him and thinking they’ve solved the problem of doping in cycling (Katuska anyone? Astana?). As for other sports, they’ve got a long way to go..

    • Hugh Mongous

      Yes you did.

  • Chris_E_Dub

    I don’t agree with much of what he says, but I enjoy reading it. And the ensuing debate it provokes. I’m a firm believer in Aristotle’s “It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it” and all that.

  • I like how he says USADA is inefficient because they never catch anyone. And then in the next sentence he complains that they…. caught him?!
    And btw… if you win seven TDFs during the “EPO era” you are always going to be the biggest scapegoat for that era. Who else would be?

    • David9482

      Ahem, some would argue the EPO era began in 1991. Yes, Lance cheated but he wasn’t the only one who cheated big. He’s just the biggest jerk and most arrogant!

      • Not disputing when it started — even still he still benefited from the EPO era far more than any other cyclist (in terms of big wins and sponsorship $$).

        • David9482

          That’s debatable. What about Contador? He built his base musculature and form during EPO era, but competes against guys that likely never touched EPO. Contador makes more per year than Lance made in 2 years, plus after the whistleblower suit how much will Lance be left with?

          This is a fruitless argument (my fault), and my points are very unpopular, but overall Lance isn’t the only problem and his insight into the sport is better than most.

          • Alex

            What did you smoke this morning? Lance’s net worth was a magnitude higher than Contador’s. His pre-doping net worth exceeded 125M. He was making over 35M a year. There was a great chart floating around before of how Lance owned part of all the companies he endorsed (Giro, Honey Stinger, etc) providing extra cash flow. Contador has nowhere near that.

            • David9482

              Net worth is only part of what Daniel S said. Also said big wins – by official counts, Contador has 7 Grand Tours (9 by his own count). All his wins were by a body that benefited from at least 3-years of EPO use.

              • Alex

                And part of what you said was “Contador makes more per year than Lance made in 2 years”, which is completely false. I’m not going to argue about Contador’s drug use, the jury is still out on that.

                • David9482

                  Whoops, yeah, you’re right i said that. Haha, the jury is still out on the net worth question too, if Lance loses big time then Contador’s measly 15-20M net worth will far outweigh lance’s!

    • Cameron Fraser

      That’s not quite what he said. He suggested that the people USADA does catch are but a small portion of the number of people who are doing something USADA should catch. I’m not defending this point of view, and certainly it could be an entirely self serving point of view at that, but it is fair to say we don’t have numbers on the number of people using banned substances who are not caught. The upshot is we don’t know how effective USADA is. Armstrong clearly thinks the answer is “not very”…an opinion he is entitled to.

    • Arfy

      I agree that his belittling of USADA is somewhat out of line, but he also sees the drugs issue still prevalent in many domestic USA sports (including their domestic “World Series”) and therefore disproportional from what happened to him. But he has to remember, it was a major sponsor who wanted their millions back from him, so they “sponsored” the USADA investigation to ensure they did. It looked much more like “big business” looking after business rather than a USADA vendetta to go and get him, although of course this helped their credibility. As Armstrong said himself, “I was the complete dumbass”.

    • Dave

      One of the major reasons that he was targeted was that the eight year limit on addressing his offences had not yet expired at that time.

      Guys like Bjarne Riis, Erik Zabel etc are too long retired now to face official sanctions. They can still be fired by teams or broadcasters, but not sanctioned by the sport’s governing bodies.

  • Andy B

    is the sound on these videos really quiet or just all through one channel?
    I broke my headphones and only have the right side

    Cant hear a thing

  • Superpilot

    I’m coming around on him. He will be punished by the legal system if they see fit. He’s had his jerseys taken. But I get a lot of his points. He is self aware that his admission, which everyone really wanted, is a pain in the ass for the current riders. Anyone watch the Ettix vid they did where they brought Cav onboard, and in their first press conference he loses his shit because the journalists were all just asking about Lance? Screw that. But he is aware of that.
    Reformed criminals, at what point do you consider his penance is paid if you are still vengeful towards him? When he has given back all the money he made? When he is poor and destitiute and locked up in jail? What then for his wife and family? And why not then extend this demand towards everyone who ever got charged for drug use?
    I don’t agree with everything he says. He has been quoted about all the mountains and points jersey winners from his era have retained theirs, despite many having subsequent doping confessions or proven in court. Because of this it seems he thinks he should get his jerseys back, I think they should take the rest away.
    Cycling was a house of cards in those days, and the reputation from then should fall over.
    He was just the most successful in a really crappy time for cycling, and everyone involved should suffer, but as he points out, because Tygart et al consider they got the biggest fish, the heat comes off WADA, USADA and all the riders of that era, because it looks like they’ve achieved something. Which is total BS.
    Another issue I find really interesting, cortisone. Totally banned for cycling. But most rugby, league, EPL AFL, NFL, NHL, NBL and NBA teams administer a shot of cortisone to overcome a niggle, with a booster at halftime. The bar for restriction is really high in cycling, and quite low in other sports. Cycling is the mainstream medias pin cushion. Would be really interesting for the media to run a fine tooth comb over other sports, and their legal limits, and how they differ to cycling. You can look at the percentage stats of sports tested at USADA and compare.

    That doesn’t make it ok, of course. The rule is the rule and breaking it should be punished.
    But again I ask, he may be a total arrogant so and so that is just trying to win back favour, but when is this debt to justice repayed, and why not insist the same for everyone else?

    Everyone EPO’d up to level the playing field, so why not level it up on the punishment?
    Final point, I find it hilarious the biggest click and comment bait in cycling online media is doping, and shit like sock length or saddle bags. Ha!

    • De Mac

      Not EVERYONE EPO’d up, THAT is the entire point – how about cyclists who could have achieved very different palmares by the ends of their careers, but never even had a look in because they chose not to use drugs???

    • David9482

      Agreed on most of what you said – especially that cycling (and mostly Lance) takes all the heat whereas the major international sports ALL have regular doping use, but no one ever does anything about it. Plus, many other top cyclists kept all their medals, jerseys, etc. – even the really successful ones (eg. which doctor worked with the TdF champ from 1991-1995?).

      It is a shame that the few riders who never used EPO, such as Bassons and McGee, had to suffer, and that a guy like Lemond’s career was cut short because he never tried EPO. But, at the same time, you can’t pin the problem on one rider who wasn’t part of the problem when the problem started. Lance was a kid trying to make it when EPO hit the scenes in a big way and started changing the sport for the worse so it’s insane that USADA, WADA, and everyone calls Lance the worst doper, etc. etc. etc.

      • Matthew Forrester

        You were beginning to win me over with this quote at the start of your second paragraph: “It is a shame that the few riders who never used EPO, such as Bassons and McGee, had to suffer, and that a guy like Lemond’s career was cut short because he never tried EPO.” but you lost me again from then on. But you’re 100% entitled to your own opinion, my friend!

  • David Bonnett

    Is there any chance of getting the video from Travis Tygart’s class discussion (assuming it was recorded)? While USADA deals with a range of sports, not just cycling, it would be interesting to hear his perspective in the same forum.

  • Andrew O’Neill

    I was about to recommend the Joe Rogan podcast, then saw the article above. If you haven’t checked it out, definitely worth a listen. Lots of self-serving stuff in there and you may not agree with a lot of it, but it’s still interesting.

  • Warwick

    Thanks for sharing CT. I know any Lance article gets all the “sick of this story” “he ruined cycling” “I took up cycling just so I could hate Lance Armstrong” etc etc comments. But personally I’m interested in what the guy has to say, and still would love to have a beer/ride with him.

    • Sean parker

      I’d like to share a beer and ask him how he came up with the strategy to publicly call his ex-soiegneur, Emma O’Reilly, a ‘drunk’ and a ‘whore’.

      That was really classy – love to have a beer with him. Perhaps I could get some tips on how to both cheat and be a misogynist.

      • dragonsheart

        And don’t forget champagne wishes & caviar dreams toasting with him over bragging about, then setting out to systematically destroy the lives of anyone who had the temerity to challenge his dictated, now admitted false narrative…not the least of which being
        Greg LeMond or David Walsh. LA saved his most vulgar attacks for the women, no question. He’s scum incarnate, not to mention a case study in abnormal psych…EPIC pathology.

        • Matthew Forrester

          Couldn’t have said it better (or at least, as succinctly, given my verbosity!) myself, DH!! Perhaps I’m über-biased as I’m a lifelong (or, at least from the age of 10, back in ’84) Lemond fan but IMO, Armstrong is the epitome of sociopathic, self-serving SCUM.

  • Nick Squillari

    That sports like the NFL have a players union that is so powerful it can reject the WADA code is enormously telling. Both with respects to cycling and with what is presently occurring with the Essendon football club.

    • Dave

      Armstrong is wrong. While the players’ unions in the big American pro sports are very strong, the reason these leagues can get away with dictating terms to USADA/WADA (with the threat of being able to tell them to flick off completely) is not the players’ unions.

      In fact, it is because those pro leagues simply have no reason to become USADA/WADA compliant. Unlike cycling, they can stand on their own two feet without requiring government assistance (which comes with the attached string of requiring USADA compliance) and they have no reason to chase international credibility. There are 10.1 million Americans for every NFL team (compared to 1.3 million Aussies for every AFL team) so they can afford to charge high enough ticket prices to pay for the building, operating and upgrading of their own world-class venues without external assistance.

      The AFL is in the same situation as cycling with regards to needing government assistance (and the ASADA compliance that comes with it) because all the major sports in Australia are on the wrong side of the supply/demand curve to afford complete independence. In every major sport in Australia (perhaps with the exception of basketball) the best venue is either government owned or has had significant government expenditure to upgrade it. Some national-level teams have their own suburban grounds, but they aren’t great and those teams will often play their major ‘home’ matches at the most convenient capital city stadium, for example Geelong FC playing home finals at Docklands or the MCG.

      There are good reasons that cyclists would be better off with a properly professionalised union (mainly to take a leadership role with regards to race safety) but the sport simply isn’t big enough to stand on its own without national governments, WADA and the IOC.

      • James Loh

        You are right US big teams don’t need municipal funding/assistance but they do get it which must be a hard pill to swallow for some. Might be a case for USADA compliance after all.

      • Bones

        Most US stadiums are funded publicly. Your numbers for NFL don’t take college football into consideration, which in many cities, is much bigger than the NFL. The NFL doesn’t compete in the Olympics so they don’t need to be compliant with the WADA Code.

        I believe it was the threat that the USADA made to the UCI, that of filing a complaint to WADA and removing cycling from the Olympics, that caused the UCI to pull Lance’s Yellow jerseys. If cycling was removed from the Olympics, then cycling developmental programs would lose most of their gov’t funding around the world. So the UCI had a choice, throw Lance under the bus and save cycling or lose funding. This is why no other Jerseys from any major races were pulled from any other dopers. IMO Lance is correct on this point, either ALL the jersey’s and victories are pulled from dopers or none are and his are re-instated.

      • David9482

        Dave – exactly, a cycling union won’t work for a multitude of reasons including the ones you gave. The sport is so fragmented and financially weak that the only party with any real power is ASO.

        It’s too bad, but it’s also why cycling gets bullied around by WADA and the public and therefore has to accept much harsher doping rules than anyone else.

  • Prestachuck

    Armstrong = Capone . Tygart = Ness.

  • Sean parker

    Have I got this right?

    “I’m not criticising Travis Tygart or anti-doping but just let me criticise Travis Tygart and anti-doping and whilst I’m critically not – criticising I’ll not mention my role in conspiracy or menacing or harassment….”

    Obviously he had to let his spin doctor go in order to pay the legal bills…

    • Matthew Forrester

      Haha, nice catch, love it!! Talk about ‘double-speak’, Orwell would be very proud of him!

  • Dan Caz

    Blergity blerg blerg blerginstein

  • Nori Uehara

    Firstly, if I’ve got a wrong idea or expression I’m so sorry because English is my second language.
    It’s sound like I was not allowed to knife fight and had no choice, Era was wrong not only me. Does it mean that Lance Armstrong was made by doping history? and if so, UCI and USADA must explain why we couldn’t figure out doping on time.

    • Bones

      There is an old saying that says, “Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight”. Which basically means know your enemy/competition and be prepared accordingly for battle.

      Most of the top performers of that era were using EPO so the logic says, ‘if you want to compete with them, you have to use EPO’. In this case EPO was the gun and non-drugged training/strategy was the knife. Therefore when Lance was competing against other professionals cyclists that were winning while using EPO, they expected the UCI to develop testing to catch the dopers. When the UCI failed to do this, Lance felt their only option was to use EPO as well. It was either that or they would quit professional cycling and -go home.

      You can go back to the early 90’s and see Greg LeMond’s take on the use of EPO by the peloton in his last tour.

      • Nori Uehara

        I see what you mean thanks a lot!!

  • metranpage

    After all the above I would like to release the only one thought… Let’s accept, he is a cheater. But no one could achieve the same results being under dope in the same conditions, in the same time. And I bet such people were out there, close to his shoulder.

    • Matthew Forrester


      • Nomad

        I agree with you on most of your points, especially with his doping. LA was a very high responder to oxygen-vector doping and had Ferrari’s full and undivided attention in his medically supervised “program.” I think it’s fair to say that without Ferrari’s masterplan & LA’s commitment to the plan, he would never have been a TDF champion let alone a GT contender…nothing new there.

        However, as egregious as LA’s behavior was at that time, he, seems to have benefited greatly from his ill-gotten gains. He has a family, enormous wealth, good health, a future in master’s competitions, and they even made a movie about him (does he get any revenue from that?). And to my complete surprise/dismay, he was invited as a guest speaker to address students at this Univ. of Colorado Sports Governance class.

        Sure, he’s been stripped of his titles, given a lifetime ban and disgraced, but going from the “penthouse to the outhouse” hasn’t seemed to be a big deal – as compared to the consequences of other high-profile American athletes who have been disgraced with doping. For example, compare LA’s situation to that of Marion Jones. Jones, who was implicated in the BALCO doping scandal, is bankrupt, served prison time and many people have probably forgotten who she even is.

        Armstrong will probably never have to work another day the rest of life while most of us posting here will. Certainly, none of us will ever be invited as a guest speaker to discuss sports ethics at a prominent University. As condemned & disgraced that LA is, his tremendously successful doping program, unfortunately, has paid off quite handsomely for him in his cycling afterlife…


Pin It on Pinterest

October 27, 2016
October 26, 2016
October 25, 2016
October 24, 2016