Armstrong: The good, the bad and the ugly
By Andrew Sutherland, 26 Aug 2012 Andrew Sutherland is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Cycling, Lance Armstrong, Tour de France
This July 7, 2005 file photo shows Lance Armstrong of the US during the sixth stage of the 92nd Tour de France cycling race between Troyes and Nancy. AFP PHOTO / Files / JOEL SAGET
Related coverage
- Tour de France TV schedule news
- 2013 Spring Classics news
- National Road Series news
- 2013 Tour de France news
After interviewing Lance Armstrong about his return to the peloton in 2008 cycling writer Edward Pickering received a phone call:
“‘Hey Ed, it’s Lance Armstrong’,said the voice at the other end. ‘How’s your kid?’.
I fought the urge to go upstairs and check he was still asleep in his cot.”
Lance Armstrong was the greatest Tour de France cyclist and the creator of a foundation that had raised millions of dollars for cancer research and yet we could relate to him being comically compared to the child murderer of When a Stranger Calls. How did that happen?
I don’t think I was the only one who always hoped Armstrong would be defeated by Jan Ullrich, his greatest Tour rival.
The big German won the aesthetic battle hands down – powerful thighs pushing enormous gears – but was unable to win the war of attrition in the decisive mountain stages. He could never take the title from the vampiric high cadencing American.
It wasn’t a case of tall poppy syndrome, I hope, or a simply a matter of aesthetics, that explained my fervent preference for Ullrich over Armstrong. It was the difference in their natures.
For Armstrong the Tour de France was about winning (“The toughest event in the world where the strongest man wins”) while for Ullrich it was something more: (“My motivation doesn’t come from rivals, but because I love cycling. That’s what motivates me”).
Well, it’s easy to dislike a man who claims to have had “a certain distrust of religion growing up” and goes and builds one around himself. His sacred text It’s Not About the Bike: My Journey Back to Life, recounts the story of the courageous and miraculous recovery from cancer but fails to mention the final ingredient in the messiah’s saga. As his former teammate and now turncoat Tyler Hamilton stated on 60 Minutes last year “Obviously there’s one more element: the doping part”.
It’s almost not about the doping anymore.
Many of Armstrong’s elite contemporaries including Ullrich have served or are serving suspensions for doping, admitting their complicity despite the absence of positive samples. Ivan Basso owned up to “attempted doping” and accepted a two-year ban.
Armstrong’s guilt for me was assured when a Dutch newspaper claimed that his close friend and teammate throughout all of his Tour victories George Hincapie would testify against him. I knew his time was definitely up when the US Postal team physicians Luis Garcia del Moral and Michele Ferrari accepted immediate life bans from the USADA after being presented with evidence of their possession , trafficking and administration of prohibited substances.
We can never know if Armstrong would have won seven titles without recourse to drugs. By refusing to go to arbitration he has avoided the humiliation of a public trial, but not the torture of never-ending persecution.
Hopefully his fellow accused and former directeur sportif Johan Bruyneel goes to arbitration and we find out how exactly Armstrong doped his way through seven Tour victories.
His laurels have now been pulled out from under him. Like roadkill, Lance Armstrong has only rough bitumen to rest upon.
However he still has time, before his carcass is picked bare, to add a final chapter to the autobiography that will tell the true and complete story of his life.
The Roar have special SKODA prize packs to award to Roar of the Crowd writers who send us their thoughts on cycling. Each month we're giving away a prize pack, and at the end you could win a SKODA road bike. Simply submit an article to The Roar and you could win! More details here.
- Explore:
- Cycling, Lance Armstrong, Tour de France


August 26th 2012 @ 6:51am
SE Informer said | August 26th 2012 @ 6:51am | Report comment
Andrew, thanks for this measured article. I share your sentiments.
August 26th 2012 @ 7:33am
WobbliesFan said | August 26th 2012 @ 7:33am | Report comment
Fantastic and compelling article. What a story. He’s done and dusted. All his peers and fellow riders have faced their sins and moved on with their lives. LA the myth and the legend won’t allow him to do the same. He’ll live out the rest of his life in turmoil and wretched self-reflection.
August 26th 2012 @ 7:40pm
SkinnyKid said | August 26th 2012 @ 7:40pm | Report comment
wont be so hard with the million and millions he has made for himself from the drug enhanced profile he created himself.
if you want to know some more interesting information about the bloke, outside of cycling there is a great doco floating around that goes into the perhaps miss-use of foundation assets. My memory is sketchy but there was something like the foundation webiste (liveingstrong.com) was held by lances private company….he then moved the foundation to .org and sold .com to another private company but pocketed the cash himself…..dont hold me to those details but its something like that.
August 26th 2012 @ 8:15am
nickoldschool said | August 26th 2012 @ 8:15am | Report comment
Great article. Truth is ugly sometimes.
French daily ‘Le Monde’ ran a great article yesterday in which they interviewed Michel Rieu, member of the AFLD, the french equivalent to the USADA. He tells us about the system in place around LA: the difficulties to locate him, the leaks within the UCI who told him when he was going to be controlled, he demanded 20 minutes before each control (which is plenty to manipulate your blood/urine results according to the scientist), the means and money to support the system etc…
Like Andrew Sutherland, i would still appreciate if he could come clean at some stage, when he is ready to do so. Nothing is black or white and maybe we could understand him better.
http://www.lemonde.fr/sport/article/2012/08/25/lance-armstrong-a-ete-prevenu-avant-tous-les-controles_1751361_3242.html
September 7th 2012 @ 1:50am
Craig Hicks said | September 7th 2012 @ 1:50am | Report comment
Twenty minutes is enough to change your blood content completely?
I am not a doctor, but I know that is possible because I eat,
I drink, I have even taken aspirin, and so I know from experience
that blood content cannot change drastically in 20 minutes.
I am not a Armstrong fan, I am dead against doping,
but I am also in favor of following the rule of law when it comes to prosecution.
I applaud the USADA goal of making American sports number one clean sports in the world.
That is really being what number one is all about: fair play.
But I am afraid I cannot agree with USADA’s approach to prosecuting Lance Armstrong.
They have no evidence but get ten witnesses; one fears they are using the carrot and stick approach to achieve this.
(We’ll keep your name out of the mud and try to make you look like a hero, if you agree to cooperate).
It’s not winning but how you play the game; that’s what the USADA needs to consider also.
August 26th 2012 @ 8:17am
Badjack said | August 26th 2012 @ 8:17am | Report comment
I think I will go for Indurains take on this before yours.
August 26th 2012 @ 11:27am
sittingbison said | August 26th 2012 @ 11:27am | Report comment
Right, the elder statesman who started the EPO epidemic.
BTW Big Mig is completely ill informed, there IS a single recognized authority, WADA. The problem is the UCI thwarting them at every turn, refusing to co-operate.
USADA is a WADA affiliate, operating under their auspices and full support.
September 2nd 2012 @ 12:04am
DerailleurED said | September 2nd 2012 @ 12:04am | Report comment
Exactly, for UCI to contest this they have to go against WADA and the WADA code. Which is why they have been very quiet about this so far (except to try and get Sparks to throw out the case).
August 26th 2012 @ 9:02am
Dale Bickham said | August 26th 2012 @ 9:02am | Report comment
As indurain was sooo clean.
August 26th 2012 @ 9:30am
Gravity basher said | August 26th 2012 @ 9:30am | Report comment
Only scum would take drugs then claim the win. Cycling is a farce the world over, riddled with scum, and wins in cycling should always have an asterix next to the man’s achievement, until they figure out how to actually beat the cheaters out.
August 26th 2012 @ 2:50pm
hamleyn said | August 26th 2012 @ 2:50pm | Report comment
The same could be said for swimming, athletics, baseball, triathlons, in fact most sports. You’re never going to be able to catch everyone. So why bother? Maybe they should just legalise it.
August 27th 2012 @ 9:32am
hawker said | August 27th 2012 @ 9:32am | Report comment
i’m with you hamelyn , people are always going to cheat and obviously the testers can never keep up, allow drugs in for an even playing field and lets get on with it.
August 27th 2012 @ 9:53am
Jimbo said | August 27th 2012 @ 9:53am | Report comment
I think the theory of a level playing field by allowing drugs is nonsense. A lot of these drugs have horrendous side effect profiles, up to and including death. There will always be athletes who are willing to run this risk by taking horse sized doses, meaning that athletes who aren’t prepared to suffer the side effects and life long complications resulting from drugs such as EPO, steroids etc. (especially at mega doses) will still be at a disadvantage.
Additionally, as the drugs are not being utilised in a therapeutic sense, it would be completely unethical of any medical practitioner to prescribe them – to the point that they would probably be stripped of registration by just about any country’s medical licensing board should they be caught.
August 26th 2012 @ 10:28am
sheek said | August 26th 2012 @ 10:28am | Report comment
Andrew,
I can understand your pain (evident in your writing), if not exactly share it.
Armstrong’s ‘exposure’ as a drug cheat probably throws up more questions than it answers. If he was the best among all the great ‘doping’ cyclists, then he might also have been the best among all the great ‘clean’ cyclists.
In other words, clean or doped, he was still the best. The BBC ran a thoughtful article the other day exploring whether it might be possible to “allow” doping up to a certain level, or time, before signature events.
Like I sad, these exposes tend to create more questions than they answer as to where we want to take all sports in general …..
August 26th 2012 @ 11:20am
sittingbison said | August 26th 2012 @ 11:20am | Report comment
Hi sheek,
This is a question often asked, perhaps he have won without the drugs.
The answer is a categorical “NO!”
Lance did not display the slightest ability to be a GC contender. He could not climb, was very average at time trialling. He had some modest success at one day classics, and won the 1992 Oslo world champs on a dead flat parcours drastically affected by servers weather and icy roads, with the smallest ever number of finishers, and all the major contenders pulled out.
His Tour record was WD WD 36th WD.
He is what is known as a “super responder” to Oxygen vecto doping. Some people have I’ll effect, most a great effect and a few a drastic effect. Another example is raising natural 39 and 45 hematocrit athletes to 50% with EPO. The 45 athlete has an 11% increase in O2 carrying capacity, but the 39 athlete has a 29% increase.
I reiterate, Lance never displayed the slightest ability to be a GC contender. And cancer does NOT transform you into superman
August 26th 2012 @ 12:29pm
sheek said | August 26th 2012 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
Sittingbison,
Fair enough. Often I’m brutally direct in my opinions but I guess I’m feeling conciliatory today!
Heard an item on the radio a little while ago how Armstrong always apparently had prior knowledge of any testing. Inside info.
The evidence is building up against him all the time. That I guess is why he has flown the “white flag”.
August 26th 2012 @ 7:45pm
Russ said | August 26th 2012 @ 7:45pm | Report comment
Sheek, that item, and ones like it, are why I hope this story continues to run, and the evidence presented. In many ways knowledge of Armstrong doping is not that important. It would be a great surprise if he wasn’t given the era he was racing in, and what we know about his competitors. Hints from statements made by the USADA and others indicate that there might be something much deeper at work. Specifically, I’d like to know:
- If the UCI (or national cycling bodies or organisers) worked o cover up adverse test results from Armstrong or others; and if they continue to do so. The way the UCI have treated these allegations and the case, from the time Landis was making them, almost screams that they have something to hide.
- If Armstrong was treated as per other riders, or if certain riders – particularly those who had fallen out with Armstrong – were targeted for deeper investigation of doping violations.
The UCI is close to facing an open revolt from teams already, so any evidence of improper actions could lead to a big shake-up of the sport. One that is probably long overdue, actually. The answers to those questions are much more significant than knowing the TdF winner from a decade ago doped to do it.
August 26th 2012 @ 10:33am
Kate Smart said | August 26th 2012 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Thanks for a great and balanced article Andrew. Armstrong in many ways is a mixture of martyr, hero and villain. Interestingly his Livestrong foundation was said to have received a huge jump in donations on Friday. Clearly, punters see a difference between the athlete and the cancer survivor. Perhaps the difference between Armstrong and those mentioned in the article who have paid their dues is that Armstrong has a name and face outside of cycling?
August 26th 2012 @ 11:06am
joeb said | August 26th 2012 @ 11:06am | Report comment
If not for the current President of the World Anti-Doping Agency, former NSW Premier John Fahey, Armstrong may’ve got away with it.
So now the U.S.’s greatest ‘clean’ Tour winner is probably Greg LeMond.
“‘Hey Ed, it’s Lance Armstrong’,said the voice at the other end. ‘How’s your kid?’.
I fought the urge to go upstairs and check he was still asleep in his cot.”
Who’d a thought.
August 26th 2012 @ 5:11pm
Exxxpert said | August 26th 2012 @ 5:11pm | Report comment
Its a sad day for cycling indeed
Hes a worm in my view