An open letter to Lance Armstrong
Roar Rookie By dan-talintyre, 24 Oct 2012 dan-talintyre is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- Cycling, doping, Lance Armstrong, livestrong, uci, USADA
Lance Armstrong has both energised and tarnished US Cycling - can it continue to grow? (AP Photo/Franck Prevel, File)
Related coverage
Dear Lance Armstrong, I guess this letter finds you in the middle of quite a busy couple of weeks media-wise, not that any week in your life in the past decade hasn’t been followed by the media.
I know you’re busy fighting all this doping stuff and figuring out what the heck your next move should be, so I’m glad that you took the time to read this letter.
Please don’t see this letter as me pleading with you to admit your guilt, and please don’t take this as me stating that you should do whatever it takes to clear your name, until all the dust has settled and we know, one way or another, whether you did or didn’t take performance-enhancing drugs.
I’m not trying to convince you one way or another as to what you should do, that’s only for you to decide and only for you to truly know.
I have no idea whether you are guilty or not.
Only you know that and, therefore, only you can answer the critics, the haters, the sympathetic supporters and the indifferent people of this world.
I guess I just wanted to take some time to say thanks.
It might seem weird, especially given all that’s going on, but I really wanted to thank you for the inspiration and passion that you’ve instilled in my life for sport, my family and the life that God has given me on this earth.
I’m not a cyclist any more than the next person, and whilst I will never understand why you drag yourself up those mountains year in and year out, I wanted to thank you for impacting the way that I approach those less fortunate than I am.
I so desperately want to believe that you are innocent and that the reports about your doping and cover-ups are simply wrong.
I so desperately want to believe that the words you said in your biographies of years gone by that I poured over late at night, unable to put down, were true and were not simply a fabricated reality that you had created for yourself as “the truth”.
I so desperately want to believe that you will clear your name, but I am fearful of attaching myself to that fear, that I too might be let down and disappointed.
I want to believe Lance, but I just can’t.
However, what I do want to believe in is belief itself.
I want to believe that we are so much stronger than we could ever imagine, and that belief is one of the most valiant and resilient human characteristics.
You said that, you know.
You said that what you had achieved on the world stage of cycling and all the accolades and praise you had received was secondary to the triumph over cancer, as well as the life that it so nearly stole from you.
You said that it was not about the bike. I believe you.
Life isn’t about the bike, and I hope that amongst these afflictions and adversities that I can only begin to imagine, I hope that you believe it, too.
I hope that you continue believing in yourself, believing in whatever you choose to believe in, and that you will see that to be the most important thing.
You have done great and irreplaceable work for cycling; you have done great and irreplaceable work in the field of cancer awareness and involvement.
You have done great and irreplaceable work in the scope of human history and for me, you have done great and irreplaceable work in shaping my life as a writer and a human.
So regardless of whatever happens in the next few days, thanks.
Thanks for the words you never knew you said to me, and for the life that you have shown me it was possible to live, whatever is thrown in your way.
I hope that the life you showed was true and not fake.
I hope that the life you lived was true and not fake.
I can only hope.
For what is greater, fear or hope?
I think you said that as well.
Take care,
Dan Talintyre.
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, doping, Lance Armstrong, livestrong, uci, USADA
October 24th 2012 @ 8:54am
Chris @ the Old Barbershop said | October 24th 2012 @ 8:54am | Report comment
Dear Dan,
Know the truth and the truth shall set you free.
God.
October 30th 2012 @ 4:20am
FRANCESCO said | October 30th 2012 @ 4:20am | Report comment
DEAR DAN
We have already heard the truth from Lance when he stated,” I have been the most tested athlete and have never tested positive”. The positive steroid test came from a cortisone cream used to treat jock itch and saddle soars that are common in cycling..You don’t need
a prescription for this atleast in the U.S., maybe in Europe you do.. He never tested positive for EPO or any other substance during his lengthy cycling career.. Due to his fight and win over cancer, EPO would have been contraindicated unless he needed kidney dialysis.. It is not prescribed for anything else in the U.S. however European physicians have the rights to use any drug without FDA approval..This is the reason why there is a cloud of suspicion over professional cyclists, but it doesn’t mean you are using it..
October 24th 2012 @ 9:29am
hmmm said | October 24th 2012 @ 9:29am | Report comment
“I have no idea whether you are guilty or not.” Overwhelming avalanche of evidence doesn’t give you any pointers one way or the other?
October 24th 2012 @ 9:31am
mwm said | October 24th 2012 @ 9:31am | Report comment
i agree Chris. Dan, LA is a cold…calculating….LIAR. No one (especially me) doesn’t marvel at him for beating the cancer he had when the disease takes so many people but his entire career after that wasn’t built on hope…it was based on lying, cheating, coercion and a win at all costs mentality.
LA coerce other team mates into taking drugs, he supplied drugs to teammates…he organised the distribution of drugs through 3rd parties while racing, he got doctors to fake presciptions to cover up positive tests, he also bullied, intimidated and harrassed anyone who dared speak out about this. THESE ARE NOT THE ACTIONS OF A HERO OR SOMEONE TO BE ADMIRED.
His cancer foundation does cancer awareness campaigns, it doesn’t fight or treat cancer like say the Jane McGrath Foundation that ex cricketer Glenn McGrath works for to provide breast cancer nurses. It solely worked around the personality of Lance…whose identity was built around a person who survived cancer and won 7 Tours…ON THE BACK OF CHEATING IN EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. He never would of raised that amount of money if not for those Tour wins, which if you don’t know by now, was won through dirty means.
He looked into every single of of those cancer patients in the eye and said you can achieve great things like me…knowing he cheated every step of the way. A real hero are those cancer patients who beat the odds and simply go back to their everyday living, humbly and without fanfare….not a cheat who bullies everyone around him.
Im sorry Dan…but the life he led in racing was fake….the image he built around him through cycling was fake. Knowing a real hero from a fake one is the most liberating lesson you can learn from this sorry tale.
October 24th 2012 @ 10:56am
Jimbo said | October 24th 2012 @ 10:56am | Report comment
“I have no idea whether you are guilty or not.”
In the immortal words of John McEnroe, “You cannot be serious”. The only reason this could be is that you haven’t bothered to read the USADA reasoned decision. I would contend that iif you want to be writing articles about Armstrong, the least you could do is bother to do a little investigation.
October 24th 2012 @ 11:56am
aussie sports lover said | October 24th 2012 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Jimbo, Dan is entitled to be write whatever he likes about Armstrong, just like any of us.
Heres what UCI had to say about the USARA “Rasoned Decision” document after McQuaid made a speech on Monday. UCI “accepts Usada’s sanction against Armstrong, but calls its evidence and methods into question, and raises grounds for a possible appeal – either by Armstrong himself, or by the World Anti-Doping Agency – against the report’s conclusions.”
McQuaid refers to the Usada report’s “overstated language”, “incorrect and incomplete statements”, and questions whether Usada had a sufficient “degree of detachment” to make a disciplinary judgment.
Here’s what Miguel Indurain had to say about the evidence, which is based on testimonies (many with conflicts of interest, i might add).
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/more-sport/cycling-great-miguel-indurain-believes-lance-armstrong-is-innocent-as-another-ex-teammate-admits-doping/story-e6frfglf-1226501929587
October 24th 2012 @ 1:43pm
ebaaan said | October 24th 2012 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
Maybe the UCI are still accepting ‘donations’ from Armstrong? Or more likely trying to divert attention away from their own incompetence/impotence/compliance. It would be strange though if Armstrong appealed the decision after waiving his right to challenge any allegations in independent arbitration.
October 24th 2012 @ 1:57pm
aussie sports lover said | October 24th 2012 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
that’s the interesting part, ebaaan. Maybe Armstrong want to see what cards USADA have pulled out before responding. You’re probably right about UCI wanting to divert attention away themselves but nevertheless, they obviously don’t fully agree with USADA but at the same time have to been seen to be doing the right thing by the public. Regardless, my point is that I do think Armstrong might be able to defend himself in court.
October 24th 2012 @ 3:13pm
ebaaan said | October 24th 2012 @ 3:13pm | Report comment
If it were an avenue I doubt he would appeal, it’s even unclear whether he would be able to after rejecting the initial hearing. If it does, however, go back to arbitration USADA will be able to call on even more evidence that would’ve only come about through arbitration panel supboenas as well as information from government investigations. The evidence assembled by USADA, as it is, would appear too great to overcome.
Besides, the UCI’s criticism of the evidence is vague at best and could easily be attributed to how inept they’ve been made to look..
October 24th 2012 @ 3:39pm
aussie sports lover said | October 24th 2012 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
As alluded in another post by Roman Sandstorm and I, the evidence presented so far are predominantly testimonies which whilst captivating and audacious, may not stand up to the standards of a proper court of law. Not one positive blood test. Again, not saying he is clean but cant help feel the public condemnation of Armstrong is equivalent to mob punishment in less civilised societies, stoning a person without proper trial because of hearsays. So have to disagree: i don’t thnk the evidence is too great to overcome. The only question is how much financial resource Armstrong has to appeal. Another point to consider is that USADA has collected the evidence and has acted as persecutor. There are reasons why the police do not act as judge in a lawful society. Besides questioning the validity of the testimonies in court, Armstrong has a lot of ammunition from how the whole process has been conducted.
October 24th 2012 @ 4:28pm
jameswm said | October 24th 2012 @ 4:28pm | Report comment
not true sports lover. He tested positive for a corticosteroid in 1999.
His 1999 samples were also retrospectively tested to prove he was on EPO. No EPO test in 1999, but developed about 3 years later.
That’s two positive tests.
His recent blood passport tests were also enough to get him banned.
Eyewitness evidence is also more than enough to convict someone, especially when it’s from that many people.
He only hasn’t had a proper trial because he forfeited the chance to defend himself. You can’t use that as an excuse.
His governing body supported the findings.
What ammunition does Armstrong have exactly? I can’ see it. The “they hate me” defence doesn’t work any more.
October 24th 2012 @ 4:35pm
ebaaan said | October 24th 2012 @ 4:35pm | Report comment
It’s true that these testmonies haven’t been held up to rigorous cross examination but Armstrong refused that opportunity. Clearly the behaviour of an innocent man with nothing to hide.
Other evidence including financial records and email transcripts presented directly contradict many statements Armstrong has made over the years. This is more black and white.
In regards to positive tests, yes, there have been more than zero. Back dated prescriptions shouldn’t have excused his positive corticosteroid test in 1999. Older samples taken before relevant testing was available show the use of EPO and blood transfusions.
Lance wasn’t refused a ‘proper trial’ and considering how much money he stands to lose currently, the financially prudent thing to do would’ve been to challenge the evidence upfront. The fact that he didn’t speaks volumes. And it’s not a case of USADA being the prosecutor and judge. As Armstrong refused to fight the allegations in the Court of Arbitration for Sport, USADA simply needed to produce a justification of their decision.
You should check out USADA’s Reasoned Decision by the way. It’s a bit more comprehensive than just hearsay.
October 24th 2012 @ 5:01pm
aussie sports lover said | October 24th 2012 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
Perhaps I should have said no “official” blood test. Like I have said, he most likely did dope but even UCI has said on Monday he has not tested positive. Yes Armstrong’s refusal to go to court in the first place is incriminating but his reasons for doing so, whilst not entirely convincing, are plausible. So USADA has justified their decisions with their reasons – that still does not equate to “guilty” in the court of Law. I don’t think people should necessary accept whatever USADA has published at face value, at least not in a liberal democratic society like ours.
October 24th 2012 @ 5:23pm
aussie sports lover said | October 24th 2012 @ 5:23pm | Report comment
By the way, Armstrong’s lawyers does make a good point it could actually cost more to attend to arbitration with USADA as attached in this letter from USADA’s reasoned decision.
http://d3epuodzu3wuis.cloudfront.net/2012-08-23+Herman+to+WB+re.+LA+rejects+arbitration.pdf
Maybe this is part of Armstrong’s plan after all: wait for both USADA and UCI to make their respective decision and then launch a single final appeal…
October 24th 2012 @ 5:42pm
ebaaan said | October 24th 2012 @ 5:42pm | Report comment
The ’99 positive corticosteriod test was official.
I’m not sure what you mean by ‘guilty in a court of law’? Armstrong fought tooth and nail to challenge USADA’s jurisdiction in pursuing the matter and he failed in the courts. A federal court in the United States ruled Armstrong was bound by USADA protocol meaning he could either go ahead with the arbitration process or accept its sanctions.
There’s no way arbitration would’ve cost more than what he stands to lose now. His plan was to strategically avoid any situation where he would perjure himself further and avoid jail – not lose all his sponsors/backers/goodwill/money and then challenge. That’s a ballsy(apologies) move if you ask me.
If he can appeal, he’s got til the end of the month. It won’t happen because the existing evidence is too great and the arbitration process will bring even more. Meet back here in a week to see who was right?
October 24th 2012 @ 9:09pm
aussie sports lover said | October 24th 2012 @ 9:09pm | Report comment
Jimbo, with regards to eyewitness account, here is an interesting link:
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2011/08/25/eyewitness-testimony-loses-legal-ground-in-state-supreme-court/
When you take into account that these events happen many years ago, and that many of the witnesses have something to gain (whether it;s a new book deal, revenge for armstrong’s bullying mentatily etc), a good lawyer can reduce the impact of these testimonies in the court of law. Also, in most of the testimonies, I think only Floyd Landis mentioned that he actually saw Armstrong injecting drugs in person, but this is the same guy that had problems with Armstrong flying in his own plane (yes this is from the USADA report)…
On first glance, the testimonies are overwhelming but there are probably enough holes there for a reasonable defence.
October 25th 2012 @ 12:04pm
Jimbo said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
Again, that might be reasonable if you were talking about a couple of witnesses, but 26? I don’t think so. Obviously discrediting guys like Hamilton and Landis was child’s play – they obviously had an axe to grind, but Betsy Andreu, Emma O’Reilly, and George Hincapie among others can’t really be accused of that. Additionally, they were all sworn statements – I would doubt that many people would be willing to lie under oath, in a manner whereby the stories were consistent and in backed up by other evidence such as the testing results. Remember – Marion Jones went to jail for lying under oath, and everyone interviewed would have been aware of the consequences of giving a false statement.
October 25th 2012 @ 12:28pm
aussie sports lover said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
I think even with betsy, emma and george, none of them actually made a statement they saw armstrong injecting drugs directly. I don’t think those guys (well not most of the anyway) were lying under oath, rather that there is a lot of room in inaccuracies with bias for recollections of events that happen 10 or more years ago. When I read the affadavits, there were very little mention of dates and times, for example on the 1st of Janaury 2000 at 3 30 pm Lance was in this place and he did this thing, rather everyting statement was a bit vague and not very specific. I suspect that was because the events were way too far back for any of them to really remember the exact details. When I think back about key moments in my life 10 years ago, I would struggle to remember the exact details. If you have time, read the testimonies again but pretend you are LA’s lawyer, I think you will find that the evidence from the testimonies are not as air-tight as you think they are. Honestly when I read it, I felt like I was reading a crime thriller telling the story of a mastermind villian who apparently controllled the whole of cycling for a decade, not an objective report into anti-doping.
October 24th 2012 @ 7:10pm
Jimbo said | October 24th 2012 @ 7:10pm | Report comment
That’s all well and good, but basically any one part of the decision would have been sufficient to secure the decision. As for the UCI, their conduct throughout this whole episode has been nothing short of disgraceful, and considering their complete failure to enforce the rules of their own sport, and their risible attempts to wrest jurisdiction from USADA, I couldn’t care less what they have to say.
Eyewitness testimony has always been an accepted form of evidence in criminal trials, and it is equally valid here. Besides, even if you ignore the fact that 26 people testified that Armstrong was a doper, you still have the million dollars that was transferred from his account to Michele Ferrari, the intercepted emails between himself and Ferrari’s son after he claimed he had severed ties with Ferrari, you have the positive test from 1999, the positive retests of the 1999 samples for EPO in 2005, the samples indicative of EPO usage from the 2001 Tour de Suisse, and the suspicious blood values from the 2009 and 2010 Tours de France. Hence, for you to say that the evidence is based upon testimonies raises two points – firstly, so what, it is a valid form of evidence, and secondly, it is far from the only evidence against Armstrong.
As for Indurain, I am not sure why his opinion is relevant, he doesn’t give any valid reasons for that opinion in that article, nor does he address any of the evidence presented.
Finally, on the point of due process, as others and myself have pointed out time and time again on the Roar, he was fully aware that by not participating in arbitration, he would be admitting guilt. He also had avenues of appeal to WADA and the CAS, so to say he wouldn’t have been offered a fair trial is just flat out wrong. That letter you posted sort of insinuates an appeal to the CAS might be in the offing, but as of now, Armstrong’s failure to participate in arbitration means that at present, he should be considered guilty.
October 24th 2012 @ 8:52pm
aussie sports lover said | October 24th 2012 @ 8:52pm | Report comment
In their Reasoned Decision report, USADA has stated that “The core of USADA’s case against Mr. Armstrong is the witness testimony and documentary evidence described in the preceding sections” and that the scientific evidence are corroborative for example, they stated that :While LNDD’s analysis of the 1999 samples may not stand alone to establish a positive test under the Code, the analysis is consistent with and corroborates the numerous witness statements recently obtained by USADA.” I think what they are saying is due to technical/legalistic factors, the samples are not positive but they still corroborate all the witness testimonies that have been obtained. My interpretation of “consistent with” abnormal samples from Armstrong can be explained by doping, however we cannot entirely exclude other technical factors that may also cause these abnormalities.
Yes Armstrong put in a million bucks to Ferrari – maybe he wants to give the good doctor a bonus…yeah look of course it is more likely it’s for the dope but again, it’s corroborative.
I think anyone reading the USADA report would see there’s enough correspondences between UCI and USADA/Armstrong to suggest that USADA has not been playing by the rules at the very least. They are not the white knight of the sporting world.
I think there are valid reasons in his letter to USADA to state why he is not participating; but I can certainly see the other side of the coin as mentioned by you and others. Well, as Ebaaan said, only time will tell whether an appeal is coming.
October 25th 2012 @ 10:38am
jameswm said | October 25th 2012 @ 10:38am | Report comment
Rubbish. Those 1999 samples are positive. But due to the rules at the time retrospective tests couldn’t be relied on.
How can you possibly consider, even for a minute, that Armstrong’s team-mates were doping but he wasn’t? Or, more incredibly, that he beat them despite them doping and him (LA) not?
You don’t have to be that much of a cynic to know in the back of your mind what the answer is. And that’s without the 4 positive tests and eyewitness testimony.
October 25th 2012 @ 12:32pm
aussie sports lover said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:32pm | Report comment
I have said several times previously I do not think that LA is clean. The point I am making is that USADA’s report is not as air-tight as you think, and that previously positive samples in 1999 is not positive under the code, as USADA has written. That’s why Pat McQuaid said on last Monday Armstrong has never tested positive, because as far as official rules are concerned, he hasn’t broken any.
October 25th 2012 @ 11:06am
Jimbo said | October 25th 2012 @ 11:06am | Report comment
What exactly would be sufficient proof for you? You basically answered your own question with regards to the 1999 samples, they aren’t sufficient when on their own, but when they are combined with several team mates testifying that he did take EPO, it is pretty damning – and that is ignoring the positive for corticosteroids in the same tour.
Take Occam’s razor to your theory (the simplest theory is usually the correct one) – for Armstrong to be innocent, 26 witnesses would have to be lying (when they gave sworn statements under penalty of perjury had they lied), he would have had to have given Ferrari $1 million after he had announced he had ceased all contact with him for purely medical services or as a bonus (I realise doctors are expensive, but that is seriously pushing it), there would be nothing in his contact with Ferrari’s son after he claimed to have severed his relationship with Dr. Ferrari, there would be nothing in the positive from 1999 for corticosteroids, nothing in the results from 1999 and 2001 indicative of EPO use, and nothing in the blood passport values from 2009 and 2010 which Professor Christopher Gore of the AIS described as having a ‘less than one in a million’ chance of occurring naturally.
There has been evidence since 1999 that he has been doping. During the period of his TDF domination, his supporters parroted the incorrect and irrelevant ‘never tested positive’ line to silence criticism. Once several others such as Betsy Andreu, Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton spoke out against him, Armstrong and his supporters attacked them all in an attempt to discredit them. Once USADA released its charges, Armstrong and his supporters attacked it as an unconstitutional witch hunt that was outside of their jurisdiction – implying that there was not sufficient evidence to support their claims. Once USADA released its evidence, corroborating just about everything it claimed through various lines of enquiry, Armstrong and his supporters again attempt to shoot the messenger, whilst Armstrong declines to actually challenge the assertions through arbitration. Armstrong will likely never admit to doping for fear of opening himself up to litigation, so I wouldn’t be holding your breath for such an admission.
October 25th 2012 @ 12:42pm
aussie sports lover said | October 25th 2012 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
The point I am making is that the CORE evidence from USADA is testimonies. If Armstrong’s lawyer can discredit or dismiss the testimonies, the samples are worth nothing. I am not even sure the samples are admissible evidence in court. The testimonies may be discredited not because they are lying (because as you say, none of them are likely to like under oath), but due to inconsistencies. The thing to remember is these testimonies will be examined under the microscope by armstrong’s lawyers if they go to court. For the average person who actually reads them, it’s fascinating, shocking but we read them with a lot of emotion and let’s face it, most of us who reads it have already assumed he is guilty. A high level court will look at them with a detachment and objectivity. Now IF Armstrong actually takes this to CAS, I am not saying he will win, but I think he has a much better chance there than in the Court of Public Opinion.
October 25th 2012 @ 2:36pm
ebaaan said | October 25th 2012 @ 2:36pm | Report comment
But that doesn’t make sense aussie sport lover. If he’s going to do better at the CAS than in the ‘court of public opinion’ how come we find ourselves here? Why wait til he’s lost everything and his name is mud? If they could challenge the evidence it would’ve happened by now. Simply put: They can’t and they won’t.
October 25th 2012 @ 9:08pm
aussie sports lover said | October 25th 2012 @ 9:08pm | Report comment
I thought he have gave some valid reasons in the letter from his lawyers to USADA, Ebaaan. I am not sure if he actually thought the whole thing can get as blown up as it is now when he decided not to go to arbitration. Or perhaps as Pat McQuaid said, Armstrong probably don’t seem to care when he was contacted by Armstrong a few hours before the announcement. As Jimbo said, Armstrong is very unlikely to admit to doping so he will either leave it as it is (probably his preferred option) or fight it (which is possilbe as the lawsuits start piling up). Armstrong may be very stubborn but I don’t think he lacks intelligence – I’m sure he is considering all his options now.
The following link is an interesting article on USADA and UCI:
http://road.cc/content/news/69446-lance-armstrong-uci-and-usada-catch-22
The following is from the article above:
“The UCI’s Decision and Travis Tygart’s response to it reveals the Catch-22 at the heart of the Armstrong scandal.
“f the rules had been applied as they were meant to be the greatest cheat not only in the history of cycling but in any major sport would probably never have been caught, while to catch him there is at least the suspicion that USADA put the result before the rules… just like Lance Armstrong did.”
October 24th 2012 @ 11:29am
langou said | October 24th 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
Dear Dan.
Its Lance here. Thank you so much for the letter, sorry it took me so long to reply but you accidently sent it to the North Pole and I got your letter to Santa asking for a new bike.
Firstly, thanks for not bothering to read the recent USADA report. Facts can be misleading and you are better off reading my books for the full story on what actually happened. If you don’t own them, a copy they can be found at your local library. For some reason they have recently been moved to the “fiction” section, possibly a reflection on how poetic my writing can be.
Now Dan, I think that you are correct, it is time to come clean and admit once and for all that I have never taken performance enhancing drugs. It is come as a real shock to me that every one of my US Postal Teammates are drug cheats. It is also baffling as to how so many of them could have implicated me in such a thing.
You only have to look at how unreliable the witnesses are. Take Emma Livingstone – she is someone who has previously been called a prostitute and a drunk, and it wasn’t just anybody who called her that but a then 7 times Tour de France winner so it must be true. Anyways how much money has she donated to help cancer victims?
I’m glad that you recognise that there are two sides to this story. The media seem to be reporting only the 22 people who have been “witness” to my drug taking and not the 6 billion people world-wide who have not seen me talk about or do drugs. Who do we trust more, a bunch of self-confessed drug cheats in a tainted sport?
I am little bit concerned by one of your comments about me helping you to install a passion “that God has given me on this earth”. By God you are referring to me aren’t you? One of my early books stated that you shouldn’t be worshiping any God other than myself so I would prefer if my devotees stuck to that pledge.
Remember Dan I have been tested 25 000 times and not once tested positive except for that time in 99 – but that was caused by saddle sores – I have a backdated prescription from a crooked doctor to prove that. Oh yeah that time where they re-tested a previous sample and found EPO but we know that was a set up or mistake or something along those lines. Once, I even donated money to the drug testers so that shows how committed I was to tackling the problem.
Keep up the good work Dave, I am going to keep trying to clear my name. If you have any good threatening text messages you can send me to help in this fight that would be great.
Kind Regards
Lance Armstrong
October 24th 2012 @ 5:32pm
Rhys said | October 24th 2012 @ 5:32pm | Report comment
Lance you smooth operator you.
October 24th 2012 @ 7:46pm
c said | October 24th 2012 @ 7:46pm | Report comment
October 24th 2012 @ 12:06pm
Midfielder said | October 24th 2012 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Guys I think you miss Dan’s main point…. Dan wants to believe in good …. what Dan wants is for LA to admit his past life and by doing so restore some faith that belief is not a wasted human emotion…
LA has painted himself into a corner … at what point does he make a statement one way or the other on his future intentions… not too contest is seen as an admission of guilt …. HHHHMMMM Thomas Moore in the Shakespeare classic held his silence on whether the good King could re marry … lost his head in the end … however it can never be assumed that silence is guilt …
The real test will come if the US courts go after him i.e. for lying under oath HHHHMMMmmmmm … then he will have to defend himself or go to jail and not pass go…
The evidence is so large that it seems almost implausible that he is innocent …
As for cancer lots of sports folk have done heaps … the SFC new marquee ADP has an equally if not more impressive track record on cancer and cancer research than LA… it takes a lot for Real & Barca fans to clap and stand for a player not in there team and playing against an old enemy but they have … as have many football fans around the world…
Back to Dan … yep see your point …. belief is something that money cannot buy and it hurts like heck when its lost … and maybe some belief could come back if LA did ? ? ? ! ! @ @ ## … not sure …
October 24th 2012 @ 1:07pm
wisey_9 said | October 24th 2012 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
“Win only by what is right, as there is no glory, point or worth in winning by any other means.” – Justin Benitez
October 24th 2012 @ 7:39pm
c said | October 24th 2012 @ 7:39pm | Report comment
lying cheat
October 24th 2012 @ 7:44pm
mwm said | October 24th 2012 @ 7:44pm | Report comment
I’m with ol’ Benitez on this point. I hate to be rude on this site as so many are….but Dan seems incredibly naive with his head in the clouds.
belief??? hope???? why would you look to this man for any of those…i love sport but i don’t tie up my self worth in athletes. THIS MAN CONNED YOU DAN!!!!! HE CONNED THE ENTIRE WORLD and is paying for it. Believe in what you can do.
October 24th 2012 @ 9:30pm
Steve said | October 24th 2012 @ 9:30pm | Report comment
Dan,
“I want to believe that we are so much stronger than we could ever imagine, and that belief is one of the most valiant and resilient human characteristics.”
Armstrong the man didn’t live up to his own message: doesn’t mean the message itself was all bad; doesn’t mean you can’t live up to it.