Former Lance Armstrong teammate and self-confessed doper Tyler Hamilton recently spoke of the sense of relief he felt when he finally began to tell the truth about his abuse of banned substances throughout his career.
It was a long, drawn-out process which began with his parents and culminated in a very public confession in May 2011 on America’s 60 Minutes television program.
Hamilton has since been vocal in his appeal for Armstrong to follow his own path and confess to using banned substances.
“I do believe we will see some sort of truth come out from Lance Armstrong eventually,” Hamilton said in a recent interview.
“I know it will do him a lot of good personally and it will do the sport of cycling a lot of good. We’re in a tough spot right now and with Armstrong coming clean we could put an end to this chapter and we could move forward.
“The peloton today are suffering for our past and that’s not fair.”
He might have added, “And the fans too.”
Hamilton has been more or less in a minority of one in his belief that his former team leader would ever come clean – until this week that is, when a report emerged in the New York Times claiming that Armstrong was considering a full public confession and was seeking meetings with Travis Tygart of the US Anti Doping Agency (USADA) and David Howman, the director general of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).
Intriguingly, when contacted by the Times for a comment, Armstrong’s long-term lawyer, Tim Herman, said only, “Lance has to speak for himself on that.”
He also denied his client was seeking talks with the USADA or WADA.
Armstrong has been facing increasing pressure to confess, chiefly from the board of the Livestrong Foundation, which fears the continuing devaluing of Armstrong’s reputation is negatively affecting the foundation’s revenue.
The article claims though that Armstrong’s motivation to confess is based on his desire to continue to compete in triathlon and other endurance events. The article states:
“Armstrong has hopes of competing in triathlons and running events, but those competitions are often sanctioned by organisations that adhere to the World Anti-Doping Code, under which Armstrong received his lifetime ban.”
Stacked up against a possible confession though are some very large numbers, which would run into the dozens of millions of dollars.
The Texan is facing an $11 million civil suit from SCA Promotions after the company was forced to pay out a Tour de France winner’s bonus to him, as well as a $1.5 million case brought by the Sunday Times newspaper.
A confession could bring out other disgruntled figures and even previous corporate sponsors, whose legal teams could present a very formidable challenge to Armstrong’s own.
The question that arises here, however, is this: Do we need a confession from Lance Armstrong?
I’m not so sure.
According to the article, Armstrong’s motivation for confessing is not to apologise for the damage he did to the reputation of cycling nor to the people whose careers his denials and counter-accusations so negatively affected.
The driving factor, as reported in the article, is his desire to be a competitive athlete once again – and, presumably, to be rewarded financially for that.
Once tipped as a potential politician, that avenue now seems blocked to him (though his ability to obfuscate the facts would serve him well in politics, some may argue). Perhaps a career as a masters triathlete seems to him to be the best of the rest at this current moment in time.
Some will argue that everyone deserves a second chance. I would normally agree. But unlike Hamilton, or Floyd Landis, or David Millar, who each doped, confessed and were allowed to move on, Armstrong’s professional life was tainted not only by cheating to win but by sustained and continuous attacks on those he deemed to be against him.
In the cases of Fillipo Simeoni and Cristophe Bassons, Armstrong played a direct hand in having them shunned by the peloton and in the early curtailing of their cycling careers.
In another, that of Betsy Andreu, the wife of Armstrong’s former teammate Frankie Andreu, he called into question the mental state of Betsy after she accused him of using banned substances, and vilified Frankie, putting considerable strain on their marriage.
The list goes on, and is depressingly long. It’s this aspect of the whole affair, as well as the continuous denials and the use of the Livestrong Foundation as a shield from which to hide behind, which would make any confession from Armstrong seem worthless.
The Tour de France titles are gone. The records have been erased. The achievements, the battles, the slow-motion segments set to epic music are all fading to grey. The truth of the matter is there is no way back from the wilderness for the former grand champion.
Confession or not, the majority just don’t want him back.
Jason
Guest
Hold your horse a second partner! There was no insinuation, purely factual. If you have the time please look at the list of victouris cyclists that have not tested positive throughout that era???? Mmm difficult to find arent they. However please feel free to continue your gallop.
sittingbison
Guest
now looks like he is throwing Weisel Hein and Pat under the bus Bobo. Can't wait, because Weisel has the dirt on EVERYTHING going back to the 84 Olympics US cycle track team and will surely retaliate.
polly
Guest
Much like people who slow down to 'rubberneck' as they drive past accidents then I take it ? For sure the guy is a superb athlete, but he has become a sideshow, whether you think he doped or not.
polly
Guest
Especially if his motivation is to be able to compete in other sports at a pro/elite level. Does triathlon really want a guy who can bring this kind of heat on to what is although a massive sport participant wise, still a baby in terms of prize money & media coverage etc ? No doubt triathlon will have to step up it's PED testing at some stage but does it do that in order to check on Lance or because there is genuinely a problem ? Of course any event will welcome increased exposure but does it want it because people are turned on to the actual sport or because Armstrong is competing ? No doubt he's got a stack of money hidden away that can't be touched by any litigation but as you said, surely any 'confession' will see a line up of claimants & possible gaol time for perjury. I just can't see it happening for a guy who's ego is reportedly bigger than Texas !
polly
Guest
Nice theory, can see Oprah paying him a lot of money for the exclusive interview, just after a little bit of titilation of a confession for a few days in the media. I still think the way the USADA 'arbitration' etc was handled was dodgy but all in all, if it was me I would be most likely martyring myself to prove I was truly innocent if I was in his shoes, the guy just seems too cool & calculating in my opinion. I'll defend his right to due process & a proper legal trial as opposed what I consider to be the kangaroo court of the USADA but Oprah is not a lawyer & her show is not a court-room, so obviously Armstrong is more interested in public relations than any pursuit of justice.
polly
Guest
Agreed, most whole-heartedly. Woods never co-erced others to join him, never bullied those that didn't, never instigated legal proceedings winning huge payouts to prove he was faithful to his wife etc etc. Most significantly, Woods has never cheated at golf to become the champion player he is.
polly
Guest
The great unwashed may just want him to go away but the companies he took money from via lawsuits etc certainly don't. This will stop him from any confession in my opinion, he may want to be a pro triathlete but he'll never win enough prize money to cover the cost of re-gaining admittance to the competitions.
Andrew
Roar Rookie
Oprah will get it out of him. http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cycling/lance-armstrong-to-address-doping-scandal-on-oprah-20130109-2cfi5.html
Derm
Roar Guru
More likely, LA is just looking for a way to get his story out through media. He'll find some sucker media company willing to give him an interview 9dunno if he can be paid for it), in which he'll get softball questions, and can give softsoap answers..
Steve
Guest
Jacques Anquetil was referring to Lance Armstrong's cheating in the modern era was he? You do understand the concept of 'worse' don't you? Evidently not, for both questions All cheats are bad; some are worse than others; Armstrong was about the worst. Your 'straw man' that people think only Armstrong deserves punishment is laughable. Keep testing, keep prosecuting, go after ALL the cheats is what I'm saying- that's the only way any kind of corruption gets cleaned up.
Sarah
Guest
"Only a fool would imagine it was possible to ride Bordeaux–Paris on just water." If he did cheat, he is no worse than anybody else .... Well at least Jacques Anquetil wouldn't think so .... and he was just a little bit more than the average "sports fan". And lets not forget Merkx and Indurain, who actually tested positive .... so he's probably no worse than them either.
Dirk Westerduin
Guest
You might be right about Bartali. But you understand my point, I guess.
Colin
Guest
I'm with you on this Jason. Everybody's throwing a lot of stones when they're not fit to cast even one. GOLANCEGO!!
sittingbison
Guest
sigh. I for one desperately hope his life sentence is not diminished. Its taken the almost death of pro cycling, the termination of many careers plus the courts and USADA processes to bring to the public consciousness the pervasive evil of doping in sport (cycling in particular), and just what an unmitigated toss pot Armstrong truly is. The truth about him is finally out there and is largely accepted now, and I don't for one second believe any right thinking person would now accept any leniency towards him. Armstrong has had numerous chances to confess, both officially as part of the USADA process and on his own bat with various revelations from the FDA investigation up to and including publication of Secret Race. Any action he takes is strategic, there is no remorse for the very good reason he is without remorse. He lacks conscience, empathy demonstrated by his continual sociopathic behaviour. There should be no accepting of his strategy.
sittingbison
Guest
couldnt have said it better Tim. chapeau!
sittingbison
Guest
I have no doubt whatsoever Warnies mum gave him the slimming tablet so he would look good for the team photo. Proof of pudding is in the eating...look at him now %)
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
+1
Tom
Guest
"Tell me honestly who wouldn’t be interested in watching him compete at any level in any sport? " Myself, for one.
Tom
Guest
I think you are being a little harsh on Hamilton. No one is claiming him to be a saint, but I think the exposure he is getting is more down to the fact that media outlets look for sound bites, and he is willing to speak openly on the issue and has inside knowledge of it, hence, he is often approached for comment. I would also say that I think you are underestimating the pervasiveness of the omerta surrounding doping in the peloton (and other sports as well) - witness what Armstrong did to Christophe Bassons, Frankie Andreu et al when they dared to speak out. Also witness the failure of many other convicted dopers to come out against the practice following their convictions. A guy like Shane Warne came out with the risible 'my mum gave it to me' defence, Richard Gasquet got off a cocaine positive (admittedly not really performance enhancing) by claiming he was kissing a girl in a Miami club who had some in her mouth, whilst I also recall an Olympic kayaker claiming his orange juice was spiked. I would much rather a full confession a la Hamilton or Millar than that sort of nonsense.
Bob Anderson
Guest
I'm normally pretty conservative on sex issues, but Tiger Woods didn't do anything remotely comparable to Lance Armstrong. In fact, what he did was personal and unrelated to his golfing. Should he have lost some sponsors? Sure, I have no problem with that. Should he have been demonized the way he has been and continues to be just for some private sexual activity? No, absolutely not, it was really none of our business. I'm no Woods fan, never have been, even when it was "politically incorrect" not to be. I always criticized his childish antics on the course and his self-absorbed attitude off it, but to suggest extra marital affairs are any way parallel to the Lance Armstrong scandal is ludicrous.