Has the evidence mattered so little as the desire of the institutions.
Let me explain...... It has been a few days now since the latest charges have been levied against 7 times Tour D'France winner Lance Armstrong. Although I commented briefly at the time on twitter I decided to look at a few source of information. Watch the TDF's again before passing my opinion.
The first thing to point out is that I am not an expert in the judicial process when it comes to cycling though I can claim a significant knowledge when it comes to the burden of proof in criminal prosecution.
The USADA have laid numerous charges on Armstrong, in the process, preventing him pursuing his triathlon career. From reading the letter to Armstrong it would appear the USADA have approached a number of athletes with evidence they used illegal substances and offered them the chance for redemption. Redemption in this case meaning no prosecution or fine. This would not be possible in a criminal investigation without significant safety controls and corroborating evidence. Think about it for a moment. Ten cyclists and team employees are told this will cost you money and your career unless you name names and we only want one...Lance Armstrong. That's right - the result of this significant investigation is that only one person will be charged..... Hence the comparison to the Inquisition ..... One person could name another before they would be tortured until they confessed. Strangely enough huge sums of money were often involved which would then go to the church and [perhaps] others.
So what do people think about Lance Armstrong and did he cheat? Well there appear to be a few categories;
- I don't care at all;
- Everyone was doing it so he gained no advantage therefore he didn't cheat;
- He is the most supreme athlete since the demi-gods of ancient Greece.
- Why does it matter after all this time.
- Well done the USADA he is a cheat.
- Well done the USADA you will be bringing down a multi-million dollar foundation and for what? Perhaps next you can prove God doesn't exist?
This is such a multi-faceted story it is difficult to capture all aspects without writing a book or thesis so I will limit my thoughts.
First of all Armstrong came back to the TDF after the 1998 Festina scandal of riders hotels being raided, drug smuggling charges, cavity searches and overnight prison stays. Two rider strikes and half the teams leaving the tour left promoters wondering about its future, they needed a hero and the got one. But he wasn't French, Their man Virenque was caught up in the Festina scandal, banned and now is the darling of the French nation. So is it the fact that the American isn't from Europe? Perhaps. Even the English had trouble being accepted into the pro peleton until Tommy Simpson's colourful character helped the acceptance process. But even he used drugs. Why? Well perhaps because it was part of the culture and like the early days of cocaine and cannabis use not to mention tobacco people didn't understand the risks. Let's face it, amphetamine's were given to soldiers during the world wars to keep them awake. Surely after the war riders wouldn't think governments would risk their health so why not use it in cycling? We can read off cycling's hall of fame and point to many dopers Pantani, Ulrich, and even the great Mercx and begin to understand drugs became part of cycling's culture over 75 years or more, it will take another 75 to clear it. And clear it they are trying to do. There are more tests and banned substances in cycling than any other sport.... As a consequence Armstrong became the most tested athlete on the planet.
When Armstrong won the 5th stage of the 1999 TDF the Italian media were actually calling out 'doping, doping, doping' in the media box. But this was the year after the festina event the press wanted more doping stories. In my opinion he didn't stand a chance.
So how does he do it. Again I'm no expert but I believe he has the mental aptitude, essential to maintain your will through training and racing. He uses technology and development effectively as well as analysing the course and plotting strategy throughout the race.
Then he is gifted- His heart is bigger, his lungs more efficient than most athletes. He doesn't create lactic acid in the way we do and he will train and train and train refusing to accept limitations. At 14 he was beating the best ADULT triathletes in the world, at 16 he joined the US national cycling team and dropped the rest of the team in the team time trial.
Before his cancer he was already a good climber but loosing 10 kilos of mostly upper body weight increased his power to weight ratio by 10%. Read that again....An already world class athlete had his power to weight ratio increased by 10%.
So he is winning all the time? Actually no. He builds his capability with the single goal of winning the TDF. Watch him in this race and you will see a pattern. When the stage is right with an uphill finish his team beat everyone into submission after protecting Lance he then goes out and finishes the job often gaining minutes over rivals. When the set up isn't right he will often only win by seconds but all of these time gains add up, through consistency and tactics he takes the lead.
Now let me ask this. Is it so impossible that an athlete can dominate his sport for seven straight years? Think about your club, is there one person with an edge over the rest? Are they taking something or do they just have more time to train and appear blessed with the attributes required?
What about other sports greats? Redgarve (awesome) Phelps (commitment and planning) Bolt (known for poor training commitment and yet ....) what about footballers? (more positive drug tests than we know) how do they all beat the rest for so long? Which brings me to two key points ..... cycling has more positive tests because it tests more and every sport has someone just a few percent better than the rest, the only hope for the rest is to catch them on an off day. And it is just a few percent after 85 hours of riding Armstrong wins by minutes. I will leave the math to you.
Some of the other evidence has come from testimony in LA confidential by Emma O'Reilly a massage therapist with postal. She points to three things, being asked to dispose of syringes, picking up pills, and providing make up to cover the syringe marks. Well, all cyclists use injections for things like vitamins ( it is allowed), all cyclists take pills, to ensure optimal recovery and prevent illness, and who wouldn't cover up these legal marks with the immediate assumption you are doping because you win. (Though I doubt it's efficiency with the amount of sweating involved in cycling).
Next the testimony of others in this latest investigation. First of all most domestiques receive a salary (these days) of about £50,000 per annum, back in the early 2000's Armstrong's domestiques could expect £1.5 million. That's right £1.5 million plus shares of prize money. Who is more like to dope? The force of nature Lance or the person trying to keep up with him? Money will make people do strange things and take serious risks.
Think of this... Hamilton (convicted for doping after leaving the postal team) rode the same training program as Armstrong and trained with him every day. He described the training as harder, much harder than racing returning home wasted..... Ever ride with a member of your club that you know will do that to you? Of course it is natural.
I could go on, and leaving it at this will leave much for people to pick at much like the investigation itself.
Armstrong was tested thirty to forty times a year in competition and out. Even being stopped on the way to the birth of his child and still being required to complete the test... In 2001-2002 the postal team was subject to a 21 month enquiry by a French judicial team that was dropped for lack of evidence.
There are other problems with the investigations, any test requires a sample B to cross check, often this has not taken place. Labs have been used that are not yet accredited. Witnesses are convicted of the same offence and receive reduced sentences for reporting others.
All of that aside too many investigations have taken place with no convictions. Is this because we can not accept an athletes dominance? Well I suppose some football fans still discuss Maradona's hand of god. So the debate will go on long after this latest trial and long after Lance steps off the planet. In my humble opinion Lance Armstrong provided us with the most enthralling 7 years of the tour d'France. We will never see his like again or be treated to the site of him storming in at the end of the final time trial. If this were a criminal investigation it could not, and should not reach a court. I firmly believe that the evidence should be overwhelming to convict an individual and not based on culture, speculation and disbelief in the capability of the human body backed up by dubious witnesses.
Lance will survive this latest inquisition I am sure. He has been spat on during the TDF, had death threats and spent most of his time defending his successes. I hope this is over soon for the sake of this incredible athlete and the sport of cycling..not to mention the multi million dollar Armstrong foundation... Go Lance
