Up for Debate: Lance Armstrong gives in

Friday, August 24, 2012 at 3:23am

Lance Armstrong gave up his fight against charges of illegal doping Thursday, and the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency said it would strip him of his seven Tour de France titles. How do you feel about that? What does it mean for the sport and for Armstrong? Furthermore, between this news and baseball's problem with performance enhancing drugs, how much faith in sports remains?


Filed under: City Voices

16 Comments on this post:

By: dargent7 on 8/24/12 at 4:27

Just saw it on the news.
He already made millions from the sport and won't pay it back.
I assume they had some serious proof he doped fpr him to give in.
Roger Clemons and Barry Bonds doped but spent the necessary
millions for lawyers to drag the thing out.
The era of Hank Aarron, Willie Mays, Al Kaline consisting of pure talent are gone for the quick fix of drugs to enhance performance.

By: gdiafante on 8/24/12 at 5:13

I can understand both sides of the argument. They have eyewitnesses, he never failed a drug test. If it's really a witch hunt, he can't win, and they won't stop until his reputation is destroyed. So for that, mission accomplished.

I think he's done more good than bad, but at the end of the day, I just don't care about cycling. I do not watch the Tour De France, nor do I care who wins. I rooted for Lance because he beat cancer. That hasn't changed.

But, it does seem that everyone in cycling is doping...but so far no one's won 7 tours in a row...even with help...interesting...

By: dargent7 on 8/24/12 at 5:31

It's the lead story on all shows...the USADA is United States based. Not France.
Defenders of Armstrong are saying the French are jealous and out for revenge.
Again, it's a USA anti-doping co.
But, I don't see how a 33+ year old Armstrong who had testicular cancer and chemo can beat 22 year old Italians and French.
re: "help"..his United States Postal Service team and Radio Shack have all been stripped of their titles. They got these guys on something big. Testing has gotten very sophisticated over the years and doping is doping, ie., blood transfusions.

By: gdiafante on 8/24/12 at 5:48

If testing is so sophisticated, how did Lance get by? He never failed a test.

By: gdiafante on 8/24/12 at 5:56

Darge, the Tour de France is a race, not an agency. And there's some question whether the USADA has the authority...


By: yogiman on 8/24/12 at 6:25

Only one person knows if he is guilty; himself. What makes the ones accusing him know what he was taking, if anything?

You can accuse one of guilt for any reason, be it personal or monetarism. But can they prove it?

By: global_citizen on 8/24/12 at 6:42

You can footnote his name in the record books, but you can't change the fact that he indeed won those seven races.

Same goes with Joe Paterno. You can say you're not crediting him for 111 games he won, but he still won them. History is history. You don't change facts or history by decree.

By: gdiafante on 8/24/12 at 6:46

No, it's just tainted. Like with Bonds, he still had to hit those bombs, but there's an asterick next to his name.

I agree about the wins...if he had doped and won one...but seven...in a row? If dope gave him such an advantage how come no one else has come close to that?

No, I think most of that was Armstrong.

By: dargent7 on 8/24/12 at 7:20

Again, several teammates were willing to testify against him at arbitration. Abirtation has won 58 and lost 2. So, they either have something big and positive, or they wouldn't waste their time.
Why would this USA organization want to ruin his life? He's American for Christ sake. It make no sense unless they had positive proof, tab tests, as well as the testimony of other cyclists he was doping and given blood transfusions.
Why would they all lie? Jealousy? I don't think so.
Would you give it all up if you weren't guilty? I'd fight to my grave.
Especially bearking up with Sheryl Crow. Maybe he's just a dummie.

By: puddycat on 8/24/12 at 7:33

Perhaps his doping, if he did, had something to do with the breakup.

By: global_citizen on 8/24/12 at 7:36

No one every played basketball like Michael Jordan until Michael Jordan came along. No one played golf like Tiger Woods until Tiger Woods came along. Some people are just off the charts in talent at their sport.

When anyone comes up with a positive drug test on Armstrong, I'll accept that he was doping. Until then, those allegations are nothing but speculation based on an extraordinary performance.

By: gdiafante on 8/24/12 at 8:03

I wonder, how exactly do you fight he said/she said allegations? Seems pretty clear, huh? That's the only evidence because he never tested positive. So it boils down to the credibility of the witnesses. In this case, they seem to think that because more than one say it, it must be true.

Like global said, unless you can prove it was in his system, it's speculation.

By: dargent7 on 8/24/12 at 9:13

I cannot comprehend that explaination.
Why would a USA based co. go after a USA born and raised 7 time winner?
It doesn't all add up. They have something big on this guy. Like chemistry.
Again. I would not plead guilty or quit for exoneration for anything I didn't do. Never.
Armstrong has millions off endorsemnets and could fight this "false allegation" for 10 more years.
Now, he's F*****.
He's guilty.

By: pswindle on 8/24/12 at 9:18

He kept the lie going for years. It made him a rich man.

By: global_citizen on 8/24/12 at 10:22

darg, if I'm ever on trial I hope you're not on the jury.

Your line of thinking goes something like this: "We don't have any evidence, but it seems very suspicious and a lot of people think he's guilty, so let's convict."

By: Rasputin72 on 8/24/12 at 12:24

This is no big deal! Evidently the entire bicycle riding racing fraternity takes performance enhancing drugs. I would like to see all of those bicycle riders who profess not to take drugs come forward so that the anti-doping people can prove that they are lying through their teeth.