Tag: doping

Seven-time-Tour-de-France-not-winner, Lance Armstrong lied and cheated his was through his career, he told talk show host Oprah Winfrey during the first of their two-part interview. Although he denied being part of ‘sport’s biggest doping programme’ and repeatedly demurred when asked about other people’s involvement (notably on the subject of his former doctor Michele Ferrari), Armstrong confessed to riding dirty on all seven of his TdF ‘wins’.  The Texan’s ‘defence’ (although far from in the legal sense as we are sure to see in the coming weeks) appears to be that he didn’t view doping as cheating, but rather as ‘levelling the playing field’ as the culture was, then, so widespread.

 

Travis Tygart, CEO of the Untied States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA), who doggedly pursued Armstrong, responded to the interview ‘revelations’ in a statement: ‘Tonight, Lance Armstrong finally acknowledged that his cycling career was built on a powerful combination of doping and deceit. His admission that he doped throughout his career is a small step in the right direction. But if he is sincere in his desire to correct his past mistakes, he will testify under oath about the full extent of his doping activities.’

 

Cyclo will bring you further reaction and analysis over the coming days, but thought a few choice quote comparisons might be in order:

 

Lance Armstrong: ‘I have never doped. I can say that again, but I’ve said it for seven years.’ (August 2005)

 

Oprah Winfrey: ‘Did you ever take banned substances to enhance cycling performance?’

Lance Armstrong: ‘Yes.’ (January 2013)

 

Lance Armstrong: ‘I have no regrets at all. I’ve got no reason to lie.’ (June 2009)

 

Lance Armstrong: ‘I view this situation as one big lie I repeated a lot of times.’ (January 2013)

 

Lance Armstrong: ‘I’ve lived by the rules. You think someone with my health history would take something like that? There’s no way.’ (July 2001)

 

Lance Armstrong: ‘It was win at all costs. When I was diagnosed (with cancer) I would do anything to survive. I took that attitude – win at all costs – to cycling’ (January 2013)

 

Lance Armstrong has apparently apologised to staff at the Livestrong Foundation, the cancer charity he created in the wake of his own battle with the disease. News agency Reuters reported that a foundation spokesperson, Katherine McLane, told them, ‘He had a private conversation with the staff, who have done the important work of the foundation for many years… it was a very sincere and heartfelt expression of regret over any stress that they’ve suffered over the course of the last few years as a result of the media attention.’

 

The meeting with the foundation staff took place just ahead of yesterday’s pre-recorded – and much hyped – interview with Oprah Winfrey, which is scheduled to be broadcast on the talk show host’s OWN network on Thursday. The show has confirmed that Armstrong was not being paid for the appearance and that it was conditional that Winfrey be free to ask whatever she wanted – following the recording Winfrey took to Twitter to say ‘Just wrapped with @lancearmstrong. More than 2½ hours. He came READY!’ This has, of course, lead most commentators to speculate that the seven-times-not-winner of the Tour de France confessed all about his doping past. This in itself could lead to huge legal wrangles as the Texan has previously sworn under oath that he had never cheated; a full confession now would surely lead to perjury charges.

 

It looks like Lance Armstrong’s scheduled appearance on TV with Oprah Winfrey (January 17) hasn’t just excited the cycling community; British gamblers are getting in on the act too with bookmakers Ladbrokes setting odds on the words he may manage to splutter out. Although they are only offering evens on the Texan using the words ‘confess’ and ‘innocent’ better odds can be found with ‘Sunday Times’ at 4/1 (although ‘Paul Kimmage’ the Irish journalist who has spent so much time trying to expose the corruption only gets 2/1) and ‘Sir David Brailsford’ at 8/1.

 

If you’re not of a gambling nature, perhaps you might try making your own word-bingo card pre-interview and attempting a full-house confessional as you watch. Of course, if it turns out that Armstrong is only going on Oprah to promote a new book (suggested title: ‘Seriously, It’s Not About the Bike’) then you might be wasting your time. We wonder what the odds are on that…

 

Following on from the suggestion in the New York Times that Lance Armstrong was on the verge of confessing all with regards to his doping past, comes the announcement that the Texan is to appear in an interview with Oprah Winfrey – the go-to confessional – to address ‘years of accusations of cheating’. Armstrong has always fervently denied any wrongdoing even in the light of being accused by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) of running ‘…the most sophisticated, professionalised and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen’ and being stripped of his seven Tour de France titles, but it has been hinted that he may now confess to these historic charges in order to move forward with his career as a triathlete. The announcement of the interview was first made when Winfrey tweeted ‘BREAKING NEWS: Looking forward to this conversation with @lancearmstrong’ along with a link to a fuller press statement – Armstrong retweeted the same some 15 minutes later. The interview is set for January 17 on Winfrey’s OWN network and will be streamed live online.

 

You might think that Lance Armstrong’s year couldn’t get any worse. Accused not only of being a drugs cheat but of masterminding the ‘most sophisticated’ doping circle in sports’ history, stripped of his seven Tour de France titles – first by the United States Anti-doping Agency (USADA), then the International Cycling Union (UCI) – asked to repay his substantial winnings and dropped by sponsors… Now it has emerged that The Sunday Times is to sue the Texan for an estimated £1m.

 

As early as 1999 the chief sports editor of the paper, David Walsh, had raised questions about the rider after his first TdF win and in 2004 they published an articled that called for questions regarding his alleged cheating be both ‘posed and answered’. Armstrong sued and effectively won when The Sunday Times settled for £300,000. In light of the fact that it would now appear incontrovertible that Armstrong is a cheat, the paper would rather like their money back and have launched an action to recoup the money in addition to interest and legal fees.