Wednesday, January 19, 2011

My thoughts re: SI Lance report.

Today Sports Illustrated and the editorial team that broke the Alex Rodriquez "drug" story published investigative journalism report on Lance Armstrong.

Click here to read the SI report

At work I was asked today what I thought, here is what I think:

I don't give a shit!

I wrote a blog about Lance in July 2010 (see side bar link to the right) and want to explain a bit more now, when the press is hot and the apparent noose on Mr. Armstrong is tightening.

I am pragmatic about dope in pro sports, it's big money and people do it. I used to get upset that cycling was always on the front pages of dope in sport and stepped away for 3 years but I reconciled a few things:

First, cycling tests the most and therefore, gets busted the most.

Second, it is sports entertainment and beautiful entertainment it is. If you think I am whacked, ask yourself this:
  • "how is it that an offensive lineman can run sub 5 second 40 and be 6'6" and 350lbs? How is it no one is ever busted in the NFL? How is it the biggest drug in the NBA is pot? I mean, look at that 19 year old 6'10" 260lbs forward who is just so dominant?"
If you are a fan of pro sport and NO ONE is getting caught in the sport you watch, ask why. FIFA's last drug positive of any noteirity was Maradona for cocaine. Please, these are superior athletes making more $$$ than baseball players and not one positive? Really, remember when baseball was squeeky clean? Um, Bonds/McGuire/Canseco/Clemens etc. were the stars.

These two points coupled with knowing I myself am drug free less a whole lot of Merlot, allow me to get on my bike with a clear conscious and train and race in the sport I absolutely love.

Third, and most importantly to the Lance question itself, the I don't give a shit part comes from a more personal place, from a place that really says to me - I just don't care if he was doped! In fact, if drugs allowed him to win and that winning in turn allowed Lance to do his foundation and write his book, then I care even less about the dope question.

Why? When you have a parent reading Lance's "Its not about the bike" in your arms knowing sooner, rather than later, we can't share that moment together and that parent gains inspiration from turning those pages, then dope up I say. I owe Lance a thanks for that moment in time, I will never forget it, it is a cherished memory for me of my mom.

If Lance was clean, clean, clean that memory doesn't change one bit. It doesn't have anymore value to it if he was clean.

Does that memory make doping ok in sport; absolutely not. I just don't give a shit if Lance doped.
Lance is bigger than his sport for all the right reasons; his foundation, his inspiration for millions, his influence in government's backing of cancer research etc. The test of a man is not how much money or fame, the test is what you do with it!

Perhaps you will argue, The test is actually HOW you gained the money and fame before what you did with in, doing right as a consequence of doing wrong does not make a right. VERY VALID, I just don't give a shit because of point #3 above.

Ride safe, please ride clean, just don't ask if you want the straight goods from me on the subject of LA!

1 comment:

  1. I could not agree more. I am just going to send a link to this when asked the same.

    For me, if he was serially doping what might be just as impressive as the 7 TdF titles would be his ability to avoid detection over the years as others were caught. The trolls would like nothing more than legitimate proof.