L'Equipe Is Out of Line and so is Tour Director

Armstrong attacks and he is lashing out at all possible offenders, rightly so. How frustrating it must be to live with these accusations for so many years and when you have finally left the sport to have a story appear like this must put him over the top!

Watching Larry King Live last night, I heard nothing that changed my mind about his cleanliness from doping. I have always thought it impossible for Lance to do so, why after cancer and the trauma his body suffered would he pollute it again, this time intentionally? In 1999 of all years, Lance had the least to prove. The fact that he was even riding at the level to be at the Tour was a miracle, and a huge inspiration to cancer patients worldwide. I remember being flabbergasted at his comeback - just to be there! And win it; what could be more sweet? Winning on the support of EPO or any other banned substance would be an empty victory after conquering cancer. He wouldn't do it. At that point in his career, it wasn't about money, fame, or anything. This is not a Rafael Palmeiro story!

What can L'Equipe hope to gain from this? Even if it was to increase sales, that is such a shallow reason that it fails to hold any chance of reason. I believe the newspaper is above this, so why??? Journalistic freedom to write? Perhaps, but I also tend to believe what Lance has said "I can't say witch hunt loud enough". It amounts to no less than a witch hunt, and WADA and ASO - Amaury Sports Organisation - are in on it by not quashing it.

As I said in my previous post, I don't know any French who cling to this notion, but certainly they exist. I am tired of defending the French in general. As Lance himself said, he does not believe this is a general French revenge. The media and l'Equipe are influential, just like anywhere and what they write and how they write it influences what the readership and public think. This story has gone too far, and while I will defend the French for their decision not to support the Iraq war, this situation, while hardly comparable, is nonetheless indefensible.

Why is Jean Marie LeBlanc, director of the Tour de France, giving the story legs with statements such as "we have been fooled, the whole cycling world has been fooled"? How can he believe there is something to this, and why go public with such a statement at such an early time as this? Dick Pound of WADA is keeping the subject alive as well. Who are these people?! Have they lost all perspective?

Lance Armstrong is an 'international hero'! Hero I say for the inspiration he gives to so many who suffer. He is a symbol of last hope, of what can be overcome. My own father in law, a frenchman, kept Armstrong's posters and images by his bed as he died of cancer hoping he could equal the feat of Armstrong. It didn't work but it was inspiration, and sometimes that is as good or better than any drug. Lance of course is a star for the phenomenal feat of 7 Tour de France victories and the incomprehensible strength and mental toughness that takes.

Lance Armstrong, in my opinion, has elevated the Tour de France far above the other grand tours in the eyes of the world. The Tour is more important than ever in pro cycling thanks in part to Lance. The relegation of the Giro and the Vuelta to lower standing is due in part of Lance. ASO, L'Equipe, and France have benefitted enormously from Lance's success. I should know, I have followed the Tour and cycling for more than 20 years, and have been selling cycling tours for 11 years!

The story and the comments of these officials do nothing to elevate the Tour, but on the contrary; they diminish it. Attacking this star, this hero, after his retirement from sport when he no longer threatens anyone is a sick act. The story isn't that compelling, and it is irrelevant in fact. It serves no positive purpose. You can try to tarnish the man, but doing so only brings shame on yourself. Maybe there will be no fallout, but I have to say that I am smitten. My French colleagues, both here in the USA and abroad, could not agree more.

Lance Armstrong Doper?

The big sports newspaper in France, L'Equipe, has irked the ire of the cycling world this week with its 4 page story alleging Lance Armstrong used EPO in 1999. This is at a time prior to there being a test for EPO, so athletes using EPO in 99 could get away with it, theoretically.

So, apparently urine samples were frozen when taken from the athletes in 1999. The lab that froze the specimens then tested them recently for EPO and sent the results to the world anti-doping agency (WADA). There are a lot of questions:

Why were specimens frozen? Did the athlete give authorization to do so?

Now that the data has come out and L'Equipe got its jealous little fingers on the info, they have exposed it. BUT, according to the lab, the results of these latest tests were only done and sent to WADA under the assurance of anonymity; for statistical analysis and who know what - ostensibly to improve the testing and control of doping in sport. It seems the lab had no intention of associating names to tests and they have in fact declined to confirm anything in relation to who these results belong to. The lab seems to have been duped.

It is no surprise that journalists seeking some headlines and sensational attention would take this info and run with it. It is surprising that L'Equipe would lower themselves. And even more, that WADA seems to be willing to take the info from L'Equipe and let it live instead of killing it dead based on the loose connection between the test and the owner of the sample. The fact that the lab won't confirm anything should tell WADA to stand up and say - NON ISSUE. Former and current pros are dismissing it though.

Alex Zulle, who finished 2nd to Armstrong in 99, basically said that this is not at interesting to him. He is finished with cycling and has moved on. Miguel Indurain rightly questions the legal ability of these tests to be conducted now; the use of samples so long after the fact and subjecting them to tests unknown previously. Jan Ulrich basically writes it off to typical journalistic sensationalism, but added that should this all be proved true, it would be sad.

So, here we are in 2005 when Lance Armstrong has gone on to be the most tested athlete, most scrutinized human specimen ever, and nothing but conjecture and inuendo has even come up to suggest anything but physical gifts and mental toughness won all those races. People love to line their pockets using loose information. The book LA Confidential published last year was timed with the record breaking win by Lance. A lawsuit by Armstrong will determine how much these journalist quacks can get away with.

Finally, though, I have a big problem with L'Equipe doing this. I have always thought of the newspaper as a sports publication and not a tabloid. They have treated Lance pretty well recently too. Whats up with this? Are sales sinking? I'm sorry to say but I don't know any French with an interest in cycling who clings to these old rumors. The French I know accepted Lance, praised his dominance, and now like everyone else are looking forward to a new champion. For those who can't get over it, its time to MOVE ON!

Thanks Lance!

As it is being written everywhere today, the Lance Armstrong era has come to an end. I suppose that means the cycling era of Lance Armstrong. It is likely we in the USA will continue to hear about Lance for many years to come. Of course, the cycling world will not soon forget Lance Armstrong and the fantastic achievements he made at the worlds most difficult, and most beautiful, sporting event.

As a long time fan of cycling, it is hard to imagine someone coming along to eclipse the record Armstrong has just set at the Tour. However, similar things were said of Miguel Indurain after his amazing streak of 5. Greg Lemond’s amazing comeback from a hunting accident to win the Tour was considered a Hollywood comeback. Now, however, both seem small compared to the current accomplishments. Lance Armstrong has dominated the Tour the way Merckx dominated all of cycling during his time. It is amazing to see how crossing Armstrong was the last thing his challengers wanted to do. Even Jan Ulrich, the perennial threat in Lance’s mind, was not willing to upset the Boss – Armstrong; or so it seems. But, even as Merckx, cycling’s greatest to date, and Lemond managed to influence the riders and fans of their era, Armstrong seems to have done more and because of his cancer comeback will continue to influence people for all of his days.

In fact, as impossible as it seems, The Tour has been elevated to an even higher level than before thanks to Armstrong. His sole focus and dedication winning the Tour, and his success in doing so, has made the Tour the only race worth winning to be considered great. Even a stage win at the Tour seems to hold more status than winning at other stage races and even some of the one day classics. The Italians and Spanish must be wondering about the value and credibility of their Grand Tours. If the greats of the future want to equal or exceed the achievements of Armstrong, they will at the least have to skip the Giro d’Italia. The Vuelta coming at the end of the season seems even anti-climactic after a big win at the Tour, so why race it if you have just won Le Tour? The Tour isn’t the only one to profit from this prestige Armstrong has added to this great race.

Cycling in general has profited of course. I don’t know the statistics, but I can just tell you from experience and the number of people I now see on road bikes versus the pre-Lance period. After Greg Lemond, road cycling experienced a modest increase but then mountain biking nearly derailed road cycling completely from popular sport in the USA. (my opinion based on observation only). Road cycling is now at its strongest as people of all ages take up the roads to be like Lance. Trek, the bike of Lance, has become an icon, and recently even created a travel company to capitalize on the renaissance of road cycling.

That brings me to our industry of course. Travel, and bicycle travel, have reaped increased sales as a result of the mad dash to watch Lance in France. I can say that for us it has been a welcome boon. (Thanks again Lance!) Averaging more than 75 persons each year for the last 4 years, we have helped to bring people to France, to discover its spectacular geography, and experience the madness of the greatest race in the world. We are not alone as the number of Tour de France tours has gone off the charts. I can remember in the mid-nineties when we were doing bicycle tours but not Tour de France tours that occasionally some passionate cyclist would call to see if we had a tour for the Tour. We referred people in those days to the only 2 companies we knew of: Sporting Tours in the UK and Breakaway. Those 2 companies must be impressed with the flood of offers that soon followed thanks to the Armstrong “story” and the phenomenon that followed. Who else profited: the numbers go on and on; some of the most famous being Chris Carmichael, Bob Roll, OLN TV, and so forth. Who were they pre-Lance? All this should not diminish who they are and who any of us are. The success of all this may be what follows in the wake of the Armstrong armada of achievements; its all been good for consumers, for the general health of people with and without serious health problems, and as an American I can say it has been good for our national psyche and image.

Yes, Lance Armstrong is the best and most visible ambassador of American good will and spirit visibly demonstrated worldwide in recent years. I have been most impressed, as the Tours have gone by and capped this year, with Lance’s graciousness, sportsmanship, lack of offensive cockiness, and his visible concern for the important things in life. Lance represents the good things America stands for: hard work, determination, overcoming obstacles, and coming from nothing to achieve everything; essentially our unwritten motto of ‘you can achieve anything if you work hard enough’. His public humility, and gracious recognition of the other cultures he works within are what make him so likeable, at least to me. He never publicly discounts any of the competition, even if inside he knows he can destroy them, and he has made great efforts to respect the traditions of his sport. The French people have come to love him like their own for his respect of their culture, language, and traditions. What better example could there be for an American abroad?