TechPowered By

More tech

10 questions Walsh would ask Lance Armstrong

By:
Cycling News
Published:
January 12, 2013, 20:44,
Updated:
January 12, 2013, 21:39
Edition:
First Edition Cycling News, Sunday, January 13, 2013
Race:
Lance Armstrong Oprah Interview

Sunday Times' open letter to Oprah Winfrey

The Sunday Times has taken the bold move of placing an open letter in the Chicago Tribune in which they pose 10 questions Oprah Winfrey should ask Lance Armstrong. The former pro rider is set to record an interview with Winfrey on Tuesday, due to be aired on the Thursday evening. It will be Armstrong's first interview since he was stripped of his seven Tour wins by the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA).

It's unclear whether Armstrong will confess to doping and accept USADA's reasoned decision. Sources have said that the American will offer a partial confession, while American's lawyers have denied the suggestions. 

Armstrong was not the only rider to be sanctioned by USADA. A number of ex-teammates testified against Armstrong, some of whom were offered six-month bans in comparison to Armstrong's life time sanction. USADA argued that Armstrong and his US Postal team ran "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen".

Regardless, the Sunday Times are in the process of trying to regain $1.5m in damages lost to Armstrong in a case dating back to 2006, when Armstrong successfully sued them.

In the open letter paid for by The Sunday Times, David Walsh lays out 10 questions which he suggests Winfrey should ask.

1. Did you tell doctors at the Indiana University Hospital on October 27, 1996 that you had taken EPO, human growth hormone, cortisone, steroids and testosterone?

2. After returning from cancer, how did you justify putting banned drugs in your body?

3. Did you have any sympathy for those rivals determined to race clean?

4. Do you regret how you treated Betsy Andreu, your former masseuse Emma O'Reilly and Greg LeMond?

5. Do you admit that your friend Dr Michele Ferrari fully supported your team's doping?

6. Is it your intention to return the prize money you earned from September 1998 to July 2010?

7. Did you sue The Sunday Times to shut us up?

8. Was your failure to understand Floyd Landis the key to your downfall?

9. Do you accept lying to the cancer community was the greatest deception of all?

10. Why have you chosen Oprah Winfrey for your first interview as a banned athlete?

epofuel More than 1 year ago
10 Questions for David Walsh: 1.) How do you feel about kicking all doping cyclists out of cycling? (You'd better be in favor!) 2.) Why stop at Lance? 3.) How do you feel about David "EPO in my house" Millar? 4.) How do you feel about all the former dopers at Garmin? 5.) How do you feel about Riis, Basso, McQuaid, etc. still having a place in cycling? 6.) What % of the pro peloton do you honestly believe was clean in the last 20 years? 7.) How do you feel about Garmin in the ProTour, but not Katusha? (Isn't that an f'n problem?) 8.) How do you feel about Betsy's husband doing EPO of HIS OWN VOLITION? 9.) How do you feel about Team Sky's dominance, given the presence of a doping doctor? 10.) Now that you've gotten your guy and made your money, aren't you going to go after the rest of pro cycling with equal vigor? Postscript: You can't possibly believe cycling or cyclists. Everyone has a cloud of suspicion around them, and I'm going to love to see the look on your face the next time this happens.
Alpe73 More than 1 year ago
Now you're talking!
Steven Ingram More than 1 year ago
If everyone admits to using, It's far.Before they call it quits.
zecarioca More than 1 year ago
great point, question 3 what riders he is talking about?? Wish Lance just go and said they were all doping, and they had doping parties, tired of all these people just forgetting about all the other doppers and people involved and looks like LA is the escape route, still say LA is getting what he deserves but he is NOT the only one. Epofuel great questions. yep why stop with Lance and everybodu is clean after he confesses.
Animal More than 1 year ago
Yawn. Another Lance licker.
Alexander Scott More than 1 year ago
OK epofuel. Let's run this by you one more time. LA was the biggest liar and cheat of all. For starters, LA was the highest paid cyclist in history. LA started a foundation which raised a few hundred million dollars based on lies. LA brought down many people in his quest for greatness. LA stole from people who believed in him. We can mention quite a few more, but then again, you should get the point. Therefor, LA deserves much more punishment. Do you think a person who steals one dollar should get the same punishment as on who steals one million? I bet you'll say yes. We know many others have doped, but those others did not pale in comparison in the corruption that LA was engaged in. And it was all for the quest of POWER. There is a BIG difference. One day your heart break will heal and you too will see the damage LA caused.
sideshadow More than 1 year ago
@epofeul. Look tardface, it's not David Walsh's job to catch dopers. He is not an anti doping agency. He is a a journalist. He covers cycling. Lance was the biggest story in cycling, and thus it was David's job to write about him. David figured he was a fraud and did his job, as a JOURNALIST. It's not his job to get people banned, not his job to get people like Riis, Basso banned, not his job to decide who should get a Tour license, and sure as hell not his job to try and get every doper convicted. If you want change then stop moaning and see if YOU can get these dopers banned, instead of attacking one of maybe 3 journalists, outside France, who had the guts to write what they know. Mr. Walsh did an excellent job exposing Edward Gunderson, the biggest fish, so now it's your turn, go get Riis and McQuaid out of cycling or shut your mouth. If you support clean cycling then you would support the good guys, but reading your comments, you either want drugs in the sport or you want attention or your working for Lance.
Nappymax More than 1 year ago
DAVID WAISH...You are a Asshole just as you;re Friend Piers Morgn...BOTH ASSHOLES....! Also TOUR de FRANCE People Are ASSHOLES....!
Steve Allen More than 1 year ago
Quite a few pros served time for doping and lost titles. Lance has to pay up. Alex Zulle served his suspension (from Festina) before the '99 tour. David Millar served his time and works for anti-doping measures. Perhaps you are looking through lance colored glasses.
the vagabond More than 1 year ago
By any objective criteria, these are terrible questions, and show the Sunday Times in a very bad light, simply because of the nature of the questions. Questions 2, 7, and 8 all involve "begging the question," in the correct meaning of that term, in that they force the respondent to accept an unproven premise by giving an answer. They are a form of browbeating, and as such are all inadmissable in courts of law. It looks like some intern from the Sunday Times spent about 5 minutes thinking up this list. Absolutely pathetic.
perfessor More than 1 year ago
Court of law? FFS it's the Winfrey show...
Animal More than 1 year ago
Armstrong is no stranger to browbeating is he?
record More than 1 year ago
I AGREE WITH THE ABOVE COMMENTS.BECAUSE THE BRITS APPEAR TO BE ON TOP OF THE WORLD JUST NOW WHO KNOWS WHATS ROUND THE CORNER. THE SUNDAY TIMES ARE AS BAD AS THE REST OF THE CYCLING MEDIA JUST NOW,AND NO I DONT NEED ANY WIGGO AFFECT!! TO HELP MY CYCLING.I STARTED IN THE 90S LONG BEFORE THIS CROWD APPEARED ON THE SCENE. WHY DONT YOU MENTION HAMMILTON.LANDIS AND THE REST,OH YEH AND OUR PAL BIG GEORGE HINCAPPIE. THEY HAVE CREATED THIS MESS,AND NO EPO.WILL NOT MAKE YOU INTO A PRO CYCLIST. HOW MUCH MORE CRAP ARE WE HAVING TO LISTEN TO FROM MEDIA AND THE NEW DRUGS HOPEFULLS. DONT KNOW IF ANY OF YOU GUYS SAW A PART OF 60 MINUTE SPORT BUT THE INTERVIWER LOOKED LIKE HE WAS RUNNING USADAS FAN CLUB,AND TYGART LOOKED LIKE HE WAS OUT THE DALLAS TV SERIES.JEREMY PAXMAN SHOULD HAVE INTERVIEWED HIM,THEN WE WOULD SEE SOME REAL QUESTIONS. EVERYONES AFTER THEIR 15 MINUTES OF FAME JUST NOW INCLUDING THE SUNDAY TIMES.
yossarian42 More than 1 year ago
Disagree: 1,2,3,4,5,9/10 all great questions. Question 2 the most interesting. You can be sure he will have justified things to himself so that he is the victim. I'd like to hear the logic.
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Yossarian, even though you have a great screen name, you must admit that these Walsh questions are amateurish. You know what? Walsh, having won, is acting like a sore loser. It's strange - but he doesn't seem to be getting what he wanted...he seems let down. Like, it's not enough for him to kick the doper(s) out, he has to know WHY. But why is that? How lame is that? If doping is the issue, discover the doping, and clean house. Don't sit around like Walsh making up silly, double-standard claptrap. Poor, poor, poor. LA was not the start of doping, and neither is he the end of doping. And David Walsh, someday you are going to have to get that through your thick head. To pursue Lance is commendable, but the way you are doing it is nothing more than some kind of childish vendetta. Call him out, state your case...but don't ever, ever invoke names like Landis, etc., as though they are some kind of good guys. Their doping, and Landis in particular, hurt cycling immensely.
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
"If doping is the issue, discover the doping, and clean house" Taking down the biggest doper in history is a good start. "Don't sit around like Walsh making up silly, double-standard claptrap." But he didn't make it up, it's all turned out to be true! You're just filthy that Armstrong has gone down.
Alpe73 More than 1 year ago
Taking down the biggest doper in history is a good start. Your opinion, fine - but ask the peleton what they think. Aside from a few like Millar (the new messiah), they couldn't give a rat's ass about all this. They just want to ride (and maybe take a bit of juice to help themselves). Clean sport? In 'house league', middle school, Sunday school ... maybe. Professional sports? Forget it. From cycling, to football, to cricket, to boxing ... it's the price you pay. Fans want gladiators? TRhat's what you get. So ..... bringing badass lance down is going to somehow "cleanse" sport ... no freakin way.
Alpe73 More than 1 year ago
Taking down the biggest doper in history is a good start. Your opinion, fine - but ask the peleton what they think. Aside from a few like Millar (the new messiah), they couldn't give a rat's bum about all this. They just want to ride (and maybe take a bit of juice to help themselves). Clean sport? In 'house league', middle school, Sunday school ... maybe. Professional sports? Forget it. From cycling, to football, to cricket, to boxing ... it's the price you pay. Fans want gladiators? TRhat's what you get. So ..... bringing badass lance down is going to somehow "cleanse" sport ... no freakin way.
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Chuck, In no way am I filthy that Armstrong has gone down. He went down as soon as he raced away from a field of dopers doing 550 watts up a climb! What I'm 'filthy' about, to use your words, is how the whole thing got twisted around to 'Take out Lance and All Will Be Ok'. How did that happen? What do you make of the legions and legions of dopers and scandals throughout the years? And a direct question, Chuck. What do you think about a buy like David Millar? I think that guy is a CO*CK and a half! I used to hate Lance, but guys like David MIllar (and Vaughters, and Danielson, and Zabriskie...) made me realize that there is something worse than Lance. Oh, just so you we're clear - Lance Armstrong and Operacion Puerto and the Festina Scandal aren't that different. And the problem with Lance being the biggest doper in history is that it took the UCI, Wada, Labs, and a ton of enablers to make it happen. So, I'm sorry, you can't just deal with Lance.
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
"And the problem with Lance being the biggest doper in history is that it took the UCI, Wada, Labs, and a ton of enablers to make it happen. So, I'm sorry, you can't just deal with Lance" Something we can agree on. That's why USADA invited him to co operate with their investigation, they know the fight against doping isn't just about Armstrong, they know that what you say is right, it absolutely took a "ton of enablers" to allow it to happen and USADA wanted to get at them through Armstrong's testimony. Even better (especially for cycling fans, which I assume we all are on here) if Armstrong's testimony could deliver Pat and Hein's heads on a platter!! But Armstrong has chosen Oprah, he always does what's best for him.
Tangled Tango More than 1 year ago
Sorry but from the 1999 Tour until now it has been all about Lance and for good reason. After the 1998 Festina scandal the majority of the peloton started the following season fearing the doping police and raced with far less PEDS. The USPS team arrived with the complete opposite approach and not only crushed the opposition, but Lance took it upon himself to impose and inforce the omerta. The following years he only strengthened that grip. So it really is about Lance above all other dopers. He was the best doper in the history of cycling. That is about the only jersey he can keep over his mantle.
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
That's a very good point Tangled Tango. In 98 many riders had been publicly humiliated (Richard Virenque on TV around the world in tears). Festina was meant to be the low point for cycling and it was hoped that 99 would be a fresh start. Then Armstrong and Postal turn up and take doping to another level. Bassons has the courage to speak out and what happens to him.... It's all about Lance, was then and still is now, opera an Oprah....
Paul Skilbeck 11 months ago
epofuel does not understand what motivates Walsh. Hint: it's not about winning, it's about honesty. As for Armstrong, there was only one Lance Armstrong. He made himself the story. He came hard and he fell hard. That's the way life is played.
Alpe73 More than 1 year ago
Totally, agree - absolutely terrible (emphasis added) questions.
marcello More than 1 year ago
I'd love to see LA try to answer DW's questions. Teach him some humility, which he is devoid of.
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Marcello - see my above reply to Yossarian. LA is definitely devoid of humility. You are dead on there. But the questions are just AWFUL. Do you know which author seemed to get the whole "Lance Thing' the most? The guy who wrote Lance Armstrong's War. He knew he was doping. But he already knew why, and he knew the playing field was level, because all were doping. Once everyone is doping, a little or a lot, no matter what the specific physiological responses are, then the playing field is level. It's like nuclear war. Once you have a warhead, you might as well have a million. When Cofidis dropped Lance on his cancer bed, he must have been fuming. Just that alone would be enough to come back and steal all their results from him. It was dopers against dopers, sinner v.s. sinner. There were few, if any, Saints, and mostly they were inconsequential.
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Woops, I meant that Cofidis dropping him on his death bed would have been enough to motivate Lance to go kick their arses, by whatever means possible. I don't think Lance was just there to say "look at me', he was also there to say F U to the rest of pro cycling, as he said F U to his cancer. And just as a nod to Kimmage, Lance is not the cancer, Paul. The world of pro cycling is the cancer. PRO CYCLING IS THE CANCER. And Lance was only a cross-section of that cancer.
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
More excuses for Armstrong's behaviour, "but I'm not a fanboy, haven't you read all my disclaimers".
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Fine, Chuck. Now, would you please clearly tell me what you think about the following men: David Millar, Vaughters, Danielson, Zabriskie, VandeVelde. That's just a handful, but I want to know what you think about them. There are no excuses for Armstrong's behavior. Just to address that. I cringed for 7 years, my friend. It wasn't the doping or the winning that bothered me, it was his attitude that rubbed me the wrong way. That was, until the USADA report, only to find something even worse.
PeterMc More than 1 year ago
Chuck, Have you ever wanted to be the best in the world at one thing? I mean really, really wanted it? I mean wanted it enough to sacrifice every other thing in life that a "Normal" person would be doing? Have you ever had to make a decision as to either doing what your competitors are doing or failing in that one quest? This question doesn't just pertain to cycling, this pertains to every form of sport. Add to that the pressures of Media, sporting organisations, sponsors, and you the general public and then see what happens. This is not an EXCUSE for the actions of sports people but until you have walked in those shoes, felt that pressure you cannot truly pass judgement on their character. What sort of pressure can be put on them? Just look at the headlines for this years TdF... "The Hardest Course Ever!" This is not the first time this has been touted, yet the organisers want these athletes to "Ride Clean" the hardest course so that these said organisers can get higher returns from the sponsors. They (and you) want the athletes to be ready to rtalk to the press as soon as they cross the finish line, (remember the outcry when Cadel wanted to be ushered straight to the bus to get his shoulder tendered to?). Yet you cry foul when theses same athletes do everything that they can to give you what you want. The self rightous of the people on here who want to believe that the WORST person doing this was LA Inc. are simply either fooling themselves, or are allowing themselves to be fooled by those who have much more to gain. One day very soon the true facts will be out there (with actual evidence not just he said she said). Did Lance dope? DOn't know wasn't there! Is it the end of the world (or doping in sport)? Not even close. Should the money have been spent going after bigger fish? Most definately!
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
PeterMc you want so much to believe, it's people like you the Armstrong has let down the most. I'm sorry for you.
Alpe73 More than 1 year ago
Another 'humility' seeker. What 'void' to you have that makes you seek humility. Sounds more about you than Lance.
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
You just keep +1ing epofuels posts, it's all you've got to offer.
ridleyrider More than 1 year ago
What justification do you have for accepting any thing less? What self-interest do you have that leads you to believe that he should seek reward for an admission of guilt? Sounds like you still want to hold him up as a hero...
Alpe73 More than 1 year ago
Not a hero, not a demon ... a human being involved in professional sports who broke the rules and received punishment. He's got a right to speak to anyone he pleases, in any forum and elicit any reponse he likes ... yours, mine and others. You have the power to come on this board and further twist the knife on Armstrong. Armstrong may have the power to regain some crediblity and maybe even the right to race (triathlon) again. That's the way it is. May the best man win.
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
Who am I to seek humility ? Fair enough Alpe73. But I wonder if he ever reflects on his own behavior and thinks if I'd acted with a bit more class a bit more humility then maybe I'd have been left to live my life in peace like Indurain. But the guy is an attention seeker, he needs to be noticed, craves it and the fact is that when you invite attention it isn't going to always be positive. You put it right Alpe73 when you said that he broke the rules and received punishment. No one is saying he's alone in this either, and the UCI has the most culpability of any of the parties involved imho. But the thing is that Armstrong is also a tool, and if you're going to act like a tool then expect to be called out on it. "He's got a right to speak to anyone he pleases, in any forum and elicit any reponse he likes ... yours, mine and others. You have the power to come on this board and further twist the knife on Armstrong" Fair enough, but when the way he speaks or treats others elicits a negative response then neither he nor others should go crying about it. Not sure why you had to add the bit about twisting the knife, I guess you like him.
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Chuck and Ridleyrider - Please give an opinion on the following riders/managers: David Millar. Vaughters. David Zabriske. Christian VandeVelde. Tom Danielson. Thank you, Epofuel
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
epofuel it's clear that I don't see the world as you do on parts of this issue. Dismissing everyone who ever doped outright will not help reduce doping (if that's what you hope for, as naive as it sounds it's what I hope for). A policy like Sky's only reinforces the omerta in my opinion. The other thing is that if you threaten life bans then you will never get any co operation from riders thus never have any chance of finding what are often the real bad guys, the suppliers, the coercers, the enablers. So I believe in a case by case approach, we all make mistakes. The guys you mentioned I don't have a problem with them getting another chance. A guy like Bjarne Riis, who not only doped himself but has continually had riders who have doped while on his teams, he should not have a place in cycling imho.
ridleyrider More than 1 year ago
Very fair request and I will do my best with that one. David Millar - Seemed to exploit the situation. He cracked, dealt with hitting rock bottom and then over compensated with his approach to doping. Do not know if that was a function of struggling to keep a job or his way of begging to be let back in - promising to be a good boy. Vaughters - more difficult there. Jury out on that one. He doped - OK. Seemed to be struggling with that memory in a positive way afterward and did not try to exploit that fact too much The remaining riders - more sheep than wolves. They never really came out and told their stories until really put in a tough spot. They let it die from there pretty much. Unlike Lance, I doubt they were the ones that orchestrated doping practices/policies within their respective organizations. They were not deep into negotiations to hide positive results, paying off officials or destroying careers to protect themselves. They are guilty of doping, but not in the manner that Lance did. Transgressions that concern me are not just doping. there is a difference between being the Mafia Boss and the guy that takes money from a corner store in the name of that Mafia Boss. Both need punishment, but the boss is the biggest criminal.
noidea More than 1 year ago
I think "nub of the discussion" here is not the doping question but the manner in which Lance Armstrong behaved to conceal his advantage in regards to doping. And also the custodians of the system that allowed it to continue.
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Chuck and Ridleyrider - I appreciate your opinions, and it is clear we agree on...parts of this, although I still think they are major parts. I appreciate the time taken to give the responses. I wish more on here would do the same! Sometimes I wanted to believe these guys were more 'sheep' than wolves, but reading articles like this made me think otherwise: http://www.sltrib.com/search/ci_3898478 It's from the Salt Lake City Tribune, and there are a few quotes by a guy named Zabriskie, oddly enough, who has, over the years, viciously attacked anti-doping advocate Matt DeCanio. Here's Dave talking: "Now, some former cyclists have made it their mission to oust riders they consider cheaters on their Web sites. But many pro cyclists, such as Salt Lake City's Dave Zabriskie, dismiss those critics as bitter crackpots who failed to reach cycling's elite level and are entirely without credibility. Still, the fact remains. There is doping in cycling. The question is, How much? "Of course there's going to be people thinking, 'How did this guy beat Lance Armstrong - break the record?' I ask myself the same thing," said Zabriskie, who clocked the fastest time trial in history at last year's Tour de France. "When another athlete is doing it to other athletes, I think that they've got the mind-set that anybody that beats them is on drugs." That's the very same Zabriskie who moaned like a baby and complained that "Lance made me do it". Here he is again: "I think people like that don't actually believe that human bodies could be different," Zabriskie said. "There are very gifted people in their world. I think it's lazy. They don't actually believe there's hard work involved in it. . . . I know who's running these Web sites and they're just idiots. I mean they're not journalists, they're not professional cyclists." I guess my fault is that I have a really, really, really hard time with a guy like this sticking around pro cycling and pretending to be 'reformed'. He was vicious to the anti-doping crowd before he got popped and needed to fess up. And though I do agree that there is a difference between him and Lance, I think Dave Z and Tommy D and the like need at least a 2-4 year suspension. Anyway, thanks for the input!
epofuel More than 1 year ago
Chuck and Ridleyrider - I appreciate your opinions, and it is clear we agree on...parts of this, although I still think they are major parts. I appreciate the time taken to give the responses. I wish more on here would do the same! Sometimes I wanted to believe these guys were more 'sheep' than wolves, but reading articles like this one from the Salt Lake City Tribune made me think otherwise There are a few quotes by a guy named Zabriskie, oddly enough, who has, over the years, viciously attacked anti-doping advocate Matt DeCanio. Here's some parts of the article: Now, some former cyclists have made it their mission to oust riders they consider cheaters on their Web sites. But many pro cyclists, such as Salt Lake City's Dave Zabriskie, dismiss those critics as bitter crackpots who failed to reach cycling's elite level and are entirely without credibility. Still, the fact remains. There is doping in cycling. The question is, How much? "Of course there's going to be people thinking, 'How did this guy beat Lance Armstrong - break the record?' I ask myself the same thing," said Zabriskie, who clocked the fastest time trial in history at last year's Tour de France. "When another athlete is doing it to other athletes, I think that they've got the mind-set that anybody that beats them is on drugs." That's the very same Zabriskie who moaned like a baby and complained that "Lance made me do it". Here he is again: "I think people like that don't actually believe that human bodies could be different," Zabriskie said. "There are very gifted people in their world. I think it's lazy. They don't actually believe there's hard work involved in it. . . . I know who's running these Web sites and they're just idiots. I mean they're not journalists, they're not professional cyclists." I guess my fault is that I have a really, really, really hard time with a guy like this sticking around pro cycling and pretending to be 'reformed'. He was vicious to the anti-doping crowd before he got popped and needed to fess up. And though I do agree that there is a difference between him and Lance, I think Dave Z and Tommy D and the like need at least a 2-4 year suspension. Anyway, thanks for the input!
Alexander Scott More than 1 year ago
Oh common epofuel. You are making me sick. Your love for LA is ridiculous. Is he paying you too to come on Cycling news and spew justifications and defenses for him? Get over it! LA has gone down and he deserves it! Period.....
aronfeld More than 1 year ago
I am one of Lance's biggest fans and I am also a personal injury lawyer miami . I don't believe nor want to believe that LA is guilty since he has not been convicted in a court of law. I don't anticipate that he will confess. " I think he will look O in the eye and state what he has said for the last 15 years. I have never failed a test." Hearsay testimony not subjected to cross examination even from a source as credible as Mr. Hincapie does not satisfy the evidence standards or due process. Am I the only one who still believes one has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty? Lance did not contest the latest accusations but that does not equal a conviction in my opinion. By the way Mr. Bruyneel is contesting USADA's findings. Go Lance!
Chuck_T More than 1 year ago
The Sunday Times putting the pressure on Oprah to ask real questions, nice.
gyp1962 More than 1 year ago
Agree totally with 'epofuel'. What's worse through this whole affair is the reaction of the people who comment on articles, most of which show exactly the same characteristics as Armstrong is accused of. In short, most people have behaved as though they were part of a lynch mob. Two questions for David: 1-What about the other post war TDF dopers, Contador, Pereiro, Pantani, Ullrich, Riis, Fignon, Zoetemelk, Thévenet, Ocaña, Aimar, Gimondi, Anquetil, Nencini, Gaul, Coppi, and Koblet, their results and money? 2-How much profit was generated in by all the other organisations benefiting from Armstrong winning the TDF ie TV advertising, merchandise, ASO, bike sales etc etc and are these people liable? This whole affair is not only about doping it's also about the hypocrisy of the manner in which we accuse individuals of crimes that have been committed by any. If this man rode for 7 years within a peloton that was largely partaking in the same fraud as him, then regardless of the race result of their deception, each and everyone should have the results (however minor) wiped away. Doping and losing or doping and winning, that's the same crime just a different result. Wake up Mr Walsh, your concerns are well founded but your methods are narrow and woefully obsessive.
Alpe73 More than 1 year ago
One of the most insightful posts I've seen in months. Thanks.
epofuel More than 1 year ago
gyp1962 - absolutely. And hopefully some of these guys will address these concerns directly, instead of getting on us for being 'Lance apologists'. I'll quote The Road for this: "Where are all the good people? They're hiding from each other!" If I could say one thing to a guy like Walsh, it would be this: "Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken." That's from Fight Club. But it's true. And all of those Garmin guys, and many others have shoved those feathers way, way up there.