Right on, mannnnn.....
He won... and this decision is just more Kabuki, too!
He won the races. It really doesn’t matter whether you say he still holds the title. If the USADA has proven anything, it is that apparently everybody in cycling is doping, and they are almost all getting away with it. So frankly, if that is the case, it’s hard to see how they can say ANYBODY really “won” the Tour — for all we know, everybody in the tour is doped up on something.
UCI appears to have vacated the victories without (yet?) having declared an alternate winner..
Right on, mannnnn.....
He won... and this decision is just more Kabuki, too!
“If the USADA has proven anything, it is that apparently everybody in cycling is doping”
Truth in taht. I mean, if everyone is doping then Lance still beat them on equal terms.
They are all doping. Cycling and track wins are all really rentals. The vast majority of them are expunged within a few years due to later testing of stored samples. NCAA football is on the same path with recruiting violations.
Many seem to be acting like Lance was the only one doping and that gave him the edge he needed to win all of those races. That without doping he would not have won.
I do believe that without doping Lance Armstrong would not have won a race. That is not because he didn’t have the talent, that is because MOST of the other riders were juicing too. This goes back to the same arguments I heard about Baseball. If the pitcher and hitter are both doping, does either have an advantage?
Armstrong had no advantage as his doping did not really change the landscape. Its not like he was the only one out there on the juice. Most of the riders were, so no advantage to anyone there.
So then the question should be, why did the USADA conduct this investigation at all? It surely wasn’t to preserve the dignity of cycling!
Cycling would have been better off to leave this alone, improve their testing, learn from it, and move on.