Lance Armstrong has admitted to doping during an interview with Oprah Winfrey taped Monday, hours after apologizing to staff at the Livestrong Foundation, which he started but has since been forced to resign from, CBSNews.com reported.
After nearly 15 years of denials, threats and actions against anyone who told the truth about doping on the U.S. Postal cycling team, Armstrong confessed to using performance-enhancing drugs during a career that included winning seven Tour de France titles, which he has since been stripped of, the Wall Street Journal reported.
Patch wants to know: Does Lance Armstrong's doping confession change your opinion of him or his charity?
Livestrong Foundation issued a statement Wednesday morning in response to Armstrong’s interview with Winfrey, writing, “We expect Lance to be completely truthful and forthcoming in his interview and with all of us in the cancer community.”
Here's what people on Facebook has to say about Armstrong's confession:
Peter Hable Conveniently timed after his statute of limitations expired and still has little regard for the people he belittled for years. Incorrectly quttes the definition of cheating to convince himself it was okay. Like Soledad said, he is a narcicist.
Lynn Vander Meer Disappointing. But not surprising. Athletes are not what we have held them up to be.
Sherri Peterson Braam I never liked the guy anyway - shady
Toni Mueller He didn't care who he ruined along the way. He ruined people who told the truth. Sued them and won. He is despicable. Only confessing cuz he has finally been caught. NOT a good person!
Stella Phipps Not shocked. Friend of mine used to compete and had said for years that it is impossible that he wasn't doping. It was simply a matter of not getting caught.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling Given how ingrained it is, combined with the pressure upon national teams to bring home victories, I can't imagine how you get it out of the sport. While Armstrong was stripped of his victories for his usage, it's pretty much a given he was competing against people using the same methods he was to enhance their performance as well. In his case there are really two issues - the doping itself and the way he treated people and institutions as he attempted to cover up his usage, once he became a target. It's worth noting that the real pressure was brought to bear after his career was essentially over. The guy is an arrogant jackwad who used everything within his power and took no prisoners when it came to protecting his image. For that, he deserves to be vilified. The doping, while wrong, has become so much a part of the sport at the levels he was competing at that it seems hypocritical to strip him of his titles, even though it is necessary in order for the sport to attempt to save face.
He will appear on OWN TV selling JUICERS for health fanatics.
He has only admitted to doping instances where the statute of limitations has expired, thus meaning he cannot be prosecuted for those infractions..Or maybe not. He has also burdened his very young children w/ a lifetime of what? Being bullied (we know how cruel kids can be), being ostracized for what their father did. Maybe they'll become dope fiends just to be able to deal w/ the continued onslaught/reminder of who their father is and what he did to so many people. I hope that POS is paid back 100fold for all the pain/damage he inflicted on so many because he could and had the resources. His reasons for "telling the truth" are once again only self serving, calculated and only what was necessary to avert legal ramifications and pave the way for him to be able to participate in sporting events in the future.
My Life With Lance Armstrong I was Lance’s personal assistant for two years, during the height of his racing career. Do I think he cheated? Yep. But my real problem is something that diehard fans seem unable to grasp: the vengeful tactics he uses against people who tell the truth about him, on and off the bike. http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/biking/road-biking/My-Life-With-Lance-Armstrong.html
You seem to overlook his brutality towards anyone and everyone who crossed him or got in his way. How many people did he decimate personally, professionally as well as financially? That selective memory of yours must come in handy.
Anything he did/won/accomplished is not valid when any type of doping/enhancing occurred. The only reason he is a 7 time Tour de France winner is because he lied/cheated/destroyed anyone who got in his way/told the truth. Whether or not he could have won w/out doping, is anyones guess, but if he had been caught in the act then he would have been banned or suspended thus most likely preventing him from participating and "winning" 7 titles in a row. Greg LeMond is the one who should be admired. Yes, he "Only" won 3 Tour de France titles, but he didn't dope/lie & cheat his way to those titles.
Acknowledging he's a superior athlete isn't the same thing as admiring him. It's acknowledging his skills. He has them. He didn't get to be the calibre racer he is via doping and other extraordinary measures alone. He may have won, or he may not have. Look into cycling a little deeper and you'll find doping has been a problem, repeatedly, in the sport almost since its inception and that not only some of his teammates, but his opponents have used it as well. Like any other professional sport, there's a lot of money riding on the results and people avert their eyes from abuses like this. Suggesting that doping is the only thing that got him where he was is not only incorrect, it's dangerous, in that it leaves the impression that a) it's fast track to victory and it's possible to do so without being caught if you don't piss off the wrong people and b) it leaves the impression that he's the only one who was partaking of it and benefitting from it when, in fact, it's a sport-wide problem at his level and even some levels below that.
The "Only" reasons he "won" 7 Tour de France titles is because he doped/lied/cheated along w/ the hard work that all of the other elite riders must have also done as their preparations. Yes, others doped, but not all. Yes, others have had their titles stripped but I don't believe any of them have taken to destroying so many people and in as many ways as possible as Armstrong when they were outed /pursued by justice. Then again, how many of them had the amounts of $$$ behind them riding Armstrons coattails to cash in on the celebrity/sociopath that is Lance Armstrong. Take away the doping/oxygenated blood transfusions and I think his dominance in the Pyrenees mountain stages, to say the least, of the Tour would have been much different and this is where he won many of the tours. Nothing he has done counts in my book.
He's been disqualified and his wins have been taken away from him, as they should be, because he broke the rules. The issue of doping goes much deeper than him. It's also worth noting that all this information was known while he was still competing and that while it was possible for him to bribe/intimidate a good number of folks, in order for it to have stayed completely undiscovered (until now) required the cooperation of those who partook of the same activities themselves as well as those who benefitted, financially or otherwise, from not having the information revealed. Once again, it's impossible to say that doping is the only reason he won. The fact that he did it, and that he got caught after-the-fact, also makes it impossible to say he would have won any of them, had he not. That's why they take the wins away. That's why he is now someone who never officially won the Tour de France. That does not, however, take away form the fact that he is a superior athlete. Doping alone cannot produce the kinds of results Lance Armstrong achieved over his career.
I'm not confused at all. He had tested positive during his career. He was just able to get out of it/squash the results. He also pulled the "I'm a cancer survivor, I would never do that to my body " bit.. People were intimidated, blackballed and/or just plain bought whatever he was selling to cover his tracks. This has been going on for years and years and the tide finally turned and at some point, the last few months there was no turning back as all of the pieces were put together and his house of cards came crashing down. It doesn't matter to me one bit if he could have won w/out doping because he obviously never tried to win w/out an illegal advantage (at least in France) and did it 7 times in a row in. Everything he has achieved is null & void. However hard he worked and however long he sacrificed doesn't matter to me one bit. Also, since he has been doping for so many years, possibly into decades, then I guess we'll never really know how good he was except that he was in an elite class of riders who also may or may not have doped as well.
******************** And why do you think that was? If someone wasn't benefitting besides just him from all this, his house of cards could have come crashing down at any point. I'll guarantee what he was doing was well known, not only amongst his teammates, but amongst those on competing teams. Connect the dots. It's not that difficult.
If you are a parent, then you should guide your children to never adore any politician, athlete, actor, artist, performer, etc. Do you and your husband let the media set the stage for morality and guidance for the young and impressionable, or do you take personal initiative and set your own your parents gave to you? It is your choice. Personal responsibility like common sense is becoming rare these days.
Your respect is misguided. Lance Armstrong only admitted to doping where the statute of limitations had passed ie enough time had passed that he could not be prosecuted for those instances. Though, there is evidence that Mr. Armstrong doped/cheated during his 2009 comeback. Have you read any articles pertaining to this whole sordid situation? "Travis Tygart 60 Minutes interview: Lance Armstrong lied to Oprah" "Lance Armstrong came clean to Oprah Winfrey about his use of blood doping products during the seven straight years he won the Tour de France, but U.S. Anti-Doping Agency CEO Travis Tygart tells CBS’ 60 Minutes that he didn’t tell the full truth. Tygart says Armstrong did dope upon his return to cycling in 2009, and he was a heavy user of EPO, not a small one, as he claimed to Oprah. He also said he wrote a letter to Armstrong, saying he has a deadline of Feb. 6 to cooperate fully to USADA's investigation in exchange for possibly reducing the length of his lifetime ban from sports. An attorney for Armstrong told USADA that the cyclist cannot accommodate the Feb. 6 deadline, but the cyclist will cooperate with efforts to "clean up cycling." It's just that they believe the sport's governing body and world anti-doping officials should take the lead in the cleanup....." http://aol.sportingnews.com/sport/story/2013-01-25/travis-tygart-60-minutes-interview-lance-armstrong-lying-doping-usada-ceo
http://www.gw2gw2.com/gold.html