Cycling: Power, influence and Lance Armstrong

Repercussions of the Lance Armstrong story are still being felt, and will continue to be so for some time, and one of the great questions to arise from the affair is: how did he get away with it for so long?

Some answers can be found in an article by Selena Roberts, 'The Influence Peddler', which lays bare the level of Armstrong's political and financial influence, and the extent to which he was willing and able to use it to get what he wanted. It is a fascinating read, showing how no-one was safe from Armstrong's bullying tactics, not even US Senator and former presidential candidate, John Kerry. Perhaps what is most striking is that this only appears to be a small sample of episodes in Armstrong's career, and there are more questions to be asked about how much political influence he was able to exert, whether it accounts for the US Attorney for California suddenly dropping a case against him in February.

Even now, after all the revelations, this seems like only the tip of the iceberg, and hopefully at some point, the comprehensive story of the Armstrong tale will be told.

Lance Armstrong's final chapter

Back in August, the USADA announced that Lance Armstrong had been found guilty of doping offences, and would be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles. The verdict had been published, but the evidence had not, and the investigation against Armstrong had something of a chequered history, not least the failure of the Federal Drug Administration to bring a prosecution, the leaks that had plagued the case, and public rows over its conduct.

Armstrong continued to claim that he was the victim of a conspiracy of former team mates, envious at his success and bitter at their own convictions for doping, and vindictive administrators, jealous of his fame and fortune. As Corinthian Spirit argued at the time, despite it seeming probable that the verdict was correct, the authorities had not helped their own case, muddying the waters by announcing a verdict without the evidence. Would cycling fans ever know for certain what went on during the Armstrong era?

This changed today, when the USADA published a 1000 page dossier, documenting its evidence. The bulk of it remains circumstantial, but it is overwhelming in terms of how comprehensive it is. Eleven former team mates have gone on the record in great detail, along with numerous other witnesses. Many of the witnesses corroborate each other, and the USADA's verdict that there was a highly organised doping conspiracy surrounding the Texan is proven to be more than a flight of fancy. One of the witnesses is Tyler Hamilton, a former team mate, whose recent book 'The Secret Race' has been damning. Another is George Hincapie, one of Armstrong's closest colleagues and more reliable domestiques. His testimony is noteworthy because of how long he worked with Armstrong, and how loyal he was to his team leader.

The levels of subterfuge and intrigue required to stay ahead of the testers are remarkable, and must have been exhausting. They make for fascinating reading, as does the testimony about Armstrong's character, he comes across as domineering and unpleasant, a bully who was allowed to do as he wished for years. Publicly, he is still playing the victim, but this is now even more irrelevant than before.

The facts will take some time to digest, and there will be repercussions for months and years to come, particularly at the UCI, who face allegations that they covered up a failed drugs test in 2001. However, there can be no more questions about the man himself, and about how dirty that era of cycling was, and this should provide the closure that allows the sport to move on.

Articles from The Telegraph and Guardian that pick out extracts can be found here and here.

Cycling: No clear outcome in the Lance Armstrong saga

A lifetime ban and the vacation of seven consecutive Tour de France titles is the apparent sad conclusion to the Lance Armstrong story, after today's announcement that he would not contest the US Anti-Doping Authority's case against him. It is an odd decision for a man previously defined by his refusal to quit. Despite his protestations that he is innocent and simply refusing to engage with biased proceedings, this decision has largely been greeted as either a tacit admission of guilt, or a final desperation play to ensure that the evidence will never be heard publicly, allowing him to continue professing his innocence.

This is an unsatisfactory outcome. Despite the USADA case, it remains hard to take a clear position on Armstrong. The circumstantial case against him is strong, but has not been subjected to independent scrutiny, and as he points out, there is little physical evidence. The basis of the verdict was an aborted Federal Drug Administration prosecution that came from an investigator with a controversial track record. The suggestion that the testimony against him was gathered through offers of immunity to other implicated riders, the way that details of the case seem to have been selectively leaked, and the fact that none of the evidence faced any third-party examination before judgement was passed, means that the USADA has arguably harmed its case in the court of public opinion with the way that it has conducted itself.

Armstrong's supporters will continue to defend him, and the rest will condemn him, but it remains impossible to make a conclusive judgement, which is why today's decision, which robs us of the chance to have the case examined during the arbitration process, means that we are no closer to the truth than before.

UPDATE: The debate is raging on, but the USADA are exptected to publish their decision in the next couple of weeks, that will apparently contain evidence, and more should come out once the cases against other individuals are resolved.