Still, he's one of the greatest aerobic/ endurance athletes in history, and I respect him for that.
His money has been made, his titles won, stripping him of his wins is symbolic at best. Everyone in the world knows his name and less than 1% of the population can name another cyclist. He passed MANY drug tests administered by people that desperately wanted to see him fail or proven a cheater. So they can do whatever they want on paper but the fact remains that 20 years from now if you ask someone who the greatest cyclist ever was, they'll still say Armstrong and they will still likely not be able to name a second cycling champion.
The problem is the millions of dollars he had to spend defending himself (while not once being proven guilty) and he may even be stripped of Olympic medals and prize-money from those titles.
He just got tired of spending money and fighting this. The guy has his priorities straight as he just wants to live his life and he has nothing to prove to anyone.
So it doesn't matter to anyone that he was paid to dope using your tax dollars while a member of the US Postal team?
Prove it. Any of what you just said, prove it.
are you referring to proving he was doping or that he made money via tax dollars while a member of the USPS team?
I realize i should have said "may have been doping using tax dollars". Either way, that is one of the justifications for the investigations into him. Especially since i believe one of his contracts with USPS listed a 'no doping' clause.
By the way, i believe the USADA has somewhere around 10 witnesses lined up against Lance. Teammates who will testify that they all doped together.
Either way, i don't really care about this issue. I like to cycle (clothing aside, sorry if it makes you uncomfortable). Lance or no Lance it doesn't really matter at this point.
It matters to me that the .gov wastes money paying grown men to ride bicycles. Isn't this the same postal system that can't manage to deliver mail with the budget it has? How can they justify paying people to ride bikes for NO REASON??
10 "witnesses" vs over 500 drug tests? Which one is more concrete?
i'm not saying the government should be in the business of sponsoring anyone, but it was a sponsorship of a professional team and a high profile athlete. similar to how nascar operates, only with a different audience. I don't know if USPS saw any 'bump' when lance was winning or not. If not, then it was a bad business decision to keep sponsoring him. If they did see a boost in return then it would make more sense, but still isn't something i think should have been done.
I see a big reason to pay professional cyclists, just not with tax dollars. Just like i don't see a reason to spend tax dollars on stadiums for football or baseball teams.
Well you do have a point there. Cycling is utterly irrelevant as a sport, at least outside the Olympics. The point is, no one can EVER prove he doped. It's over and done. They don't have any physical evidence and what his teammates or anyone else says doesn't amount to squat. How do you feel about millions of tax dollars being spent on the effort to prove the unprovable, which never had a single thing to do with governing our country? If you're upset about the USPS paying for him and his team, you should be furious with the USADA and their shenanigans.
Similar threads
