Lance Armstrong

January 19, 2013

I’ve always been a big fan of Lance Armstrong, who hasn’t got admiration for a person who has survived cancer and then won the Tour de France 7 times. With his Livestrong foundation he raised money for the fight against cancer.
Until the day the interview with Oprah aired I hoped he would say that he didn’t use anything. How can a man who has overcome cancer use drugs which can give him cancer? Only to win?
I have watched the interview with Oprah carefully and processed it. Yes he made ​​a mistake but is he therefore bad? He used drugs, but all riders did, didn’t they? What makes him different from others.. just because he won?
I find it difficult that other riders blame him. Yes he was a very dominant and narcissistic guy but didn’t they want to ride with the ‘big’ Armstrong? They could still opt for a different team, they still made the choice to stay and use the drugs. They could say NO, but have not done that and are pointing to Armstrong afterwards, I find that cowardly.
Where I also have difficulty with is that all the ‘expert’ people who argue that this interview is a lie. What does he have to lose, he has fallen from his huge platform, he has nothing left! Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but people overreact so easily.
People forget that in 2009, Armstrong has become third in the Tour without doping! I find it strange that he no longer participates at sportingevents, even if it has nothing to do with cycling. No other rider has received such punishment, making it seem like it’s something personal from the USADA and UCI.
At the end he still is the man who overcame cancer!