Tyler Hamilton’s win in La Doyenne in 2003 was one of the highlights in what was generally a fantastic season. A great Spring campaign, a great Giro, a great Tour, a great Fall; unpredictable races, and closely-fought battles littered the events. But, with the luxury of 20-20 hindsight and a quick cross-reference of results listings to doping scandals, it’s safe to assume that season landed smack in the middle of an era of jet-fueled racing that rivals the 1990’s in their indulgence.
It’s a tough time to be a cyclist. Death, doping scandals, corruption in the organizing bodies of the sport. We test our athletes more than any other sport, but the tests are flawed and incomplete, and rumors persist that teams and riders pay off not just the labs to surpress positive tests, but also the UCI. Hamilton’s confession on 60 Minutes this week is the latest in an unsettling chain of events that keep peeling back more layers of the onion. I was a big fan of Tyler’s and part of me even believed in his innocence. He seemed like a genuinely nice guy – much too nice a guy to get involved in cheating. But there he was on television, talking openly about the magnitude of drugs-taking within the USPS team.
On the other hand, I’ve never been a fan of Armstrong’s. I find him to be arrogent, controlling, manipulative. His Tour wins were too formulaic; in sharp contrast to his fight with cancer, his racing showed no element of humanism. I have taken it for granted that his wins came with considerable assistance from a carefully planned and executed doping regimen. But these beliefs were woven together by a thread of doubt, and the possibility always existed that his were clean wins.
Hearing Hamilton talk of the seemingly nonchalant attitude towards doping at USPS and, in particular, by Armstrong, is surprising not in the content of the message, but in how hard the message hit. I expected the words. I had read them. I have even written many of them myself. But there was always a tangible element of speculation about them. For me, that element is now gone, and it feels strange to say the least.
Even as someone who generally accepts that doping is commonplace in the peloton, it hurts me every time another allegation of doping comes out. It takes me days to recover from it. But even if the worst happens, if Professional Cycling as we know it today falls apart, cycling will continue. Because cycling is more than watching others race bikes. It’s about racing or riding the bike yourself. It’s about overcoming your own limitations. It’s about the rider and the machine working together. It’s about cleaning, caring for, thinking about your bike. It’s about taking photos of it so you can look at it when you’re away.
Cycling rides through a storm today, but we will always have the bike. We will always have la Vie Velominatus.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
BTW, the only reason we're even discussing this is because Bertie actually found it necessary to use a freaking diet drug during his spring training before he made his blood bank deposit for use in July. How idiotic is that? Here's a guy whose only full time job is to basically ride his bike. No 40+ hour work week as a desk jockey, cashier, etc. A team and assorted servants to take care of his every need. Yet for some reason he found it necessary to take a diet drug instead of say, oh I don't know, RIDING his bicycle MORE or being more CAREFUL of what he EATS???
This is the exact same reason that Flandis got popped. He wasn't stupid enough to use T during the Tour, he was an idiot to think that somehow the substance would magically disappear in the blood bag when he was using it during training and employing the Vampire method.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/05/news/origins-video-jens-voigt-on-his-first-bike-races_175812
Jens, being an inspiring antidote to a lot of the aforementioned frustrations of professional cycling, belongs in this comment string, I think.
When he was talking about his first race in 1981, I couldn't help but to picture a 9.5 year-old, arm wrapped in bandage netting from an earlier wreck, leading Hinault through some killer descent.
@Seth!
Brilliant. Just when it's all getting depressing what with Tyler and George and the whole 'We need more time to think about the beef situation' news, someone finds that perfect antidote - Jens!. Thanks. Am looking forward to seeing the other interviews in the series - though I cannot imagine they'll be as engaging as Jens!' one.
@Marcus
Marcus, you're right. I am being a smartarse, and Armstrong was no slouch pre-cancer. Just trying to start a conversation. That's what makes this forum so great.
@Xponti
For sure the bike assisted with his recovery and will to live - no doubt about that. However, without chemo and other scary ass drugs, just riding a bike isn't going to cure your cancer - especially with the serious illness Lance was facing.
@Dan O
Didn't say that JUST riding was going to, only that it was a part of his will to beat cancer. You can drug people up as much as you like but if they don't think they have anything to live for, then they won't. If there is something there to fight for and something driving them to beat cancer, then that is a help. The body is still a mystery and the brain even more so.
All I am saying is that his determination to beat cancer AND to get back on the bike HELPED him to beat cancer, not WAS the REASON he beat cancer.
It was Mothra; Gojira hit Tokyo and I understand it was more like "faaark me" than "oiii, here comes that big beastie"
@il ciclista medio
Oooooh. Thanks for the clarification.
@all
Just saw this; interesting details:
And, regarding the meeting with Pharmy:
A few last words on LA or COTHO. I don't know him and I'm not a personal friend of Armstrong. That is a very short list. I have raced on and off for over 20 years in Texas and I have been in races that Armstrong participated in during the period of the late 80s. (A former life when I was 155 lbs of pure fucking steel, piss and vinegar). I can tell you he was the strongest rider I have ever seen in Texas including several others that have gone on to be European professionals. He was also a stupid, abrasive, arrogant, chubby teenager that should have won every race he entered. He would almost always go straight off the front from the bell and try to shame the rest of the pack with his huge motor. I've seen him lap the field in circuit races and I've seen him lose to much lesser riders because of his lack of tactical sense. I'm fairly certain that Richardson Bike Mart was not supplying him with PEDs at that time and he was a fucking beast.
I can tell you that based on what I know of him that he is a difficult person to work for. Again, arrogant and abrasive with very high expectations. I know people who have had personal and/or professional relationships with LA that would agree with Frank's assessment of his personality.
However, I know for a fact that Livestrong is a purely altruistic pursuit for him. He does NOT benefit from it financially and his demeanor towards the survivors and volunteers is a complete contrast to his other professional relationships. To say Livestrong is a "cash cow" or some sort of fodder to mask his persona is total bullchit. Look at the financial statements that are a matter of public record.
You're entitled to your opinion of COTHO, but to piss on Livestrong is completely fucking ridiculous. It is what it says it is and it does what it says it does.
Now back to my present life...2 hours of towing 185 lbs up and down these ATEX hills. Still a lot of piss and vinegar. Not much steel.
Well yeah, look at how he would yell at Alfonso to get off of his bike and back to work at the office during last year's TdF "The Shack" commercials. I assume those were real, yes?
In all seriousness, thanks for the 'local' insights. My personal take on doping, in regards to Armstrong (and other riders who have been suspected dopers but have gone on to crush their opponents) isn't that doping is what made them great, it's that they were already at the top of their game and doping provided just one more little advantage. I think riders like Armstrong or Alberto could still do amazing things, even without doping - but if they did indeed dope, were just looking for any little advantage they could get, because in professional racing, a difference of seconds or meters matters can matter a lot.