New Store Hours

Monday: 10am - 7pm
Tuesday: 10am - 7pm
Wednesday: 10am - 7pm
Thursday: 10am - 7pm
Friday: 10am - 7pm
Saturday: 8am - 5pm
Sunday: 10am - 5pm

"Everybody's Dirty" is NOT a Valid Argument against Armstrong

I talk to a lot of cyclists these days who are convinced that Lance Armstrong is guilty of doping.  The principal argument they have is the repeated confessions of everyone else.

"Well, if Landis and Hamilton and Andreau and Virenque were all doping, then Armstrong MUST have been doping to have been able to beat them!"


That argument is absolutely stupid and lazy and it's the type of thing that you have to expel from your mind.  In fact, that argument is similar to the lazy, terrible mentality that seems to pervade the UCI (which for my money is the biggest criminal in this whole affair).

Look, if you believe an athlete is guilty then get hard, scientific, indisputable evidence!  Don't sit around and gossip behind your hand in the bathroom because that's just a waste of time and it makes you look like an idiot.

Seriously, everything is out of whack here. The issue isn't whether Armstrong is guilty. The issue is how are the UCI's tests so amazingly incompetent that riders are able to have ten or fifteen year careers while doping the whole time? Who is getting rich off this?

Look at the NFL, they just suspended a guy for steroids. He took it, they caught it, done deal! Why can't the UCI follow that model? Aren't they adults? Don't they get paid millions of dollars to do their JOB? Well, why can't they come up with a functional model for athletic testing?

I'll tell you why, because somebody's getting their hand greased to keep the system terrible.

Doping in cycling is a serious issue. I quit watching the Tour after the Landis win and I only watched a couple stages last year (only because it featured Armstrong). Sure, this whole payoff thing is all fun and games, but when the payoff threatens to completely destroy the sport, somebody's gotta stand up and get smart (you're about to kill the meal ticket idiots).

Who's the marketing genius who managed to get everybody talking about the riders instead of the governing body that's mind-bogglingly incompetent? Comments like, "Armstrong must be guilty since everyone else is guilty" completely sidestep the real issue.

And by the way, there's no amount of EPO that I could take that would allow me to beat Lance Armstrong. Heck, I doubt there's enough EPO out there for me to take so that I could even make Lance Armstrong breathe hard. If I took EPO and Armstrong beat me and I admitted to cheating later, all that proves is that I'm not very good (which was probably the motivation for cheating in the first place). To assume that Armstrong must be guilty because others in the peloton have admitted so makes no logical sense.

But if you want to persist in believing Armstrong is a doper, fine. Just make your argument with scientific proof not with lazy pseudo-logical arguments.  And put a little pressure on the UCI while you're at it, they aren't weathermen...they can't AFFORD to be wrong all the time.  If cycling is destroyed by doping it will be the governing bodies and not the riders who are to blame.

No comments:

Post a Comment