Blue Byline

A cop's perspective of the news and South Sound matters

Guess it really was about the bike, Lance

Post by Brian O'Neill on Jan. 21, 2013 at 4:10 pm with 2 Comments »
January 21, 2013 4:12 pm

I was a cyclist long before I first heard the name, Lance Armstrong. Yet it was the buzz around this single-minded Texan that lured me, and thousands of others, into watching the Tour de France, the penultimate race of a sport most Americans thought of only as exercise.

On the road to his 7th tour win/ Courtesy of
On the road to his 7th tour win/ Courtesy of

As Armstrong’s trips to the podium miraculously continued, we reveled not only in his success but in the backstory: raised poor by a single mom; found a passion for cycling; diagnosed, treated and defeated aggressive cancer; began a legacy as Tour de France winner and celebrity philanthropist.

It was a story Lance himself described in his 2000 autobiography, It’s Not About the Bike, a work meant to inspire his new-found fans and to properly frame the spiritual underpinnings of his success. I lapped it up, including this gutsy, typical Armstrong quote:

“Pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside and something else will take its place. If I quit, however, it lasts forever.”

Love, hardship, pathos, grit and, especially, miracles. It was all there in the book. Except that now, of course, we know there was something missing.

Drugs. Blood-doping. Lying.

In May of 2011, I wrote a column about Armstrong’s doping controversy following a 60 Minutes interview of his former teammate, Tyler Hamilton. One of the last to believe my hero would lie, I had just begun to reconcile myself to reality when I stated, “Maybe over the course of time Lance’s success as a champion against cancer will eclipse his cycling successes.”

Now, I know the truth. We all do. What willl be the long-term fallout of Armstrong’s admission? Hard to say. In the short term, however, the “cheater” label has created a backlash that even some staunch followers of his Livestrong foundation have turned their backs on him. For them, Armstrong’s message of courage and determination, of the hope implicit in even the worst moments, belong in the trash heap already filled with his lies and deception.

During his confessional interview/ courtesy
During his confessional interview/ courtesy

Now, instead of a lycra-wearing, endlessly pedaling, yellow-jerseyed superhero, the image is that of a suddenly mortal man answering uncomfortable questions in a staged interview, displaying the body language of a slightly repentant truant.

Now that the truth (or whatever passes for it in this sideshow) is out, the media has jumped on the topic of Armstrong’s eventual legacy. This is not a question that interests me, however. Here’s mine:  Who the heck is this guy we thought was Lance Armstrong? I’ll take a stab.

He is the amped man we see on Oprah’s couch. He is a fighter, an athlete and, also, a former player in the sometimes devious sport of professional cycling. He is single-minded and aggressive to a fault and sharp enough to recognize that, world-class skills or not, he likely would have only seen the podium from a distance were he not to join many (most? all?) of the other Tour winners in their clandestine game of doping. He is a cautious, calculating competitor who kept his secrets well. He is a skilled deceiver who, having perjured himself, was patient enough to hold his tongue until the statute of limitations expired.

That’s the man I see now, a tragic figure from Shakespeare undermined by his petty and all too human failing. Did he feel guilty? I’d like to believe he did, that he considered this current future when he wrote in his book,

“At the end of the day, if there was indeed some Body or presence standing there to judge me, I hoped I would be judged on whether I had lived a true life.”

Good luck with that interview, Lance.

Still, we did love your spirit. You fired us up with your competitive drive. We gushed at your cancer story and admired your philanthropy.

But, oh, that cheating heart.

Leave a comment Comments → 2
  1. elmerfudd says:

    The real problem with Lance isn’t that he doped, but rather that he tried to destroy honest people for telling the truth. He sued them, libeled them, intimidated them and used his connections to blacklist them and he was very aggressive about it.

    If Lance had just been a doper, it would just be another case of an athlete using some unethical but common means to try and get an edge.

  2. Bicycles can be fun too. Have you ever seen the Christmas lights
    in Puyallup from the sidewalk in December? If you took your
    bicycle on the trips you could instead of your car how much money
    would you save? The roads in the Puyallup valley are mostly flat,
    take advantage of this.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0