I do not know what is worse, testicular cancer or 2 hours
with Oprah, (I hope I never have to endure either one) but either way it’s fair
to say that Lance Armstrong has been through a lot in his life. In any event,
it is absolutely mind boggling to me how a man who has provided support to and
inspired thousands (if not millions) of cancer patients over the years can suddenly
be villainized by America. I have never
advocated doping in pro sports for the simple reason that it creates an unfair and
unsafe barrier to entry for amateur athletes who rely on shear talent and
tireless preparation to make it. At long last, professional sports are catching
up to the Olympics to protect the integrity of their leagues and make sure that
these barriers do not continue to exist so that only the absolute best can
reach the highest level of their given sport. However, in my stance against
doping and support for all anti-doping measures, I am also a realist who cannot
ignore the norms of the past. While I do not have any form of proof it is
fairly safe to say that 95% of Tour de France competitors between 1995 and 2005
were using some form of artificial substance to allow them to train harder to
conquer the inhumane conditions of the Tour, yet only one of these many riders
won 7 titles. Only one rider in the history of the sport became a household
name throughout America, and only one used that celebrity status to create a
better world for cancer victims and their families. Furthermore, in a twist of
irony and despite the testimony of many Tour riders, Lance Armstrong in his
recent admissions will ultimately and single-handedly rid the sport of the
heavy doping that was present long before he got there. In many ways, Lance
Armstrong is much more a victim of doping than a perpetrator, as the greatest
cyclist of all time he may have been able to compete and dominate as he did in
another era without the use of banned substances, but coming into the sport in
the 90’s doping was the norm and not doing so would have given the other riders
an unfair advantage over him. Not doping for Lance would have been like Roger
Federer going through his entire tennis career using a wooden tennis racquet
when all other (less talented) players were using titanium. Lance is clearly a
classy gentleman who has nothing to be defensive or ashamed of which may
explain why he allowed Oprah her chance to once again point her nose down at an
interviewee, but as she continued to point out how he used artificial substances
to do his job better, it would have been appropriate on some level for him to
ask her if she ever took a diet pill or underwent cosmetic surgery to keep her
ratings and marketability as high as possible.
AND THAT'S THE BRUTAL TRUTH!
