Lance Armstrong: Does cheating destroy his legacy?

“In his quest to be the greatest cyclist ever, Lance Armstrong let nothing stop him,” said the Chicago Tribune in an editorial. Not testicular cancer, which spread to his brain and lungs and left him with a 50 percent chance of survival. Not the grueling Alpine climbs of the Tour de France, which he won a record seven times. But after the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency accused him of systematically cheating to gain an edge, the combative Texan did something last week “he had never done before: He gave up.” Armstrong still insists he never doped, calling the USADA investigation a “witch hunt,” said the New York Daily News. But his surrender “was an implicit admission of guilt.” The USADA says its review of old blood tests found “overwhelming proof” that Armstrong used steroids and the banned, red-blood-cell-boosting substance EPO, and illegally gave himself blood transfusions during races to increase his endurance. Ten former teammates were prepared to testify that Armstrong was at the center of a sophisticated blood-doping scheme designed to evade detection. Knowing the evidence against him was strong, Armstrong elected not to fight any further. “The hill was too steep.”

There’s still no evidence of Armstrong’s guilt, said Greg Lott in BleacherReport.com. Throughout his 20-year career, jealous rivals have consistently tried to label him a cheat and “sully his impeccable reputation.” Anti-doping authorities have subjected him to hundreds of drug tests, none of which he ever failed. After realizing the futility of fighting an Orwellian agency with an obvious vendetta, “Armstrong has simply stepped out of the arena.” Nonetheless, his unparalleled legacy stands: He’ll always be remembered as the cancer survivor who rose from his deathbed to “become the greatest cyclist of his or any other generation,” and raised $500 million to support other cancer survivors through his Livestrong charity. And “if he did take enhancers, so what?” said Buzz Bissinger in Newsweek. Professional cycling is a “rotten sport,” and every rider who finished second to Armstrong in the Tour has since been connected to doping. If Armstrong used banned substances, he was merely “leveling the playing field. He was still the one who overcame all odds.”

Your loyalty is misplaced, said Rick Morrissey in the Chicago Sun-Times. Yes, Armstrong’s charity has helped many cancer victims. But the man also has a massive ego, cheated to win races, and then lied about it repeatedly to protect his brand, which has made him a very wealthy man. Now’s he’s “decided to play the martyr role,” figuring his cancer work and blind “hero worship” will shield him. Sorry, Armstrong fans: “You have been cheering for a hollow man.”

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Why must it be either/or? said Mary Schmich in the Chicago Tribune. If Armstrong cheated at cycling, does it change the fact that his astonishing comeback from cancer, and the survivor network he created, inspired so many people in their own fight to live? People can still “do a lot of good even if they’re not full-fledged heroes.” Amen to that, said Kurt Badenhausen in Forbes.com. Five years ago, Armstrong’s book and example helped me keep my spirits up through a brutal, year-long course of radiation and chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. I even began competing in triathalons as a tribute to him. There are thousands of cancer survivors who got through some very dark moments because of what he symbolized. That is more important than the Tour medals, and “that is why Lance Armstrong still matters.”