Is Lance Armstrong the biggest fraud in the history of sports?

Cycling has never seen a day when riders weren't seeking success through chemicals.

 

We have an entire, very lengthy thread on this site whose name comes from the phrase, for crying out loud.

Armstrong was another case of us rooting for laundry. If he was a German or Spanish cyclist? Forget about it.

 

I'm in this group. When you factor in both how much of a fraud he was in the sporting arena, plus how he eagerly played the role of this great guy who beat cancer and then won all these Tour de France titles despite everyone trying to paint him as a cheater and lying to take him down, when by virtually all accounts he is one of the biggest and most vindictive, vicious assholes when the cameras aren't on him, I don't think it's close.

At least when it comes to people like Bonds, Clemens and Tiger, they really don't pretend to be anything other than assholes across the board.

 

Oh, I wouldn't say that about Tiger -- he may be an asshole to reporters, but he sold a pretty wholesome and happy and welcoming image to the world for a long time. Smiled on cue with the best of 'em.

 

If we're talking about athletes using PEDs, yes Lance belongs up there. But just sports in general? Joe Paterno.

 

Is the "fraud" the doping? Or the foundation?

 

I don't think even Tiger on PEDs would touch Lance's fall.

For starters, Lance embodied and emboldened everyone who has ever battled cancer, and everyone who has ever had a loved-one battle cancer. Tiger is just a golfer. Lance proved that not only can one of the worst scourges of human history be defeated, he proved that it could have its ass royally kicked and that you could come back better than before. Tiger hits a golf ball a long way, and always has. Lance built a foundation to assist those battling cancer, provided hope to victims and their families and did it all on the basis that he was riding clean. Tiger sells red Nike shirts well.

The thing is, you don't need PEDs to play golf. That sport is built on technology. High-tech clubs and balls give nobodies the ability to drive 300 yards. True, Lance may ride the most state-of-the-art bikes on the planet, but that wouldn't allow you or I to climb the Pyrenees. You give the average Joe Golfer access to Tiger's clubs, and he'll be able to launch the ball too. Plus, Tiger is already a known cheater - in life, if not golf. People wouldn't be surprised, I think, to learn that a guy who has it in him to cheat on his wife for years would do the same for his game. Lance was supposed to be above that.

 

I don't buy this argument - to me, it's akin to the, "Steroids can't make you hit major league pitching" argument.

Technology assists Tiger, as it assists everyone in sports. As it assists, as you note, Lance Armstrong. Can I launch the ball with today's golf equipment? Yes, which I groove one I can. Can I launch one down the fairway at Augusta or Pebble Beach, center cut, rinse and repeat? No, I couldn't. And that's what's akin to climbing the Pyrenees. The gap between Tiger's launches and my launches is deceptively wide. The gap between Tiger's launches and Joe Blow on tour's launches is also deceptively wide. Like a lot of professional sports, golf is won in the margins. To you or me, 10 yards give or take on a drive is of little significance. For these guys, 10 yards average on a drive over the course of four rounds is a huge advantage. Over the course of a season, maintained, it separates the men from the boys.

 

I'm not here to defend Tiger. I think he's a world-class douche. That said, let's not ignore his charitable efforts. The guy built a school for underprivileged kids, and IIRC it was with his own money. My suspicion is that he's spent more of his own money on charity than Armstrong, who peddled influence to raise money for Livestrong.

 

I''ll throw Rosie Ruiz into the mix, short-story form.

 

Until there's real, physical proof, the biggest frauds are the others around him.