The U.S. Anti-Doping Agency today slapped Lance Armstrong with a life-time ban and said the superstar cyclist will be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles, after Armstrong announced he's giving up his battle to clear his name of doping charges.
Armstrong maintains he's innocent, that he's never used performance enhancing drugs, and that he's never once tested positive.
So why then is he giving up the fight to clear his name and save his legacy?
Bill Strickland, editor-at-large at “Bicycling” magazine, has followed Armstrong's career from the beginning. He shares his take with Anderson.
Post by: Cate Vojdik
Filed under: Anderson Cooper • Bill Strickland • Lance Armstrong
Anderson Cooper goes beyond the headlines to tell stories from many points of view, so you can make up your own mind about the news. Tune in weeknights at 8 and 10 ET on CNN.
Questions or comments? Send an email
Want to know more? Go behind the scenes with AC361°
how sad my late husband was a cyclist @ a fan of all tours france was favourite. Sadly he always had doubts about lance @ sure he would liked to c him fight, as he would hated 2 c the only sport he loved reputation go down the tubes as he said he had doubts so lance if u believe innocent 4 sake of fans of this sport which is 1 0f the hardest sports ever fight ur corner
The recent doping charges against Lance Armstrong – true or not – is compelling enough a reason to look at athletes from other cultures and what they use to enhance their performance. The Chinese have long used products that go undetected by modern testing techniques – in fact the West is unaware of many such 'natural' performance-enhancing products used very commonly in Far Eastern cultures. Where does one draw the line between what is right and what is wrong? – especially when the end result of both is the same.
Lance Armstrong would not receive a fair hearing in arbitration. Mandatory arbitration is just about always unfair. I bet the USADA would not be so cocky if they had to prove a case against Lance Armstrong in court before a judge and jury, which is the procedure every deserves when their important rights are at stake.