A Partial Defense of Lance Armstrong

I am a cyclist - a "roadie" in cycling terms. I began to ride a bike in 2001 shortly after 9-11 as I neared my sixtieth birthday. It was hard at first and still is. As Greg Lemond, the first American to win the Tour de France, is reported to have said: "it never got any easier, I just went faster."

In 2004, I went off to France to ride my bike and watch several stages of the Tour, including the finale in Paris where I took the photo of the victorious USPS Cycling Team to the right. Prior to getting on the plane for France, I put on a yellow Livestrong wristband which has been on my wrist ever since. Lance Armstrong won his sixth Tour that year then went on to win a seventh in 2005.

For a long time, I have been a supported and defender of Lance Armstrong. In the "spin" classes I teach, I would quote him and urge the class to push themselves as hard as he would push himself. I recall numerous conversations over Armstrong's alleged doping, including one with a taxi driver in France who insisted he was a doper. In my terrible French I arrogantly countered that there was no proof and, besides, he and his countrymen were just jealous that no French rider had won the Tour in years.

Armstrong lied. He was a cheat, a bully and worse. I have met some people who know him well; while they have lots to say about Armstrong, some of it quite funny, they would go silent when the subject of doping came up. They didn't want risk becoming the target of this cheat and bully.

I've watched the two part interview of Armstrong with Oprah Winfrey. His comments for the most part struck me as sincere, especially when he described his conversation about his doping with his son, Luke. He may be hiding or shading some parts of the truth but my gut tells me that there's not much more; that the truth and the humiliation he feels are complete.

But I am surprised by many of the critics who expected more from him - to see him, what, cry, grovel, sob? They describe him in the interviews as cold, distant, arrogant, manipulative and cunning. What these critics don't get is this man - regardless of his doping and lying and bullying - is one strong, self-contained individual. He is in control of himself. He accepts his fate and apologized several times for what he did and the pain he caused to others. But he is not a man to grovel or breakdown.

Whatever his sins - and they are many - Lance Armstrong remained in control in his defeat. We should despise him for the harm he has done to his fans, supporters, family and the sport of cycling. But I also see a man with some qualities to admire, however grudgingly: reserve, strength and composure as his world and life collapse around him. No wailing. No sobbing. A straight back and face turned directly into the storm.