This morning I watched the video where Armstrong verbally attacked Paul Kimmage in the press conference before the Tour of California.

Two weeks ago I read 'The Secret Race' and felt anger deep down towards the way that Armstrong chased down that attack in the Tdf (can't remember the name of the rider) who had the audacity to talk about struggling being a clean rider in a dirty peloton. The imaginary zip he ran across his mouth when he overtook him said it all.

I'm currently reading 'Lance to Landis' and you just can't hide the fact that Lance Armstrong is a product of the system he was introduced into. US Cycling were doping - he came into the system and knew nothing else. Add into this the fact that he is an arrogant man (Texan) and we have the nasty kind of bile we've seen from him over the years.

I've still to read the whole USADA report (I intend to) but I've seen a few snippets from it. He appears to have threatened/bullied just about every one of the witnesses (and wives).

I had already made my decision about Lance Armstrong. I'd say the last few weeks I've gone from having sympathy for him (he knew no other way), to pity (deep down he probably wants to come clean) to utter hatred (I want to see the man publicly humiliated).

Going back to my first point - why did Armstrong lay into Paul Kimmage? He said that Lance was 'the cancer in the sport'. I don't know if I'd have put it that strongly but he was definitely one of the symptoms.

The Future

Cycling is cleaner now than it has ever been. This is the hope I hold on to. Mind you, I remember this being said after Festina before Lance arrived back and re started the arms race.

What has to happen for me is a period of truth and reconciliation. All riders who have doped should come forward and admit to their sins. If they do then they should be subject to the same 6 month bans.

Anyone who does not come forward and admit their past or gets popped for doping from the start of next year should receive a life ban. That stands for staff members on teams too (are you listening Sean Yates?).

As for the UCI - it needs stripping down and re starting again. I want Uncle Pat out, Hein Verbruggen gone. The 28 people (out of 32) in the congress who voted against a 'truth and reconciliation' period gone for good.

I don't want a UCI that tests someone’s sample and then checks to see who it is before reporting it to WADA and the rider. I don't want a UCI who accepts 'bribes' from Lance Armstrong. I don't want a UCI that has quiet words with Alberto Contador saying 'it will all be alright - don't worry'. I don't want a UCI who chooses to take Floyd Landis to court while pushing USADA to produce the Armstrong evidence far more quickly.

Probably because Kimmage was the only person pursuing him and the problem of widespread doping in the sport. Also, using the term 'cancer' in relation to Armstrong was always going to get his back up - I reckon Kimmage used it deliberately in order to crack Armstrong open a little bit, force a little bit of that personality to leak out, but that's purely my speculation.


I don't want a UCI that is suing Kimmage personally for things he's written. If there is a problem, you sue the publishers, not the author. It smacks of vindictiveness and bullying.
A truth commission is the only way to draw a line under this. If the sport is ever to shed the image completely, it has to happen.

Agreed around Paul Kimmage. I'd already donated to his fighting fund but I'm going back to give some more. This is our opportunity for change.

Cycling truly is currently one of the most fascinating sports for all the wrong reasons.

Christophe Bassons?

That's the chap. He was on the Festina team in 1998. His popped team mates made a point of stating he was clean.

Bassons wrote an article for a newspaper stating how the peloton were surprised by Armstrong since his return.

The more I think of Armstrong and his behaviour the more I want the man ruined.

The first two posts on this thread are quite interesting. (Not having a go, Stu.)

Found this an excellent article... www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/others ... acked.html Will Fotheringham mentions Bassons: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... heat-bully and he is also included here -> www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oc ... al-service

Found this an excellent article... www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/others ... acked.html Will Fotheringham mentions Bassons: www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... heat-bully and he is also included here -> www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oc ... al-service

While Prudhomme prefers marking 1999-2005 as not having a winner - possibly sensibly - here's an rlinteresting exerciserl in examining who really won those Tours.

I don't know where I am with cycling right now. Let me summarise where I was a few months ago.

I've loved the sport for a long time. Fell out of love with it in the mid 90's and the Lance Armstrong years because of the doping that was going on. I fell back in love with it when I bought a road bike again 6 years ago and I'm once again a fully fledged cycling nut. I believed that cycling was a lot cleaner than it had ever been and that the authorities were doing as much as they can to stop cheating......

Where am I now?

The USADA evidence backs up my thoughts and feelings towards the decade where I gave up on cycling. Doping programmes organised by teams where they were pretty much 'all at it'.

But these people who doped are still involved in our sport. Some are still racing. What I'm most scared about though is the young cyclists coming into a system where the DS's, Team Managers and Soigneurs have doped in their past. Some of them have been honest and come clean. Some of them have been honest and not accepted any fault. Some of them still deny the fact they doped even when they were caught. Some of them got lucky and have not been caught.......yet.

But all of them are in charge of young riders desperate to make it into the big time. Some of them will be lucky enough to sign for Garmin and have Vaughters. Some of them will be unlucky to sign for Saxo/Astana etc etc. I've lost all respect for Riis who claimed to have come clean in his book but it is now clear he only told us half truths.

Even Sky have not come out of this smelling or roses. Sean Yates must go, the Leinders affair showed how impossible it is to be a 100% no doping history team.

I fear that we are believing the riders too much who are claiming to be clean now. I'm disgusted by how few of them have come out and said 'The USADA stuff is all in the past, nothing to do with me' instead of saying 'We must drive doping out of this sport'.

I'm disgusted by the UCI who police and promote our sport and appear to have made judgements based on someones star rating as to whether they get popped for a positive.

Where do I want to be?

I want to believe that we have a sport that is clean. I'm not too daft to know that it will never be 100% clean. There will always be someone prepared to cheat and I believe other sports have just as much to hide (in some cases a hell of a lot more - including rugby league).

I need the current crop to spit on the memory of cyclists of the past. They were all at it in once way or another but the last few decades have been particularly dirty. Instead they insist on paying homage to the past champions and that leaves a nasty taste in my mouth. To me it sounds like the chat of someone who knows that they themselves are taking undetectable 'advantages'.

Cycling needs root and branch reform. My preferred option would be life bans for anyone caught/admitting/being complicit in doping. That includes riding, managing, massaging, bike mechanics, bus/car drivers, helpers, UCI officials, UCI Presidents etc etc. EVERYONE!

However I fear that will be impossible.

Perhaps I just need to start hearing the majority of the peloton talking down the achievements of the riders of the past. Perhaps I just need to see some strong management from the UCI and maybe them admitting to their mistakes and corruption. Perhaps I need to see Teams not appointing unrepentent dopers into Team Manager positions.

Perhaps I'm about to fall out of love with cycling again. Perhaps I'm just getting caught up in the media frenzy and questionning too much?

But if I'm questionning where I am right now then I'm sure other far more important people than me are. The sponsors must be asking questions about whether they have been lied to. We could see a big downturn in cycling after a few years of it being on the rise.

Just on my employer's TV sports news channel that Armstrong has stepped down as chairman of Livestrong.

And now Nike have withdrawn his sponsorship contract

The saddest thing about all this is that Armstrong is never likely to have the bottle to come clean. Thankfully though it has got past the point where him and his lawyers can bully people into submission, and finally he's being backed into a corner.

I've gone from a position of supporting him not too long back, to wanting to see his world fall apart. Let's hope all the organisations he fraudulently sued and claimed bonuses from can take him through the courts and give him a taste of his own "medicine".

Big test for Sky with Rogers named as a client of the omnipresent Dr Ferrari and Sean Yates's association with Armstrong. Beginning to think their 'zero-tolerance' policy is less productive than Garmin's one of openness

rlMillarrl