I think the one thing to keep in mind, and the one thing that might save cycling, is that doping, especially systematic and continued doping, is not exactly the decision of the individual rider. The ‘young cyclist faced with the choice’ thing is a bit of a chimera. There are several reasons for this: it takes money, first of all, and starting cyclists don’t exactly make a lot of money; also, it takes a network, you have to have access to resources that are not exactly advertised for openly. Thirdly, it takes organization and infrastructure, getting the drugs, storing them, administering them - they don’t seem like things you’d want to run all by yourself because in the best of cases it’ll just take a lot of time. More likely, though, you’ll need accomplices.
All of that makes doping much more a team decision than it is a personal decision. Those teams are sponsored by companies that don’t necessarily are too involved in cycling, but that are interested in the longer term. Do you think that US Postal is excited about all the coverage they’ve been getting? I’m not sure that people are sending fewer letters because of Lance Armstrong, but you have to admit that this is hardly the sort of attention that sponsors are looking for. Shit, I don’t even know what Festina sell, all I associate them with is the doping scandal.
If the peloton can be reformed in that (for instance) the UCI gain more control over what goes on in teams medically and in that sponsors gain more control over the goings-on of teams they support for fear that their name might get tainted, you might be getting somewhere.
Bumpity bump, because here we are a couple of months later and that shameless waste of skin is finally about to come clean…in a stage managed way that will no doubt elaborate on how poor old Lance was just a victim, and how everyone else was doing it, yadda. No doubt within 5 years he’ll be making serious coin out of his drearily predictable faux confessional memoirs.
The only hope I have is that the public humiliation of Armstrong might prevent the “whatever it takes to win” spirit from contaminating the career of other cyclists. Have an example - Graeme Obree, an undeniably gifted cyclist. He overcame personal demons, surmounted lack of sponsorship by building his own bike, etc to achieve world pursuit records and other distinctions, but was ditched from tour level cycling because he would not dope.
This is what your dear old hero promoted. He fostered a culture where the truly great and gifted, the ones who overcame all hurdles to actually excel, were laughed out of the court because they would not cheat. To every person who reckons that what Armstrong did is ok because it’s the winning that counts, or it’s only cheating if you get caught straight away, or that it’s ok if you get away with it , or hell lots of other people were doing it, or whatever excuse you have: I have nothing but contempt for you. You do not understand what sporting endeavour means. You have no understanding of true competition. You are a disgrace to whatever sport you claim to support.