SI story about Lance Armstrong. Doesn't look pretty.

Well, it did say SI didn't name sources, and they apparently only tried to talk to people in the Armstrong camp. It was a half-assed effort at discrediting if that's what it was.

 

There is a significant portion of the American public ready to see Lance Armstrong hang just for how he treated Sheryl Crow.

 

True, but that's nothing compared to what he did to his first wife.

 

What no love for the Olson twin?

 

The full SI story ...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180944/index.htm

 

Don't think Cav's been blood doping -- or that gash above his eye would have been a geyser!

 

http://outside-blog.away.com/blog/2011/01/don-catlin-response-to-si-article-on-lance-armstrong.html

 

Man, I bet it stinks by now...

(Feds going to test Armstrong's 12-year old piss sample)

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrongs-urine-samples-requested-by-us-authorities

 

More bullshit that I've been saying. They busted Contador IN COMPETITION during last year's Tour, and the Spaniards let him off. Our government is wasting money to examine a jar of piss the Frogs have been holding onto for a dozen years.

 

@ Shoeless:

But how can we hold ourselves superior to people like the Spaniards if we don't hold our heroes to a much higher level? Aren't you disproving your own point?

 

Here's a direct link to Catlin's response, which is thought-provoking, to say the least.

http://thecatlinperspective.wordpress.com/

 

I don't really have a point, except that the only people who really give a crap whether or not Lance doped are those of us that are cycling fans and have a pretty good idea anyway. Quit worrying, wasting time and resources on something that happened a decade ago.

I don't really hold athletes to the hero standard.