Lance Armstrong, one of the world's most celebrated cyclists and a hero to millions of cancer survivors, finally surrendered a war of attrition with doping police that has cost him his seven Tour de France titles and an Olympic bronze medal.
On Friday, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency stripped the retired racer of those storied victories, vacated every race he'd ridden since 1998 and banned him for life from the sport that brought him fame and fortune. The move came one day after Armstrong said he will no longer fight accusations that he was a cheater who used prohibited performance-enhancing drugs.
Armstrong, who retired in 2005 and staged a comeback in 2009, spent much of his career fighting doping allegations. He steadfastly maintained his innocence to the very end — even, officials said, as teammates claimed he'd cheated — but said, "enough is enough."
"If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and — once and for all — put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance," Armstrong said in a statement. "But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair."
In many ways, Armstrong appeared to choose the best end to a game he wouldn't win. The standard in cases brought by USADA is merely “comfortable satisfaction,” not “beyond reasonable doubt,” which would have made it tough for Armstrong to prevail. He felt he was never going to get a fair hearing, so he cut his losses.
"It can be seen as a vendetta," said Joe Lindsey, a longtime contributor to Bicycling Magazine who has followed the Armstrong saga. "They've been after him. Why would you submit to that?"
Had Armstrong pursued arbitration, any evidence against him could have been made public — a potentially embarrassing situation that Armstrong may have wanted to avoid. It would be better to surrender, claim the deck was stacked and endure the short-term harm to his reputation.
"It's losing the battle to win the war," Lindsey said.
Armstrong may have done just that. Bicycling editor-in-chief Peter Flax told CBS This Morning that "95 percent" of the people commenting on the story at the Bicycling Magazine forum support Armstrong, and he feels the cyclist was unfairly and excessively targeted.
"I'm absolutely convinced that he did," use performance-enhancing drugs, Flax said, "but I'm also convinced that he is the victim of a witch hunt."
Armstrong's decision to quit fighting came after a federal judge in Austin, Texas, on Monday refused to bar USADA from proceeding with the case it opened in June. Armstrong had until midnight Thursday to request arbitration. He refused, prompting the agency to issue sanctions stemming from "his numerous anti-doping rule violations, including his involvement in trafficking and administering doping products to others."
“Nobody wins when an athlete decides to cheat with dangerous performance enhancing drugs, but clean athletes at every level expect those of us here on their behalf, to pursue the truth to ensure the win-at-all-cost culture does not permanently overtake fair, honest competition,” Travis T. Tygart, the agency's CEO, said Friday morning in a statement. “Any time we have overwhelming proof of doping, our mandate is to initiate the case through the process and see it to conclusion as was done in this case.”
The agency has accused Armstrong of using and trafficking in EPO, testosterone, corticosteroids, human growth hormone and other substances beginning in August, 1998, and attempting to cover it up. USADA said it had evidence from more than a dozen witnesses "who agreed to testify and provide evidence about their first-hand experience and/or knowledge of the doping activity." They included as many as 10 former teammates, according to USADA.
Armstrong remained defiant until the end.
"The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors," he said. "I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided."
Still, Armstrong said he would not accept the agency's sanctions. According to USA Today, his lawyers threatened to sue if USADA -- a nonprofit business recognized by Congress as "the official anti-doping agency" for the Olympics and other programs -- proceeded with sanctions. It argued that the agency must first resolve a dispute with the International Cycling Union, the sport's sanctioning body, over whether the case should be pursued.
Tygert told the Associated Press that the UCI is "bound to recognize our decision and impose it," but the UCI said Friday that it wants a detailed explanation of why Armstrong should be stripped of the Tour titles he won from 1999 through 2005. The Amaury Sport Organization that runs the Tour de France told AP it would not comment until hearing from the UCI and USADA.
Armstrong is among the most famous athletes of his era, an icon to his sport and a hero to millions of cancer survivors. His career had the feel of a fairytale, as his first tour win came after an epic fight against testicular cancer in 1996. He then racked up an unprecedented run of seven consecutive Tour wins and a bronze medal at the 2000 Summer Games.
But it was his work as a tireless advocate in the fight against cancer, through the Lance Armstrong Foundation, that made him famous beyond the world of sports. The foundation has raised some $500 million since 1997. It is standing by Armstrong, whose "devotion to cancer survivors shines."
"Faced with a biased process whose outcome seems predetermined, Lance chose to put his family and his foundation first and we support his decision," foundation vice chairman Jeffrey C. Avery said in a statement. "Lance’s legacy in the cancer community is unparalleled... Lance has unfailingly stood by the cancer community and we will always stand by him."
You'd expect the foundation named for Armstrong to say that. The bigger question is what his many sponsors, which include Nike, Trek and RadioShack, will do. Nike has sworn to continue supporting him.
"It’s very interesting that Nike has stood by him," said says David Srere, co-CEO of branding and design firm Siegel+Gale. "Nike is about performance and this is about cheating. This could have negative fallout on the Nike brand by continuing to support someone who has so blatantly cheated.
“I think this is worse than the Tiger Woods thing, because with this you can draw a very straight line to Armstrong’s performance. Tiger Woods screwed around, but it didn’t have anything to do with how he was hitting the golf ball. I think the vast majority of his sponsors are going to go."
Whether that happens gets back to the witch hunt question and the fact many people consider Armstrong a hero who has been unfairly persecuted, said Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer at the branding agency Landor Associates. His status as a hero, and the challenges he overcame, could trump anything the USADA says he did.
"I think theres a certain empathy," Roth said. "Cycling was one of the later sports to see enlightenment in that area [doping] and for that reason people don’t think of Lance as having done anything. He didn’t hurt anybody and oh, by the way, he came back from cancer."
In the end, that may be all that matters. Armstrong may be guilty, but in the eyes of millions of people, he remains an inspiration.
Beth Carter, Michael Copeland and Ryan Tate contributed to this report, which was updated at 6 p.m. Eastern.
