- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Lance Armstrong (pic courtesy Photosport International)Half of Tour de France winners say Lance Armstrong should get his seven titles back
More than half of the winners of the Tour de France who are still alive believe that Lance Armstrong should be reinstated as winner of the seven editions of the race between 1999 and 2005.
All but two of the surviving 25 champions responded to a poll by Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf, which asked them whether the American, banned for life in 2012 and stripped of his seven victories, should have them given back to him, reports Telegraph.co.uk.
Tour de France organisers ASO now show a blank space in the list of winners of the race for the seven editions where Armstrong stood on the top step of the podium in Paris, declining to award the victories to the runners-up, almost all of whom have been sanctioned for doping at some point.
Among those who said Armstrong should be reinstated was Ireland’s Stephen Roche, who won the yellow jersey in 1987, the same year he won the Giro d’Italia and world championship.
He said: “Armstrong should stay on that list [of winners]. In the 100-year history of the race you can't not have a winner for seven years. Doping has been part of sport, not only for cycling, for decades. Who tells me Jacques Anquetil won clean? Should we take his victories away? Or why does Richard Virenque get to keep his polka dot jerseys?"
Older riders tended to believe that Armstrong should be given the titles back, while those who won the race more recently said he should not, including the winners of the last three editions – Cadel Evans, Sir Bradley Wiggins and Chris Froome, who said: "Those seven empty places symbolise an era. We should leave it like it is."
There were exceptions though, with Oscar Pereiro, champion in 2006, and Andy Schleck, awarded the 2010 victory when Alberto Contador was stripped of it in 2012, the only two winners from recent years to say that Armstrong should be viewed as winner of those seven editions.
Schleck said: “Who remembers who was second place in those races? I wouldn't know myself. You can't have seven races without a winner, so just leave Armstrong on the list."
Other riders who backed the former US Postal rider’s reinstatement included Felice Gimondi, Jan Janssen and Joop Zoetemelk, who said: "They should never have erased Armstrong from the list. You can't change results 10 years later. Of course it's not good what he did but you can't rewrite history."
Race director Christian Prudhomme made it clear that ASO would not be reconsidering its position. "You ask the people along the route," he explained. "It's clear, his name will not be on the list again. Period."
When in October 2012 former UCI president Pat McQuaid ratified the sanctions imposed by the United States Anti-Doping Agency, he opened the press conference by saying, “Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling.”
He too seems to have changed his view, telling journalists at the Tour de France on Tuesday’s rest day, “I don't necessarily think the same now. Armstrong is the victim of a USADA witch hunt" – words used repeatedly by Armstrong’s own defence team until he finally confessed in January last year.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- the little onion 5 sec ago
Can someone who know more clarify something: is the driver's license suspended until such time as they take this awareness course, or is it like a...
- Steve K 3 min 24 sec ago
The big hashed area around the spaces is a big clue too.
- Steve K 5 min 38 sec ago
It is, apparently, "packed with high visibility reflective details on back and shoulder."
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 28 min ago
The Battle of Thermopylae (480 BC) was one of the most important battles of the ancient world, where 7,000 Greeks, led by the Spartans under...
- ktache 9 hours 27 min ago
The people at Hexlox have asked me to tell others about their black Friday deals, but I don't quite know what the offer is yet. But saving anything...
- Dnnnnnn 10 hours 24 min ago
I'm unclear how simply considering the views of people who travel through an area is voting for rat-runs. No need to explain though.
- biking59boomer 12 hours 3 min ago
Sadly the cyclist hate in this country seems to have worsened of late. Dangerous motoring combined with anti-cycling officialdom in some places is...
- Cyclo1964 14 hours 35 min ago
Brilliant 🤣
Add new comment
50 comments
50% of the people I work with think that bicycles should be banned from all roads - all roads. I know because I asked them today when I read a news article about something Carlton Read is going to talk about over some group who claim to represent car drivers - so should we ban all bicycles from UK roads, because 50% of people apparently think it would be a good idea.
And at risk of having some nut job screaming Godwins Law - why don't we cut Hitler a bit of slack - today Hitler suffers terribly being made the butt of endless jokes through cut up chunks of his wonderful film by ignorant oiks on YouTube -all he wanted was a little breathing space for christsake - isn't much to ask for and all we do is treat him as if he was the most horrible human being ever born and I am quite certain that if you asked 100% of people who belong to any fascist or nazi style group whether or not we should celebrate Hitlers ever existing then you will get over 50% saying yes we should.
Lance Armstrong cheated. Lance Armstrong tried to and, in some cases, succeeded in threatening people in order to cover up his dishonesty. Lance Armstrong only needs to do one thing for cycling - piss off and never come back.
you should piss off with idiotic posts like this.
You have used the whole sale slaughter of millions of people and put Hitler in the same post about a guy who took drugs to climb up mountains faster on a bike.. You sir are a monumental idiot who needs some context in his life. And opening your statement with 'Godwins law' doesn't excuse it.
Lance Armstrong causes Global Warming.
We all know who 'won' those tours, says more about the respondents. Andy doesn't mind giving them back but Alberto does? Obviously Contador was one of the Non-respondents, but very strange comments from Schleck. He finished second three times in a row but says who remembers second place? He was given his tour in retrospect, perhaps the blank spaces undermine his own win; should he be demoted to second after Blank for 2010?
Yes ,drugs have no place in our sport .
No matter what you think ,or say , he did drugs ,but he still got over the mountains and hills and route before anyone else who were allegedly on drugs .Period.
If your not first your last .
But we do know most of them were doping... they got busted before he did.
That's the real reason those tours are blank... its because no one else can realistically be called the winner above armstrong.
Truly embarrassing and a massive backward step for the sport, let alone a PR disaster.
I assume that all of those who are against LA keeping the title also are happy to erase those previous holders who have a chequered history. Didn't Merckx get pulled for drugs? Anqetuil openly condoned such a thing. Lets ban him as well. Also its totally illogical to lump LA's drug taking along with other facets of his character. Bullying if thats what it is, is a different issues and there are two side to that story.
Actually it is totally incorrect to say that there was no winner in the Armstrong years. He was the first over the line . That's what a winner is. You can't have buts . He won.
Back in Anqetuil's day, there weren't strict rules on doping. He had other issues though. Have you read the biography about him?
Armstrong was proven to have won with chemical assistance when this was most definitely not allowed. We don't know for sure all his competitors were doping; only some of them. It's different.
Keep it blank.
I don't see how it's different when you say only some of his competitors were doping. Are you saying that all of Anquetil's competitors were doping or do you believe that only a select few riders in the LA era decided to take an, as of that time, undetectable drug with very noticeable performance benefits?
Until Travis Tygart decided that, as Lance was an Atheist, his divine mission was to protect current US athletes from harm by pursuing offences over a decade old, in a sport that already has the most thorough anti-doping controls; then the only 'clean' i.e. not caught rider to podium in those seven years was Lance himself.
Check this out:
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/20-out-of-21-tdf-podium-finisher...
I think it's strange to have no winner for those years but it's just a political exercise and, ultimately, it's just a list that will fade into time. If anyone asked me who won those Tours I'd have to answer "Lance Armstrong".
You obviously don't understand. He was only first over the line because he cheated (& in his case also because he doped so extensively and systematically in the sense of requiring his team to dope).
Winners' who are subsequently revealed as people who cheated to cross the line first (or in any other position for that matter) are stripped of their position.
There seems no reason why Armstrong should be exempted from that rule since it is one that applies to everyone else - not just in cycling but in other sports too - who has been found to have cheated.
The greater crime is if the removal of the winner means cycling feels it has a clear conscience. It KNEW it was corrupt. It didn't do enough.
A poor example - look at Turing, the government gives the guy a posthumous pardon and suddenly feels it can reject all blame for the terrible treatment it dished out to the guy.
Armstrong was a cheat. That's bad. LOADS of people in cycling knew it and did nothing. That does not go away just because Armstrong has been nabbed.
The slate has not been wiped clean.
So does Andy think still view Bertie as being the winner of his TDF, leaving Andy in 2nd?
Also, what the cracking hell is Pat McQuaid doing still hanging round the tour?
He's basically said as much in the past. Tells us a lot about Schleck's position on doping.
The "Lance Armstrong: Stop at Nothing" documentary, which I recently watched on BBC4, reminded me why I dislike Lance so much. In addition to his doping, he went after people who spoke out against him, for example spreading insinuations that Emma O'Reilly was a whore and a drunk and setting his lawyers on her. If he was singled out and a "witch hunt" led against him, he fully deserves it
No I see it the other way... he is just as deserving to be on the list of winners as nearly everyone else there.
I think we all feel so strongly about Armstrong because he has been portrayed as a total bully and a control freak. Not only because he was a doper, he was a cnut as well.
I don't personally think thats fair. I'm not saying that it's not the case, only that no other convicted doper has had a complete character assassination through the press... I am sure if we looked in the cupboards of a load of ex-cyclists and dopers there would be loads of dark skeletons lurking.
So, to be objective, I remove all of the talk of his bullying etc and look at the crimes committed. In those cases, and based on the statue of limitations, he should be reinstated for all but his 2005 win.
I'm with Froome and Wiggins etc - leave them blank. If Armstrong ends up doing time, while they're at it maybe they could find room for Pat McQuaid in his cell.
Not much of a suprise, those who are more widely believed to have doped want him back, those who are trying not to be tarnished with doping do not.
Indeed. No further questions m'Lud.
Wow, “I don't necessarily think the same now. Armstrong is the victim of a USADA witch hunt". Its scary to think these words are being used to describe the process of outing a person who later confessed to being guilty. I'm afraid that a few years down the line all will be forgiven, his sponsors will return, his titles will be reinstated and all the pain he caused people during his 'win at all costs' crusade will be forgotten.
I am not a massive LA fan but I do think that probably most TdF winners have been dopers. Just because it was so endemic for so long. If you excluded everyone that doped it would be 50 or more blank titles.
I also believe that LA's rivals in all 7 were well at it or had been. So it probably was a level playing field.
Apart from that we all know who got the title so it's silly to just leave blanks.
Pages