quote:

---

Lance Armstrong plans to make an admission about doping in an interview with Oprah Winfrey scheduled to tape Monday at his home in Austin, Texas, a person with knowledge of the situation said.

In the interview, which is scheduled to air Thursday on the Oprah Winfrey Network, the famed cyclist plans to admit to doping throughout his career but probably will not get into great detail about specific cases and events, the person said. The person spoke to USA TODAY Sports on the condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak publicly about it.

---

http://rss.cnn.com/~r/rss/cnn_topstories/~3/7wljtqwTm_o/index.html

let everyone do dope.

I'd still like for some science to prove Armstrong doped, not testimony from other dopers.

''This is a landmark day for cycling.''

quote:

---

Livestrong spends as much on legal bills as on these two programs combined: $1.8 million in 2009–10, mainly to protect its trademarks. In one memorable case, its lawyers shut down a man in Oklahoma who was selling Barkstrong dog collars. Meanwhile, “benefits to donors” (also merchandise, as well as travel expenses for Livestrong Challenge fundraisers) accounted for another $1.4 million in spending in 2010.

There’s still a research department, but now it focuses on things like quality-of-life surveys of cancer survivors. During my visit, I was plied with glossy reports and brochures, which are cranked out by the truckload. The foundation’s 2010 copying-and-printing bill came to almost $1.5 million.

But Livestrong’s largest single project in 2009—indeed, the main focus of Armstrong’s comeback—was the Livestrong Global Cancer Summit, held in Dublin in August. The summit ate up close to 20 percent of the foundation’s $30 million in program spending that year.

---

The Charity Navigator along with other such charity rating agency gives Livestrong very high marks for seeing that the percentage of money taken it is spent on the charitable goals:

»www.charitynavigator.org/index.c···gid=6570

quote:

---

"The Livestrong brand was more about the foundation and fighting cancer than it ever was about Lance Armstrong," Matt Powell, an analyst at consultancy SportsOneSource told the Wall Street Journal.

Still, in a philantropy.com article, Lenkowsky points out that unlike the case with many other celebrity charities, Armstrong embodies Livestrong's mission: he is a cancer survivor.

Kevin Gallivan, a 47-year-old cancer survivor, says that he, for one, is able to compartmentalize the scandal and the cause. "He can be a liar, and he is, but it's not going to affect my life in any way other than cancer," Gallivan told Businessweek. "I wear a Livestrong band on my wrist, and I will until the day I die."

---

quote:

---

I found a curiously fuzzy mix of cancer-war goals like "survivorship" and "global awareness," labels that seem to entail plastering the yellow Livestrong logo on everything from T-shirts to medical conferences to soccer stadiums. Much of the foundation's work ends up buffing the image of one Lance Edward Armstrong, which seems fair--after all, Livestrong wouldn't exist without him. But Livestrong spends massively on advertising, PR, and "branding," all of which helps preserve Armstrong's marketability at a time when he's under fire. Meanwhile, Armstrong has used the goodwill of his foundation to cut business deals that have enriched him personally, an ethically questionable move.

---

For all of you who are relishing the take-down of Armstrong, you have also probably succeeded in taking down Cycling too... :huh:

For all of you who are relishing the take-down of Armstrong, you have also probably succeeded in taking down Cycling too... :huh:

Was all this really worth the final outcome???

quote:

---

The latest bad news came Friday when Dutch bank Rabobank announced it would no longer sponsor professional cycling teams after the controversy that has engulfed Armstrong and the cycling profession.

The bank, which has sponsored teams for the past 17 years, made it clear that its decision to end its sponsorships by the end of the year was to distance itself from the doping allegations.

"It is with pain in our heart, but for the bank this is an inevitable decision," said Bert Bruggink, of Rabobank's managing board.

"We are no longer convinced that the international professional world of cycling can make this a clean and fair sport. We are not confident that this will change for the better in the foreseeable future."

---

Anheuser-Busch, Trek bicycles, Radio Shack, Giro (helmet manufacturers) and Honey Stinger also dropped him. He resigned from the FRS Co board.

I don't think Nike ever dropped Tiger Woods, did they? They dropped Vick but re-signed him when he got out of prison and had shaped up. And they removed Paterno's name from their child care center.

Nike drops Armstrong

»www.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/sport···tml?_r=0

I do wonder what Nike saw that made them decide to kill off the contract.

I think turkey bacon is awesome.

My comment did not need fixing thanks anyway :uhh:

Maybe I'm missing something, but from what I've read, you've got a bunch of people who got caught doping saying Armstrong was doping, too. Weren't his accusers caught by failing blood or urine tests? Didn't Armstrong pass all the same tests? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

He will be remembered as an elite athlete who beat competitors who cheated.

He was the fastest.
He was the strongest.
He was a sportsman.
He inspired.
He was the most accomplished.
He was the greatest of all time.

No words and NO ONE can ever change that. No notation in a "record book" can ever change the fact that he beat everyone, wore the Yellow Jersey and stood atop the podium.

Armstrong is indeed a wizard apparently.

Armstrong is indeed a wizard apparently.

What I cannot understand is, if the evidence were so convincing why did the Feds drop the case?