Everything that is public to know about Lance Armstrong is now out there on the table for everyone to read.  Both supporters and detractors vehemently espousing their positions and their proclamations of Mr. Armstrong’s guilt or innocence.  Stories abound about his impassioned work with cancer survivors (cue halo and choir) and his ruthless personal attacks in the cycling world that pushed people out of the sport (where’s that pitchfork?).

Where the whole farce seems to fall down is in the apparent inability of people to separate the two lives of Lance Armstrong.  “He can’t possibly be the man the USADA says he is – just look what he’s done for cancer awareness!” or “Livestrong is simply fancy marketing, a shield for Doper Lance to hide behind”.  My question is – why can’t Doper Lance be an impassioned proponent of cancer awareness?  Why must he – or anyone – be singularly good or evil?

Al Capone opened the first soup kitchen in Chicago during the Great Depression.  Does this somehow absolve him of his crimes?  No.  Neither does Armstrong’s cancer work erase his actions as a cyclist.  The key here is to accept that people are not one-dimensional.

My opinion:  I believe he doped and I believe he was a key player in the conspiracy the USADA charged him with.  I also don’t believe he was the target of their investigation.  Here’s why.

• While there’s little doubt about Lance’s abilities on the bike, I am exceedingly skeptical that a clean Lance Armstrong was so blessed, so gifted, that he could beat the world’s best cyclists who were doping.  Never mind that analysis of his performance – specifically power output per kg of body weight – was, like other cyclists since found to have been doping, well beyond the realm seen in normal humans.  So, he’s either an alien or was doping.  Occam’s Razor would suggest doping.  If he’s an alien, I still count that as cheating.
• Passing a test doesn’t mean he didn’t cheat.  The rules were not “don’t fail the blood and urine tests”, they were “don’t use performance enhancing drugs”.  A quick search of the internet will put reams of information in front of you on how to cheat drug tests.  Passing the drug tests was considered so easy that getting caught was likened to failing an IQ test.
• He didn’t fail any of his tests, but…  when developing a test to detect the use of EPO, the lab tested 87 samples from pro cyclists.  An enterprising reporter requested the results of the tests from the lab and the doping control forms from the UCI.  The UCI cleared the release of the forms with Lance, to which he granted permission.  The reporter quickly matched the ID numbers on 6 out of the 13 EPO-positive samples to the doping control forms belonging to Lance Armstrong.  (side note – the manufacturer of Amogen brand EPO was venture-capitalized by Lance Armstrong’s business partner Thomas Weisel though this in no way implies a connection to the doping)
• USADA suggested they had 10 or more first-hand eye-witnesses who were willing and able to detail the specifics of PED use by Lance and others, including themselves.  Either Lance is such an unmitigated asshole that 10 (or more) of his former associates, their family and his own staff are willing to lie under oath or, Lance is trying to valiantly – and failing – to keep a lid on things.
• His defence has been: “I’ve never failed a test” and “everyone is out to get me”.

Here’s the rub though.  I don’t believe that Lance himself was ever the target of USADA’s investigation.  Sure, they named him because their investigation showed he was involved – heavily – in the use, distribution, counseling to use and even administering PEDs to other riders in addition to thwarting all attempts to uncover it.  That takes a team of people to accomplish so why hack on a “retired 41-year-old father of 5″?  Because he wouldn’t get on board.  USADA has said publicly that Armstrong was offered the same “sweet deal” that their 10 witnesses were offered, but he turned it down.  If he was offered a deal to testify on their behalf, he can’t have been the big target now could he?

But why does any of this matter?  Of the 5 people named in the USADA documents, 4 of them are actively involved in professional cycling today.  Now.  This is not aboutthe haters taking down the hero Lance Armstrong at any cost.  This is about cleaning up pro cycling today.  This is about excising the cancer of people who would give your 16-year-old son a choice between a needle or a seat on the next flight home to mamma.  Lance isn’t important, the people he’s protecting are.  Bruyneel, Ferrari, Del Moral, Marti, Celaya – they’re still active.  Bruyneel and Celaya are the team Manager and Doctor respectively for  the Radio Shack Nissan Trek Cycling team.

So, at the end of the day I’m obligated to follow logic – there’s an extremely high probability he doped given the EPO positive research tests, the eye-witness testimony and his performance against known doped riders.  The USADA tried to offer him a deal to testify against the remaining 4 but to no avail – so this isn’t over either.  Bruyneel and Celaya are going to arbitration where at least some of the testimony will come out.  Do I think we’ll ever see a contrite and apologetic Lance Armstrong?  No, but then we don’t need to – that’s for the haters and the people who’s lives he’s turned upside down, the racers he forced out.  For the rest of us, the real victory will be the removal of these particular poisons from the sport leaving kids who don’t want to dope a fighting chance.

Now, when are they going to go after the UCI?  That’s the real question.