Aimercat (aimercat) wrote,

Lance Armstrong: Does the good weigh out the bad?

Lance Armstrong has finally confessed to doping throughout his cycling career. I say "big deal".

Sure you want a clean sport, but I think it's ridiculous to strip him of his titles when it's been reported that 75-90% of the field he was competing with was doping as well. That's not really cheating. it's pretty much fair play because almost everyone was doping so he was just giving himself a level playing field. Can you say that he would've won had he not doped? No, but i'm pretty darn sure that whoever did win would've been just as dirty. It's just like baseball in the 90s….everyone was juicing & that's why the Baseball Hall of Fame is having the issue that it is having now. What to do with the juicers? Sure, you could NEVER elect any of them to the Hall of Fame, but then you're going to be left with a museum that isn't going to acknowledge basically a whole generation of iconic players.

Sports are trivial when you look at the grand scheme of life. Here was a man who defeated cancer after being told he only had a 5% chance of surviving. It would be one thing if his lie was that he never had cancer in the first place, but that isn't the case. Then he made it his cause to help those who have to fight the same battle. This is what he should be known for regardless of what happens in the sporting world.

I truly believe that the good he has done for cancer research/treatment and giving hope to those who hear that dreaded C word goes far beyond the sporting world.
Tags: sports
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded