Snobbed

Last week, the Amaury Sports Organization (ASO), owner and organizer of the Tour de France, unveiled that 2006 route. Instead of talking about the race and the route, ASO instead talked about cleaning up the sport against doping and the "'merci'-God,-Lance-the-doper-is-gone!" theme.

The relationship between Armstrong and ASO has been frosty since August when the French newspaper, L'Equipe, accused Armstrong of using the performance enhancing drug EPO in the 1999 Tdf. L'Equipe is owned by ASO.

If you ask me, it would have made great racing (if you're an Armstrong fan) if Armstrong was to ride next year. It's "slights" like these that motivates him to annihilate the competition. In fact, not a few people have said that Armstrong sometimes looks for a fight to motivate himself.

Looking back in 2004 and 2005, Armstrong's motivation came not from his rivals on wheels but from the media (who came out with a book accusing him of doping with circumstantial evidence), the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the French and Italian magistrates (who had him under investigation for doping and threatening a witness, respectively). Then just after he retired, the L'Equipe accusations exploded.

So what's with ASO? It doesn't make sense for them to embarrass a 7-time TdF winner. I think that the bottom line is about zeros in the bank account. Since 1999, Armstrong ruled the Tour with an iron fist that left other riders scrambling for crumbs. This is no different from the domination of Michael Jordan and Michael Schumacher where too much domination by a single man or team can lead to boring event, at least from the organizers and their rivals' fans point of view. But why fault the Jordans, the Schumachers and the Armstrongs? Didn't they work their butts off just to reach the top? Is it their fault that they were so good while the others were just riding it out? And while ASO insinuated that Armstrong had doped, he officially didn't fail a drug test therefore he is officially clean. Whatever "unofficial" happens has no meaning at all. But then again, judicial proceedings in France and Italy is different especially when you came from a country like the USA.

At the end of the day, what matters are the fat bank accounts of these major sports organizations. For them, it's not good economics when a single person rules the roost for a long time, especially if it's an American who's butt-kicking the Europeans in their own game. The fans get bored; the sponsors (of the losing teams) get bored and the money heads south.

Me, I don't get bored.

2006 Tour de France

When a dominant Tour de France champion retires, the next few years are won by different riders. Jacques Anquetil reign was followed the wins of Felice Gimonde (65'), Lucien Amar (66') and Roger Pingeon (67'). Bernard Thevenet, Lucien van Impe and then Tehevent again won after Eddy Merckx last won in 1974. After Bernard Hinaults' 5th tour win in 1985, the sport saw 3 winners in the next three years- Greg Lemond, Stephen Roche and Pedro Delgado. Three different winners also won after Miguel Indurain won his 5th tour- Bjarne Riis, Jan Ullrich and Marco Pantani.

The next 2-3 years would be exciting.