Lance Armstrong: Athlete of the Decade
Wednesday, July 8, 2009 21:35
Lance Armstrong is making a case for Athlete of the Decade. Tiger, Mike Phelps, and Federer can fight for #2.
Okay, such a claim would only happen with another Tour de France win for the 7-time winner. What makes this particular run so very compelling is Armstrong is making it under the microscope of today’s anti-doping rules that have tossed out previous winners (come on down, Floyd Landis). While the specter of doping has dogged Armstrong since his first win in 1999, no formal accusation or positive test has ever occurred. You can bet Tour organizers are determined to protect the integrity of their event by all means possible. Lance is under impossibly close scrutiny.
For Lance Armstrong even to make another run at the Tour is amazing in many ways. After an unprecedented seven straight titles on the Tour (1999 – 2005), success as the Founder and Chairman of a globally recognized cancer survivor foundation (LiveStrong.Org), and the profile and credentials to remain a bankable and marketable commodity, he’s probably not doing it for the money. That makes it all the more incredible. It’s more than Lemieux putting on the blades one more time, or Jordan lacing up the sneakers, or Montana putting on a helmet. The Tour is, as The New York Times once described it, the most physiologically demanding of athletic events… the equivalent of running a marathon several days a week for 3 weeks – with elevation climbs comparable to climbing 3 Everests.
Here’s the kicker (at least at the time this is being written)… after Stage 5 of the Tour, Armstrong is only one second behind the leader. With plenty of race left, including the mountains where Armstrong has historically separated himself from the rest the pack, it may not be early to say that he is on pace for #8. Remember, this is under the intensive scrutiny of race organizers, some of whom would love to catch Armstrong with a banned substance. And, so far, he’s clean. As long as he stays that way and his dash through mountains is at all like his previous seven, it is likely he could win again. If that should happen, it’s clear that Armstrong might be The Preeminent Athlete of the Decade.
Few athletes are capable of completely dominating a sport, taking a short layoff, and then returning and dominating it once more. Ted Williams was the best hitter of his era before he left for military service. After he returned, he continued to be the best hitter in baseball. Mario Lemieux still had some youth and gas in the tank to return from lymphoma and be a dominant force, if only for a few seasons. Jack Nicklaus defied age to win majors over several decades. But no football players have ever retired on top and then come back to be dominant (leave Brett Favre out of this, he never really ‘retires’). As for basketball, Michael Jordan tried but was merely good in a Wizards uniform, not his former ‘great’ self, and certainly not dominant.
Lance Armstrong is in very good position to win his 8th Tour de France in 10 years. If he pulls it off, he’ll have my vote for Athlete of the Decade.
3 Responses to “Lance Armstrong: Athlete of the Decade”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Lance Armstrong: Athlete of the Decade: Outplacement Layoff says:
July 9th, 2009 at 12:36 am
[...] rest is here: Lance Armstrong: Athlete of the Decade Tags: Business, case-the-layoff, come-on-down, decade-tiger, disgruntled, Internet, Layoff, [...]
Nate Barlow
says:
July 13th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
It's always tough to compare athletes in different sport–heck, it's difficult enough to compare athletes in different generations in the same sport! That having been said, Armstrong's recommendations are truly remarkable.
Gairzo
says:
July 14th, 2009 at 3:38 am
Nice stuff on just how demanding the Tour is…Several marathons a week for three weeks? 3 Everests? I'm short of breath just writing it down.
But I disagree.
First, Tiger Woods has won 12 majors in 8 years. He's never trailed after 54 holes in any of those victories. He has won more tournaments in the past 8 years than all but five golfers have won their entire careers–spanning 150 years of the game's modern history.
Armstrong and his colleagues spend the whole year training for the Tour. Every other race is but a prelude or preparation for a "Leg" of the Tour. I'm not minimizing Armstrong's dominance or the validity of your argument that he is the decade's best.
You would win that argument with most sane people. (Insert joke here:)
Beyond the dominance though is a more salient point: When Woods joined the golf tour, the sport–even after Nicklaus' great career and his weekly tussles with other legends–was still a lazy man's sport. During golf's golden era, only Gary Player and a few other golfers conditioned themselves the way professional athletes should.
Tiger changed all that. He's made every golfer since 1997 workout on a daily basis–just to remain in shouting distance. Even with major advances in equipment and the lengthening of courses, Tiger still dominates. Of course, the counter point is "So has Armstrong."
While true, there is another factor working here.
The torque Tiger generates with each swing began to take it's toll five years ago and it is rearing its fangs with every passing tourney. As great and conditioned and strong as Woods is, he is not immune to the damaged inflicted by life's claws.
Armstrong seems to be immune to everything: cancer (not only of the testicle, the stomach, liver, and brain), a long layoff, and aging. We marvel at his performance after retirement and are amazed he is doing so well under the harsh–some say unfair—glare of intense scrutiny.
It bears repeating Armstrong has never tested positive for any PED. And, we need to remind ourselves the French can, generally speaking, come off as snobbish twits. But it isn't only the French whispering things about Armstrong. Even if they never catch the Lancester cheating, you still gotta wonder, no?
Sosa, McGuire, and Bonds, made a mockery of their sport. They achieved feats no one had or has since achieved. Their numbers, their performance past their primes or with injury were off the charts with the historical numbers.
I watched a special on Armstrong. They showed his lungs working at a level that his doctors described as freakish, surpassed only by his body's ability to produce much less lactic acid than other athletes.
Again, there has been no substantive proof Lance Armstrong has taken any PED.
The facts say he has overcome cancer and the effects of aging like no other athlete perhaps in the history of sport.
Like it or not, those facts themselves raise a veil of suspicion, however thin. Is he truly a "freak" or just milliseconds ahead of those who think something else is at work? With Armstrong can we ever know for sure?
Until we do, Tiger Woods is the undisputed athlete of this decade.