Hacker News Reader

Comment by coliveira | Hacker News Reader

Ridiculous non-sense. Every sport has rules, cycling is not different. Doping is against the rules, that's why they have anti-doping tests. If LA was doping he was clearly cheating, not playing the game. It doesn't matter how many people are doing that, the only reasonable thing to do would be to report the abuse, instead of repeating it.

Also, what good has he made to the world of sports if now he is a well known cheater, who lost all his ill-gotten titles?

View on HN

Sports have written rules and unwritten rules. Cycling during the LA era was a cheater's game and the people in charge of it were unwilling to even attempt to clean it up. It's unlikely that any rider in the top 30 of the TdF was clean and the authorities knew it and were complicit. They were getting ratings like never before. Armstrong was bringing the massive US market to the sport and Europeans were watching in record numbers because his success made them angry. There was a game within the game that was all but sanctioned by the unwillingness to address the doping problem. That was the game, one played by the unwritten rules of the sport, that Armstrong played better than anyone else.

> what good has he made to the world of sports if now he is a well known cheater

Beyond the fact that he didn't have to give back any of the money, inspired a ton of cancer patients and cancer donors and had a damned funny cameo in Dodgeball? He brought exposure to an amazing sport to the US. I count myself among the millions of people that would likely never have gotten into cycling without Armstrong. And, cheater or not, my ride up the Tourmalet was a highlight of my trip to France and something I'll remember the rest of my life. If you don't dope, cycling is an amazing exercise that's makes you a healthier person. How many other millions were inspired to get on a bike by Armstrong? Sure, if you take the myopic view that the world of sports is limited to professionals, Armstrong may have destroyed most of what he created. But when you take a wider view, his cheating created a lot of amazing effects that survived the scandal.

Also, what good has he made to the world of sports if now he is a well known cheater, who lost all his ill-gotten titles?

Asking the question reveals your opinion, but I'll say that I am not bothered by what Lance did. He won those races (both in my mind and in actual reality) no matter what anybody says officially.

No one is disputing whether or not he crossed the finish line first, here. Doping didn't make it easy for him to win, but it surely made it much easier. That in itself is unsportsmanlike and deserving of the ire he's received.

Also, what good has he made to the world of sports

I couldn't care less about the world of sports - and I was a champion cyclist in college (RMCCC Silver medal 2006). Look what livestrong and the LA foundation did for cancer research and support.

Clearly beneficial.

This is another example of the "ends justify the means". The charity work does not change a iota of what he did in the sports arena. If that was possible, then for example a thief could take a good portion of his gains and invest on charity to undo other wrongs. In fact, in retrospect his charities can be easily seen as a tentative to buy favorable public opinion.

This is another example of the "ends justify the means".

Okay. So what's the problem? Consequentialism is a valid philosophical outlook.

> Consequentialism is a valid philosophical outlook.

It is also a sign of lack of character.

That's completely ridiculous and is extremely arrogant. I suggest you look into the writings of Iain King.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com