Seven-times Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong will race in next year’s Giro d’Italia according to the news agency Reuters. This would be the firs time he has ever ridden the race. His reason for adding it to his comeback schedule say the organizers is that it fits in with his aim of raising awareness of the fight against Cancer. The 37-year-old, who retired in 2005, will compete in the May 9-31 race before bidding for an eighth Tour title in July. "I will give my utmost, and not only to prepare for the Tour," Armstrong said in a statement from race organizers RCS Sport. "Not having taken part in the Giro was one of my biggest regrets as a rider. Finally I will be able to do it." Armstrong’s first race back will be in January’s Tour Down Under in Australia after he was cleared to compete by the International Cycling Union (UCI) last week. Riders making comebacks have to be in the UCI’s anti-doping program for six months prior to racing but the governing body has made an exception for Armstrong, who announced he was returning to the sport only last month. Armstrong, who fought off cancer and was latterly dogged by unproven doping allegations during his career, is partly making a comeback with the Astana team to promote a global cancer awareness campaign. The Giro will be celebrating its centenary next year. The route has yet to be announced. There is no word yet from the Astana team on who would be the designated team leader Armstrong or 2008 Giro winner Alberto Contador. Given that raising cancer awareness is such a big part of the reason for Lance’s comeback the announcement of his Giro entry also raises the intriguing prospect that he may also enter the Vuelta too.
Armstrong to ride 2009 Giro
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
No Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
I'm not saying the officers acted with malice, just with stupidity and ignorance of physics and the law. (Once again, well done CyclingUK, who are a very fine organisation!)
@jackcycles There is no taking away or suffocating freedoms of other road users. Drivers are still free to drive. They are not and nor have they ever been free to to drive wherever they want, however they want. A cycle lane has never prevented someone from driving to a place they could previously drive for unless the plan was always to pedestrianise somewhere. What do you think about bus lanes and taxi lanes? I don't disagree that ideally cyclists simply share the road with cars. There is no question of joined up infrastructure or why cyclists aren't using the shit infra they are provided. The massive issue with that is that drivers aren't getting better, they are getting worse. Its nothing to do with cyclists and their behaviour and everything to do with motorists being absolutely unwilling to share the road with cyclists. I see this every time I go out on the bike. I see it every time I take my kids out on the back of the bike. Doesn't matter that I have small children on my bike, a large proportion of drivers couldn't care less and will bully me and put our safety in danger purely because they have the power in our dynamic. The other day within 1 minute of leaving my front door I saw a driver nearly hit the curb on a straight road because he was looking at his phone and then a middle age man cut the corner of a road I was coming to the end of so much that I had to swerve to avoid him. Drivers won't change so we have to remove them from the equation. They have to be treated like the children they are. If you can't share then we will take it away.
"...investigation will commence into alternate testing along with appropriate training for officers..." Translation: we'll try to understand the law, you know, that legal stuff we're meant to be upholding.
Do that one about "avid cyclist" => "angry motorist" again...
@andystow "Alright mate, no need to state the obvious"?
"Both the rider and Birmingham Bike Foundry have launched a legal appeal, supported by Cycling UK’s Cyclists’ Defence Fund, arguing that the process employed which led to the destruction of a £6,500 legal e-bike was “fundamentally flawed”." Good to see my money being put to good use. Keep it up! As others have said, if the police can just confiscate and destroy something which has broken no laws with no attempt to contact the owners, there is something seriously wrong that needs to be sorted out in court. I hope the owners are adequately compensated, including legal costs, and the police learn how to test an ebike.
@Mr Blackbird and what would you say to cyclists who think there are already too many motorists on the road?
Interesting the article on e-bikes having the statement that many English councils encourage pavement parking at the same time Scotland is moving in the polar opposite direction of fining drivers that do. This isnt just in the major cities either, the area I live in, Houston, Bridge of Weir which are medium sized villages have had people fined for even marginally encroaching walkways with their cars. If only English councils would follow this common sense approach. If they want to bag on about cyclists being on the roads, you have zero argument if you then allow cars to block the paths and cycle lanes you want them them to use instead.
“And what would you say to motorists who think there are already too many cyclists on the road?” "Get a grip!"?