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.
- News

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
@AidanR So you're happy with their reporting? Much more of this and EAPCs will get more regulation despite them not being the issue, much like part of the US (Boston I think). Especially if Reform ever get in.
I feel like there needs to be a "translation" under most of those comments. "I am a shit driver and struggle to maintain a speed or be able to periodically check my spedo without being dangerous" "I like breaking the rules when I drive and I think that I should be allowed to do so with impunity (like those bloody cyclists!!!!!). I struggle to make sensible arguments so I usually resort to using massive overreactions to create strawmen that other people with room temperature IQs can mistake for a cohesive argument"
“Fife Council just hate motorists end off [sic]” There is no full stop at the end of that sentence so, in fact, the end is off and "[sic]" is not required.
@Rendel Harris yeah, I struggle to see where the costs in these things is coming from. They don't have any of the constraints that a normal bike has to worry about when it comes to alignment at the front end, bearings, weight, tolerances. Its literally just a adjustable frame with a small amount of electronics. I understand the convenience angle vs an old bike but it just feels like a lot for something very simple and cheap to manufacture.
@Boopop The BBC are correct, it is an e-bike. EAPCs are a subset of e-bikes; they are not synonyms.
@mattw additionally I would like to see some more restrictions on what's put on sale and to whom; but that appears to be hopeless now (unless / until someone runs over a "significant" politician using a Suron I guess). I hope I'm not doing them a disservice but without actually trying to buy one I couldn't see any clear indicators in e.g. the local Currys PC World that there might be any restrictions on using a non-EAPC powered wheeled thing. But perhaps the staff were all trained in informing customers, or perhaps it was very clearly spelled out on page 38 of the manual?
I appreciate they're showing Trumpton * in that Glasgow visualisation, but there are several things which look a bit childish. Or rather: not suitable for children, or pedestrians, or cyclists... The side street, the main street, the "continuous footway / entrance construction" are all deficient. They should go read Robert Weetman's articles e.g the "quality checklist for continuous footways" and the "Factors in pedestrian-friendliness" for side streets. For one - the side street is one-way, single-lane - so why does it appear so wide? At the very least the width just beyond the continuous footway should be narrower. Then if the main street has speed limits > 20mph where are the separated cycle paths? (Not even a cycle lane marked there...) There are all kinds of issues with the markings, but for the full kerb-nerdery see Robert's blog. * How on earth has he managed to get his name on things *retrospectively*? Truly he's surpassed George Foreman in "putting his name on it" (or in Australia and Hong Kong General Sir George Murray).
Not a problem in France, I have never even heard anyone suggest it might be a problem on public transport. The level of acceptable risk appears to be totally arbitary and in the UK the default action is to always ban and control.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/sep/02/japan-new-speed-limit-30kmh-narrow-city-streets
"I cycle myself...." 'Nuff said.