Admission?

When you choose not to stop what somebody else is doing to hurt you, is it an admission that they're correct in their actions? That's the question that many bicycling enthusiasts are pondering, as they witness Lance Armstrong's decision not to stop the USADA's unilateral action against him.

They say he was doping for years, and intend to sanction him if he doesn't refute it. He says they are on a witch hunt, and will no longer exert himself in his defense. Who's right? Is this the corporate sport version of Lance turning the other cheek? Does USADA have adequate standing and credibility to tarnish the name and the sport?  Is it deserved?

In 1999, as Lance was winning his first Tour de France, my wife and I watched from her hospital room, where she was recovering from the life-threatening injuries inflicted on her by a hit-and-run driver who hit her from behind as we cycled before dinner one night. My wife found inspiration in Lance's victory over cancer and his rise to the top of his sport. The ensuring years added to our respect; but, then the doubts started to creep in.  Did he or didn't he - dope, that is?  There were compelling explanations on both sides of this issue.

Now, what are we to think?  UCI, the organization which governs international bicycling, has said to USADA essentially "Show your evidence.". They indicate they will not act until they see the justification. Until they do, I understand that Lance still holds his titles. It's all very sad. Regardless, this story is far from over. Will there be any heroes standing when we see the conclusion?