4 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(09/16/05 5:29am)
The nasty tug of war between the bosses of the international cycling union and the World Anti-Doping Agency over who leaked documents to a French newspaper accusing Lance Armstrong of doping claimed its first casualty Thursday: any chance of a comeback by the seven-time Tour de France champion.\nArmstrong, who said just days ago that this latest fight to clear his name had stoked his competitive desires, made clear Thursday he wasn't interested in returning to the sport he dominated.\n"Sitting here today, dealing with all this stuff again, knowing if I were to go back, there's no way I could get a fair shake -- on the roadside, in doping control, or the labs," Armstrong said on a late-afternoon conference call.\n"I think it's better that way," he added a moment later. "I'm happy with the way my career went and ended and I'm not coming back."\nArmstrong and his handlers spent most of the remaining 45 minutes with reporters criticizing WADA chief Dick Pound. It was Pound who set off another round of charges and counter-charges in the doping controversy earlier Thursday by accusing cycling union boss Hein Verbruggen of supplying documents used by L'Equipe, France's leading sports daily, to charge that Armstrong used the blood-boosting drug EPO during his first tour win in 1999.\nArmstrong, who has repeatedly denied ever using banned drugs, said he was the victim of a "witch hunt" after the report came out last month.\nArmstrong said he was concerned Pound might be seeking revenge for an open letter he sent to newspapers and the WADA chief several years ago, defending his sport against the widely held notion that cycling was rife with competitors using performance-enhancing drugs.\n"I was not trying to say that Dick was bad guy or a crook," Armstrong said of his letter, "but I might want to say that today. ... He's trying to divert attention from the serious ethical issues involving WADA and himself."\nHis agent and attorney went even further, accusing Pound of smearing Armstrong in public without conclusive proof or due process. They also said Pound had a hand in ensuring that an identifying code was included with the results of tests for EPO conducted by a French lab on Armstrong's urine samples six years after they were taken. If true, that would violate WADA's own protocol requiring that any tests be done strictly for purposes of research.\nCalls seeking comment from Pound at both his WADA office and home in Montreal were not immediately returned Thursday.\nEarlier Thursday, Pound said he received a letter from Verbruggen ackowledging the cycling union, known as UCI, had provided L'Equipe's reporter with forms indicating Armstrong had tested positive for EPO during his first Tour victory.\n"Mr. Verbruggen told us that he showed all the forms of Mr. Armstrong to L'Equipe and that he even gave the journalist a copy of one of the documents," Pound said during a conference call from Montreal.\n"I don't understand why they're not stepping up to that and saying, 'Well, I guess we do know how the name got public, we made it possible,'" he said.\nBut Armstrong said that he himself had authorized releasing the forms to L'Equipe. He said the request from the newspaper was to check whether the UCI had granted him any medical exemptions during competition, not to find out if the numerical code used by race official to identify Armstrong matched the one attached to the frozen samples.\nLast Friday, the UCI said it had not received enough information to make a judgment on the accusations that six of Armstrong's frozen urine samples from 1999 came back positive for EPO when they were retested last year.\nIt also criticized L'Equipe for targeting Armstrong and Pound for making public statements on the "likely guilt of the athlete" without knowing all the facts.\nPound countered by saying, "It's ... quite clear the only way there could have been a match between the code numbers and a particular athlete was on the basis of information supplied by the UCI."\nHe then questioned the UCI's willingness to fully investigate L'Equipe's accusations and wondered whether the cycling body was merely looking for a "scapegoat."\nIf so, Armstrong suggested Pound should look in a mirror.\n"Is Dick Pound a vindictive person and somebdy who holds grudges?" he said. "Perhaps."\nArmstrong again refused to rule out legal action against L'Equipe. And while he said again he wouldn't make a comeback next summer, it's not because of a lack of competitive desire.\nAsked whether rumors that President Bush beat him in a bike race during a visit to Crawford, Texas, several weeks ago, Armstrong replied, "no," but insisted the president was a strong rider.\n"But we didn't subject him to any medical controls, so we don't know if his performance was enhanced. In my opinion," he added, laughing, "it was suspicious"
(06/26/03 1:05am)
Have no illusion about whom LeBron James is playing for.\nHe certainly won't.\nLast year, his mother took out a sizable loan and bought him an H2 Hummer for his 18th birthday. For months afterward, she was all he talked about.\nLast month, a shoe company gave James $90 million to wear its sneakers until 2010. All of a sudden he turns up on HBO and says, "Nike is my family."\nTo be fair, James wasn't actually choosing between his shoe company and his mother, but between Nike and the Cleveland Cavaliers, the team that will make him the top pick in Thursday's NBA draft and pay him $12 million over the next three years.\nHe was asked who owned his allegiance first and this is James' complete answer:\n"That's kind of a tough question because right now my family is Nike," he said. "I don't have an NBA team right now. Once I get into the organization, I'm a team player. Once I get to know my teammates and coaches, I think it's going to be 50-50."\nMoney still won't buy you love, but the day when $12 million was enough to guarantee loyalty sure came and went in a hurry.\nThe late sports agent Bob Woolf, who counted Joe Montana and Larry Bird among his early clients and is credited with helping start the profession, used to tell cautionary tales about athletes frittering away money.\nSome clients sent him invoices from Brazilian opal mines that never seemed to open, some from big-city bars that never seemed to close. Still others would go into a new town for a weekend series, buy a couple or three Armani suits and a car, leave the suits on the hotel bed and the car running in the middle lane at the airport, and then head merrily on to the next town. Woolf lived in fear of the day their extravagant tastes turned into contract demands.\n"I always wonder what athletes will they be like," he would conclude, "when they come into some real money."\nWe got some indication 10 years ago, when a just-retired Michael Jordan topped Forbes magazine's annual list of moneymaking athletes and highlighted an unsettling trend: Jordan was paid $4 million in salary by the Chicago Bulls and several times that amount by Nike. Finishing close behind him was Shaquille O'Neal, who was paid $3.3 million by the Orlando Magic and four times that much pretending to play basketball at photo shoots.\nThat same year, O'Neal threatened to withhold his services from "Dream Team II" because USA Basketball organizers had a sponsorship deal with Coke instead of Pepsi, the soft drink he endorsed. And Alonzo Mourning toyed with the Charlotte Hornets during contract talks because the money he bankrolled from a shoe deal made his salary seem almost superfluous.\nJames has handled stardom well for most of his young life, and he's given every indication so far of being the "team player" he referred to above. He's already shown deference to Paul Silas, the old hand the Cavs hired to be their new coach, and downright humility when Jordan said he would rate James near the bottom of the league's small forwards and shooting guards.\n"He has unbelievable potential," Jordan said. "But he has played against high school kids who probably are under 6 feet and have the talent of sportswriters."\nJames had the uncommon smarts to say he'd work harder to get better. "That's like your father telling you something at home. If Michael Jordan says something to you ... all you can do is listen, because he's the greatest player to play the game of basketball."\nBy the same token, James wore a $500,000 watch to a photo shoot Tuesday in New York. A few hours later, he turned up in his own TV special saying how much he loved his ride -- outfitted with the obligatory custom stereo, DVD and video-game console -- and how he hated being alone. An entourage, as James is finding out already, costs money. What he'll learn soon enough is that it rarely delivers solid advice in return.\nExactly how much loyalty a contract should buy is a hot issue right now in Chicago, where the Bulls receive updates on the condition of Jay Williams. The former Duke star, injured in a recent motorcycle crash, was taken second in last year's draft and his face still peers out hopefully from billboards around town.\nUntil the accident, Williams and the word "reckless" would not have turned up often in the same sentence. Now, even before any realistic judgment on his playing future can be made, another round of surgery will be necessary. Wisely, the Bulls concern themselves only with questions about Williams' health these days and refuse to discuss whether he had permission to ride the motorcycle, something prohibited by the standard NBA contract.\nBut it's a safe bet the one thing management never counted on the day they signed off on Williams' deal was the kind of buyer's remorse staring them between the eyes at the moment.
(06/12/03 1:01am)
OLYMPIA FIELDS, Ill. - Superman had Kryptonite. Samson had Delilah. Tiger Woods has his weak moments, too.\nOr not.\n"I don't think I've ever been in a slump," he said Tuesday, then paused for a heartbeat to actually consider the question. "No. I think my overall career has been pretty good. Ever since I came out of the womb and started playing golf." Woods added, smiling, "I've had a pretty good career."\nTo say it's been one unbroken run of success from the cradle to the green is an exaggeration. But only a slight one. He's known moments of anxiety and self-doubt, just not too often.\nWoods was 2 when he beat Bob Hope in a putting contest on the old "Mike Douglas Show," 8 when he collected the first of six international junior titles and 21 when he won the first of eight majors against guys his own size. He hasn't lifted his foot off the world's throat since.\nYet somehow, despite almost four dozen wins as a pro and some $40 million in prize money, Woods arrived at the U.S. Open this week having gone four tournaments in a row without winning even once. His best finish in that stretch, including the Masters, was fourth place. Now, add in the fact he hasn't been in contention on the back nine Sunday since the end of March (then conveniently forget Woods won three of the first four tournaments he entered this year) and what you have ... is the hint ... of a whiff ... of a scent ... of a slump.\nSo, naturally, this is the way Tuesday's news conference began:\nReporter: "Tiger, are you concerned about what we are concerned about ..."\nWoods: "I didn't know you were concerned about it."\nWoods had to be asked twice after that for his definition of a slump, and this is what he finally came up with: "I guess it's when you completely lose your game."\nNot exactly.\nGuys who lose their game completely never quite recover. Most wind up as answers to trivia questions, like Tigers pitching phenom Mark "The Bird" Fidrych. The cautionary tale in golf around the same time was Bill Rogers; in the last decade, it became Ian Baker-Finch, who went from winning the British Open in 1991 to the broadcast booth a few years later after being unable to break 90.\nNobody asked Woods to provide an example of a slump, but there was a whopper available nearby. The Chicago Cubs, who play just 45 minutes up the road at Wrigley Field, won back-to-back World Series in 1907-08, and haven't won another since. Then there were the New Orleans Saints, who scored a touchdown on the opening kickoff of their first game in their first NFL season, then lost the game to begin the first of what would be 20 consecutive losing seasons.\nBy contrast, a slump by anybody in Woods' class draws whispers the moment it extends beyond a month, a few matches or a handful of games.\nMuhammad Ali could barely survive two losses in a row; the same number of knockouts meant the end of his career. Leave aside the third coming and you'd be hard-pressed to find consecutive games during his 13 seasons with the Bulls where Michael Jordan wasn't clearly the best player on the floor. The only thing on ice that took fewer nights off than Wayne Gretzky was the Zamboni; over the course of 20 seasons, the Great One tallied almost twice as many points, goals and assists combined as games played.\nWoods' work is not as dangerous as Ali's, but he doesn't have the luxury of a team to cover his back, either. His winning percentage, around .290 since turning pro, may not seem impressive until you consider that as many as 150 others are arrayed against him.\nAnd so, the only exact comparison, as in so many other things, is with Jack Nicklaus. And as things worked out, a young Tiger taped a list of the Golden Bear's accomplishments to the wall of his bedroom and has since beat Nicklaus to every one.\nHow soon we forget: In 2000, Woods won nine times, including the last three majors, then started 2001 by going six tournaments without a win. After he double-bogeyed the 18th at the Desert Classic in Dubai to lose to Thomas Bjorn, the cover of one prominent golf magazine blurted out, "What's Wrong With Tiger?"\nThe short answer then, as now, turned out to be nothing. He promptly won his next three starts, including the Masters (which enabled him to pose alongside all four major trophies), and then twice more on tour after that. Last year, the questions he was fielding had more to do with Grand Slamming than slumping.\nWhich may be why whatever sense of urgency the rest of us feel, the only rhythm Woods cares about is his own.\nReporter: "Could you give us a rundown on how your game is, in your observation."\nWoods (disinterestedly): "I'm hitting the ball well this week. I'm pleased at the signs I'm showing."\nIf I'm Ernie Els, Davis Love III, Phil Mickelson, Vijay Singh or Sergio Garcia, the fact that Woods is tired of talking about it tells me this slump ends starting on the first tee Thursday.\nThe race for second place will begin immediately afterward.
(05/20/03 9:42pm)
BALTIMORE, Md. -- They have come in all sizes and colors, with vastly different personalities and every conceivable advantage. There have been big ones and small ones, silver, black and brown ones, the bashful and the born entertainers. They have been piloted by wizards, trained by superstars and owned by blue bloods, princes and captains of American industry.\nYet the thing each has been remembered for, finally, was failing to get the job done.\nNow it's Funny Cide's turn.\nFor the fifth time in seven years, a thoroughbred left Baltimore in the gloaming with an eye on New York and the chance to do what hasn't been done since 1978: win the Triple Crown.\nNone of them, though, has tickled the sporting imagination the way this one has.\nFor the past month, the sport of kings has been hijacked by its subjects and court jesters. Funny Cide has a decidedly commoner's pedigree and his connections are definitely hoi polloi -- fronted by a handful of high school buddies who kicked in $5,000 to start an ownership group that, while not quite threadbare, has been spotted wearing some of the worst threads ever glimpsed in the priciest sections of the grandstands.\nAs if more proof were needed to show just how much a "horse of the people" Funny Cide has become, look at how profoundly he's already affected the people around him.\nThe big red gelding has breathed new life into jockey Jose Santos' flagging fortunes and completely turned around trainer Barclay Tagg's view of the world.\nAfter the horse won the Kentucky Derby, Tagg, a self-avowed eternal pessimist, spent two weeks remembering all the bad times in what up to that point had been an otherwise forgettable career. And soon after the son of Distorted Humor out of Belle's Good Cide claimed the second jewel of the Triple Crown with a near-record Preakness win, Tagg was asked to recount the whole sad story.\n"Well, these last few weeks have been extraordinary," he said through a sheepish grin. "They have made up for all of the other lows."\nThen, just a few minutes later, the trainer caught himself talking about Funny Cide's chances to complete the most difficult trifecta in sports -- words that 30-plus years of scuffling in the business had convinced Tagg would never cross his lips.\n"He's shown he has stamina, and he's shown he has speed," Tagg said. "He ought to be ideal for it."\nAnd what a year this would be for it.\nThe last horse to sweep the Kentucky Derby, Preakness and Belmont was Affirmed, who held off the noblest of rivals, Alydar, by narrowing margins over the span of five weeks a quarter-century ago. That gap equals the longest drought ever between Triple Crown winners; the last sweep before Secretariat's transcendent romp in 1973 was Citation's summer of '48.\nBut the stars are aligned more fortuitously than that.\nThe buzz that accompanied author Laura Hillenbrand's best-selling book "Seabiscuit" grows louder as the release date for the movie of the same title nears. "The dreams of a nation rode on a long shot," the trailer goes, harkening back to a time when horse racing dueled only with baseball and boxing for the attention of the sporting public.\nEven a sweep by Funny Cide won't bring those days back. But it can restore, if only for an afternoon or two, the delicious anticipation of seeing a performer take his game to a level where only history can provide a proper context for judging. (And who wouldn't be rooting to see a bunch of regular guys pick up the $5 million Triple Crown bonus that is offered every year by Visa USA but has never been claimed.)\nBesides, since the gelding won't be whisked off to the breeding shed anytime soon, chances are Funny Cide, like Hall of Fame greats Forego and John Henry, could stick around and race long enough to make those afternoons last a few extra years.\nSo keep your fingers crossed. The best and the brightest in the business are doing the same.\nLate Saturday, along the runway to the paddock, trainer Bob Baffert surveyed the mournful gray sky above Pimlico and smiled.\nFunny Cide beat one of his colts, Indian Express, at the Derby, and had just bested another, Senor Swinger, at the Preakness. Baffert was through trying to beat the gelding and preparing to jump on his bandwagon instead.\nBaffert knows only too well what awaits Tagg and his horse around the bend. Three times since 1997, with Silver Charm, then Real Quiet and last year with War Emblem, Baffert arrived at Belmont with a shot at the Triple, the best of everything and the desire to do right by the horse, his owners, the handicappers who pack the joint on the first Saturday in June and especially the game itself.\n"I didn't realize until last year, maybe, what it takes out of you. Your life is under glass, you open yourself up to every kind of second-guessing, your voice is shot, everything still has to go perfect for you to have a chance -- and then you get beat by a nose," he said.\nWhich is exactly what happened to Baffert with Real Quiet in 1998.\n"That's why I can't wait to get home," he said, "and watch somebody else go through it on TV"