Rupert Guinness: This week you confirmed that you would race in the Tour de France as well as the Giro d'Italia. What or who prompted you to make that final decision?
Lance Armstrong: We have had on-and-off discussion with [the Tour organisers]. There wasn't a clear moment where we got, for example, a guarantee or any promises. It was a natural decision-making process after a few conversations. It is the biggest race in the world, so it is worth doing from a sporting perspective and from the cancer initiative's perspective. We tried to stay pretty relaxed about it. And it wasn't easy when everybody wanted [an answer]. It was always the first question: 'Are you doing it, or are you not doing it?' It was easier to hurry up and make the decision, get it over with and get back to training and then racing.
RG: Is there anything about Australian cycling you have had to research? Local riders will try to beat you everywhere …
LA: I've no illusions of grandeur when it comes to the results there. I suspect there will be a lot of guys - especially young guys - [who are] super-fit because of their season, who will be stronger than me and the European-based pros. For me, it was important since I have been away to start racing earlier, or sooner rather than later. The hot conditions are almost welcome. Typically, that time of year you are in places where you are freezing your arse off. As long as it is dry and not humid, that is good.
RG: Are there any specific goals you have in mind for the Tour Down Under?
LA: I have looked at the course online. I have looked at the profiles online. Some it is a little bit hilly. I plan on training hard before so I don't get thrown into a mess that I can't deal with. You have to be fit. You have to be light. You have to have endurance. I probably need the speed of a race. One hundred and fifty guys going down the road goes f---ing fast. And I don't have that in my legs right now. I need to get behind the motorbike and understand what it is like to go 55-60kmh in a cross wind. I will prepare for the event with that [in mind].
RG: Australia has produced two Tour contenders recently: Cadel Evans, who was eighth overall in 2005, fourth overall in 2006 and has twice placed second, and Michael Rogers, who last year came down with Epstein-Barr virus and crashed out of the Tour in 2007, but was ninth in 2006. Can they can improve?
LA: To be a Tour competitor you need to climb and you need to time trial. Both can do those very well. Michael has to get his health back. It is very hard when your health is off and on. Cadel probably needs a little bit of a stronger team. But both have the talent to podium, if not be close to winning. These countries come along and have these periods, for whatever reason, where you have a resurgence of talent. The US had it a few years ago. Australia sees it now between those two guys and Stuart O'Grady, who has been around a long time, but is very consistent, strong and has real presence.
RG: Your mention O'Grady. He is not an overall Tour rider but has won many great races. In light of his injuries over the years, how does his durability rate for you?
LA: He is a tough dude. In the classics, other races and hard [Tour] stages, he is always there. He is a scrapper. He has that nose that wants to find the finish before anybody else. He would compete against his mum, he is that tough.
RG: Australian Phil Anderson rode with you in your formative days as a professional cyclist on the Motorola team from 1992 to 1994. What influence did he have on you?
LA: People focus a lot on my career from 1999 to 2005, but in reality there was a lot of shit that happened from 1992 through to 1996 … and a lot of good stuff - a couple of stage wins in the Tour, a world championship [1993], wins here and there. Phil, in those first years, was the biggest influence on my career. On the road, rooming with him, talking about cycling, talking about life … he had a profound effect on me back then. Because of this second part of my career, that's been forgotten a little. Phil was a true professional [with] the way he conducted himself in the race tactically and the way he was off the bike - at the dinner table or in the room relaxing or recovering, really looking after his health, training hard. At that time he was older. General consensus was that he was past his prime. He had some fantastic seasons because he redoubled his efforts with training and really looked after himself. That was an example for me. It is probably an example I should follow now because now I am the old fart.
RG: Is it a matter of getting the best out of yourself with what you've got?
LA: Exactly. We can compete at an older age now. I don't think science says a 37-year-old is worse than a 32- or 27-year-old. It is how much you want to do it, what your mind says or can put up with.
RG: You had a chance to observe the Tour since 2005. Did you believe you could have won them?
LA: I didn't watch that much because I was busy the last few years, I travelled a lot during the summer and didn't always have a TV available with the channel. It's pointless for me to say I could have won an eighth Tour or a ninth Tour. If you are not there, you can't win. It would be silly for me … it would be unfair for me to say I would have won. Were there things tactically that people did wrong? Yes. In 2006 T-Mobile, Rabobank, and CSC made big mistakes … giving guys [like Oscar Pereiro, who wore the yellow jersey and finished second, but won the Tour after first-placed Floyd Landis was disqualified for doping] 30-minute breakaways. Johan Bruyneel [Armstrong's sports director] in an ambient-induced sleep would not have done that. He would not have let it happen. We would not have let it happen.
RG: But did looking at the Tour from the outside allow you to pick up on anything for next year?
LA: Sure. Stuff on and off the bike. You watch riders develop. You see their weaknesses and strengths. Hopefully, you see how the sport evolves and the way the people and media treat the sport.
RG: You have yet to implement the independent anti-doping program you asked Don Catlin to run on you specifically. Will that be in place before the Tour Down Under?
LA: That is complicated to organise. You have the idea of Don Catlin. You have the reality of [Doctor Rasmus] Damsgaard [who is commissioned to carry out independent testing of all the riders] at Astana. You have the reality of WADA [World Anti-Doping Agency], USADA [United States Anti-Doping Agency] and the UCI [Union Cycliste International]. Then you have the reality that none of these people communicate. I think the idea that you have a comprehensive independent testing program is a great idea. [But] it is another step to post those results online. Keep in mind WADA does not support Catlin and Damsgaard. For them, an independent testing program is their worst nightmare.
RG: Might you revise the idea of having an independent testing program?
LA: There has to be a layer of independent [testing]. If it's Damsgaard, Catlin or a combination, we will accomplish that. We have to deliver that. And we will. The American public don't know Dr Damsgaard. They know Dr Catlin pretty well, so that helps. The other tricky thing is that we were dinged a little because it wasn't in place, but we didn't get a proposal from Catlin's team until a couple of weeks ago. But these [drug-testing] guys are coming all the time. I've just had my seventh surprise control the other day [Several hours after this interview Armstrong had an eighth random test].
RG: Do you think the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority will target and test you here?
LA: I take a leak every day anyway, so it doesn't matter. It's not as if they show up and you have to do 200 push-ups. It is not anything hard. It is pretty natural.
RG: A number of cyclists such as Ivan Basso are coming back from doping bans. Can they redeem the lost confidence of people in them and their own confidence in their ability to race?
LA: If you are out of competition for a couple of years, as I am experiencing now, you've got to get back into the tempo of a race which is different than training. As far as their place in society and sport, I believe in a society where if people mess up, if people make mistakes, they serve their time. If you get caught speeding you pay a fine. If you do something more serious, you go to jail and you get out. I don't want to be in a society where if you make a mistake you get locked up forever. Even with the semi-crisis cycling is in, I think when people do their time and repay their debt to sport and society, we have to let them back in. This is not China. There are people who will say: 'Absolutely not. You're an arsehole. You are a cheater. Once a cheater always a cheater.' Is that right? I don't think that does anybody any good because you know what, man? The last I checked nobody is f---ing perfect here.
RG: Do you have to focus harder on your fight against cancer now than before 2005 when you were racing?
LA: The work I do [now is] almost as much as cycling. Society doesn't perhaps operate that way, or doesn't have an appreciation for that. The non-profit world is not something they understand. [This week] I did a big interview with France's Stade 2 television. My foundation has raised $US300million ($465m) to fight the disease. That's a heck of a lot of money. We have gone on to do a lot of great things, but people say: 'We don't understand. We have no idea what you are doing. How that helps you. How that helps Americans. How that helps us.' The benefit is for everybody. We haven't told that story well enough, or they haven't been receptive to that story. The fact is, it is very real, very professional and ultimately very effective.
RG: How did the South Australian Government's pitch persuade you to come to Australia?
LA: There was the professional aspect, needing to race sooner than later. We had a good vibe. Australians probably get the idea quicker because of our ability to communicate. Australians are also a little more proactive when it comes to this issue [cancer] versus another country I could have gone to. There were no guarantees. I felt a solid sense of partnership. The burden is heavy [on Australians] because of sun exposure and melanoma. You have a high level of awareness. You have a high level of preventative measures, especially kids who are taught from a very young age. In the US when a kid goes on the playground they don't have sunscreen on before they walk outside. In Australia they do.
RG: Was your comeback at all influenced by something missing from your life after retiring, even though it has taken you to the White House, the talk-show circuit and the world of Hollywood?
LA: People say I was clearly missing something in life, or that 'he was missing something that only cycling could provide'. That is simply not the case. I have three beautiful kids who are happy and healthy. I have a great relationship with their mother, my ex-wife. We worked hard about nurturing that. I have a foundation of 70 people and staff that wake up every day with the sole purpose of kicking cancer's arse. I have got more money than I ever thought I would have. I don't need to be out here for the money. I don't need to be out here for the fame. If there was one thing I was missing, I did [realise] this at [the] Leadville 100 [the mountain bike race where he realised he needed to come back]. Training for that, for two or three weeks, on the bike, on long rides, getting fit, being healthy … that passion and that structure was something I definitely missed. That, coupled with the need for a global message we thought was based on the studies we had done around the world, made the comeback a reality. Obviously people can speculate [that Armstrong] was pissed about the attention everybody else was getting … blah, blah, blah. That is simply not the case. If you saw the training rides at Aspen before Leadville, if you had of seen the need for this initiative around the world, that's all you've got to look for.