Also in the same article:
Last November, Pound made headlines when he slammed the National Hockey
League's drug policy. At the time, he stated as many as a third of the
NHL's 700 players may be taking some kind of performance-enhancing drug.
Also, the IOC has called for an independent inquiry to help resolve the
feud between cycling star Lance Armstrong and Pound. In mid-June,
Armstrong's eight-page letter to IOC president Jacques Rogge sharply
criticized Pound for trying to keep alive the doping allegations against
the seven-time Tour de France champion.

Three questions come to mind:

1. Will Armstrong take the IOC up on it's offer to set up an independent
investigation?

Why? Is he planning to ride the Olympics again? I thought he'd retired.


2. Will Armstrong visit the Tour this year?

Don't know. Presently the public answer is no, and the private answer is
that he's getting kinda tired of the controversy it would inevitably stir
up. But my guess is that, if Discovery is doing well, he'll make an
appearance.


3. If he does visit, will he answer any questions from Paul Kimmage or
David Walsh?

No; there's nothing either would ask that hasn't already been asked (and
answered). Just because people don't like the answers doesn't mean that
you're required to keep facing the same question over and over and over.

Regarding Dick Pound and Hockey, so he says a third of the players are on
drugs. Wouldn't that justify a full-court press on the issue? Just how few
sports might there be that *don't* have a drug problem? Cycling's but a tiny
spec in the grand scheme of things, yet Dick Pound just can't get enough of
it. What does it mean that cheating (forget drugs, let's just call it for
what it is, which is cheating) is so prevalent in sports? Heck, what does it
mean that cheating is so prevalent in schools and business?

Forget Dick Pound. We need Jimmy Carter!

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com