Beyond that, Tygart was convinced he could bring the governing body of cycling down with corruption charges, leading to a landmark case and publicity for himself and USADA. He was targeting something that did not exist. The idea was put there by the likes of Betsy Andreu and Vaughters. They had an infantile view akin to something you would see in a Hollywood movie, like secret cabals and furtive phone calls with money being passed around under the table and rivals being targeted for positives. Tygart bought into it. This is the reason he was willing to go outside WADA rules, to go beyond the statute of limitations, to take away victories that occurred before WADA even existed, etc. He thought Armstrong would break and give up the UCI with stories of paying people off. This is also why a deal was never struck; Tygart was after something Lance could not give him.
I agree with much of this, but the last, bolded passage I wonder about. It was reported--and we're mostly getting TT's side of the story--that Tygart offered LA a deal, maybe lose two or three TDF titles if he confessed to some doping. And LA refused.
Why did LA refuse? The view at the time--and I think that view has held up--was that LA thought he was untouchable. After all, he had been for so many years. So why give up two or three titles when he could most likely keep them all? It was a gamble, but maybe not much of one, given that if he had lost even one, let alone several titles, the ones he retained would have been tainted, anyway. The nature of the case Tygart was building made it clear that LA didn't dope for just some Tours, but all of them. Maybe his name would have remained in the record books, as a four or five time winner officially, but everything else would have been gone: the endorsements, the cancer foundation, the respect and admiration of the public.
What was Tygart after in proposing the deal? It seems to me, the same thing he got from other riders: details about who, what, when, where, etc. As I understand it, the other riders got off with relatively light sanctions, because they were willing to cooperate. LA was not willing to. Maybe Tygart expected more from LA, but even if Tygart was after something totally unrealistic, LA would not have known this without first talking with Tygart, and AFAIK, he never did. . He just blew him off.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't think LA refused a deal because he couldn't deliver what was asked. He refused a deal because he was never going to admit to doping under any circumstances. He had far more to lose than a few years worth of results.
Funny thing. I once asked Floyd why Vaughters and Tommy D were not very successful. They both had the numbers in testing. They had the potential to be great. What happened? With no hesitation he responded with "focus". Those guys could not concentrate on training the same way Lance and Floyd could. It is day after day, week after week, month after month of being singularly focused on the goal. That is what I think the difference was. It was not some secret drug or special doping regimen; the same things were available to everyone else. Floyd and Lance were very talented bad ass mofos who were driven to a degree others were not.
I would think that at the very pinnacle of the sport, guys who were getting away mostly on talent alone would have been weeded out. I know focus is a perennial feel-good story in sport--I got to the top because I worked harder than others--but I question how large a role it plays in separating the very best. After all, there is a limit to training. You can only train so many hours a day, so many days a week; if you exceed that, you're likely to get worse, not better.
These guys are professionals. Professionals--indeed most people--expect to spend long hours doing things that aren't particularly pleasant. Some can't handle it, for sure, but a lot can.