Cycling legend, Lance Armstrong, recently shocked the world of sport by announcing his plans to come out of retirement to compete in the Tour de France. Armstrong has never been one to shy away from controversy and his reasons for returning should certainly be taken with a pinch of salt.

The official reason behind the cyclist’s return is a desire to “raise awareness of the global cancer burden”, a charitable intention somewhat undermined by the subsequent comment from his manager that “we’re not going to try to win second place”. So why exactly is Armstrong coming out of retirement?

Perhaps the first, and most cynical, reason that springs to mind is financial gain. Armstrong has been quick to put a stop to this kind of speculation, stating that he is not going to ask for a salary. Whether this is true or not is beside the point.

Some form of income is bound to come as a result of the media frenzy surrounding Armstrong’s recent announcement. On the other hand, the cyclist’s bank account is hardly at risk of running low, given his lucrative sponsorship deals with Nike and Trek bikes.

Some pundits have suggested that Armstrong is secretly keen to prove that his previous victories in the Tour de France have been clean, following continuing speculation that he took the banned drug, EPO, during the 1990s. However, this argument appears somewhat tenuous, especially since Armstrong has already passed dozens of drug tests over the years. Furthermore, would such an independent and self-assured character really result to such drastic measures just to prove certain sports critics wrong?

Perhaps the real reason lies behind this self-assured sense of identity that the cyclist has built over the years. After so many years at the top of his sport, it must be extremely difficult for Armstrong to simply let go of that area of his life. He has focussed his energies on raising a tremendous amount of money for charity but has seemingly not been able to experience the thrills provided by regular competition.

Many other sportsmen and women have found themselves in similar predicaments following retirement and have reversed their decisions without any of the speculation that is surrounding Armstrong’s announcement.

Whatever the reason for the cyclist’s decision, it certainly is a brave one. He has put his reputation on the line and ultimately risks humiliation. After all, Armstrong will be 37 when the Tour de France begins and only one cyclist over the age of 34 has ever won the tournament, and that was over 80 years ago. Rabobank team leader, Adri van Houwelingen, believes that it will be “impossible” for the cyclist to win the Tour de France, stating that Armstrong will be unable to “come back on the level he had before” as a young man.

However, in response to questions over his age, Armstrong has been quick to remind the public of the examples of Dara Torres, a 41-year old Olympic medallist swimmer, and Constantina Tomescu-Dita, who won a gold medal in the Olympic Marathon at the age of 38. Ultimately, the message seems clear: write Armstrong off at your peril.

Written by Charlotte Cook