Winning by losing

Officially Lance Armstrong did not win le Tour de France in his return to the race after a 3 year 'retirement' but he may have done more to help promote his Livestrong Foundation internationally by losing.

So is it possible? Can you really win when you actually lose? It depends on what your goal is. While Lance Armstrong has long been admired in the United States for both his professional and philanthropic achievements he has at the same time been equally reviled across Europe, especially in France, the home of le Tour.

The complete focus, dedication and cut throat nature that led Armstrong to the pinnacle of professional cycling and an unprecedented seven consecutive Tour victories from 1999-2005 also made him appear cold, calculating and unapproachable. A very bad combination if you are trying to gain broad based public support for a charitable cause.

But a funny thing happened during the 3,500km (2,174 miles) trip to Paris this year. Lance Armstrong became a human being. While still finishing an amazing 3rd in the Tour (at age 37 the third oldest podium finish in the 106 year tour history) Armstrong is no longer unbeatable, at least in the world of competitive cycling, and that just might help him become a stronger international force for his foundation. Why? Because in losing he showed the world, most importantly a jaundiced European public that he can be both humble and gracious and is willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of the overall cause (in this case playing a supporting role to help his teammate win the Tour); and those traits will take you a long way in gaining the broad based public support necessary for a charitable cause to be successful.

So did Lance Armstrong win? I guess that depends on the measurement. If his goal was to win le Tour de France then no, he fell short. But, if his goal was, as he often stated, to promote his the Livestrong foundation internationally then he most certainly won.