Lance Armstrong: Badass or Jackass?

Lance Armstrong's had a rough couple of months. The USADA stripped him of his seven Tour de France titles, he stands to lose millions of dollars in endorsement deals, and was told earlier this month that his lifetime doping ban prevents him from running the 2012 Chicago Marathon.

But today's his 41st birthday and we could give him a gift by proclaiming his badassness. Or, maybe, we'll rain on his party—because nobody likes to be called a jackass on their birthday. Check out our slide-by-slide examination of Lance Armstrong's character to determine whether he's a badass or jackass.

Written by Sean Evans (@seanseaevans) and Jose Martinez (@ZayMarty)

RELATED: The Anatomy of a Sports Phony

Follow @Complex_Sports

Date: October 1996

In October of 1996, Lance Armstrong was diagnosed with testicular cancer. While this particular type of cancer has one of the highest cure rates, Armstrong's case was made worse by the fact that his tumor had already spread to the brain and lungs. With brain and testicular surgery, as well as chemotherapy, in his future, Lance's chances of survival were slim.

Three years later, Armstrong was not only back to competing in the sport that he loved so much, but he went on to win the Tour de France for the next seven straight years. Regardless of all the controversies and accusations, Lance still deserves to be seen as a badass for overcoming his battle with cancer and coming back from his illness stronger and better than ever before.

Date: 1998-Present

Throughout the late '90s and early '00s Lance Armstrong was arguably the most popular athlete in the United States. Still, his narrative was predominantly "Lance against the world." His LIVESTRONG campaign, perhaps intentionally, is both honorable and incredibly self-serving.

Armstrong, however noble his cause, seems to equate his own athletic successes with surviving cancer. The line between Armstrong the man and Armstrong's cause is often blurred. Any criticism of the cheating bicyclist comes off as an affront to curing cancer. Rallying a brand base in this fashion is fine when the naysayers are largely exaggerated and, occasionally, imaginary. But it makes you look like a jackass when evidence shows that the hinge point of your campaign is as slimy as his bike chain.

Date: 1997

After successfully beating testicular cancer, Lance Armstrong created LIVESTRONG, which according to the foundation's mission statement is meant "'to inspire and empower' cancer survivors and their families." Regardless of the doping charges, there's no denying that Armstrong has played a pivotal role in motivating people suffering from cancer to continue battling their illness. Maybe one day they could mirror Lance's life and re-write the record books when their painful chemotherapy is through or they could simply keep fighting and hopefully one day be cancer-free.

In the end, the accolades always seemed second to Armstrong's desire to inspire and help through LIVESTRONG. And with over $325 million raised for cancer research and patient assistance programs, we have to admit that through this foundation, Armstrong has done a damn good job at keeping his priorities in check.

Date: 1999-Present

Lance Armstrong and his supporters hang their hat on Armstrong never testing positive for performance enhancing drugs. This, of course, is debated with the controversial alleged cover up in '99 and a French newspaper reporting that a half dozen of urine samples from the '99 Tour tested positive for EPO, a banned blood booster. The same report claims that the embattled cyclist also tested positive for a banned corticosteroid.

But let's say you want to pass off news accounts, eye witness reports, and the sworn testimony of "at least ten" former teammates as scorned haters talking shit, you still have the words of Armstrong. We've always been perplexed by the cyclists constant claim of "never testing positive" opposed to saying he "never cheated." Semantics? Sure, but it's an important distinction.

Date: July 2001

Jonathan Vaughters was a teammate of Armstrong's and, like many others around Armstrong, an admitted doper. After a brief stint with USPS, Vaughters joined a competing French team.

During the 2001 Tour de France he was stung by a wasp and because of an allergic reaction, turned into a contemporary version of The Elephant Man (see picture). He could have been treated with a cortisone shot but, because the injection would have violated UCI's drug policy, decided to let his face swell like a rotting papaya in protest of what he felt was a ridiculous rule by competitive cycling's governing body.

As he lined up for the following day's stage Armstrong said to Vaughters, "Poor Jonathan and his stupid little French team. What the fuck are you like? If you had stayed with me, this would have been taken care of but now you are not going to finish the Tour de France because of a wasp sting." Classy.

An example of Lance Armstrong ripping a guy for playing by the rules while, simultaneously, allegedly breaking them.

Date: July 2005

Can we toss aside all the accusations for a second? Now, even though we may never know whether or not Lance Armstrong did in fact use performance-enhancing drugs, what we do know is that Armstrong exhibited a model of consistency that cycling had not seen since Miguel Indurain of Spain won five straight Tour titles (1991-1995).

By winning the Tour de France for seven consecutive years, Armstrong established a new yardstick that future cyclists aspire to reach. Even though the record books may not show Lance's consistent victories in the record books, people know the impact that he had the sport. Be honest, did you know about the Tour de France before Armstrong? Even though cycling may want to rid themselves of Lance, they should be grateful for what the guy did in making the sport what it is today.

Date: 2005

If the USADA is a frenzied prize fighter looking to split Armstrong's skull, then the UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) is his trusty corner man, there to clean up his cuts and, if need be, fill his boxing gloves with plaster. The UCI is a governing body for competitive cycling that is responsible for, among other things, overseeing drug tests. The USADA claims that a positive test from Armstrong was covered up by UCI.

Armstrong supporters who want to claim that the USADA is conducting a witch hunt for "big fish" athletes might, on some level, be right. But Armstrong's not doing those who believe in his clean performance history any favors by signing $100K checks to the very organization responsible for testing him. UCI President Pat McQuaid admitted to receiving money from Armstrong, but denies any wrongdoing.

Date: 2006-Present

Lance Armstrong is a medically-gifted, freak athlete. Just to give you an idea, Armstrong's aerobic capacity, which measures the body and its ability to transport oxygen, is double that of a normal person. So, with those type of physical attributes, it only made logical sense for Lance to pursue other sports outside of cycling and he did just that.

In 2006, Armstrong competed in the 2006 New York City Marathon where he finished 856th. The following year, Armstrong returned to the same event and improved his time and ended up in 232nd place. Then, in 2008, Lance took part in the Boston Marathon where he finished in the top 500.

Most recently, Armstrong has taken on a new field of interest: triathlons. On February 12, 2012, Armstrong competed in the inaugural Ironman 70.3 Panama race. With anything having to do with cycling out of the question due to giving up on his doping allegations, Lance is now focused on qualifying for the 2012 World Ironman Championship in Kona, Hawaii. So, what's a one-sport athlete?

Date: June 2012

As a cancer survivor, Lance Armstrong realizes the importance of funneling more money into medical research across all spectrums. That is why he served as co-chair of the committee that tried getting the California Cancer Research Act passed. If ratified, the law would've put a $1 tax on all tobacco-related products, which would've been used to help finance medical research on smoking-related illnesses and prevention programs.

On June 5, 2012, California residents voted on whether or not to pass the act. Unfortunately, CA Proposition 29 was declined after 50.2 percent of the people voted "no." Maybe they weren't ready just yet, but with a close enough margin, you can't help but think that this isn't the last time we've heard of the California Cancer Research Act.

Date: August 2012

Lance Armstrong has the resources to fight the USADA. The non-profit organization's entire annual budget for 2009 was $2 million by comparison Armstrong reportedly brought in $20 million that year. Let's start there. Roger Clemens took on the federal government and won. By comparison, Armstrong's situation is a cakewalk. When you think about all that Armstrong has endured (cancer, Floyd Landis, the hill stage), it would seem that a courtroom battle would be the least daunting of his recent struggles.

This is a guy whose personal mantra was "Pain is temporary. Quitting lasts forever." Here he is walking away from a group with questionable authority without throwing a punch. Critics who claim that Armstrong faces a mountain of incriminating evidence and bowing to USADA won't do much to silence them.

When judging Lance Armstrong as a "badass" or "jackass" it comes down to one simple question: Is the inspiration he provides cancer survivors badass enough to outweigh his being a self-righteous, cheating, ego-maniacal jackass? Yes.

The biggest jackass thing you can do is revel in the failure of a cancer survivor who allegedly cheated in a sport that a) nobody gives a fuck about and b) damn near anyone who's relevant has been accused of cheating. That plus the help he's given to cancer patients throughout the world makes him a badass despite his aforementioned flaws.