George Hincapie vs. Lance Armstrong, or Truth vs. Loyalty

"In cycling we're on the side of a mountain for weeks, in small hotel rooms, sharing every ache, and pain, and meal," Lance Armstrong wrote in his book Every Second Counts. "You get to know everything about each other, including things you'd rather not." If George Hincapie, Armstrong's road captain and long-time lieutenant, talks about what he knows of Armstrong's alleged doping, it will jeopardize their friendship. Will he?

Lance Armstrong is one of the most accomplished athletes of our time. He won the Tour de France seven times. He beat cancer. He is an American hero.

Now George Hincapie, also one of the most respected cyclists of our time who has been called "Cycling's Captain America," may undo all that.

If Hincapie testifies publically, his story could turn out to be one of the most jarring revelations in a sport known for its code of silence about doping. 

So far, what Hincapie told the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency is secret so far. But that could change any moment if Armstrong's case goes to arbitration.
 
To be sure, Armstrong has never officially failed a drug test. Only once, in the 1999 Tour de France, he tested positive for cortisone, a banned substance. And he later produced a doctor's note for that. 

But already in May 2012, Tyler Hamilton, a colleague on the U.S. Postal Team and an Olympic gold medalist, told the FBI that he had done doping throughout the last 14 years (see this video about Hamilton speaking out on "60 Minutes"). The implication was that doping was the usual thing, that all cyclist did it.

In the documentary "A Ride with George Hincapie," Armstrong was interviewed and asked about Hincapie's best quality. He answered it was his loyalty, both as a teammate and a friend.
 
Hincapie faces an age-old ethical dilemma: Truth vs. Loyalty. Do you choose friendship and withhold information that might hurt your friend? Or do you choose honesty at all costs? Mafia underlings have faced this dilemma, as have corporate whistle-blowers (and some husbands whose wives asked them if they were too fat).

People who know Hincapie say he must be tormented about his role in the case. They say it goes against everything engrained in him as a rider who sacrifices himself in the service of the team leader by sheltering him from head winds or fending off attacks by rivals.

In 2009, during a break Armstrong had taken from the sport, Hincapie said, "I'd do anything for the guy. He's like a brother to me." But now, Hincapie -- the only rider mentioned by name in the dedications of both of Armstrong's main books -- told The New York Times they haven't spoken "in a while."

What do you think? Is Lance Armstrong a hero or a villain? And should George Hincapie be loyal and cover for his friend and leader, or say the truth whatever damage that causes to Armstrong? I look forward to reading you on my blog: http://thomaszweifel.blogspot.com/.

P.S. To learn more about tackling ethical dilemmas, check out The Rabbi and the CEO: The Ten Commandments for 21st Century Leaders (now available in German and Polish).