"The lifetime ban on Lance Armstrong under the WADA Code is not implicated” - Armstrong’s podcast controversially set to sponsor Hincapie's Modern Adventure Pro Cycling

Earlier this week, George Hincapie announced the launch of a new cycling team: Modern Adventure Pro Cycling. The project aims to support the sport’s growth in the United States and beyond. But the announcement quickly took a controversial turn when it was revealed that The Move, the podcast co-owned by Hincapie and disgraced former cyclist Lance Armstrong, will be sponsoring the team.

For a sport still trying to shake the shadow of its doping past, the move is both bold and deeply contentious.

“As of now, our understanding is that this venture is outside the UCI jurisdiction and that of any WADA Code signatory. So, the lifetime ban on Lance Armstrong under the WADA Code is not implicated,” a spokesperson for USADA recently told Cycling Weekly. That clarification makes the partnership legally possible, but it does little to answer the questions of public perception and trust.

Hincapie addressed the sponsorship in a statement to Escape Collective. “I am part-owner of the podcast along with Lance,” he said. “I saw it as an opportunity to promote the team through those channels and gain more support through that outlet, as we have a big viewership during the Tour. No other affiliation beyond that. Looking forward to a great show this year talking about the Tour.”

He also confirmed that the team is currently in the process of registration with cycling’s governing body. “The UCI registration process is still underway, and all sponsorship arrangements are part of that review. We've been fully transparent about the structure and are working with our legal team to ensure everything meets their requirements. We're very excited about what we're building and the momentum we have so far to help support cycling here in the USA and abroad.”

Still, the idea that Armstrong’s brand, tainted by the most damaging doping scandal in cycling history, would be associated with a competitive team is already stirring concern. The sport has made significant efforts to clean up its image over the last 15 years, and many within the peloton have built their careers in that new, stricter environment.

The reaction from the professional ranks remains to be seen, but unease seems inevitable. While Armstrong retains a sizeable media following and The Move is especially popular during Grand Tours, many current pros have been vocal in their desire to distance themselves from figures associated with the EPO era.

There’s also a risk that the controversy could overshadow the team’s ambitions. For younger riders or American talents hoping to break through, the sponsorship may come with baggage they didn’t sign up for. Even if the team is UCI-registered and above board, being linked to Armstrong, even indirectly, could make partnerships with other brands or race organisers more difficult.

Ultimately, the Modern Adventure Pro Cycling project sits on a delicate line. Legally, there appears to be no obstacle. Ethically and reputationally, it’s far more complicated. Armstrong’s name continues to divide the cycling world, and this move is unlikely to bridge that divide.