Lance Armstrong always give the same general response to those who claim that he was tricked and treated. He strongly denied. Then usually attack his accusers, often calling them all liars. It is a strategy that has worked for years - until two weeks ago, when Armstrong began backing into a corner and nearly paralyze any attempt to return, experts in branding and crisis management. After seven Tour de France title was stripped of his official Monday, Armstrong has more followers and no major sponsor. We also lose the right to compete in the main event of the competition except for unauthorized use of American sports. The two agencies that you agree to the evidence undisputed that Armstrong doped. However, Armstrong has never given land. In June, when the U.S. Doping Agency announced the case, Armstrong issued a statement: "I have not been sedated, and, like many of my accusers, I competed as an endurance athlete for 25 years without performance increase over 500 approved drug tests and never failed one. ' If only he managed various allegations, experts say it has received a lighter sentence and possibly an easier path to the public for forgiveness. "If a sports hero or a president, not the act of getting problems, is a lie about it later," says David Srere, Siegel Gale signs autograph expert. Marc Mukasey, a lawyer expert in crisis management, strategy questioned Armstrong. "There are so many ways to handle this situation than perfectly rejection and went on a mission against all accusers," he said. After years of siding Armstrong, but the International Cycling Union (UCI) on Monday decided to keep the sanctions against him. Shortly after the announcement of the UCI, the last major sponsor of Armstrong - Oakley sunglasses - said the breakdown of a relationship with him based on doping "evidence". Nike, travel, Anheuser-Busch and a few bike riders links fell last week. "Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling, and should be forgotten in cycling," UCI president Pat McQuaid said in a press conference. In what may be the last official word on Armstrong doping case, UCI's decision came in response to a file of evidence Released October 10 of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. Archive contains more than 1,000 pages, including 26 letters from witnesses describing how Armstrong went and implement a computer conspiracy to use illegal drugs and blood transfusions to get an advantage - and the method of drug failed drug test. After appropriate USADA listed online, people can decide who is lying: all witnesses or Armstrong. Level of evidence, including the story of the pilot talking tactics for Armstrong denies doping keep all but the most loyal supporters, many of them cancer patients inspired by Armstrong successful fight against disease and work with Livestrong, a foundation he established. Armstrong Livestrong left the President last week, but charity can be your shelter in the future. He continued to participate in events such Livestong last weekend on the 15th anniversary of the charity in Austin, Texas. Livestrong CEO Doug Ulman, said last week that the organization received "lots of messages from people who say they admire and respect the decision of the Lance" resigned as president. For many supporters of Livestrong, Armstrong's first cancer survivors. "The most important thing for them is to continue to work," said Ulman. "It's pretty humbling to see the outpouring of support from people." It will take time to assess the effect of doping cases in the foundation, although the organization has shown that it can spread the mission of the founder. Although the sponsor of Armstrong dropped, some say they will continue to operate on Livestrong. From USADA Armstrong lose their titles in August, Ulman said that the dollar amount of donations to LIVESTRONG nearly 8 percent from the same period in 2011, approximately $ 3.4 million. The number of donors fell 3 percent, he said. The release notes that the evidence used against Armstrong slapped explosion last week, however, Armstrong's decision not to cooperate with investigators led gathered and forwarded to the UCI, and also released to the public. USADA accused of having a personal vendetta against him. He refuses to fight the charges in the arbitration, because he said the process was unfair. In August, USADA CEO Travis Tygart told USA Today that the Armstrong Sports can be part of the "solution". "Instead, (Armstrong and his lawyers) launched their attack against us, but actually a lot of it can be prevented some extent as provided in the rules if he had been honest and want to meet to advance the sport for excellent "; Tygart said later. Tygart said at the time that Armstrong will face a lighter sentence and can only lose two of seven Tour de France titles, and the limits within eight years I have kept valid evidence. But now may be too late. "The way it works is that the (working together) before a person is lost in order to investigate," said Richard Young, USADA lawyer Bryan Cave LLP and the company. "You can not say," I'm not. I do not. I do not. But now you have me, so I'll admit it and go and get some rest. It does not work. ' But America loves comeback stories. If Armstrong admit mistakes, experts say can improve their public stature, such as Tiger Woods made in the face of personal scandal in 2010. One problem for Armstrong it could be that he has invested heavily in the negative, and legal experts say that the confession may make you more vulnerable to civil or criminal action. Earlier this year, the federal government catch a criminal investigation to determine whether Armstrong and other fraud team committed U.S. Postal Service cycling, but did not provide reasons for rejecting the case. An insurance company in Texas demanding the return of $ 7.5 million in bonus Armstrong win the Tour. After overcoming cancer to win the Tour de France, Armstrong could feel the "indestructible," Mukasey said. So it is not unlikely that nature has to give up, even today. "He has raised millions and millions of dollars to fight cancer, and can find its way back to the middle of America," Mukasey said. "But I do not know what's in their best interest to support the allegations."