With all the ridicule that's been/going to be heaped on the various riders who have been busted for doping (Let us now start another vanishing twin ate Tugboat's strudel before Der Kaiser could get to his EPO thread) there is/was/and continues to be a deafening silence whenever Merckx is brought up.
So here's my giant, stinky, and incredibly loud fart in church, my Sinaed O'Conner tearing up of the Pope's picture, my Keith Richards showing up at the blood bank to donate:
How in the world can a guy who failed several dope tests be considered the greatest cyclist of all time by the same people who are so disdainful of the "modern" dopers, with such a blind eye? And no, they ALL didn't fail dope tests during Merckx's era. Some did, some didn't. Conjecture aside, the facts are the facts. He rode dirty. And his excuses were every bit as pathetic as Tyler Hamilton's.
I get that he won a lot of races. I get that he was doped for some of them too. And understand that my personal opinion is pretty much along the lines of Willy Voet's "Dope doesn't turn a mule into a race horse" comment. My panties are seldom in a bunch over the latest doping scandal.
So 'splain it to me Lucy...