I've just read both articles - seem reasonable, intelligent and consitently argued. I agree to some extent, too.

He isn't saying Lance isn't an athlete, or that cycling is non-athletic, he is saying that it takes more skills (particularly hand-eye coordination) combined with Lance's other attributes (stamina, "clutch" etc) to make the world's greatest. Do I necessarily agree with all his other contenders? No.

I think some of you should take a little more pause and read the articles carefully before trying to jump down his throat.