this article wasn't about attack cycling. he was attacking people that go for the "flavor of the week" so to say. It made for a better article if he makes Lance seem less credible as the world's greatest athlete.

Wouldn't have been much of an article to say: "Lance Armstrong is an incredable athlete, but he's probably not the greatest athlete of all time. Why do people always do this?" Probably had a wordcount or something to have to hit to fill a part of a paper.

It did make me upset to read and see how he belittled cycling. And several of his arguments weren't very good. Especially "If lance is so great why isn't he in the ESPN top 100 greatest athletes? He couldn't even beat a horse" Well, that list was compiled in 1999. If they compiled it again today I know he'd be on it.