I was listening to the local (Charlotte) sports talk radio show today and they asked the question of whether or not Lance is the greatest athlete in the history of sport. The general concensus was that though he is an incredible athlete and the most successful Tour rider ever, he is not the best athlete ever. Names like Jim Thorpe and Dion Sanders were thrown around. Some of their reasons were valid and others were not, most likely due to not knowing enough about cycling.

They then got on the topic of how silly it is to have the last stage be a virtual procession into Paris and not challenging the leader on the last day out of a show of respect. One of the hosts, a cyclist and fan for many years, was justifying it because it was tradition and a way to honor his achievements over the other stages, which it is. The dissenters argument was that in other sports, you don't have a team giving up in game 7 or the ninth inning or the last round of a golf tournament because they have been beaten up to that point.

Having said all that, I tend to agree with the dissenters. Sure it would be unlikely that Basso or Ullrich would have been able to get the time needed on Armstrong yesterday to take the overall but it sure would make it more exciting and a contest until the end. Why shouldn't they be able to take advantage of a situation that would give them the win? Sure it's tradition but shouldn't the leader and his team be responsible for defending the lead all the way to the end?

Other than that i was glad and a bit surprised that there was no one on there saying cycling wasn't a sport or dimminishing Armstrong's and other cyclists accomplishments and efforts in the Tour or in cycling in general. A pretty big feat coming from the heart of Nascar country.