by some shitty writer who clearly knows nothing at all about cycling. I wonder how such morons get to write for a major site like CBS when 99.9% of people here could do FAR better. Good to see that people were enraged in the comments section. For writing that gigantic fresh turd of an article he should be forced to ride 250km over the Alps withing 9 hours.

but is really takes a pompous jackass american jock of the highest caliber to really crank out art like this.

This was almost better than the swedish panel of “experts” on morning TV who said that there was so much medical shenanians whith IVs and such going on in cycling that “they are practically replacing bodyparts between stages”

I think it is really quite interesting that LA can come back and be right at the top, not in a bad way I don’t think he’s drugged up or anything. I suppose the biggest factor is probably the team he is on as it is probably the strongest most stacked team in history so he has the support around him. But on the other hand it isn’t as if the team is carrying him, he’s going over those hills quite easily. I guess for a certain level of pro sportsman you never really retire and totally let yourself go. He was probably still cycling hundreds of miles a week and keeping trim because that’s all he knows. Not to mention running a marathon here or there.

using the word “ignorant”…

Some dumbass sports journo – and I use this term in the loosest possible way – decides to write the “why cycling isn’t a sport” or “why cyclists are a bunch of girly men” article.

Meh.

I can’t believe these people get paid.

As far as I can tell, he’s paid to be controverisal. He even has a mailbag where he answers people who tell him how much he sucks. He answers back in kind.

deep breath

That said sometimes his columns hit their targerts dead center. Bascially he takes a sport and takes a different point of view of the normal media and says in essence, what’s wroung with this competition? Not surprisingly he does finds something quite wrong.

Now to this article. His main point-behind all the dope-baiting- is that it makes no sense for a 37 year old to be seriously contesting in such a difficult contest. And he’s completely right, at least on the surface. There is no biological way that Lance should be 8 seconds behind at this stage, again on the surface. Something has to be seriously wrong with that picture. He correctly notes how Jordan wasn’t in his prime with the Wizards and the same should apply to Armstrong too. BUT Jordan wasn;t god damned awful in his advanced age but in Doyle’s rush to be controversial he minimizes that. As Pee Wee herman says, BIG! MISTAKE!

Now there are two ways to go from here. One is to note if the course is deceivingly placing Armstrong high; the other is to go into the doping angle.

Needless to say he misses the first thing, the tricked up course and my guess is that outside of golf and baseball (and much more so than golf and baseball) the course layout is such a huge factor in cycling compared to other sports. Being an American sports writer, I’m honestly not surprised to see him missing this completely in his rush to be controversial.

Thus he has to rely on doping, which is what he wanted to do all along probably. And to keep up his attitude he has to make cycling out to be worse than other sports, which of course, he has no idea about.

Sad. Doyle can be quite incisive. But he has to know something about what he’s writing about first. Unfortunately he doesn’t and a good opportunity is missed.