What I should have said

I'm insulted by the flippancy of your blog post. To think that I used to hang on your every word and now I only get one word a year. One post a year, and that post is a 3.5 liner.

~Rizzle

The sentiments of this comment left me feeling like I was wrapped in a warm blanket on a chilly night. In an effort to allay Ryan's un-satisfaction I offer the following.

I have few sports heroes. I like lots of sports, I just don't find myself drawn to individuals very often. One exception is Lance Armstrong. I am a huge fan of Lance. In fact, just mention his name near me and you'll get an explosion of conversation that would rival any political, talk-show host in the aftermath of Sarah Palin's VP announcement. I think the Tour (or Tour de France to most of you) is one of the greatest tests of physical endurance on the planet (covering 2200 miles in 21 days). Lance has won the Tour a record 7 times. He completed this feat after conquering testicular cancer that had spread to his lungs and brain before it was diagnosed.

During his reign as the father of the peloton Lance was often accused of using performance enhancing substances. Although he was tested more than any other athlete in history, he never failed a test. In the light of rampant, drug-use by other cyclists there are critics who say Lance must have cheated. These critics have trouble acknowledging his un-aided greatness.

Since his retirement, drug testing has become more sophisticated, revealing even more cyclists using performance enhancers. This has only fueled the nay-sayers who now claim Lance must have doped. I hear even casual fans disregarding his accomplishments.

With his, now confirmed, return to the Tour, he will win. And he will win without the use of drugs. Today's more sophisticated tests will vindicate his accomplishments.

That got me kind-of excited yesterday, so I thought I would share it with my faithful readers.