This year’s Tour de France has been fantastic viewing.  It’s back to the old days of ups and downs, and no clear winner yet as we head into the Pyrenees (note:  I haven’t checked out today’s results yet).

What I find most interesting is how everyone is down on Lance Armstrong for his performance.  The fact is, Lance’s heyday was an impossibility — that is, for him not only to be on top of his game for seven wins, but to have lady luck on his side all those times.  And the further fact is that his serial bouts of bad luck this year are more par for the course.  So those of you who started watching the Tour during the reign of Lance are finally seeing what it’s all about — welcome to the show!

This article is particularly bad.  Now, Lance may well be a doper; I don’t know.  I do know that to say it’s foregone conclusion because a) he’s not as strong at 38 as he was in his prime, and b) because proven liars have accused him is a pretty good foray into stupidity.  And to ignore that doping has nothing to do with staying upright and avoiding flat tires only adds to Bill Gifford’s numbskullery.

My favorite part:

After a good start, he struggled in the third, cobblestoned stage, losing nearly a minute to Contador.

Lots of top contenders struggled in that stage; I’m pretty sure that’s why they added it.  To heap scorn on someone for struggling on the cobbles reveals Gifford as completely, utterly clueless about the sport.  Note to Bill:  Lance lost that time waiting for his team car after suffering a flat.  And Contador had the ride of his life that day.  That Lance lost less than a minute says he was on pretty damn good form, pinhead.  Maybe you could watch the Paris-Roubaix sometime before writing about cycling again?