Is Lance Armstrong really the second greatest athlete of the past decade?
How on earth has Lance Armstrong been voted the second greatest athlete of the decade ahead of Roger Federer?
It’s an absolute joke.
How can a man who only participated in his sport for half of the last 10 years come close to the number one ranked Tiger Woods, and how can he finish above the tennis legend that is Federer?
Admittedly Armstrong ruled the cycling world for the first few years of the 21st century but can he really be classed as the best during the whole decade?
Evidently the fact that the poll in question was carried out by US sports editors worked in his favour – had it been Swiss editors then maybe Rog would have a broader smile on his face.
A point reinforced by the fact New England quarterback Tom Brady (who?) came in fifth above Jamaican phenomenon Usain Bolt.
Nonetheless there can’t be many who would question Tiger’s position as the greatest athlete of the decade (even with his recent troubles) given the man has single handedly dominated his sport since his emergence 13 years ago.
But I bet there are many non-Americans like myself, who feel Armstrong does not deserve to be recognised as the second greatest athlete of the decade. Am I right?
