Lance Armstrong just ran a marathon not to long ago. What does his finishing say about cycling as a sport?

Question

Lance Armstrong finished in just under 3 hours, for an average speed of around 8.5 mph. He finished an hour behind the winner, at 856th. The story can be found at http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/trackandfield/news/story?id=2650506

Answer 1

cycling and running are two very different types of sports, but both are very challenging physically and mentally and they train you mentally to be able to handle either, but the physical demands are quite different and to switch from one to the other is very hard on your body

Answer 2

It says nothing except that Armstrong is a great athlete even to be able to do both types of races. The sports are very different -- the greatest marathoners are skinny little lightweights. Cyclists are bigger and more powerful. A marathon lasts 2-3 hours. A cycling competition lasts 2-3 weeks. It's almost like comparing a marathon to the 100 meter dash.

If some lifelong world-class marathoner suddenly competed in the Tour de France, do you think he'd have a prayer of even finishing? Not likely.

Answer 3

He likely can run less than 3 hours... He replaced into between the perfect junior triathletes contained in the country earlier he took up biking complete time, yet also keep in mind that he has suggested that he's operating the NYC marathon for relaxing, and not in any respect competing. So if he feels like operating a three hour marathon he will, yet he would only be utilizing this race as a thanks to stay in structure. and prevent with the "he's a doper" crap. except you've one hundred% evidence he dopes, dont assume.

Answer 4

Not a real fair comparison.
I wonder how M. Gomes dos Santos, Stephen Kiogora, or Paul Tergat would do on a bike?

Answer 5

The cycling is a good sport. Also a tough one to compete in.