I love this debate. I have gone back and forth many times and am still not sure where I stand. I really want to believe that it is not the fault of celebs who choose to run marathons that they receive so much attention. I would like to think they run for the challenge of the event, to see if they can do it, to raise money for charity, whatever. The lion's share of the criticism should be directed to the sensationalistic media for giving so much attention to accomplishments that fall short of extraordinary and the general public that eats it up with a spoon. However, last week my point of view did a 180, when I saw an ad for a financial services company on TV featuring Lance running as a metaphor for the great things that can be acheived through hard work and determination. What? Why not have him on a bike? Why not use someone who has actually accomplished something through running? I guess this bothers me because now he is profiting from being a runner even though he admitted to using a [email protected]#$$$% training program. Is this the dedication he is trying to portray? I hate the ad. I will probably lean towards celebs being bad for the sport.