How do you define "the best"? How do you compare?
Look at Anquetil 1961 TdF victory: 21 days in yellow and a victor with a 12'+ margin over the second. When I look at this it tells me a lot about how superior to the competition Anquetil was then. And he had finished second in the Giro that year. Incidentally he won both races in 1964 too. In that context, yes, Armstong is good, but others also were.
For the record, I don't consider myself "good" when I put name in the same parag. as Anquetil or Hinault.
Let me clarify what I'm saying about Lance, the TdF and his achievement, I didn't think it would cause confusion.
I know there are/were other GREAT cyclists.
I'm saying that he is clearly the most successful TdF rider ever with 7 wins. Just Tour de France. Not Indoor Team Time Trial (although he's a hell of a TT rider) or any other discipline.
I didn't say anything about the Giro, just about Lance's record of winning the Tour. He's the most successful Tour de France rider ever. That's all I'm saying. 7 is a bigger number than 6 and 5 and so on.
It doesn't matter how much you win the Tour de France by, it's totally irrelevant, winning it is the objective. Usually the Yellow-Jersey won't try and annhialate the opposition every day, rather they'll just make sure the opposition stays comfortably behind. Winning by 1 second is winning. Possibly Lance could have won by bigger margins but there's simply no point when 1 second is enough.