probably the first pod ive seen thats been taken with an iphone

 It's still good haha

 yeah im pretty surprised an iphone froze action that well haha

 It's not really about who can or cannot take a better photo, anyone can take a good photo. But if you read through some of the comments on photos here you'll see plenty of "well what do you expect from a guy will a full-frame and a bunch of L lenses." Such a bunch of nonsense.

 Yes, but cheap lenses drastically effect image quality. You can see a big difference between this shot and the ones you have taken on your 5D, and your post processing is much more obvious in this one. An L-lens will produce much better results in more extreme lighting conditions, especially when shooting towards light. A lot of people coast along on the shots produced by the 70-200 IS (not saying you do btw) because you almost can't take a bad shot with it if you know the basics, the focusing, speed and image quality are just superb. This is much more difficult on a $100 Sigma for example. Equipment makes a huge difference to how good the actual image and light quality is which makes it much more easy to use lighting conditions. The same cannot be said for composition or timing however, that takes an eye and skill.

 I forgot to mention all the post processing was done on the phone too just too keep it legit. You're correct about light needing to be much more optimal the less advanced the camera sensor/lens etc, and shooting with an iPhone in the dark Andorra woods speaks to your point. Had I tried this on a more open and sun filled track the results would have been much different. But a good shot is a good shot regardless of what it is shot on. You may get less of them with something like a phone camera, but it's not impossible either.

For example: www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/jul/27/london-olympics-2012-smartphone

 I think it's proper to take the middle ground on these types of debates on whether or not it's the equipment or the human-being behind the equipment that's making that "great image".
For me, it's not all about the equipment since it's the photographer that takes the "great" shot.. but in the end having good equipment at your disposal helps refine the final product that the photographer himself creates with his own vision and experience. Same can be said for almost anything. Like whether it's the high-end bike or the rider himself making fast laps on the hill.

 I disagree, you really can't say the same thing for almost anything. It's nothing like that bike analogy I'm afraid, since photo equipment has such a bearing on the quality of the output (minus timing and composition of course). None of those Olympic shots compares in the slightest to what could have been done in the same spot at the same time with good equipment. They're ok shots, but if I took them they would mostly be throwaways or warm-ups. The potential for each situation really isn't reached at all, and they're obviously taken by someone with skill and knowledge, so I would like to see what he could've done with a 5D+L-Series.

 Well I should have fleshed it out. The high-end bike has a huge bearing on the amount of grip, speed and balance you gain, but that doesn't mean just anyone can use it in the same way and achieve the same results. Much like a Supercar or a Pro Camera. These things *help* people, but they don't do their jobs for them. I don't believe people can "coast by" when they get expensive equipment. Whether that be photography or Graphic design or whatever. Anyone worth their salt will be able to point out a mediocre photo, even if it was taken on a Canon 7D with a $1000 lens.

But I digress. The point I'm making (And seemly General-lee as well) is that the image created above would still be exactly the same as it would have been on a high end camera, albeit slightly less refined (image quality, focus, etc) due to being taken on low-end equipment.
It's just a counterpoint to this growing consumer stigma that if you buy yourself a really expensive camera you'll suddenly be taking pro shots and everything comes together real easy, when (in my belief) it's a solid mixture of both the camera and the photographer that make the great shots come together.
But you have a point. It does help create a highly refined piece of work, absolutely, but it doesn't make great images on its own. A good shot is a good shot regardless of the camera. The only thing a high-end camera does is help refine what's already been placed there by the photographer. And what makes "a good image" isn't solely based around crisp image quality from a DSLR.. but we're getting into subjective sh*t there.

 Please re-read my comments epic as my argument was not at all what you seem to think. It certainly was not that the gear makes the photo (or bike makes the race run, or whatever) and I never said as much. My point was that you can have all the skill and knowledge in the world, be a fantastic, world-class, award winning photographer and still not be able to take a decent photo on a smart phone because they do not allow you to use the skills and knowledge you have - as evidenced by the above shot and those on that Olympic blog. Even a great photographer can't polish a turd so to speak. Now, I'm not talking about the disparity between say, a 1D and a EOS Rebel, which is far smaller than the gap between a Rebel and a smartphone, which is enormous. Do you understand my point? And have you ever used the 70-200 IS L series? If you have a little skill you almost can't take a bad shot. Some photographers (who will remain nameless here) have been coasting with that lens for years with no hint of composition knowledge! What you call "slightly less refined" is actually an enormous difference. Things like focus, depth of field, shutter speed and sharpness aren't just little frivolities of photography, they ARE photography.

 Have to completely agree with redrook, if you look at general-lee's other photos the huge difference is immediately obvious. I'm not really a photographer but even I can see that a smartphone doesn't compare with a decent camera even if they are both in the hands of the same skilled photographer. EDIT: Also, I think I know at least one of the photographers you're talking about who's coasted on that lens redrook (he's from the UK and his initials are AM?)

 Lol, no comment.