rykomatsu said:Doping science is almost always one step ahead of detection science. Once a dopant is found, a test needs to be developed that can detect it by direct means, surrogate markers, etc, qualified, then validated and even then, false positives crop up But a test can't be developed until the dopant and/or its effects are known.
Anyone who thinks an athlete can competitively complete the tour de france (or any of the other grand tours..giro and vuelta) on just gatorade, pasta, and a multivitamin is lying to themselves or doesn't know how demanding cycling is.
Doesn't mean that the TdF can't be completed w/o doping...just means that at the competitive level as it stands right now, it's more difficult to believe that top athletes are NOT doping.
Even granting you all of that accusations still require proof or evidence. Not saying you're singling him out, but simply saying "well of course he's cheating, that's obvious!" isn't enough. And in the end, if everyone is cheating he's still shown himself superior, hasn't he?