I think everyone accept that athletes are generally getting better and better each year with better technology, nutrition, training and medicine. Yet overall cyclists were 5% faster on the climb sections of the Tour de France on the dark days of 1996-2006. How is it that everyone is now much worse than they used to be? One answer seems obvious.
Also for all these claims that Lance never failed a drug test, that isn't true. He was caught twice. "One in 1999 for steroids and again in 1999 for the red cell boosting drug, EPO."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/richkarlgaard/2012/06/13/lanc...By the way this article has another interesting point, but one that isn't proof. It asks if everyone else was cheating and getting a massive advantage how could he possibly win against them?
None of these forms of evidence which include many, many people that rode with him saying that he doped may be good enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he doped. But in my heart being able to disqualify damming tests on technicalities doesn't make him innocent.
It isn't just one piece of evidence like the sworn testimony of those that rode with him, or failed drug tests, or statistical analysis it is just a massive wall of evidnce. Looks like it will never be proven in court but it is proven to me.
Despite all of this is he still a hero. The common belief now is that they were ALL doping and so in a bizarre way he was competing on a level playing field. So I have a bizarre opinion. I consider that he was a drug cheat, but in an era when everyone was he is still the seven time champion and an inspiration to me.