[Donger]

Originally Posted by alnorth

You almost dont even need the testimony.

The basic case against Armstrong, without witnesses, and without a positive drug test, is this:

The tour des france is an incredibly long race. Several days. Despite the race lasting several days of racing time, the winner always wins by minutes.

During Armstrong's time, we know that EVERY SINGLE ONE of his top rivals cheated. They were all caught, red-handed, no doubt about it, proven, everyone Armstrong raced against was a cheater. When cycling was cleaned up and enforcement was massively increased and cyclists had to race clean, race times ballooned to a huge extent, by several hours.

It is simply not reasonable to believe that Armstrong could have won those races, clean, against a field full of cheaters. You can say maybe he had to do what he had to do because everyone else was breaking the rules, but he's a liar.

That's odd. I remember watching Greg LeMond ride the fastest time trial ever to beat Fignon by seven seconds in 1989.