It is not a date, how I told there is a transitional period.
But I know, and I am sure in fact, Landa is a clean rider and I see how Landa won Cobo in Neila, and Cobo won that Vuelta, so of course that Vuelta, is quite clean, I think was mostly clean. (you can believe me about Landa or not...of course, but I going to write about what I know)
You cant say Menchov was clean in that Giro, you must read again the interview, Ten Dam said he didnt see anything.
Menchov is a good rider for GC, of course, he is not like Di Luca but I wouldnt say he was always clean, and I dont dare to assert he was clean that Giro, becouse he is on Padua investigation. Sastre was clean.
For all those people that dont believe in Froome or Wiggins, it is impossible believe anything that people talk today, or to make sense with the facts today, but maybe that people must think about the possibility of them to be clean, becouse that possibility makes sense. ( I wrote about that ).
If you dont believe you are going always to find arguments to support your opinion...so, if you dont want to believe, you dont believe ever...or, what would you need to believe in cycling? tell me, I am sure I could find an argument to tell you the contrary.
That you dont believe without any evidence or important argument in something doesnt mean that reality is as you think, and it is not going to make I dont write my opinion and work with the other alternative that make perfectly sense, althoug a lot ot people here work with another argument, that could make sense, but is far to be a fact.
Your arguments are: Wiggins, Horner, Cobo, Froome,... must be dopers, becouse I cant understand an explanation, or, it is not in "my very expert and clever logic" but that explanation is there, and they can perfectly be clean.
So, if you use to discredit any statement, a non fact, that discredit is discredited itself.