It seems some people use these standards to determine if a rider must be doping:
* He's fast.
* He wins races.
* He doesn't win lots of races.
* He wasn't as fast, and now he's faster.
* He won races and was fast, and isn't now.
* He competes in a lot of races.
* He competes in few races.
* If a cheater who got caught says so, no matter how many other lies and falshoods that person has spread.
Others?
I love bike racing, and I hope they keep catching these guys and cleaning things up, but man oh man does it get boring to listen to all the blah blah blah about doping, so much of which is just unsubstantiated rumors that in many cases are "damned if you do, damned if you don't".
* He's fast.
* He wins races.
* He doesn't win lots of races.
* He wasn't as fast, and now he's faster.
* He won races and was fast, and isn't now.
* He competes in a lot of races.
* He competes in few races.
* If a cheater who got caught says so, no matter how many other lies and falshoods that person has spread.
Others?
I love bike racing, and I hope they keep catching these guys and cleaning things up, but man oh man does it get boring to listen to all the blah blah blah about doping, so much of which is just unsubstantiated rumors that in many cases are "damned if you do, damned if you don't".