I read the article(and the hysterical comments section too) IMO, Tilford does seem to make an assumption that "99% of the Russians were doping", then he cites a link done by a German(I think) report stating such. I took from it that if 99% of Russian cyclists are doping, then not only are they not doing well at it, but that would mean(IMO), that the rest of the field is doping too. Maybe I am misunderstanding the article/title, but I took it as what i posted.Granville57 said:The better question would be: Where does he say this?
It seems you're confusing Tilford's headline (and his conclusions) with the OP and the title of this thread.
I lol'd at Wonderboy claiming that Hampsten doped, where the heck did that come from?
The comments section was comedic gold too.