One of the things I got out of it - the motivation for doping - which makes sense to me. Floyd felt like if he was going to be competitive, he would have to dope, because most others did, and certainly all contenders, and so he did.
If he felt like no one was doping, he would have gladly done his best without it and let the chips fall where they may. This is different from another American I feel, who would have been glad to dope when others were not because of the advantage it provided him.
Granted this is more implied by the article than explicit, but it does put Floyd in a more sympathetic light than the demonization we see so frequently - "disgraced, drug cheat etc...etc..."
It would be interesting to see a similar portrait of Armstrong, how it would compare. Of course that would require him to answer questions.