A Needless discussion really, nobody will ever know how well any of those guys responded to doping.We also need to know how unusual his lowish haematocrit was. Tyler Hamilton, for instance, I think he self-reports his natural haematocrit as 42, which is close enough to the range we seem to be looking at for LA as to be not giving LA a significant advantage.
(The real world linkage between haematocrit and performance I am ignoring. As both you and Merckx Index note, it's not clear one way or the other what it is. In the same vein I am ignoring the possible influence of other products and his responses to them. This is specifically about the belief put forward earlier that Armstrong had an unnaturally low haematocrit - mid-thirties - and this meant he was a donkey when not doped and a thoroughbred when pumped full of EPO/blood bags.)