I'm thinking of things in a purely statistical sense-as in, what are the chances that you get two GT winners, racing at the same time, in a country that fields around 50 riders at their national championship each year as opposed to say France, that fields maybe 150 riders each year (and in essence, many times more as their regional championships field many hundreds each year). France can't produce a GT winner and yet Slovenia manages two simultaneously.
Someone pointed out Ireland, a really statistical outlier, mind you at Roche's and Kelly's time, the Irish Nationals fielded far more than 50 each year.
Numbers at Nationals are just one example, there could be many more. I'm really just getting at pursuing a purely statistical analysis on performances on International stage. This might help us remove some of the speculative (and frankly often emotional) thinking behind saying this rider is doped vs. this rider isn't. That sort of thing.
This line of investigation isn't likely to get much traction, but I think there is merit in it. When I saw the vast numbers of riders (and so many kids!) racing in Europe, I just couldn't get my head around how it was that they weren't producing GT winners and yet "lesser" racing nations were. Remember-the UK, with a healthy, but not spectacular racing scene, has produced more GT winners than France, the Netherlands, Belgium and Italy combined in the past decade. Slovenia has produced more GT winners in 5 years than France has in 25 years (more?).
Why are nations with enormously developed racing cultures (and NOTHING compares to the "big 4") not winning Grand Tours, when statistically, they should be pumping out a GT winner every 5 to 10 years? The natural superiority of English and Slovenian speaking cultures?