I read carefully Hamilton s book. It was amazing for me, not what he said about doping, that sometimes as well, but what he said about no doping.
And one thing that he said : today he believe there is a new era that could be called clean.
You give credibility to all said in those books, well, I gave it at Hamilton sbook, and later Lance confessed the same...but if you give it, why give credibility to all that Rassmusen say and not that statement from Hamilton?
I could read Rassmusen book and he gave me credibility, I started Hamilton book with some doubts about Hamilton, he wasnt a guy I liked, I consider he betrayed me. I went to Burgos, I saw Hamilton, I went to him, gave my hand and I told him: congrats for your gold, he shaked my hand, looked at my eyes and told me: thank you. Just a few time later he tested possitive for transfusión and years later a new positive... for me was a big lie as a cyclist...
But after to read him, I consider him in a very different way. He had his mistakes, but we can rely on his current word.
But today if Rassmusen said that if Froome is clean he is better than Merck or Coppi, it is an opinion more...from a man that say very easy that all the Tour team in 2007 was involving in doping, and another day say another thing, becouse he didnt think well what he was saying, or wich name were involving in his statement. most of the peloton was involved and rabo wanst an excepcion, that the reality, but not to say Freire was involved then, or even Flecha.
Landis yes, he is a more similar case to Rasmusen. You can belive him, but he is not so reliable, he could change a litte reality.