Since when is the fact that he beat top cyclists 7 times in a row acceptable proof for Lance using PED's? I'm not denying that it is POSSIBLE that he did, based on the prevalence of doping in the sport of cycling, but until there is actual proof of him doping I have no reason to believe that he did.
The logic of many of you that a winner must have been doping is ridiculous. First of all, where is your source that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a "clean" cyclist to beat a "dirty" one? I believe Renato Canova has come on here and disclosed (at least in the sport of track and field) that it is usually the average elites that end up cheating to get to the next level, not the ones that are the most talented. Assuming that Bekele is clean, which we should since there is no evidence that he is not, then he is beating all the "dirty" athletes out there. Also, since when is the fact that your teammates cheated proof that you did? If that were the case everyone should assume that El G was dirty too... but once again there is no proof so that would be like speculating in some other type of mythological idea.
I don't understand why it is so hard to believe that Lance could win so many times. The guy was swimming 6 miles a day at the age of 12, and has a resting heart rate of 32 beats per minute. He won the genetic lottery, just like Geb, Bekele, El G, etc.
One can look at Lagat, for example, and speculate that he "cheated" because of one positive A sample while he was competing for Kenya. Let's say this is true. I doubt anyone in their right mind would even think that he is cheating as an American athlete. So why is he still setting American records and running 12:54 at the age of 36? The answer is because he is more talented than most of if not all the runners in our country. I don't see why it is that ludicrous to think that he could have run 3:26 in his prime, given his consistent performances this late in his career when he is supposedly "clean".