His point is that Lance is da evil. Funny how he keeps lying about the extent of doping in order to put more blame on LA. Heck, he is even lying about Cipollini not using transfusions in 2001 even though Gazzetta dello Sport reported Cipo's program for his build up to the 2001 Giro. (9 consecutive days of EPO followed by a transfusion followed by more EPO plus HGH and a transfusion on the first day of the race.)

Then there Michael's--I mean Julian's--admission that Moser used transfusions for his hour record but denial that it was more than that even though Moser's team, Gis, was using them. Again it is a way to put more blame on LA instead of admitting that cycling was a cesspool of doping before Lance won the Tour. PDM's own soigneur says he was giving transfusions to riders in 1988 but that is dismissed because no riders have admitted it. Uh huh. We all know that riders would never lie about their doping and we should take there word for it rather than contemporaneously written records about what was being given to riders on the team.

It is just bizarre. With incomplete information but clear evidence that transfusions were used before 2000 and clear evidence that transfusions were used after 2000, he comes to the conclusion that Lance must have been the only one using them and had an advantage. This looks like the typical hater fantasy being promoted by Race Radio, that cycling was about to clean itself up after the Festina affair but Lance--all by himself--dragged an unwilling sport back into doping in 1999. Hey, wasn't there a wily French refugee from Festina named Virenque who rode the 1999 Tour? Nah, couldn't be. Even if there was I am sure he did not continue doping.