Such as in the Golden Days when Copi, Mallejac, Rivière, Anquetil, Simpson, Mercx, Yates, Kelly & Pantani where racing ? All dopers .
The Tour and professional cycling has never been "real" !
It simply is not the case that all through Armstrong's career, everyone was doping. And you are not comparing like with like anyway. The era of 'pot belge', brandy and speed which characterised the riders of the post-war period into the 70s was different from the scene from the late 80s when laboratory pharmaceuticals started to be abused in a big way (i.e. the EPO era). In fact, until the late 60s, speed was not even banned so you can hardly claim that people were 'unreal' or 'cheating' for taking these kinds of things.
In the 90s, there many riders who were basically forced to make the choice of leaving the sport or doping by social pressure (they would be able to keep up if they didn't) or by manipualtive team managers. In fact the 90s fostered a particular culture of cynicism in the sport, where the most devious were the ones who would win. This was already coming to an end by the 2000s as regulation and surveillance started to catch up with drug technologies and doping practices. So did the Law - as the growing sophistication of doping practices meant increasing overlap with organised crime and underground labs. This actually made it far more risky for all involved once the police, prosecutors and courts started getting involved
Managers and teams started to take a stand and more ethical team policies emerged with Highroad and Garmin and others. The biological passport was a turning point, as was the growth of the 'whereabouts' rules. Training has got far more scientific and controlled instead. Younger riders coming in now are much less likely to be under pressure to dope but will face much more rigorous training and monitoring. Another very important factor is that there has been some greater control over the difficulty of the Grand Tours - they are still amongst the hardest competitions in sport, but they aren't insanely, stupidly difficult any more. You don't have to dope just to finish. And you have really seen an end to the 'unbelievable' attacks in the mountains.
It's not all great. The UCI still has to work better with WADA and race organizers. New tests have to be embraced. The biological passport has to be tightened up. But it is better.
As for Armstrong, you can see where he fits in this story. He was a product of the EPO era, and perhaps the most cynical of them all. I don't want to see him stripped of his titles, I think that would be pretty meaningless in the context, but I do want to see him and his co-conspiritors held to some account not just for the doping but for the intimidation, lies and cynicism they fostered, and for cycling to acknowledge its recent past as part of the process of producing a cleaner sport.
