"From Lance's side, he's passed every drug test he has taken, more than 500 of them," says Michael Straubel, director of the sports law clinic at Valparaiso University in Indiana. "That's a pretty good record, and in some respects, it's almost as if USADA has to argue why all those tests were wrong."

What if Armstrong isn't clean but no one who has been a champion in cycling in the last decade was clean?

I mean, the USADA could be right AND Armstrong really didn't have a choice if he was to stay competitive?

Ultimately, lance Armstrong doesn't matter -- or shouldn't matter -- to the USADA. As a wise mentor says, "I care much more about the future than the past."

Lance is the past of competitive cycling; they did effectively ban him from ironman competitions, but ultimately they don't even seem to be paying any attention to how to create a level playing field in the future,

I don't believe everyone was cheating. One article said that Greg LeMond and Miguel Endurain were special freaks of nature, implying that Lance must have cheated. Lance also was a "freak" of nature AND he trained harder than anyone else and peaked just for Tour de France and not other big races or Olympics.

In a sense, he was a specialist.

Can anyone acfually explain to me how blood doping works anyways and makes someone a better athlete?

Blood doping is artificially increasing your red blood cell supply.

It's illegal because it can be actively harmful.

Mostly we want to keep future athletes from doing it.

See also: What's wrong with doping?

Cycling has a bigger problem if they can't catch dopers.

Seems like they've caught everyone they suspected.

Just the American ones.

That makes sense, actually. War on Drugs and all.