I think the biggest failure here is not tracking the 4 months prior. Each week, given he undertook dedicated training under the guidance of a professional, he w

I think the biggest failure here is not tracking the 4 months prior. Each week, given he undertook dedicated training under the guidance of a professional, he would have seen an improvement in his results. I'm sure his measurements and ride data would have looked meaningfully different between week 2 and week 12 of his 4 month run up period. Now some of that would taper but he'd still see performance improvements after 4 months with regular dedicated training in place. So it would be key to have that context. Perhaps the increase due to doping is 3-5% vs the 7%. Still substantial either way.