So is the current assumption that he doped unwitting athletes for his own gain instead of finding morally bankrupt athletes who willingly dope? Not that it’s implausible, just find the shift interesting.
That’s my opinion. I’ve thought it for a while. Given how many people really top athletes have around them. Often the people above them have as much at stake and have been relatively immune, with athletes often jettisoned on a failed test.
So is the current assumption that he doped unwitting athletes for his own gain instead of finding morally bankrupt athletes who willingly dope? Not that it’s implausible, just find the shift interesting.