Another nail in the coffin of Lance Armstrong's reputation was delivered this week following revelations that he lead 'the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping programme that sport has ever seen'.
That damming verdict comes from the 1000 page report by the United States Anti-Doping Agency which looked into the practices of Armstrong and members of his former cycling team US Postal services.
It's hard to see how Armstrong has any defence left when so many former team mates have admitted their part in drug taking and have confirmed that Armstrong was actively involved in drug taking himself.
I've only recently started following cycling and didn't watch the sport closely when Armstrong was winning his 7 Tour titles.
What I've realised is that period of the late 90s and early 2000s was arguably when cycling was at its dirtiest - everyone was taking drugs!
Yes it appears that Lance Armstrong was a cheat, but was it possible during that era to win the Tour de France without cheating? I'm not sure it was.
Without defending Armstrong, there's still a part of me that thinks winning 7 Tour de France titles is still a phenomenal achievement, even if he was a cheat in a peloton full of cheats.