Perhaps you can elucidate who is actually clean? Because if you don't your argument becomes circular and the guys who you consider dopers are obviously the same people who would win anyway. So, rumours (your choice of wording) are true then?
This will take time, it has been stated by many admitted dopers, in books and press, that it was almost impossible to get out of the U23 levels without PEDs.
I think this has has legitimately changed in the last few years and there are ex-dopers who are now racing clean, and there are clean teams. However, there are still unethical doctors hovering around pro cycling teams who have the demonstrated ability to dope riders without detection, and there are many hormones that are still really impossible to detect. These are networks from riders to directors to doctors that have existed for years under a code of silence, these networks persist, and the ASO knows this. If this isn't cleaned up at every level, it just rewards dopers, as in the last decade.
The idea that one rider can beat other known, admitted, or convicted dopers for years would be the only one clean indicates a profound ignorance of physiology and pharmacology surrounding PEDs. We can all now deny that the former eastern block, famous for large state doping programs under the USSR, just happens to be the source of so many top riders? The US did not have a large Olympic doping program in the 80-90s?
Frankly, the whole Armstrong/Hamilton/Landis/Andreu/Grewal thing is indicative of cognitive denial, yay Barry Bonds, yay Marco Pantani.
I have great hopes for Highroad and Slipstream.
Like I said, my Giro and tour DVDs are now carefully hidden out of sight behind the chinchilla porn DVDs.