Maybe he is not denying it or admitting so he doesn't have to be a hypocrite like all the others in his era that rde loaded on everything they could get their hands on. What difference does it make at this point? He has no come back in mind anyway!!
Well, he's talking about the 1997 Tour as his great achievement, and one might have thought whether he cheated his way to victory or not relevant?
I would say that if everyone else, or at least the majority, was riding 100% clean, then it would be relevant. But, since we all know that is not the case, to say or argue that he was clean would be hypocritical and lying. To say he did dope would simply make him the same as others that are being hypocritical by not admitting to doing so. Either way, there is not a single thing to gain in anyone's eyes.
Don't get me wrong. It passes no judgement on right or wrong or on him personally. It simple is what it is.
I do agree with what I think you are getting at that given many of Ullrich's competitors were doping his achievement in winning the 97 Tour is greater than it would be had fewer or none of his competitors been doping.
That said, the evidence points to the guy having cheated, quite possibly for a long time. Cheating fans and clean riders. Similarly, when caught by Peurto Ullrich did deny it.
As for the earlier point in the post about going quietly, the obvious counter is that those who've blown the lid on what goes on have done much more to help create the change we've seen in the last few years.