point of reference?

I've been frequenting the Eurosport website to satisfy my voracious appetite for Le Tour and it's been refreshing to see things from a different point of view.  Plus the site had some of the best looking race calling online out of anyone.

The point of this post is a poll that they had today.  Asking the question whether or not Floyd is a worthy champion the results were resounding to the positive: 70% saying that he was.  The nay statement said that "2006 was a Tour without the favorites".  So my question is: in light of all that has come out from OP, who was a favorite?  How can you consider Basso a favorite, if his form and wins were courtesy of the good doctor?  Was Jan ever the hard luck champion that we all loved him for being? 

To me, they weren't the favorites from a sporting view.  The favorites won the Tour, cracked spectacularly, fought for stage glory after losing touch w/ the GC, and they finished the race.  The pretenders got what they deserved.  I'm sure in the coming days as all the deals of OP are revealed we'll find a few bitches that slipped through the cracks like the roaches they are that still rode the race.  Then they'll get what they deserve as well.

T-Tags: cycling, Tour De France, Floyd Landis, Eurosport.com, doping, Operation Puerto