Is anyone besides me bothered by the argument that "they all do it, so he's guilty"...?

It seems to me that besides a presumption of guilt before all the evidence is in, it is impossible to mount a defense against a blanket, sweeping statement like this. If you believe this, then no amount of "proving a negative" will change your mind. Seems a little unfair to me...

Where, exactly, is the *proof* that they all do it? I think it is one thing to suspect that there is a lot of doping in cycling--some has even been demonstrated. However, I could just as easily say that all Texans are arrogant (I'm a Texan, so that's why I'm using this example )...Just saying it isn't actual "proof" of anything except someone's opinion and suspicions--no amount of evidence to the contrary would change that person's mind...

IMHO.