I think that misses just how entrenched doping was. As mind blowing as it is, it is fairly safe to say that everyone that was making the leaderboards was likely cheating.

Probably the entire peloton was -- if so, can it still be considered cheating?

Of course, not everybody used EPO and not everybody who did used as much as Riis, Ullrich, Pantani, Virenque, Armstrong, Zabel, Hamburger... Blood doping existed long before EPO. Amphetamines (and strychnine!) were used long before blood doping. Induráin almost certainly used either EPO or blood doping.

EPO and blood doping can still be used (and are likely still used) but noone can push it to the dangerous extremes of the 90's. That will be caught (because such hematocrit values aren't allowed anymore -- and it's easy to test for).

You are still trying to fix the past which is impossible and not addressing the possibility of fixing things moving forward.

For a lot of people, they are most interested in the recognition and achievement. You are basically saying "you may be a footnote as someone that should have won, if the others weren't caught cheating years later." Right? I can see how that is less than comforting. (Especially so with no way of knowing who all is actively cheating at the time.)

I can't say it is a bad idea to try, mind you. It could very well work. I just have my doubts.

They still all are. Just not as brazenly as the past. More nuanced, more systematic, but overall less of it is happening.