So why worse than Millar?
The way Millar tells it is that he never really wanted to dope, he was just caught up in the systemic doping that was still part of cycling at the time. He was largely left to his own devices by his team, but they still put immense pressure on him to win races. Eventually the pressure got to the point where he caved in.
And call me a credulous fool, but I believe him. I believe that he is truly repentant and I believe that he is strongly opposed to doping. He is now part of a team that has a strong anti-doping ethic and makes a point of providing proper pastoral care for its riders so they are far less likely to succumb to the temptation to cheat.
That is why he is different to Vinokourov.
But I don't think Vinokourov is by any means the worst offender - I'd give that honour to Tyler Hamilton, mainly for his arrogance and his apparent desire to see the sport of cycling dragged through the mud. Another of my credulous beliefs is that the majority of cyclists and people involved in pro cycling really do want to clean up the sport, and Hamilton's behaviour suggests that he doesn't want to allow that to happen. IIRC, he's American, isn't he? (Dwain Chambers has had a similarly damaging effect on British running, and he's not from the Eastern Bloc either.)
d.