I'm glad you accept, finally, that anything is possible. You don't seem to have understood that if there was conclusive evidence we wouldn't be having this discussion.
You evidently will ascribe Froome's almost overnight transformation to a sudden response to Sky's training methods. Me? I think it's more likely to be a bit of dope. Seemed to work well enough for other riders.
Fully understand what I understand and fully understand a patronising posting when I see one. And your post would also mean it is perfectly possible that Sky have not broken any rules and have achieved success by hard work and taking greater interest in areas that others have previously ignored, such as the introduction of warm-down sessions that is now copied by all other teams. Which also means, as you accept, there is no conclusive evidence and that you are giving an opinion which does not constitute fact. Your opinion is worth nothing more than a few keystrokes at the keyboard or whatever you use to post comments.
An overnight transformation did not happen with Froome and such statements are akin to tabloid journalism IMO. You accuse Froome of doping. I assume you also accuse his teammates of doping, or do you restrict your allegations to Wiggins and Froome? No mention of Thomas, and he is part of Sky and has seen some marked improvement in performance. What do you think? And how about the others?
Oh, and how about BC riders such as Mr Kenny and Mrs Kenny? Bit of a Brailsford connection, so must be part of the doping scene, or is it that Brailsford is only part of the doping regime in road racing?
Ah well, easy to knock folk rather than provide evidence and easy to deride the decisions of those in charge who make the decisions.