There were no high-profile positive tests: a heartening sign for the post-Armstrong, post-EPO era. Just as we were becoming a little complacent, however, news broke of discrepancies in the Team Sky rider Jonathan Tiernan-Locke's biological passport.
Biological passports are electronic records which collate athletes' urine and blood tests over a period of time, with any significant fluctuations in values being flagged up as a possible indication of doping.
The discrepancies in Tiernan-Locke's biological passport could mean nothing, a they are certainly not a definitive a sign of guilt either. Fluctuations in values can be caused by many factors - illness, long-haul flights, dehydration, tapering or altitude, among others - and Tiernan-Locke is robustly protesting his innocence. He has until next week to provide the International Cycling Union (UCI) with an explanation for these discrepancies, following which it will be decided if he is to face sanctions.
This case highlights several issues. Firstly, it demonstrates how important anonymity is regarding any doping issue. Tiernan-Locke may, in the fullness of time, be fully exonerated of any wrongdoing, but his reputation will forever be tainted by this stain on his record.
It is not the first time that details of doping procedures within cycling have been leaked. Only last month, Chris Horner won the Vuelta a Espana at a record-breaking 41 years of age. If his victory alone was not greeted with enough cynicism, news broke that he had missed a doping test the day after his win.
It transpired that Horner was completely innocent and the Spanish anti-doping authorities were at fault, but his Vuelta win will, for many, have an asterisk attached to it which would not have been the case had news of his "missed test" not been leaked.
The second point which the Tiernan-Locke case highlights is just how poor Sir Dave Brailsford is at managing public relations for both British Cycling and Team Sky. It is somewhat ironic that a cycling team sponsored by a media organisation is so inefficient at handling their image within the media.
Tiernan-Locke was informed by the UCI of his biological passport discrepancies during the Road World Championships two weeks ago, a few days prior to the men's road race. Despite him being an integral member of the British team he withdrew yet, instead of Brailsford practising the transparency that he continually says is required in order to transform cycling's reputation, Tiernan-Locke lied about it. He wrote on Twitter that he just did not "have the form to help the lads out there".
It is entirely understandable that Tiernan-Locke and Brailsford wanted to keep the news of the biological passport anomalies under wraps, but disguising the reason for the withdrawal before being exposed when the seasoned anti-doping campaigner, David Walsh, broke the story was always going to attract criticism, particularly when you consider the history of the sport.
It is not the first example of Brailsford poorly handling the media. The remarkable rise to prominence of British cyclists in the Tour de France has meant that, as holders of the yellow jersey, both Sir Bradley Wiggins and Chris Froome were incessantly questioned about doping. While I have little doubt that being asked the same cynical questions day after day can become tiresome, these interrogations, unfortunately, come with the jersey. Brailsford must learn to accept this and be less snippy with the media when these -hardly unexpected - questions are asked of him and his riders.
During the period of deciding who the leader of Team Sky for the 2013 Tour de France was to be, Wiggins and Froome entered a childish and very public war of words. The British riders took turns in claiming that they alone would be Sky's leader in that year's Tour in a spat that threatened to overshadow all else. If Brailsford had been as strong a leader as he claims to be, this petty squabble would never have seen the light of day.
Also handled poorly has been the zero-tolerance stance that Team Sky holds regarding doping. Sky will not employ anyone - rider or support staff - who have been associated with doping in the past. While this may appear commendable, it is entirely unworkable.
All Sky can do to ensure a rider has not doped prior to signing for them is to ask them outright. And if an athlete has lied and cheated their way through their career by doping, then another lie in order to secure a contract is nothing. Sky have been burned several times by this stance: the rider Michael Barry admitted doping, while both Michael Rogers, another rider, and the doctor Geert Leinders have been heavily implicated, albeit not while on Sky's books.
Brailsford is undoubtedly good at his job: consecutive Tour de France winners proves that. But it will be interesting to observe how he deals with the Tiernan-Locke case in the coming weeks and whether he is able to handle this situation as competently as he handles on-the-bike matters.