Barry Bonds Exposed! He's a juicer!

[Zito75]

Here it is folks, breaking news on CNN.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/baseball/mlb/03/06/news.excerpt/index.html?cnn=yes

[DoubleX]

So I go on the internet and right on the front page of CNN.com is a picture of Barry Bonds and a caption that says, "Bonds bombshell: Book details slugger's steroid use." CNN.com is my homepage, and for something in sports to capture the main headline, usually means its a pretty big deal.

Here is a link to the SI.com article about the book. (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/baseball/mlb/03/06/news.excerpt/index.html?cnn=yes)

Thoughts anyone?

[runningshoes]

Anyone esle besides me get a sick feeling thier stomach as they were reading that?

[Buzzaldrin]

Absolutely disgusting. This game has become a f#+*ing joke. How? How can one human have such an ego and play games with the faith of millions? What a fraud.

[Zito75]

What gets me is the fact that he thought he'd never get caught. What a jackass.

[rockin500]

Anyone esle besides me get a sick feeling thier stomach as they were reading that?
not really, no. unless you are referring to the two authors at any rate.

[digglahhh]

The authors describe how Bonds turned to steroids after the 1998 season because he was jealous of McGwire. Bonds hit 37 home runs in '98 -- a nice total and the fourth most of his career at that point -- but he was ignored by fans and the media who were captivated by McGwire's 70 home runs and his duel for the record with Sammy Sosa, who hit 66 that year.


Well, if nobody else is going to pat me on the back, then as per Bonds, "F--- off, I'll do it myself!" :)

[DoubleX]

So I go on the internet and right on the front page of CNN.com is a picture of Barry Bonds and a caption that says, "Bonds bombshell: Book details slugger's steroid use." CNN.com is my homepage, and for something in sports to capture the main headline, usually means its a pretty big deal.

Here is a link to the SI.com article about the book. (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/baseball/mlb/03/06/news.excerpt/index.html?cnn=yes)

Thoughts anyone?

This was merged from another thread started at the same time.

[DoubleX]

I for one will wait for the book to come out and to actually read it to see how strong the author's sources and information. But right now, it's not looking good at all for Barry.

If this stuff is true, and is substantiated in the book, then I think Barry needs to walk away right now. The last thing the game needs is for him to be chasing Ruth and Aaron with this information now out there.

[runningshoes]

not really, no. unless you are referring to the two authors at any rate.

Yeah..they're lying, no doubt.

I won't bother to add the little sarcasm thingy.

[rockin500]

Yeah..they're lying, no doubt.

I won't bother to add the little sarcasm thingy.
i dont care if they are lying or not. They're probably telling the truth, but it doesnt change the fact that they are anything but muckrakers.

besides, they are using grand jury testimony. testimony that is supposed to be sealed. But i guess thats ok in your book since its aimed at bringing down barry.

[DoubleX]

i dont care if they are lying or not. They're probably telling the truth, but it doesnt change the fact that they are anything but muckrakers.

besides, they are using grand jury testimony. testimony that is supposed to be sealed. But i guess thats ok in your book since its aimed at bringing down barry.

It's not like they stole the testimony. Someone must have leaked it to them, so blame the leak. You can't blame them for exposing information that was put out there for them.

[Uncle Dak]

I'm sure there are other threads about this, but it is obvious Bonds has used steroids for years.

[DoubleX]

For those with a tv, one of the author's is being interviewed on CNN right now.

[runningshoes]

i dont care if they are lying or not. They're probably telling the truth, but it doesnt change the fact that they are anything but muckrakers.

besides, they are using grand jury testimony. testimony that is supposed to be sealed. But i guess thats ok in your book since its aimed at bringing down barry.

Is mudrakers a euphamism for telling the truth, or is it for finally getting fans out thier denial?

[UnderPressure]

For those with a tv, one of the author's is being interviewed on CNN right now.


Thanks for the heads up.

[DoubleX]

ESPN.com was scooped by an hour, but here is its first article about the book and Bonds. (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2358236)

[digglahhh]

Post removed, I'm confused about somebody's earlier comments.

Rockin please explain what you mean by post #11.

Thanks.

[rockin500]

believe what you will, but the authors wrote it to make a buck and a name for themselves. which isnt necessarily a bad thing, but dont try to wrap it up and pretend to be noble.

i have zero use for this kinda crap. Fine, Barry is a juicer. we knew/suspected that already. You can enjoy reading that crap, but I dont. How does it help the situation any? It doesnt.

[west coast orange and black]

DoubleX: ESPN.com was scooped by an hour

uh, fainaru-wada and williams are scheduled to appear (http://www.booksite.com/texis/scripts/bkpass_author/bkpass_author.html?lname=Corte+Madera+Author+Event s+-+April+2006&page=3) at book passage in corte madera, ca on saturday, 8 april at 7:00.
i got my book passage mailer last week.

has anyone else read excerpts from the book?

[Blackout]

believe what you will, but the authors wrote it to make a buck and a name for themselves. which isnt necessarily a bad thing, but dont try to wrap it up and pretend to be noble.

i have zero use for this kinda crap. Fine, Barry is a juicer. we knew/suspected that already. You can enjoy reading that crap, but I dont. How does it help the situation any? It doesnt.

this is proof that Bonds cheated. all the time people used to say "sure, he grew in size but you cant PROVE he cheated"

here's the proof.

im a very happy man :cool:

[KCGHOST]

That awful sucking sound you hear is the Bonds' apologists trying to catch their breath. Anybody seriously surprised by this needs to have a serious reality check with themself.

[runningshoes]

believe what you will, but the authors wrote it to make a buck and a name for themselves. which isnt necessarily a bad thing, but dont try to wrap it up and pretend to be noble.

i have zero use for this kinda crap. Fine, Barry is a juicer. we knew/suspected that already. You can enjoy reading that crap, but I dont. How does it help the situation any? It doesnt.

I happen to believe that exposing a degenerate, lying,..fill in the blanks yourself, who we all thought was the greatest player ever is a good thing for so many different reason. The one that pops into my head first is morality.

Let's make a list of why this is a good thing.

[west coast orange and black]

xx, let's say that the book comes out and the authors have nailed things correctly in the past two-plus years of searching for the truth and things are not good for bonds.

why do you believe that bonds oghtta walk away from the game?
is there anyone else whom you care to name?

[Tigerfan1974]

I knew it all along.

As I have said before, he had never broken 50 and suddenly he crackes 73? It was/is so obvious he was using 'roids.

Gee, I hate being proven right!

[ballparks]

WCOAB-
Can you just admit that Bonds is a complete FRAUD?
He's a disgrace to the game, sport and to our society. He ought to walk away with his head hanging low. His 'records' should all be taken away, just like Ben Johnson's were. He's a liar, cheater and complete scumbag.

[BoofBonser26]

Finally. Finally finally. Finally finally finally finally...

This is still a sad day for baseball. With a very sick feeling, this is great news. May it never have to happen again.

[runningshoes]

From the Mercury News:


On KNBR, Gary Radnich's usual stock phrase is "nobody cares." Ninety percent of the time, he's right. But I'm listening from the office right now, and the man has shut off the phone lines and gotten deadly serious about what the latest revelations mean for Bonds. Some samples, since Radnich is saying it better than we could right now (and better than probably anybody):

""Barry's gonna have to sit there and say, 'Folks, I made a mistake, I made a big mistake.' No more of these phony press conferences where you come out and start screaming at the media. He's a dead man as far as his credibility. his credibility's shot."

"He's been full of crap up to now except when he has a bat in his hand, and he's gonna have to come clean.''

"They've always had somebody there to clean up his mess from the Giants on down. And the giants know it too. You think they're proud having to be aligned with this guy and kiss his ass?''

We all know by now that Gary doesn't overreact. He's now on discourse about why this isn't just The Media out to get him. It's worth a listen at KNBR.com.

[Astro]

Maybe its just me, but what is the big deal with this? It is written by the same people who "broke" that he used the clear and cream about 2 years ago... so why the big up-roar? It's the samething just in book form

All this is, is propaganda

[BoofBonser26]

All this is, is propaganda
No, it's not. It's PROOF Bonds lied.

[johnny]

WCOAB-
Can you just admit that Bonds is a complete FRAUD?
He's a disgrace to the game, sport and to our society. He ought to walk away with his head hanging low. His 'records' should all be taken away, just like Ben Johnson's were. He's a liar, cheater and complete scumbag.

To paraphrase a quote from Will Clark on his pard Rafi that seems apt here 'ha ha you got caught'

Now the big question, will Barry Bonds step up to the plate -sans the protective padding- and face the fans. The truth, we just want the truth.

[ballparks]

The truth, we just want the truth.

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!

Sorry, couldn't resist, but there are some here where that would be fully applicable.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

This isn't good. Not for baseball and not for Barry. Selig thought he was worried before about the HR chase. Now what?

Alright, so if everyone else is gonna play the "I told you so" card, I gotta throw mine down for *hits and giggles. Here's a post I made in May of 2004. I used to be much more harsh on Bonds than I am now, and plus this thread had something to do with comparing him to Ruth, so I was a bit fired up, lol.
------------------------------
End of 1998 phone call--

ring.... ring..... ring....

Balco- Balco, how may I help you

Bonds - Yeah, get me my guy, right away; I need to talk to him about that new designer steroid

Balco - one minute Mr. Bonds........

Balco - Hey Barry, how can I help you?

Bonds - Can you believe what Sosa and Big Mac did this past year. The way the fans responded to their historic home run season, how can I do that?

Balco - Well Barry, they chose to go the standard steroid route, but I have good news for you. Theres this new stuff, they don't even test for it, and even if they tried, you can hide behind the players union. Its called THG, and if you keep working out the way you have been, average fly balls will become home runs, especially with that tiny bat you swing. If people question your 35 pound muscle mass gain over the offseason, just tell them its cause you worked out extra hard.

Bonds - How will I explain it when my skull and face structure actually grow... ya know, when my head starts to press against my ears cause its so puffy

Balco - Just be the prick you usually are, and blow those people off, ya know, that chip on your shoulder attitude... it's worked great all these years for ya.

Bonds - Will I be able to wipe my own *** after going to the bathroom after I've been juicing?

Balco - No, not at first, your arm won't reach all the way back there, but we invented a device to help you out with that, talk to me when it becomes a problem, ok.

Bonds - sign me up, I don't care if I cheat, I just want someone in this game to remember me... I'm tired of being an average hitter, they're building these ballparks nowdays so small, and the pitching is so watered down its rediculous. Besides, our Giants are never going to win anything, so I might as well play out my career for individual stats. I need the approval of my Godfather, I need that stuff now.

Balco - I'll send it right away, but remember if anyone ever finds out I sent it to you, don't admit you actually took it. You can just say you received it, opened it, knew what it was, but never took it. They'll buy that, people are morons these days.

Bonds - Thanks

CLICK

[johnny]

YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!

Sorry, couldn't resist, but there are some here where that would be fully applicable.

I agree. :laugh Hey, I am from Seattle :coffee so I know when it's raining and to have those lying Roiders spit in my face and tell me its raining is just annoying at best.

[johnny]

This isn't good. Not for baseball and not for Barry. Selig thought he was worried before about the HR chase. Now what?

Alright, so if everyone else is gonna play the "I told you so" card, I gotta throw mine down for *hits and giggles. Here's a post I made in May of 2004. I used to be much more harsh on Bonds than I am now, and plus this thread had something to do with comparing him to Ruth, so I was a bit fired up, lol.
------------------------------
End of 1998 phone call--

ring.... ring..... ring....

Balco- Balco, how may I help you

Bonds - Yeah, get me my guy, right away; I need to talk to him about that new designer steroid

Balco - one minute Mr. Bonds........

Balco - Hey Barry, how can I help you?

Bonds - Can you believe what Sosa and Big Mac did this past year. The way the fans responded to their historic home run season, how can I do that?

Balco - Well Barry, they chose to go the standard steroid route, but I have good news for you. Theres this new stuff, they don't even test for it, and even if they tried, you can hide behind the players union. Its called THG, and if you keep working out the way you have been, average fly balls will become home runs, especially with that tiny bat you swing. If people question your 35 pound muscle mass gain over the offseason, just tell them its cause you worked out extra hard.

Bonds - How will I explain it when my skull and face structure actually grow... ya know, when my head starts to press against my ears cause its so puffy

Balco - Just be the prick you usually are, and blow those people off, ya know, that chip on your shoulder attitude... it's worked great all these years for ya.

Bonds - Will I be able to wipe my own *** after going to the bathroom after I've been juicing?

Balco - No, not at first, your arm won't reach all the way back there, but we invented a device to help you out with that, talk to me when it becomes a problem, ok.

Bonds - sign me up, I don't care if I cheat, I just want someone in this game to remember me... I'm tired of being an average hitter, they're building these ballparks nowdays so small, and the pitching is so watered down its rediculous. Besides, our Giants are never going to win anything, so I might as well play out my career for individual stats. I need the approval of my Godfather, I need that stuff now.

Balco - I'll send it right away, but remember if anyone ever finds out I sent it to you, don't admit you actually took it. You can just say you received it, opened it, knew what it was, but never took it. They'll buy that, people are morons these days.

Bonds - Thanks

CLICK


that is so funny. great stuff. :laugh :laugh :laugh

who would have thought 'flax seed oil' would cause such a commotion.

[west coast orange and black]

i hafta agree with ballparks.

most of us could not handle the complete truth about baseball players and the myriad of illegal substances that have been used over the years.

[ballparks]

i hafta agree with ballparks.

most of us could not handle the complete truth about baseball players and the myriad of illegal substances that have been used over the years.

I agree with WCOAB agreeing. I do think that it's a very true point that nobody wants to be let down and made to feel stupid. I include myself as part of that long list of fans who bought into the entire thing hook, line and sinker. Big Mac was my fav, just like Bonds is that of some others. We're all suckers.

Baseball is supposed to be a reflection of ourselves and our society. Nobody wants to face the fact that our greatest national treasure, the game of baseball, is tainted; possibly beyond repair.

[Astro]

No, it's not. It's PROOF Bonds lied.
It's a book written by the people who have bashed Bonds since before the "leaks" ...

Go look up what propaganda means then tell me if it is or isnt

[west coast orange and black]

over here in the san francisco bay area we have been treated to front row bonds circus tickets for quite some time now. to many, especially to some bay areans more familiar with the balco story and with the giants organization and individual players, nothing new is expected to be contained within the book.
it very well might make for a very good single comprehensive source, though.

[Dasperp]

Am I the only person who doesn't absolutely despise people who used steroids? In a business where an extra boost means money and fame, it's absolutely human to try to get a leg up on the competition, especially when you know many others are using without any repurcussions. I blame MLB, the player's union, and the press for just not giving a damn. It will be fun to see how Selig deals with this though.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

especially when you know many others are using without any repurcussions. I blame MLB, the player's union, and the press for just not giving a damn. It will be fun to see how Selig deals with this though.

Exactly. This goes back further than most of us would care to find out. Rob Deer, Tettleton, whoever. Would it surprise anyone if Kirby took a PED? Not me.

I agree most of the blame has to fall on MLB for leaving the cupboard door open. Rediculous.

[west coast orange and black]

the game of baseball has long chosen to largely ignore the situation of illegal drug use within the game.

i do not understand what fun or amusement can come from the game's management leader having to field questions that can lead to nothing but negative news.

either you like baseball, or you don't. and if you do, what joy could be had?

[Mattingly]

I for one will wait for the book to come out and to actually read it to see how strong the author's sources and information. But right now, it's not looking good at all for Barry.

If this stuff is true, and is substantiated in the book, then I think Barry needs to walk away right now. The last thing the game needs is for him to be chasing Ruth and Aaron with this information now out there.
I'd have to see what kind of substantiation is used. Are these the infamous "anonymous sources" that sometimes are used, or are actual logs specifically identifying one Barry Lamar Bonds at issue?

I'm also interested in knowing who corroborated this story, and which other players had their records that were also seized.

I'd also have to hear Barry's side of things. If he truly believes he was innocent, I expect to hear of a lawsuit. I'm not sure if it's defamation of character, slander or what, but I would think something would be written.

We're also talking journalistic ethics here, so to me, it's not all cut-and-dried.

[MyDogSparty]

It would be GREAT if all non-steroid using pitchers (hopefully that would be a majority) refused to pitch to Bonds for the entire season. Just walk him every time he comes up regardless of the situation. I think it would send a great message that says "you can't play if you lie and cheat."

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I'd have to see what kind of substantiation is used. Are these the infamous "anonymous sources" that sometimes are used, or are actual logs specifically identifying one Barry Lamar Bonds at issue?

I'm also interested in knowing who corroborated this story, and which other players had their records that were also seized.

I'd also have to hear Barry's side of things. If he truly believes he was innocent, I expect to hear of a lawsuit. I'm not sure if it's defamation of character, slander or what, but I would think something would be written.

We're also talking journalistic ethics here, so to me, it's not all cut-and-dried.

Apparently it's all documented. His testosterone levels, what he was taking and how much, phone conversations, wire taps, etc.

[csh19792001]

over here in the san francisco bay area we have been treated to front row bonds circus tickets for quite some time now. to many, especially to some bay areans more familiar with the balco story and with the giants organization and individual players, nothing new is expected to be contained within the book.
it very well might make for a very good single comprehensive source, though.

So you've known the truth all this time, and you've just been lying through your teeth in defense of your baseball hero all this time?

If that's the case, it really is truly sad (and pretty pathetic) that a handful of Giants fans/Bonds apologists here would spend hundreds (if not thousands) of hours defending a guy they already knew was completely, utterly guilty.

[west coast orange and black]

mdsparty, no way would players be that hypocritical.
you make it sound as if 29 other clubs have fielded teams that have been 100% clean... and that teammates of the non-giants teams have not known or cared to know who the using players have been.

there is no great message that exists to ballplayers. they know that the game has been dirty for quite some time, by a large number of players.

[csh19792001]

mdsparty, no way would players be that hypocritical.
you make it sound as if 29 other clubs have fielded teams that have been 100% clean... and that teammates of the non-giants teams have not known or cared to know who the using players have been.

there is no great message that exists to ballplayers. they know that the game has been dirty for quite some time, by a large number of players.

Stop changing the subject and fess up, Tony. You're certainly man enough to do that.

This is exclusively about Barry Bonds and his extensive drug use.

[west coast orange and black]

i do not purport to know *the truth*, csh19792001.

i contend that i have already read and heard, as have many of us, what the book seems to put forth.

ps: bonds is not my baseball hero.

[west coast orange and black]

csh19792001: Stop changing the subject and fess up, Tony. You're certainly man enough to do that.

This is exclusively about Barry Bonds and his extensive drug use.

i did not change the subject.
i posted about another's post. sorta like how you did.

if you want to police this thread and make certain that all posts refer strictly to "barry bonds and his extensixe drug use" as you believe the topic of "barry bonds and his extensive drug use" is, have at it.

i think that what i am *man enough* to do is inappropriate bb-f talk.
no need for that. agreed?

[rockin500]

i do not purport to know *the truth*, csh19792001.

i contend that i have already read and heard, as have many of us, what the book seems to put forth.

ps: bonds is not my baseball hero.
exactly. its been written many times over and we already know it. barry isnt my hero either in baseball. i dont have any, well maybe Ryno, but thats about it.

baseball wanted homers, they wanted offense. well, they got it. they can deal with the consequences.

[HogWash]

There is no scientific study done to date that can demonstrate that steroids are indeed "performance enhancers" in sports. All that we have are the anecdotal rantings of self righteous sports "journalists" and obsessed fans.

My concern with steroid use in sports is quite simple and has very rarely been heard in the media or in public domain: It's bad for you health. Most articles do not even brouche this subject, but rather speak of the betrayal of "cheating" and how it undermines the so called "purity" of the game.

In other words, it purely selfish. Sports is supposed to be entertainment, yet in our culture it is treated like a religion. You must be pious and holy in order to get respect. Never mind that someone's personal life has nothing to do with the performance on the field. Think about it. How many people out there say to themselves "Well gee, Brad Pitt got a divorce, I'm not going to see his movies anymore". Silly right? The same applies to sports.

We are just too damned serious about a game.

[Brownie31]

There is a great website, www.1919blacksox.com., that has a section showing similarities between that scandal & the steroids scandal. They also have some incredible film clips on the site of the 1919 Black Sox, including one of action during a World Series game against the Reds. Brownie31

[Mattingly]

There is no scientific study done to date that can demonstrate that steroids are indeed "performance enhancers" in sports. All that we have are the anecdotal rantings of self righteous sports "journalists" and obsessed fans.
If they're not performance enhancers, then why are they illegal? Why are the Soviet athletes accused of having used those during the Olympics if they didn't improve performance one bit?

Performance enhancing drug use at SHU (http://blogs.setonhill.edu/Setonian/014781.html)
With the growth of athletics at Seton Hill University (SHU), there is cause for concern among student athletes and their possible use of steroids and performance enhancing, General Nutrition Center (GNC)-type drugs.

Janice Beckage, SHU’s Wellness Center coordinator said, “Steroids are usually a man made drug, usually like testosterone-they’re used to help with increasing muscular mass, and by doing that, improving the performance of the athletes. A lot of steroids are used for medicinal reasons too-originally they were developed to help kids that weren’t growing.”

Performance enhancing drugs include Creatine, which increases protein synthesis, Hydroxy-Cut, Pro-Fuel and GNC Pro Performance. “They haven’t really been proven that they actually do much, but it would seem to me that they would have to use large amounts of it in order to get the results that they (the athletes) want,” said Beckage on performance enhancers.

[Mattingly]

There is a great website, www.1919blacksox.com., that has a section showing similarities between that scandal & the steroids scandal. They also have some incredible film clips on the site of the 1919 Black Sox, including one of action during a World Series game against the Reds. Brownie31
You mean this specific link?

http://www.1919blacksox.com/steroids.htm

[Brownie31]

You mean this specific link?

http://www.1919blacksox.com/steroids.htm
Yes. Brownie31

[west coast orange and black]

Mattingly: If they're not performance enhancers, then why are they illegal? Why are the Soviet athletes accused of having used those during the Olympics if they didn't improve performance one bit?

there are many substances on baseball's banned list that are not *performance enhancers*.

it seems to me that the whole thing about *performance enhancers* is that just because steroids may better a human physical attribute does not necessarily mean that they actually do at the time that the athlete wishes for it to occur. what good, then, is taking steroids if doing so does not guarantee bettered performance?

also, even if one athlete's gained success happens to enjoy measureable success, it may very well be that that same steroid will not assist another athlete.
i believe that to date, there has not been even one single study that measures bettered physical abilities due to steroid use.

it is quite the popular thing nowadays to toss out "this substance does this", "this substance does that" ("human growth hormone improves eyesight", "hgh makes your white muscles twitch at a faster rate") simply because a tested group happened to enjoy benefits. only, the tested group is nearly always comprised of unhealthy people, and the benefits are not quantifiably measured.

[DoubleX]

I'd also have to hear Barry's side of things. If he truly believes he was innocent, I expect to hear of a lawsuit. I'm not sure if it's defamation of character, slander or what, but I would think something would be written.

We're also talking journalistic ethics here, so to me, it's not all cut-and-dried.

I would expect lawsuits to abound as well. However, I saw one of the co-authors on CNN this afternoon, around 3, and he was asked if he expects lawsuits. He basically said that it was not a concern. That the reporting and investigating are so solid, have been checked so much, that it's pretty much airtight.

[chrismarullo]

Prediction: Bonds will call a press conference and do 1 of the following scenarios:

a) Forget how to speak English

b) Cry and refuse to talk about the past

c) Announce his retirement and announce the first dates of his co-headlining tour with Rupaul

[TonyK]

Too bad this eclipses the great game between the Dominican Republic and Venezuela that was played today.

Anyone who has just been villified in a book like he has cannot possible say there is no reason at all for him to read the charges in the book. I was just getting enthused about the WBC games too.

[TonyK]

chris: ...or d)

d) Announce he will be playing for the new All Steroids baseball team competing in the WBC and managed by Pete Rose. They will need lots of pinch runners but they should hit more home runs than everybody else.

[KingJ]

This kinda boosts my respect of Bonds. Anybody could tell he was a 'roids user, but knowing he didn't actually start taking them until 1998 (when he already had a lot of solid 40 HR, .400+ OBP seasons) shows there was an actual good player in there before he started unlike Sammy Sosa who went from 8 to 60 HR a season just like that. In the end, I don't think Bonds started using them to be good because he already was, but to player forever.

[Blackout]

I love when people try to debate whether steroids help you out or not


look at Bonds* now and compare his body to 10 years ago. then compare his power stats. should be open-shut unless your a Giants fan who's still in denial.

[Blackout]

chris: ...or d)

d) Announce he will be playing for the new All Steroids baseball team competing in the WBC and managed by Pete Rose. They will need lots of pinch runners but they should hit more home runs than everybody else.


C-Pudge Rodriguez
1B-Mark McGwire (comes out of retirement)
2B-
SS-Nomar Garciapara
3B-
OF-Sammy Sosa
OF-Barry Bonds
OF-Jose Canseco (comes out of retirement)
DH-Jason Giambi

the only pitcher I can think of is the guy from the Twins who got busted last year

[Sultan_1895-1948]

There is no scientific study done to date that can demonstrate that steroids are indeed "performance enhancers" in sports. All that we have are the anecdotal rantings of self righteous sports "journalists" and obsessed fans.


Read about what these forms of steroids have been PROVEN to do for the human body, and then relate that with baseball. They are indeed performance enhancers. The mental aspect stems from the physical enhancements.

Don't hold your breath for your "scientific study" to be done either. You need two control groups to play in the majors for an extended period of time. This would require juicing an entire group to compare their performance with the other group. Like I said, don't hold your breath. They do help, especially a drug like HGH which is a fountain of youth.

[Astro]

I love when people try to debate whether steroids help you out or not


look at Bonds* now and compare his body to 10 years ago. then compare his power stats. should be open-shut unless your a Giants fan who's still in denial.
Yea... your right thats good logic

Take a 5 year old, look at his body when hes 15... he must be on the juice

How about a 15 year old when hes 25... juicer

Infact, look at Jared from Subway! He must be popping atleast 20 pills a day



Again, this is no NEW INFORMATION, this is the exact same info that we heard 2 years ago, just now its in a book (gasp) so it must be true! Everything in books is true!

No, just stop... when he tests positive for steroids then badger him all you want... hell why dont ya make a thread about Alex Sanchez, he tested positive... but then again its not as fun to bash him, is it?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

C-Pudge Rodriguez
1B-Mark McGwire (comes out of retirement)
2B-
SS-Nomar Garciapara
3B-
OF-Sammy Sosa
OF-Barry Bonds
OF-Jose Canseco (comes out of retirement)
DH-Jason Giambi

the only pitcher I can think of is the guy from the Twins who got busted last year

Cammy

Tejada

Boone

ps. If Mac won't come back, give Thome a call.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

when he tests positive for steroids then badger him all you want

What he took isn't even detectABLE, so how how can it be detectED

[chrismarullo]

There is no scientific study done to date that can demonstrate that steroids are indeed "performance enhancers" in sports. .


Right. Guys just buy them to watch their bits and peices shrink.

[Blackout]

Yea... your right thats good logic

Take a 5 year old, look at his body when hes 15... he must be on the juice

How about a 15 year old when hes 25... juicer

Infact, look at Jared from Subway! He must be popping atleast 20 pills a day



Again, this is no NEW INFORMATION, this is the exact same info that we heard 2 years ago, just now its in a book (gasp) so it must be true! Everything in books is true!

No, just stop... when he tests positive for steroids then badger him all you want... hell why dont ya make a thread about Alex Sanchez, he tested positive... but then again its not as fun to bash him, is it?

do grown men really get stronger in their late 30s than they were in their late 20s?

I guess Bonds was just eating his wheaties when he was hanging out with Greg Anderson, a convicted steroid dealer, huh?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Exactly.

And Hogwash, did you know that there's no scientific proof that cigarettes cause lung cancer either? Just turns out that pretty much everyone who gets it, was a smoker.

[Astro]

What he took isn't even detectABLE, so how how can it be detectED
I see, so in other words you have no proof that he took steroids except for a sealed grand jury testimony that was illegal leaked to the people who are writing/wrote the book

how convient.. I wish I could make accusations, without much proof, and get many people to buy into it as well

Hey, what do I know, hard evidence is overrated

[Astro]

Exactly.

And Hogwash, did you know that there's no scientific proof that cigarettes cause lung cancer either? Just turns out that pretty much everyone who gets it, was a smoker.
Actually, they have did controlled experiments that have proven they cause cancer...

to blackout: you seem to think late 20's and late 30's is old... thats not very old considering most people in the United States live to be about 70 or 80

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I see, so in other words you have no proof that he took steroids except for a sealed grand jury testimony that was illegal leaked to the people who are writing/wrote the book

how convient.. I wish I could make accusations, without much proof, and get many people to buy into it as well

Hey, what do I know, hard evidence is overrated

How are you still denying he used them?

At least move on to phase 2 of your defense like most other Bonds supporters, and claim they don't help, or claim that it's all MLB's fault...but outright denial at this point? Come on.

[Astro]

Actually, they have did controlled experiments that have proven they cause cancer...

to blackout: you seem to think late 20's and late 30's is old... thats not very old considering most people in the United States live to be about 70 or 80
Maybe I'd be more inclinded to side against Barry Bonds, if 90% of the people who did didnt act like 13 year olds going around naming "cheaters" with no proof

Naming off people who havent been caught taking steroids in threads, saying they should play on the all-steroid team, is just a lack of class and just rude... then people wonder why players dont like fans that much... look in the mirror

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Actually, they have did controlled experiments that have proven they cause cancer...


Right. So they forced one group to smoke. Even so, not everyone in that group got lung cancer, therefore nothing can be said for sure. They know there's a strong correlation, but there's no actual proof that lung cancer is caused by cigarettes.

[Astro]

How are you still denying he used them?

At least move on to phase 2 of your defense like most other Bonds supporters, and claim they don't help, or claim that it's all MLB's fault...but outright denial at this point? Come on.
Do I think he took steroids? Not sure, he probably did... but I'm tired of all the childish Barry Bonds bashing, naming of players for the "All-Steroid Team"

People like that should go turn off the TV and not watch baseball again, you do nothing but harm the sport

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Actually, they have did controlled experiments that have proven they cause cancer...

to blackout: you seem to think late 20's and late 30's is old... thats not very old considering most people in the United States live to be about 70 or 80

In baseball terms, late 30's is old and you should be declining. Every players record in the history of the game tells you as much.

[Astro]

Right. So they forced one group to smoke. Even so, not everyone in that group got lung cancer, therefore nothing can be said for sure. They know there's a strong correlation, but there's no actual proof that lung cancer is caused by cigarettes.
Last post towards Sultan, I believe talking to my dog would get further than this

You need to go learn some things, such as statistics for one... I'll refrain from saying anything else so I dont have to have Mattingly come moderate my post...

Please get a clue tho

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Do I think he took steroids? Not sure, he probably did... but I'm tired of all the childish Barry Bonds bashing, naming of players for the "All-Steroid Team"

People like that should go turn off the TV and not watch baseball again, you do nothing but harm the sport

What's more harmful. Using logic to weed out the users, or burrying your head in the sand.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Last post towards Sultan, I believe talking to my dog would get further than this

You need to go learn some things, such as statistics for one... I'll refrain from saying anything else so I dont have to have Mattingly come moderate my post...

Please get a clue tho

I've read that on numerous websites. That's there's no absolute proof, only the correlation. I'll search for a link if you'd like. With you though, that might not mean much since you seem to pretty much know more than anyone here.

[west coast orange and black]

if you're gonna pop off, blackout805, at least get the story straight.
any talk about whether steroids can be categorized as performance enhancers needs more info than simply the size of a particular ballplayer and his power stats.

try it this way: remove bonds from the picture.
mlb told us a few years back that *at least* 40 ballplayers tested positive, thus initiating the current substance abuse policy. so, make a private list of 40 players who are bigger and have better power stats.
should be open-shut for you.

while you are at it, perhaps you can explain *how* steroids better physical performance, particularly of major league baseball players.
i am willing to wager much that you can do no such thing.

[Blackout]

if you're gonna pop off, blackout805, at least get the story straight.
any talk about whether steroids can be categorized as performance enhancers needs more info than simply the size of a particular ballplayer and his power stats.

try it this way: remove bonds from the picture.
mlb told us a few years back that *at least* 40 ballplayers tested positive, thus initiating the current substance abuse policy. so, make a private list of 40 players who are bigger and have better power stats.
should be open-shut for you.

while you are at it, perhaps you can explain *how* steroids better physical performance, particularly of major league baseball players.
i am willing to wager much that you can do no such thing.

I'm not a scientist, why should I have to do that?

All I know is that right around the time Bonds allegedly took steroids, atleast according to the article, he grew in size and started breaking home run records.

If you read the article, it details how Bonds' eyesight got stronger as well and how steroids may have been the reason he was injured for so long in 1999 and why although his power numbers were there, his basic batting numbers werent up to norm (explaining his sub-par .262 BA that year). Thats all the evidence I really need. Thats another peice of the puzzle IMO. He got his eye-sight stronger and as soon as you know it, he's hitting .300 again hitting homers into the water outside the stadium.

You change your tune from "prove to me that Bonds took steroids" to "prove to me that taking steroids helps you". I'm all for discussion, but I don't really give a crap enough to go out there and buy a bunch of chemistry books and waste my time just to make a simple point about steroids.

[Knick9]

Barry! :eek:

I don't care if Barry keeps denying it, one day he's going to get it! It looks like that day may come soon! :D

I just want this saga of his to end...it has been dragged on for some time now.

[johnny]

I'm not a scientist, why should I have to do that?

All I know is that right around the time Bonds allegedly took steroids, atleast according to the article, he grew in size and started breaking home run records.

If you read the article, it details how Bonds' eyesight got stronger as well and how steroids may have been the reason he was injured for so long in 1999 and why although his power numbers were there, his basic batting numbers werent up to norm (explaining his sub-par .262 BA that year). Thats all the evidence I really need. Thats another peice of the puzzle IMO. He got his eye-sight stronger and as soon as you know it, he's hitting .300 again hitting homers into the water outside the stadium.

You change your tune from "prove to me that Bonds took steroids" to "prove to me that taking steroids helps you". I'm all for discussion, but I don't really give a crap enough to go out there and buy a bunch of chemistry books and waste my time just to make a simple point about steroids.

I say ask those that should know if Roids help. Oh, they won't SAY it in words but their actions speak even more loud and clear. After all, if they didn't think it would help why in the heck were they jumping through hoops to take the juice? Rafi did so AFTER testifying under oath! To those in denial, talk about get a clue...

[Astro]

I'm not a scientist, why should I have to do that?

All I know is that right around the time Bonds allegedly took steroids, atleast according to the article, he grew in size and started breaking home run records.

If you read the article, it details how Bonds' eyesight got stronger as well and how steroids may have been the reason he was injured for so long in 1999 and why although his power numbers were there, his basic batting numbers werent up to norm (explaining his sub-par .262 BA that year). Thats all the evidence I really need. Thats another peice of the puzzle IMO. He got his eye-sight stronger and as soon as you know it, he's hitting .300 again hitting homers into the water outside the stadium.

You change your tune from "prove to me that Bonds took steroids" to "prove to me that taking steroids helps you". I'm all for discussion, but I don't really give a crap enough to go out there and buy a bunch of chemistry books and waste my time just to make a simple point about steroids.
You believe everything you read?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Last post towards Sultan, I believe talking to my dog would get further than this

You need to go learn some things, such as statistics for one... I'll refrain from saying anything else so I dont have to have Mattingly come moderate my post...

Please get a clue tho

Here's are a couple to start with. This is where I got my "clue" from.

Q - What does it mean when something “is associated with” lung cancer?

A - It means that there is a link between the two, but there is no proof of cause and effect. More research needs to be done before we know for certain. But we know that most lung cancers are caused by smoking.

http://www.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/batco/OCR/11400/11461.txt

http://tobaccodocuments.org/lor/01139366A.html

http://www.forces.org/articles/files/passive1.htm

The point was, you can't always get scientific proof of anything for certain, especially when it comes to steroids. They do help baseball players though.

[Astro]

Here's are a couple to start with. This is where I got my "clue" from.

http://tobaccodocuments.org/lor/01139366A.html

http://www.forces.org/articles/files/passive1.htm
http://tobaccodocuments.org/lor/01139366A.html

That article is from the Charleston Evening Post.... in 1955

http://www.forces.org/articles/files/passive1.htm

That article is from 1998... 8 years ago

[TonyK]

Astros: Sorry, but I think many of us see the obvious connections when looking over the Steroid Juicers team. Sudden unexpected increases in power, followed by mysterious illnesses, and then finally early retirement.

Some knew how to take the drugs better than others. Bonds went from a 29 HR/per year guy to a 51.6 HR/per year guy at a time when his power should have been declining.

It is safe to say that historians will look back on this era with harsh words, not towards the fans, but towards the abusers. You can defend Bonds since he hasn't been officially convicted of anything yet. The best thing about this is he is very close to retirement so we can soon focus on the game again. Like I said earlier we should be talking about the DR-Venezuela game tonight.

[Astro]

Astros: Sorry, but I think many of us see the obvious connections when looking over the Steroid Juicers team. Sudden unexpected increases in power, followed by mysterious illnesses, and then finally early retirement.

Some knew how to take the drugs better than others. Bonds went from a 29 HR/per year guy to a 51.6 HR/per year guy at a time when his power should have been declining.

It is safe to say that historians will look back on this era with harsh words, not towards the fans, but towards the abusers. You can defend Bonds since he hasn't been officially convicted of anything yet. The best thing about this is he is very close to retirement so we can soon focus on the game again. Like I said earlier we should be talking about the DR-Venezuela game tonight.
See, Tony, if everyone was as rational as you we wouldnt have these badgering sessions... I think more should learn from you

[chrismarullo]

I work in the media and know pople in the publishing industry.

What's the 1 thing reputable publishers and media outlets fear the most?

Lawsuits caused by misinformation.

They simply do not tolerate it. They are scared ****less to get hit with a multi million dollar libel suit that not only bankrupts them, but ruins their credibility which hurts their future buisiness.

The Canseco book had severeal things ommitted from what I understand due to fear of libel. Note than no one mentioned in that book has sued Canseco or the publisher.

My point is that the publisher would not put this book our unless the authors made them feel very very secure that the book was accurate.

[digglahhh]

Tony,

I always felt that when this day came it might actually be worse for you than it would be for Bonds.

I defended your right to have the position that we did not know whether or not Bonds took PEDs. When it becomes clear he did, your argument shifts to whether or not they actually help. C'mon man, just have some integrity and admit that Barry could/would not have had Ruthesque seasons with his chemical enhancement. The guy is still a great player, first ballot Cooperstown deserving and the best player of the 90's.

You seem to have a vested, personal stake in this argument. Originally, you were presenting yourself as a man of principle, using the rights granted to us as citizens of the U.S. If that whole charade was a cheap ploy to delay facing what you knew was inevitably true, that reflects pretty poorly on your character. I don't want to believe that about you.

This is not about whether there is a generic steroid regimen that lifts all players equally from their previous level. This is about whether or not Barry Bonds reaped benefits from the use of illegal substances, that's it. If you want to talk about the specific effect of specific substances on individual players or if players need individually tailored regimens to benefit from the use of thos substances, that's another discussion.

In the case of Barry Bonds, he used these substances, and that use corrolated with him upping his level of play to a standard he had neither reached nor sustained prior to that point. All this happened in his supposed decline years. All the evidence points one way, I don'tknow what to say.

I don't know what "proof" is. I mean, can I "prove" that you one day you are going to die? Maybe not, and you're free to go on living thinking that you won't, but that doesn't make it the responsible position to take in light of the information available.

[west coast orange and black]

well, blackout805, there certainly is no need for you to assert *how* it is that steroids are performance enhancers. after all, bonds is living proof of such and represents every single person on the face of the planet.

you say that i changed my tune. well, i did not tell you to prove to me that bonds took steroids. you made that up. also, i did not state that you need to prove to me that steroids are performance enhancers. what i stated is that no one on the face of the planet has successfully done so, and that i am confident that you, also, can do no such thing.
i also said to come up with a list of 40 players -- but i wager that you can not come up with 40 who meet your own criteria.

also, the article did not detail how bonds' eyesight got stronger. it reads that bonds noticed that his eyesight improved. so, no *details*, no "how".
it bears repeating: get yer facts straight.

[TonyK]

Tony,

I always felt that when this day came it might actually be worse for you than it would be for Bonds.

I defended your right to have the position that we did not know whether or not Bonds took PEDs. When it becomes clear he did, your argument shifts to whether or not they actually help. C'mon man, just have some integrity and admit that Barry could/would not have had Ruthesque seasons with his chemical enhancement. The guy is still a great player, first ballot Cooperstown deserving and the best player of the 90's.

You seem to have a vested, personal stake in this argument. Originally, you were presenting yourself as a man of principle, using the rights granted to us as citizens of the U.S. If that whole charade was a cheap ploy to delay facing what you knew was inevitably true, that reflects pretty poorly on your character. I don't want to believe that about you.

This is not about whether there is a generic steroid regimen that lifts all players equally from their previous level. This is about whether or not Barry Bonds reaped benefits from the use of illegal substances, that's it. If you want to talk about the specific effect of specific substances on individual players or if players need individually tailored regimens to benefit from the use of thos substances, that's another discussion.

In the case of Barry Bonds, he used these substances, and that use corrolated with him upping his level of play to a standard he had neither reached or sustained prior to that point. All this happened in his supposed decline years. All the evidence points one way, I don'y know what to say.

I don't know what "proof" is. I mean, can I "prove" that you one day you are going to die? Maybe not, and you're free to go on living thinking that you won't, but that doesn't make it the responsible position to take in light of the information available.

Are you addressing me or the other Tony that also posts here?

[Mattingly]

Actually, they have did controlled experiments that have proven they cause cancer...

to blackout: you seem to think late 20's and late 30's is old... thats not very old considering most people in the United States live to be about 70 or 80
Who is "they" in this case? I've never heard of such a group.

As to players declining, in the entire history of baseball, can you name 3-5 examples of slugging players who were previously destined for the HoF, and yet drastically increased their offensive production at the age of 36 from the prior year? We're talking a .175 increase in the SLG from 2000 to 2001. That's pretty steep.

[Astro]

Here's are a couple to start with. This is where I got my "clue" from.

Q - What does it mean when something “is associated with” lung cancer?

A - It means that there is a link between the two, but there is no proof of cause and effect. More research needs to be done before we know for certain. But we know that most lung cancers are caused by smoking.

http://www.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/batco/OCR/11400/11461.txt

http://tobaccodocuments.org/lor/01139366A.html

http://www.forces.org/articles/files/passive1.htm

The point was, you can't always get scientific proof of anything for certain, especially when it comes to steroids. They do help baseball players though.
The newly added link is from 1970....

[Mattingly]

Are you addressing me or the other Tony that also posts here?
Likely the other Tony, who has the several thousands posts and has been a noted defender of Barry Bonds re his accusations of PED usage.

[TonyK]

Thx Mattingly! I thought I was having a senior moment after I read that.

[Astro]

Who is "they" in this case? I've never heard of such a group.

As to players declining, in the entire history of baseball, can you name 3-5 examples of slugging players who were previously destined for the HoF, and yet drastically increased their offensive production at the age of 36 from the prior year? We're talking a .175 increase in the SLG from 2000 to 2001. That's pretty steep.
The "they" is the Center for Disease Control (CDC)

[west coast orange and black]

c'mon, now, digglahhh, it could never be worse for me than for bonds.
bonds did the wrongdoing, not i.

i appreciate that you have extended a courtesy to me that many others have not; that you have not called me names, slurred me or alluded to a lack of mental capacity.

as i say that bonds' achievements on the field these past seasons were not accomplished without the use of banned substances or illegal ones, i take great pride that i did not conclude so based on biases, prejudices or personal feelings of hatred against a fellow man, as some have.

i hold my head up high. that is all that i expect of myself.

[ESPNFan]

As someone who works in the Medical research feild with a Doctor who specialises in Lung Cancer I can basicly tell everyone here that we wouldn't go through hundreds of thousands of dollars in Animal costs and Complex smoking machines if we knew exactly how tobacco smoke caused cancer. Make no mistake its an amost certainty but the science behind it is still a mystery.

Anabolic steroids are a much easier nut to crack and anyone who thinks that they do nothing/or very little is seriously out to lunch.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

As someone who works in the Medical research feild with a Doctor who specialises in Lung Cancer I can basicly tell everyone here that we wouldn't go through hundreds of thousands of dollars in Animal costs and Complex smoking machines if we knew exactly how tobacco smoke caused cancer. Make no mistake its an amost certainty but the science behind it is still a mystery.

Anabolic steroids are a much easier nut to crack and anyone who thinks that they do nothing/or very little is seriously out to lunch.

Exactly. Thanks for your post. As I stated, there's a strong correlation, but there's no concrete proof. Apology accepted for your rudeness Astro.

Or two beers short of a six pack; pick your cliche ;)

[rockin500]

Exactly.

And Hogwash, did you know that there's no scientific proof that cigarettes cause lung cancer either? Just turns out that pretty much everyone who gets it, was a smoker.
not entirely true. 90% of men who get it were smokers, but the percentage is a lot lower in women (granted, still high at 80%, but that is a significant amount)

[Solair Wright]

Wait...Nomar took steroids? That's news.

[STLCards2]

If somebody did prove that steroids can enhance performance, those who support Bonds will say, "but there is no proof that steroids helped him, even if they do help others. After all, smoking doesn't kill everybody." If it was proved that Bonds' performance was enhanced, supporters would claim, " Bonds just wanted a little edge. Can you blame a guy for wanting to be the best at something? I don't see a problem with anybody using steroids. It is their body and they can do with it as they please."

This argument has gone beyond common sense and turned into the 90% of people in the baseball world can see all of the convincing "coincidences"vs. the 10% who like him. Most people who are coming out against Bonds are doing so based on common sense, not a hatefull desire to bring a man down. And no, saying that Bonds' performance the past 7 years was enhanced does not mean that we are saying he isn't a great player, or even that he wouldn't have been a very effective player during that span. All evidence and logic points to Bonds benefiting the past 7 years from steroid use. Any argument to the contrary looks very biased and/or homerish. Claiming that those who feel this way are spitefull people with a whitch-hunt agenda are wrong on most accounts. Sometimes the coincidences are too numerous and too powerfull to ignore.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

not entirely true. 90% of men who get it were smokers, but the percentage is a lot lower in women (granted, still high at 80%, but that is a significant amount)

Read post 101.

[Mattingly]

Thx Mattingly! I thought I was having a senior moment after I read that.
Sometimes forumers call each other by their real names. Sometimes forumers are named after players. Tony often calls me "two-three", which represents the #23 that Don Mattingly wore. Confusion can occur, but I think I know both digglahhh and wcoab (Tony) to make an educated guess on that.
The "they" is the Center for Disease Control (CDC)
If you could make some kind of discussion by offering a link and show paragraphs of this which you believe support your viewpoint, I think that would help. Otherwise, we may just be debating what CDC wrote, then someone else says that the Journal of American Medicine wrote something else, that the American Lung Assn wrote something else. Get the picture?

I'm not expecting anyone here to be some medical doctor who works in sports medicine (people here could work for some express courier service or be taxi drivers, for all I know), but at least something to support your point is great.

Me, I'm not too crazy about that "well, they did this study which showed". Something like, "I believe that ___ may be the case. If you look at (linked article), by ___, I believe you may see what I'm trying to say.

Something along those lines is what I'm getting at.

Thx. :)

BTW, you forgot to reply to the 2nd part of my question:
As to players declining, in the entire history of baseball, can you name 3-5 examples of slugging players who were previously destined for the HoF, and yet drastically increased their offensive production at the age of 36 from the prior year? We're talking a .175 increase in the SLG from 2000 to 2001. That's pretty steep.

[rsuriyop]

As to players declining, in the entire history of baseball, can you name 3-5 examples of slugging players who were previously destined for the HoF, and yet drastically increased their offensive production at the age of 36 from the prior year? We're talking a .175 increase in the SLG from 2000 to 2001. That's pretty steep.

Off the top of my head, I could name one: Hank Aaron (c. 1971-73), although I wouldn't so much as call it a drastic improvement.

[Mattingly]

not entirely true. 90% of men who get it were smokers, but the percentage is a lot lower in women (granted, still high at 80%, but that is a significant amount)
I happened across something to that effect. First, from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:

Lung cancer most common cancer worldwide (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/health/1500AP_Lung_Cancer_Glance.html)
Lung cancer is the world's top cancer killer and the most common cancer worldwide, with more than 1 million new cases every year and just as many deaths from it.

Treatments are improving and recent studies have found that chemotherapy can help survival. But despite that progress, about 6 out of 10 people with lung cancer die within one year of finding out they have it.

Tobacco smoke causes more than 8 out of 10 cases. However, like Dana Reeve, 1 in 5 women diagnosed never smoked. Most lung cancers occur in older people; only 3 percent turn up in people under 45, regardless of smoking status.

and this article from the Mayo Clinic:

Women's top health threats: A surprising list
Do you know what threatens your life most? The answers may surprise you (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/womens-health/WO00014)
Do you know what threatens your life the most?

Below are the top causes of death for women in the United States, starting with the most common. Take this opportunity to learn about each health concern and how you can reduce your risks. What you learn may surprise you.

No. 1 — Heart disease
Surprised? Many women are. It's common to think breast cancer is the No. 1 threat to women's health when, in fact, heart disease is responsible for more deaths in women than all forms of cancer combined. Heart disease is the most significant health concern for women in the United States today, responsible for nearly 489,000 deaths each year.

The common belief that heart disease affects mostly men is a dangerous myth. In reality, more women than men die of heart disease in the United States each year. But according to the American Heart Association, only 13 percent of women know that heart disease is a major threat to their health.

[Mattingly]

Off the top of my head, I could name one: Hank Aaron (c. 1971-73), although I wouldn't so much as call it a drastic improvement.
Good example, as he was 37 in 1971, but his SLG went up by .095 from 1970-71, not .175, as did Bonds from 2000-01.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/aaronha01.shtml

Also, Hank had the same 118 RBI in 1970 as in 1971. Also, Aaron's OBP jumped by .025, whereas Bonds' jumped by .075, which to me is a big difference.

Aaron went from 38 to 47 jacks, but Barry went from 49 to 73, which is almost 50%. I think your example is relevant, but as we seem to agree, I can't say it's in the same category of drasticness in its change upward.

I'm not very good at rating historical players, but I'd say that before 2001 and the dramatic pace he'd set from then, he was several steps below his godfather, Willie Mays. Right now, he's been compared to Babe Ruth and some have even said he's passed him in many offensive categories, less the HR by a lefty slugger.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/bondsba01.shtml

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Good example, as he was 37 in 1971, but his SLG went up by .095 from 1970-71, not .175, as did Bonds from 2000-01.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/aaronha01.shtml

Also, Hank had the same 118 RBI in 1970 as in 1971. Also, Aaron's OBP jumped by .025, whereas Bonds' jumped by .075, which to me is a big difference.

Aaron went from 38 to 47 jacks, but Barry went from 49 to 73, which is almost 50%. I think your example is relevant, but as we seem to agree, I can't say it's in the same category of drasticness in its change upward.

I'm not very good at rating historical players, but I'd say that before 2001 and the dramatic pace he'd set from then, he was several steps below his godfather, Willie Mays. Right now, he's been compared to Babe Ruth and some have even said he's passed him in many offensive categories, less the HR by a lefty slugger.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/bondsba01.shtml

It might be better to look at a larger span of years. Up until 1998 his SA was around .550. After that, over .725.

[csh19792001]

Off the top of my head, I could name one: Hank Aaron (c. 1971-73), although I wouldn't so much as call it a drastic improvement.

And even that is attributable mainly to park.

Read this (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2795) article, which specifically addresses Aaron's ostensible late career improvement on his performance during his prime.

[csh19792001]

Good example, as he was 37 in 1971, but his SLG went up by .095 from 1970-71, not .175, as did Bonds from 2000-01.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/aaronha01.shtml

Also, Hank had the same 118 RBI in 1970 as in 1971. Also, Aaron's OBP jumped by .025, whereas Bonds' jumped by .075, which to me is a big difference.


Mattingly-
See the link I just posted. It's a great article, and directly germane to this conversation.

[rockin500]

just a curious question. how is it any different than an athlete taking cortizone shots prior to a game? other than being done by a doctor at any rate. Its a PED itself you know. A comment on Mike n Mike this morning (from an article by Dan Lebatard) made me think that he is right. we are kind of hypocritical on the subject.

[bigtrain]

Last post towards Sultan, I believe talking to my dog would get further than this

You need to go learn some things, such as statistics for one... I'll refrain from saying anything else so I dont have to have Mattingly come moderate my post...

Please get a clue tho

I didn't know Bud Selig posted on this board. Hello Bud.

[Dasperp]

just a curious question. how is it any different than an athlete taking cortizone shots prior to a game? other than being done by a doctor at any rate. Its a PED itself you know. A comment on Mike n Mike this morning (from an article by Dan Lebatard) made me think that he is right. we are kind of hypocritical on the subject

It's definitely an interesting thought. The general anger seems to be more about unfair advantages steroid users have over people who played the game when steroids weren't around and the new records that come from that advantage. But what about Lasik? Players in the past couldn't fix poor eyesight nearly as well as players now can, and they didn't have access to the modern medicine and training that plyaers now do. I'm not sure i agree with this line of thought, but it is an interesting argument.

[DoubleX]

A thing about Bonds and BALCO is that he wasn't just taking steroids, he was taking it with the guidance of professionals who were in the business of making the most of steroids, taking steroids to the next level, and making the most out of human performance. Bonds' change was not just injecting steroids, it was a meticulous science.

[ESPNFan]

just a curious question. how is it any different than an athlete taking cortizone shots prior to a game? other than being done by a doctor at any rate. Its a PED itself you know. A comment on Mike n Mike this morning (from an article by Dan Lebatard) made me think that he is right. we are kind of hypocritical on the subject.

Cortisone is a Cortico Steroid. Its actually the Opposite of Anabolics where its chemical properties actually facilitate the breakdown of tissue in exchange for its antiinflamitory and healing properties. Its basicly a synthetic version of what your body already produces. And Good luck trying to administer it with out a doctor. If you make a mistake you could end up with cortisone flare, a crystalization of the cortisone which Hurts like a MOFO! :eek: Happened to me when I was in college and took about a day to clear up.

Cotisone, Pankillers, arthriscopic surgery, vision correction, none of these are performance enhancers. They are treatment for injuries and corrective procedures. Would an athlete at his physcial peek take or do anyone of these substances?

Anabolic steroids, HGH and the anciliary drugs to compliment them are all done for one simple reason, to get a demonstrable advantage over your opponents. They are used to cheat. They are used to add a few more HR's in a contract year. Or in Bonds case to enhance already Hall of Fame quality skills to pad his own ego.

[johnny]

A thing about Bonds and BALCO is that he wasn't just taking steroids, he was taking it with the guidance of professionals who were in the business of making the most of steroids, taking steroids to the next level, and making the most out of human performance. Bonds' change was not just injecting steroids, it was a meticulous science.


Kind of a Dow Chemical "Better Homers Thru Chemistry" dealie, eh?

You gotta give this to Barry, he wasn't half ass in his approach. :atthepc

[wilkerson_rulz-06]

Anyone esle besides me get a sick feeling thier stomach as they were reading that?
It's official, ban him, wipe out his stats and let him rot!
The ******* even denied it!!!

[rockin500]

Cortisone is a Cortico Steroid. Its actually the Opposite of Anabolics where its chemical properties actually facilitate the breakdown of tissue in exchange for its antiinflamitory and healing properties. Its basicly a synthetic version of what your body already produces. And Good luck trying to administer it with out a doctor. If you make a mistake you could end up with cortisone flare, a crystalization of the cortisone which Hurts like a MOFO! :eek: Happened to me when I was in college and took about a day to clear up.

Cotisone, Pankillers, arthriscopic surgery, vision correction, none of these are performance enhancers. They are treatment for injuries and corrective procedures. Would an athlete at his physcial peek take or do anyone of these substances?

Anabolic steroids, HGH and the anciliary drugs to compliment them are all done for one simple reason, to get a demonstrable advantage over your opponents. They are used to cheat. They are used to add a few more HR's in a contract year. Or in Bonds case to enhance already Hall of Fame quality skills to pad his own ego.
all very true. but if you are going by the strict definition of performance enhancing, getting a cortizone shot is still performance enhancing. would he have gotten a homer without it?

use the argument that it was against the law, I'll grant you that argument, as its very valid. but dont use the argument that it was performance enhancing. amphetamines are performance enhancing too, but no one cared about that.

[AMG]

It'll be very interesting to see how all this plays out during the season. Barry will (most likely) deal with some ruthless fans from the ball parks, and the press will be attacking non stop. I wonder how Bonds will deal with all the drama? When he passes Ruth, will the house cheer or will they boo him out of the
park?

This will be one interesting season, for all the wrong reasons.

-AMG-

[Sultan_1895-1948]

just a curious question. how is it any different than an athlete taking cortizone shots prior to a game? other than being done by a doctor at any rate. Its a PED itself you know. A comment on Mike n Mike this morning (from an article by Dan Lebatard) made me think that he is right. we are kind of hypocritical on the subject.

Depends on how far you're willing to go in order to defend the cheaters.

You can take it all the way down to the use of batting gloves and helmets if you want. Those are performance enhancing. So are protein shakes, whirlpool baths, etc. Players didn't use to have 75% of this stuff available to them, but technically you could get pretty absurd in defending steroid use. Cortizone dulls the pain, it doesn't rebuild tissue and increase muscle mass.

[unfinished_business]

The Problem with all what Bonds did:

It was not illegal.

It is now. There is pretty much no doubt that he took steroids, just as McGwire did.

He has not tested positive yet. You can't ban if he has not done anything illegal like Rose did! A shame that MLB didn't start the PED-testing earlier. (Ken Caminiti


You feel pretty sick reading the SI excerpt. And you just feel betrayed.


but now i feel this too:
Roger Maris is still the HomeRunKing!

[Sultan_1895-1948]

The Problem with all what Bonds did:

It was not illegal.

It is now. There is pretty much no doubt that he took steroids, just as McGwire did.

He has not tested positive yet. You can't ban if he has not done anything illegal like Rose did! A shame that MLB didn't start the PED-testing earlier. (Ken Caminiti


You feel pretty sick reading the SI excerpt. And you just feel betrayed.


but now i feel this too:
Roger Maris is still the HomeRunKing!

He didn't test positive for a reason. Because they made sure it was all undetectable. That's what money and resources will get you. It was mentioned that when Bonds took a few private tests, while they didn't show up positive, that they raised many eyebrows because of increased testosterone levels.

[ESPNFan]

The Problem with all what Bonds did:

It was not illegal.

It is now. There is pretty much no doubt that he took steroids, just as McGwire did.

He has not tested positive yet. You can't ban if he has not done anything illegal like Rose did! A shame that MLB didn't start the PED-testing earlier. (Ken Caminiti


You feel pretty sick reading the SI excerpt. And you just feel betrayed.


but now i feel this too:
Roger Maris is still the HomeRunKing!

It definetly was illegal

This is the memo that went out in 1991 from MLB
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=1

Its pretty clearly stated that Anabolic Steroid use was illegal. Now the fact that they didn't or couldn't get testing in place because it had to be collectively bargain for with a players union that seem to be protecting its cheaters in a different story.

[DoubleX]

The Problem with all what Bonds did:

It was not illegal.

It is now. There is pretty much no doubt that he took steroids, just as McGwire did.

He has not tested positive yet. You can't ban if he has not done anything illegal like Rose did! A shame that MLB didn't start the PED-testing earlier. (Ken Caminiti


You feel pretty sick reading the SI excerpt. And you just feel betrayed.


but now i feel this too:
Roger Maris is still the HomeRunKing!

I don't understand why so many people are saying, "it wasn't illegal." It wasn't against the rules in baseball, but it was very much illegal, it had no place in baseball or anywhere. Just because it was not in the express policy of baseball, did not exempt the players from abiding by the law. Baseball's policy might not saying anything about murdering a fellow player on the field, so does that make on the field murder exempt?

If it is against the law, it is illegal everywhere, including baseball; I don't see anyway to rationalize around that.

[ballparks]

It was not illegal.

![/B]

You can bet your petunias that in the United States of America, the use of anabolic steoids for non-medical purposes is ILLEGAL.

[Mattingly]

Two questions:

First:

Does MLB have to list every single drug (or combinations thereof) and provide this to the MLBPA union for this to make a drug "illegal"? Or would all of these so-called "performance enhancers" be deemed "illegal" in one fell swoop?

Second:

It was mentioned that Selig now has to worry about whether Barry's records get an asterisk on them. I can't say yes or not for a fact that these allegations are true, but if, for argument's sake, they were, would Barry's 73 jacks in 2001 get asterisked by Selig? Would McGwire's 70 and 66, and Sosa's 62 get the same treatment?

Also, which other, if any, of Bonds' records would get an asterisk?

[Mattingly]

You can bet your petunias that in the United States of America, the use of anabolic steoids for non-medical purposes is ILLEGAL.
What about the designer drugs, such as the "cream" and the "clear"?

I'll have to read back a few pages on this thread, but in 1998, Barry Bonds was accused of using anabolic steroids? Or some of the pricier (and less detectable) so-called "designer drugs"?

[west coast orange and black]

though illegal use of steroids has long been against the rules of society, until recently they were not against baseball's rules.

what this means is that while punishable by criminal statute, the institution of baseball was helpless against the steroid user. it must be clear, though, that baseball essentially chose to be helpless about the steroid problem, as it did not codify rules against it.

was it wrong to use illegal drugs before mlb enacted thier own rules against it? of course. but knowing of an illegal act and being able to do something about it are two very separate things.
i happen to be very much in favor of wada-type testing. i have long-favored it, in fact. but baseball, while taking short-sighted attempts to protect itself, has actually made itself more vulnerable to ridicule and speculation and, along with that, open to calls of federal regulation.

[Mattingly]

though illegal use of steroids has long been against the rules of society, until recently they were not against baseball's rules.

what this means is that while punishable by criminal statute, the institution of baseball was helpless against the steroid user. it must be clear, though, that baseball essentially chose to be helpless about the steroid problem, as it did not codify rules against it.

was it wrong to use illegal drugs before mlb enacted thier own rules against it? of course. but knowing of an illegal act and being able to do something about it are two very separate things.
i happen to be very much in favor of wada-type testing. i have long-favored it, in fact. but baseball, while taking short-sighted attempts to protect itself, has actually made itself more vulnerable to ridicule and speculation and, along with that, open to calls of federal regulation.
Do you or anyone else have a list of which drugs became illegal by MLB standards, and in which year they became illegal?

I'm presuming that any drug not contained on such a list would not be illegal by MLB. Would I be correct on this?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

What about the designer drugs, such as the "cream" and the "clear"?

I'll have to read back a few pages on this thread, but in 1998, Barry Bonds was accused of using anabolic steroids? Or some of the pricier (and less detectable) so-called "designer drugs"?

The cream is a drug that was designed specifically for beating drug tests.

When they test players, they look for raised testosterone levels as they compare to other chemical levels.

The cream raised testosterone levels, but had epitestosterone in it, which raised BOTH levels, therefore, not causing a positive drug test.

So while Bonds never tested positive, his high testosterone levels did raise many eyebrows for this very reason.

[DoubleX]

though illegal use of steroids has long been against the rules of society, until recently they were not against baseball's rules.

what this means is that while punishable by criminal statute, the institution of baseball was helpless against the steroid user. it must be clear, though, that baseball essentially chose to be helpless about the steroid problem, as it did not codify rules against it.

was it wrong to use illegal drugs before mlb enacted thier own rules against it? of course. but knowing of an illegal act and being able to do something about it are two very separate things.
i happen to be very much in favor of wada-type testing. i have long-favored it, in fact. but baseball, while taking short-sighted attempts to protect itself, has actually made itself more vulnerable to ridicule and speculation and, along with that, open to calls of federal regulation.

See what I don't understand is why so many people (not saying this includes you), are trying to condone Bonds and all the other users by saying it wasn't illegal in baseball (just saw Todd Jones on TV saying the same thing). That doesn't condone it in the least. It was illegal by law, meaning the players should not have been doing it. There is no way to condone the activity. Like I said before, baseball might not have a policy banning murder on the field, but that shouldn't exculpate a player from murdering on the field.

[Mattingly]

The cream is a drug that was designed specifically for beating drug tests.

When they test players, they look for raised testosterone levels as they compare to other chemical levels.

The cream raised testosterone levels, but had epitestosterone in it, which raised BOTH levels, therefore, not causing a positive drug test.

So while Bonds never tested positive, his high testosterone levels did raise many eyebrows for this very reason.
Thanks for the info. By this, I presume that at the time, since the "cream" was designed to evade drug testing, that it would then be "legal", as they had no test for it, lacking knowledge of its mere existence?

[Mattingly]

See what I don't understand is why so many people (not saying this includes you), are trying to condone Bonds and all the other users by saying it wasn't illegal in baseball (just saw Todd Jones on TV saying the same thing). That doesn't condone it in the least. It was illegal by law, meaning the players should not have been doing it. There is no way to condone the activity. Like I said before, baseball might not have a policy banning murder on the field, but that shouldn't exculpate a player from murdering on the field.
Yeah, but you may want to choose another example. Murder someone on the field, the authorities haul you off and you don't play baseball again. :D :p

[jpenrod]

See what I don't understand is why so many people (not saying this includes you), are trying to condone Bonds and all the other users by saying it wasn't illegal in baseball (just saw Todd Jones on TV saying the same thing). That doesn't condone it in the least. It was illegal by law, meaning the players should not have been doing it. There is no way to condone the activity. Like I said before, baseball might not have a policy banning murder on the field, but that shouldn't exculpate a player from murdering on the field.


My personal take on this is if it is illegal, then baseball should have no need to ban it. the only substances Baseball needs to ban are legal ones. That is not to say that MLB should not test for illegal substances but if they are illegal it should be understood that it is banned. By contrast McGwire admitted to using Andro in '98. At the time Andro was a legal over the counter product and MLB had not banned it's use. While I believe McGwires use of the substance undermines the integrity of the game he did nothing illegl and he broke no baseball rules. If it is illegal it is illegal whether baseball bans the substance or not. I do not know if this makes any sense but that is just take on it.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Thanks for the info. By this, I presume that at the time, since the "cream" was designed to evade drug testing, that it would then be "legal", as they had no test for it, lacking knowledge of its mere existence?

Sounds about right. If something can be made to mask illegal drugs and still be legal, then sure.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I heard that before '99, Bonds was using andro. Anyone hear the same?

[DoubleX]

My personal take on this is if it is illegal, then baseball should have no need to ban it. the only substances Baseball needs to ban are legal ones. That is not to say that MLB should not test for illegal substances but if they are illegal it should be understood that it is banned. By contrast McGwire admitted to using Andro in '98. At the time Andro was a legal over the counter product and MLB had not banned it's use. While I believe McGwires use of the substance undermines the integrity of the game he did nothing illegl and he broke no baseball rules. If it is illegal it is illegal whether baseball bans the substance or not. I do not know if this makes any sense but that is just take on it.

My thoughts exactly. The fact that it is illegal means that it is illegal in baseball, and a formal policy is only reitterating what the law already says. Regardless of whether baseball has a policy or not, the players are not supposed to be using steroids.

[west coast orange and black]

of course you are right, xx. there i no way to condone ballplayers using illegal substances.

but, using your own example of murder, it does not matter that baseball has no rules expressly forbidding murder, because murder is codified by criminal statute. should a ballplayer be accused of an illegal homicide, the proper authorities would charge him.

as it is, most of us in this country are able to wager money whenever, wherever we want. but baseball has rules against betting under certain circumstances. should a ballplayer be accused of going against the rules of baseball, baseball would handle it, not the city or county or state or federal officials.

baseball has rules against chewing tobacco.
the same rules do not apply to the public at-large.

different house, different rules.

[Brian McKenna]

You can bet your petunias that in the United States of America, the use of anabolic steoids for non-medical purposes is ILLEGAL.

by the u.s. congress in 1990 -- the very place palmiero lied and mcgwire refused to answer any questions

[west coast orange and black]

jpenrod, your take that if it is illegal, then baseball should have no need to ban it is a proper one. to a point.

where it stops being relevant is that 'til only recently, mlb had no remedy against the act of using steroids illegally. that was by design, i believe.
the problem was so great that the game as we know it would be in jeopardy of coming to a screeching halt.

it's one thing to observe a wrong, it might be another thing entirely to be able to do someting about it.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

This just in:

Brady Anderson and Greg Vaughn are doing a tandem "60 minutes" interview!!! Just kidding :p

[west coast orange and black]

thanx, man.

[DoubleX]

of course you are right, xx. there i no way to condone ballplayers using illegal substances.

but, using your own example of murder, it does not matter that baseball has no rules expressly forbidding murder, because murder is codified by criminal statute. should a ballplayer be accused of an illegal homicide, the proper authorities would charge him.

as it is, most of us in this country are able to wager money whenever, wherever we want. but baseball has rules against betting under certain circumstances. should a ballplayer be accused of going against the rules of baseball, baseball would handle it, not the city or county or state or federal officials.

baseball has rules against chewing tobacco.
the same rules do not apply to the public at-large.

different house, different rules.

But there are criminal statutes against distribution and possession of many steroids and performance enhancers. So shouldn't they fall under the murder analogy? In that given the criminality of the conduct, baseball should not need to even have a policy in place, since its just reitterating the legal standards of society anyway?

[jpenrod]

jpenrod, your take that if it is illegal, then baseball should have no need to ban it is a proper one. to a point.

where it stops being relevant is that 'til only recently, mlb had no remedy against the act of using steroids illegally. that was by design, i believe.
the problem was so great that the game as we know it would be in jeopardy of coming to a screeching halt.

it's one thing to observe a wrong, it might be another thing entirely to be able to do someting about it.

of course you are correct WCOB. I am not talking about what was, I am talking about what is. Now baseball has the mechanism in place to discipline players testing positive for illegal steroids. If a player tests positive this year for an illegal substance that is not specifically outlined as banned in baseball, that player should face the same penalty as a player that tests positive for a banned substance. Again, this is just my take on the subject.

[DoubleX]

Hey WCOB,

Do you think you could give us some insight about what the reaction is like in San Francisco right now? I know you've probably been knee-deep in Bonds and BALCO coverage for a couple of years now, and that the book reports might not seem like as big and as sudden of a deal as it does in other parts of the country, but can you give us an idea of what feelings and perceptions are like in the Bay Area this week?

[west coast orange and black]

xx, the criminal statutes against distribution and possession of steroids and pe must not be included in baseball's rules. the way tht i see it, baseball is thinking that society's laws trump it own in this area.

but baseball does have laws that have little or nothing to do with laws against society. take bumping an ump, or management making a p.a. announcement belittling the umps. against the rules of baseball and they come with a fine. but when was the last time a player was arrested for unlawful touching when bumping an ump? when did managemaent ever get in trouble by criminal or civil statute for popping off?

different house, different rules.

now, should baseball have codified rules against illegal drugs and substances? yes. absolutely.
bu baseball was out to protect itself - it has enjoyed many privileges for many years.
the steroid story is only the most recent one to further along.
nasty and ugly and to the core of the game, yes. but also merely only the most recent one.

[west coast orange and black]

jpenrod, i totally disagree with you on this.

a player can not have consequences held against him unless he knows or ought to have known the consequences of a specific wrongdoing. this is one of the reasons why baseball, as all businesses, has an employee contract.
in this, baseball mirrors everyday life.
how could you be arrested for a non-crime*? you have rights, you know.

*not including the current administration's actions of holding people against their will without arrest and representation. that situation is just a whole 'nother ballgame, so to speak.

[DoubleX]

xx, the criminal statutes against distribution and possession of steroids and pe must not be included in baseball's rules. the way tht i see it, baseball is thinking that society's laws trump it own in this area.

but baseball does have laws that have little or nothing to do with laws against society. take bumping an ump, or management making a p.a. announcement belittling the umps. against the rules of baseball and they come with a fine. but when was the last time a player was arrested for unlawful touching when bumping an ump? when did managemaent ever get in trouble by criminal or civil statute for popping off?

different house, different rules.

now, should baseball have codified rules against illegal drugs and substances? yes. absolutely.
bu baseball was out to protect itself - it has enjoyed many privileges for many years.
the steroid story is only the most recent one to further along.
nasty and ugly and to the core of the game, yes. but also merely only the most recent one.

I agree different house different rules thing, but baseball's house is within the house of the country; baseball is not its own country. Baseball is not exempt from the laws. The laws apply to baseball players just as they apply to everyone else, and it shouldn't matter whether or not there are formal rules in baseball regarding things that are illegal by law anyway. If something is illegal, like steroids, a baseball player has not right to use it, same as you and me, irrespective of what the laws of baseball say or do not say; meaning, that baseball's silence on the matter does not give license to illegal conduct.

[west coast orange and black]

it's kind of a mixed bag, xx. but certainly the mood here is much more favorable to bonds than in other parts of the country, for a variety of reasons.

firstly, san francisco as city and county is very liberal, perhaps second only to neighboring marin county as most liberal in the entire country. so, as the personal politics of people shine through a bit, there is a lot of:
it's just a game;
baseball knew about steroids for years and chose to ignore the problem, why shouldn't we?;
it is bonds' own personal problem;
who am i to judge?;
according to the rules in place, a positive test result is needed to take action against bonds.

also, as you said, we have been at ground-level zero since the story broke. so:
it's an old story;
just play ball.

there is the other side as well, but there is quite a bit less of:
he's a bum. throw him and his records out of baseball.

this is not scientific data, but culled from listening to talk radio and reading the opinions of thesan francisco bay area public.

[west coast orange and black]

although baseball's house is within the house of the country, baseball had no specific rules against steroids.

baseball can not enforce a rule unless the rule is there.

the proper authorities had every right to step in and arrest, try and convict, but they did not. baseball is not to blame for that. but it is to blame for cocooning itself and not protecting itself and its players by not disallowing specific illegal acts.

the powerful players union has fought long and hard against rules forbidding substances. it has long known of the severity of the problem. management simply looked the other way, fearing that to tackle the problem head-on would lead to less ofense, less money.

that is how it all seems to me.

[HogWash]

This notion that steroids taints the game is pure crap. Mlb has cheated forever. ruth corked, perry threw spitballs, willie mays and stargell used amphetamines, ty cobb cheated on the basepaths, my god the list goes on and on. There is no proof steroids make anyone hit better. Ask micheal morse, wally joyner, benito santiago, and alex sanchez how steroids helped them hit. Steroids is nothing but a story created by the media. It will blow over eventually when the media moves on to a better story.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

according to the rules in place, a positive test result is needed to take action against bonds.


If this is indeed true, then what happens when it's proven that he took the cream and other masking agents? It was shown that his testosterone levels were extremely high (which would have resulted in a positive), but the test didn't come up positive ONLY BECAUSE of the masking agent he is proved to have taken. By definition then, he did test positive.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

This notion that steroids taints the game is pure crap. Mlb has cheated forever. ruth corked, perry threw spitballs, willie mays and stargell used amphetamines, ty cobb cheated on the basepaths, my god the list goes on and on. There is no proof steroids make anyone hit better. Ask micheal morse, wally joyner, benito santiago, and alex sanchez how steroids helped them hit. Steroids is nothing but a story created by the media. It will blow over eventually when the media moves on to a better story.

This is your second post here, and you really shouldn't make a third.

Not worth responding to each and every issue you raised, it's all crap. You clearly don't understand much of anything regarding this issue.

[jpenrod]

jpenrod, i totally disagree with you on this.

a player can not have consequences held against him unless he knows or ought to have known the consequences of a specific wrongdoing. this is one of the reasons why baseball, as all businesses, has an employee contract.
in this, baseball mirrors everyday life.
how could you be arrested for a non-crime*? you have rights, you know.

*not including the current administration's actions of holding people against their will without arrest and representation. that situation is just a whole 'nother ballgame, so to speak.

From what I can find the MLB Policy does provide for a player to be suspended for testing for an illegal substance that is not speicifcally banned by baseball. From what I have found if it is on Federal Regulations Controlled Substance Schedule II (http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=2b6f396384bc213e376e452ddb82b5b6&rgn=div8&view=text&node=21:9.0.1.1.9.0.25.5&idno=21) list a player can face penalties even if it is not on MLB's banned list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_drug_policy#Prohibited_subst ances).

[Steven Bryant]

ty cobb cheated on the basepath
How exactly do you cheat on the basepath? I don't think he was running from 1st to third when the umpire wasn't looking. :crazy

Steve

[west coast orange and black]

HogWash: Ask micheal morse, wally joyner, benito santiago, and alex sanchez how steroids helped them hit.

uh, don't know about joyner and sanchez, but you gotta seriously leave santiago outta that conversation.

[west coast orange and black]

sultan: It was shown that his testosterone levels were extremely high (which would have resulted in a positive), but the test didn't come up positive ONLY BECAUSE of the masking agent he is proved to have taken. By definition then, he did test positive.

1. by definition, "by definition" means "according to prior determination, as a given." it is certainly not a given that the only way for testosterone levels to increase is by an illegal act.

2. you nor can anyone else definitively state that bonds' higher testosterone levels were because of substances.

6. there is a difference between a plant moving towards sunlight and a plant moving away from darkness, even though the end result is the same.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

HogWash: Ask micheal morse, wally joyner, benito santiago, and alex sanchez how steroids helped them hit.

uh, don't know about joyner and sanchez, but you gotta seriously leave santiago outta that conversation.

His entire post was flawed, why even bother responding. You could ask Caminiti, Canseco, Palmeiro, McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Juan Gonzalez, Belle, Thome, Vaughn, Ivan, Tejada....need I go on. Fact is, you don't really want to know how much they help HogWash, cause you'd have nobody left to look up to.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

sultan: It was shown that his testosterone levels were extremely high (which would have resulted in a positive), but the test didn't come up positive ONLY BECAUSE of the masking agent he is proved to have taken. By definition then, he did test positive.

1. by definition, "by definition" means "according to prior determination, as a given." it is certainly not a given that the only way for testosterone levels to increase is by an illegal act.

2. you nor can anyone else definitively state that bonds' higher testosterone levels were because of substances.

6. there is a difference between a plant moving towards sunlight and a plant moving away from darkness, even though the end result is the same.

Young Jedi,

You are indeed a slippery creature, or as Yoda would say, slippery creature you are.

[Boston Boxer]

everyone is calling for Bonds' head on a platter...fine, but what about others like Sosa, McGuire, Giambi, Sheffield, and Clemens. Why not go get these guys too.

[west coast orange and black]

uh, way ahead of you on that one, man.
only, what a player might (can) get busted for is not the same as what a player will get busted for.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

everyone is calling for Bonds' head on a platter...fine, but what about others like Sosa, McGuire, Giambi, Sheffield, and Clemens. Why not go get these guys too.

If Roger was approaching 511 wins, there might be a least a tiny investigation.

[jpenrod]

everyone is calling for Bonds' head on a platter...fine, but what about others like Sosa, McGuire, Giambi, Sheffield, and Clemens. Why not go get these guys too.

I am going after any player that tests positive for bbanned substances under the current policy. If Bonds did indeed use steroids (it seems at this point he did) then my opinion of him is severely damaged, but he was playing under the rules of baseball at that time. If he or any of the other players test positive this year I believe they should meet the same fate. Interesting you throw ZClemens in there, I mean I see the reasoning but I have not heard any accusations against him. As for Sheffield I see a lot of people throw his name in there, but I was under the impression that at the time of the Balco investigation he was pretty much cleared that he did not use the steroids provided to him. Maybe I am just niave and read only what I wanted to.

[BoofBonser26]

from a post by Victory Faust in another thread:

"The argument Bonds supporters have used in his defense is, "well, you don't have absolute proof that Barry did steroids; he's innocent till proven guilty."

Well, it appears these SI writers do have that proof now. Every reporter in the world has been swarming around this story, and you can bet your bottom dollar that the SI editors made these writers produce tons of airtight documentation before they allowed this story to be published."

Following the arguement on this thread, it has been proven that he took substances illegal in the United States if not specifically by MLB, therefore he cheated, therefore I now think more highly of dirt than Bonds. Officially. Before this I always was of the opinion that Bonds was a jerk but you couldn't prove steroids. Now you can. It was wrong.

WCOAB, I know baseball ignored this problem, I know other players juiced, I am not singling out Bonds. There are 12 guys guilty under MLB, including Rafael Bentancourt on my beloved Cleveland Indians. But there is absolutely no way to argue that Barry did not willfully cheat and lie about it.

[west coast orange and black]

Boston Boxer: what about others like Sosa, McGuire, Giambi, Sheffield, and Clemens. Why not go get these guys too.

too much to handle, man. and at the same time, not enough.

the real story, i think, is not the superstars and their amazing achievements, but the platoon outfielders, back-up catchers and utility infielders.
if someone were to demonstrate that the drug problem has run through the very core of baseball, run very deeply, that would open some eyes.

[Astro]

His entire post was flawed, why even bother responding. You could ask Caminiti, Canseco, Palmeiro, McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Juan Gonzalez, Belle, Thome, Vaughn, Ivan, Tejada....need I go on. Fact is, you don't really want to know how much they help HogWash, cause you'd have nobody left to look up to.
Uhhhh so anyone named on Canseco's book is a steroid user in your mind? You call HogWash dumb yet you insist Miguel Tejada and others use them when there is absolutely ZERO proof that they used ANY type of steroids... it looks to me like you pick and choose what you wish to believe, and bash anyone who has an opinion outside of your own, even if they have facts and proof to back it up, unlike yourself

Tell me when Jim Thome tested positive... Miguel Tejada... How about Albert Belle? Juan Gonzalez' positive test date please... ok how about Greg Vaughn's? Or did you mean Mo? Pudge Rodriguez, he tested positive on what date again?

[csh19792001]

although baseball's house is within the house of the country, baseball had no specific rules against steroids.

baseball can not enforce a rule unless the rule is there.


Right, and how convenient for Barry and the others that baseball has been so incredibly devoid of anyone with a spine and without dual interests (such as an evil pawn like Bud Selig).

We're all fully cognizant of it. But the fact that no system of jurisdiction exists does not make the action right, nor excusable. You act as if it absolves everyone of their wrongdoing (and completely negates a world of evidence), because we don't have positive urine sample for guys like Bonds.

The problem, Tony, is that you seem all to happy to be complicit with the whole steroid mess, and its perpetrators. You've probably spent dedicated 5,000 posts denying, explaining away, and rationalizing Barry's drug use over the past several years here.

And yet you say you knew the whole story all along, which makes your position of "I didn't know anything" even more indefensible, and your hundreds of hours spent dedicated to prevarication of the truth even more puzzling. It's truly bizarre.

It isn't in line with what I've seen of you otherwise at all- you're very intelligent, fair, evenhanded, and imparital.

People won't ever forget this, and they won't ever look at Barry's "records" without steroids coming up. The die has been cast, the truth has come out completely, and his legacy is tainted forever.

It's a horrible shame that the greatest player of his generation ended up in this predicament, but hey, hubris is what hubris does.

Pride goeth before a fall.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Uhhhh so anyone named on Canseco's book is a steroid user in your mind? You call HogWash dumb yet you insist Miguel Tejada and others use them when there is absolutely ZERO proof that they used ANY type of steroids... it looks to me like you pick and choose what you wish to believe, and bash anyone who has an opinion outside of your own, even if they have facts and proof to back it up, unlike yourself

Tell me when Jim Thome tested positive... Miguel Tejada... How about Albert Belle? Juan Gonzalez' positive test date please... ok how about Greg Vaughn's? Or did you mean Mo? Pudge Rodriguez, he tested positive on what date again?

I listed those players to prove a point. WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT A LOT OF PLAYERS. So Hogwash listing guys like Sanchez and whoever else as "proof" that they don't help is utter non-sense. And I never read Canseco's book, don't care to.

Who did I bash who had proof of something? Hogwash's post was full of inaccuracies including Ruth corking, Cobb cheating on the bases, and steroids not helping a hitter.

Before you come at me like that, I suggest you read other posts I've made compared to what Hogwash has made. I back up what I say through experience and research, and if there's something I want to learn more about I ask.

[west coast orange and black]

according to baseball's rules, boof, only a properly administered drug test that results positive determines whether or not player used. not outside information, no matter how high the stack.

i am not arguing that bonds did not willfully cheat and lie about it.
i am past that.

what the san francisco chronicle writers (not sports illustrated. merely excerpts from the book, game of shadows, available in bookstores 27 march appear there) have published seems to be rehash of already-known information and very little new information.

for you to equate bonds with "12 other guys guilty under mlb" is incorrect information. when did bonds test positive? i am unaware that it occurred.
this is different than stating "bonds did not use". this is not my claim.

[Astro]

I listed those players to prove a point. WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT A LOT OF PLAYERS. So Hogwash listing guys like Sanchez and whoever else as "proof" that they don't help is utter non-sense. And I never read Canseco's book, don't care to.

Who did I bash who had proof of something? Hogwash's post was full of inaccuracies including Ruth corking, Cobb cheating on the bases, and steroids not helping a hitter.

Before you come at me like that, I suggest you read other posts I've made compared to what Hogwash has made. I back up what I say through experience and research, and if there's something I want to learn more about I ask.
Alex Sanchez was the first major league player to test positive... Mike Morse also tested positive

Ruth used illegal trick bats when he played
Cobb sharpened his spikes and slid into fielders to try and injure them

There is no PROOF that steroids help players hit homeruns, Alex Sanchez averaged about 2 HRs a season... It makes you stronger, yes, but there is no guarantee it will up your homerun production

Not to mention you have said Tejada and some of these players earlier in this topic, I just let it slide the first time

[ESPNFan]

I really don't understand why people try to resort to defending people who take steroids by saying they don't do anything/or there is no proof they help "enhance" performance. Just look at the science behind them and their benefits as a agent for muscle growth beyond normal human capacity is evident.

I have posted this article on ESPN and its really interesting. Its from Clinical Chemistry and its a research project into the documents recovered from the East German's State Sponsored Doping program. It lists specific gains that can be expected from world class athletes in a wide range of events, once they start the program, the substances they take, side effects and also note drops in performance after athletes stop taking the drugs.

http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/43/7/1262#R4

This was over 40 years ago and these substances and the science behind their application have progressed many times since then. Look at all the medals and world records that were won in a short amount of time and try arguing that these substances do nothing.

[west coast orange and black]

csh19792001, the illegal actions of players are exactly that - illegal.
i do not absolve or pardon or condone wrongdoing. you got me mixed up with someone else.

nor am i complicit in any way. on this, you simply don't know what the hell you are talking about. dude, you are so far outta line with that.
how am i associated with drugs? how did i participate in a crime?

i do not actually expect an answer on that from you. how could i?
you do not know who i am, or what i do, or with whom. you made that up.

you also have me confused with someone who has been here "several years" and making "5,000 posts" dedicated to bonds/balco - look it up.
i have not denied. i have not explained away. if it appears that way to you then i have grossly overestimated your reading abilities, csh19792001.
my bad.

what i have done, though, is try to look at it objectively. how could i explain away and at the same time continue to examine for the truth? how is it that you claim that i "knew the whole story all along"? where does that come from? no one can make that claim. not even fainaru-wada and williams, and it's their story.

ballplayers cheated. ok.
now, what to do about it?

mlb is powerless, per player agreement, devoid a negative test result.
what do you want for baseball to do?
i am not explaining away here. what can baseball do, absent that positive test result? nothing. their hands are tied.

mlb can not toss bonds out, and bonds is not going anywhere on his own.
so, again, what to do?

i happen to think that it is a good thing that people, the fans, do not ever forget. it's part of learning. bonds made his bed, he must lie in it.

the story is what it is. let's stick with facts.
"pride goeth before the fall" is overused. to purport to know why bonds used is plain silliness.

[lllllllllllllllllll]

His entire post was flawed, why even bother responding. You could ask Caminiti, Canseco, Palmeiro, McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Juan Gonzalez, Belle, Thome, Vaughn, Ivan, Tejada....need I go on. Fact is, you don't really want to know how much they help HogWash, cause you'd have nobody left to look up to.


How do you have the audacity to criticize someone's post when your's is just as flawed, if not more ?

Besides caminiti, canseco, palmerio ( if we believe he wasnt used as a scapegoat), and bonds, the rest is just speculation, no different than reggie jackson's best friend ( who lived with him, by the way) dealing drugs to canseco.

Infact, this ridiculous post can be deemed as slander, yet you have the audacity to criticize someone's post, ridiculous.

The arguement you were using also doesnt hold much merit, i Could easily say " look at giambi and sheffield's numbers without steroids in 2005 ", it doesnt mean anything, just like your flawed misinformed post doesnt mean anything itself.

Pathetic.

[west coast orange and black]

espnfan, there really is not much of a defense of steroid use around here, that steroids do nothing. rather, trying to quantify what it is that steroids do for the baseball player.

one of the difficulties is that being the fastest and strongest does not necessarily equate into a good ballplayer, much less a superior one.

if it can be shown that taking substance x can make someone jump higher, push greater barbell weight, whatever, what does that do for the baseball player?

how does x's benefits translate onto the baseball field?

[ESPNFan]

csh19792001, the illegal actions of players are exactly that - illegal.
i do not absolve or pardon or condone wrongdoing. you got me mixed up with someone else.

nor am i complicit in any way. on this, you simply don't know what the hell you are talking about. dude, you are so far outta line with that.
how am i associated with drugs? how did i participate in a crime?

i do not actually expect an answer on that from you. how could i?
you do not know who i am, or what i do, or with whom. you made that up.

you also have me confused with someone who has been here "several years" and making "5,000 posts" dedicated to bonds/balco - look it up.
i have not denied. i have not explained away. if it appears that way to you then i have grossly overestimated your reading abilities, csh19792001.
my bad.

what i have done, though, is try to look at it objectively. how could i explain away and at the same time continue to examine for the truth? how is it that you claim that i "knew the whole story all along"? where does that come from? no one can make that claim. not even fainaru-wada and williams, and it's their story.

ballplayers cheated. ok.
now, what to do about it?

mlb is powerless, per player agreement, devoid a negative test result.
what do you want for baseball to do?
i am not explaining away here. what can baseball do, absent that positive test result? nothing. their hands are tied.

mlb can not toss bonds out, and bonds is not going anywhere on his own.
so, again, what to do?

i happen to think that it is a good thing that people, the fans, do not ever forget. it's part of learning. bonds made his bed, he must lie in it.

the story is what it is. let's stick with facts.
"pride goeth before the fall" is overused. to purport to know why bonds used is plain silliness.


Actually If he wanted to couldn't Selig trot out the "best intrest of baseball" clause to basicly make any rulling he wanted, assuming he had the backbone to do so?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Alex Sanchez was the first major league player to test positive... Mike Morse also tested positive

Ruth used illegal trick bats when he played
Cobb sharpened his spikes and slid into fielders to try and injure them

There is no PROOF that steroids help players hit homeruns, Alex Sanchez averaged about 2 HRs a season... It makes you stronger, yes, but there is no guarantee it will up your homerun production

Not to mention you have said Tejada and some of these players earlier in this topic, I just let it slide the first time

Since you're such a "stickler" on proof, do you have proof Ruth used a trick bat? Or are you referring to the bat he slammed against the ground, tried to tape and nail it back together, and continued to try and use it because it was his favorite bat. That bat, that he gave to Harry Hooper who later gave it to a museum. You mean that bat? Or do you have other "proof." You should really read up more if you're gonna talk about Ruth.

As far as Cobb, I gather you haven't done much reading on him either. Just throwing stuff out there. That's cool. Throw false stuff out there about legends, and then defend current Aholes who juice. I see the logic.

Steroids don't help hitters? I can tell you've never played baseball. It helps, and I'm NOT going to waste my breath (finger energy) explaining how and why. These topics always bring out the ignorant posters; very frustrating.

You get out of them WHAT YOU WANT TO. Sanchez did not want to become a HR hitter, he did not workout to become one. He obviously wanted speed, stamina, and injury prevention. You honestly think every player that takes them is going to hulk up or hit HR. Doesn't work like that.

[chrismarullo]

For the It Was Not Illegal At The Time Argument:

I have not read the MLB rule book but I'm pretty sure there's not a passage in there about bringing a car on the feild and running over each member of the oposition. However, since that is clearly against the law, except for maybe in Detroit, MLB probably sees no reason to include it in their rule book.

So do we now need to include the laws of every jurisdiction in which an MLB game is played in the rule book? Lets go ahead and throw in federal laws and even local deed restrictions while we're at it.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

How do you have the audacity to criticize someone's post when your's is just as flawed, if not more ?

Besides caminiti, canseco, palmerio ( if we believe he wasnt used as a scapegoat), and bonds, the rest is just speculation, no different than reggie jackson's best friend ( who lived with him, by the way) dealing drugs to canseco.

Infact, this ridiculous post can be deemed as slander, yet you have the audacity to criticize someone's post, ridiculous.

The arguement you were using also doesnt hold much merit, i Could easily say " look at giambi and sheffield's numbers without steroids in 2005 ", it doesnt mean anything, just like your flawed misinformed post doesnt mean anything itself.

Pathetic.

You missed my point, clearly.

Pathetic.

[west coast orange and black]

sultan: ...and if there's something I want to learn more about I ask.

so, go ahead, sultan, ask.
i can draw you a picture, if you'd like. :D

c'mon, admit it, those pics a few weeks back were fun, weren't they?

[west coast orange and black]

guys.

go at without "pathetic" and what-not. k?

[ESPNFan]

espnfan, there really is not much of a defense of steroid use around here, that steroids do nothing. rather, trying to quantify what it is that steroids do for the baseball player.

one of the difficulties is that being the fastest and strongest does not necessarily equate into a good ballplayer, much less a superior one.

if it can be shown that taking substance x can make someone jump higher, push greater barbell weight, whatever, what does that do for the baseball player?

how does x's benefits translate onto the baseball field?

And Im not saying that anyone could take Anabolics and be a superstar. But
the added batspeed and reflexes can make a difference to a player who already possesses the needed skillset to make a major league baseball team.
Also one's own physiology will determine how much or little they help.
But If just think about how it pertains to swinging a bat and throwing a ball and ask yourself if someone on these substances could throw it harder or hit a ball further with their aid. I'm at work but when I get home I'll post what Bill James has said about the topic as well.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Also one's own physiology will determine how much or little they help.


This is completely true. And if you want to take it a step further... because of genetic makeup, you could make the argument that African Americans are more likely to benefit at higher levels than White are, because of muscle fiber makeup.

[rockin500]

Actually If he wanted to couldn't Selig trot out the "best intrest of baseball" clause to basicly make any rulling he wanted, assuming he had the backbone to do so?
probably not, not anymore. the union would throw up so many road blocks that bud wouldnt be able to do it.

There is a 3 strike policy in baseball. he cant just override that because he feels like it.

[HogWash]

The ignorance here on steroids is incredible. You can tell none of these kids have ever sampled the drug. Steroids when taken long-term tends to weaken and/or break down cartilage and tendons, and decrease vision acuity. If they do help ( and that's a big IF) it's short-term. Anyway the fact mlb has cheated forever should excuse these 'cheaters'. You cant start banning cheaters now when the hall of fame has a bundle of them already in.

[Astro]

Since you're such a "stickler" on proof, do you have proof Ruth used a trick bat? Or are you referring to the bat he slammed against the ground, tried to tape and nail it back together, and continued to try and use it because it was his favorite bat. That bat, that he gave to Harry Hooper who later gave it to a museum. You mean that bat? Or do you have other "proof." You should really read up more if you're gonna talk about Ruth.

As far as Cobb, I gather you haven't done much reading on him either. Just throwing stuff out there. That's cool. Throw false stuff out there about legends, and then defend current Aholes who juice. I see the logic.

Steroids don't help hitters? I can tell you've never played baseball. It helps, and I'm NOT going to waste my breath (finger energy) explaining how and why. These topics always bring out the ignorant posters; very frustrating.

You get out of them WHAT YOU WANT TO. Sanchez did not want to become a HR hitter, he did not workout to become one. He obviously wanted speed, stamina, and injury prevention. You honestly think every player that takes them is going to hulk up or hit HR. Doesn't work like that.
Sultan... seeing as how I had rarely seen you around before this thread, you are very rude when someone doesnt agree with you... may I suggest you go read the guidelines, since it is apparent you have not

I'll be leaving Mattingly a PM about this matter... when someone makes a counter point you stoop to the level of badgering them... that said, grow up sir

[west coast orange and black]

espnfan: ...couldn't Selig trot out the "best intrest of baseball" clause...?

puntos for being creative.:clapping
the players union just might go out on strike over it, though.

imagine, the players walking off the job because of actions against the villified bonds.
it would not surprise me, though. not one bit.

[Buzzaldrin]

Sultan... seeing as how I had rarely seen you around before this thread, you are very rude when someone doesnt agree with you... may I suggest you go read the guidelines, since it is apparent you have not

I'll be leaving Mattingly a PM about this matter... when someone makes a counter point you stoop to the level of badgering them... that said, grow up sir

I have to protest here, and i do this as an Astros fan (possibly the biggest on these boards, ever since my first game in 1970). Sultan was within his rights- he is, whether you've seen him around or not, ALL OVER these boards- and as I and others have learned to our detriment, NEVER include Ruth in an argument with him that cannot be backed up with unshakeable fact, you will water down your other arguments immeasurably. Trust me.

Do steroids help? Well, a more important q- does a player who's a lock for the HOF, with THREE MVPs under his belt, already one of the best five tool players in history need an extra bit of assistance? AND- even saying steroids do nothing whatsoever to a player in any way. WHY would that player take them?

I'm not gonna bend over backward for this guy. There ARE cheaters in the HOF, but to flagrantly induce an illegal substance into your body, day upon day, with the specific intention of having an "edge" over the competition, well, Dock Ellis isn't in the Hall of Fame, but I really think someone should call him and get his take on this. Anybody know how to reach him?

[west coast orange and black]

you mentioning the 3-strike rule just now made me think of something, rockin500.

although the players participating in the world baseball classic are subject to wada-testing, should a player test positive, he is banned from international play for a few years, but his name is not released publicly.

such are the powers of mlb and of the players union.

[Astro]

"As I see it, wrote Bill James, in The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract, "nothing could be more typical of Ruth than to use a corked bat if he could get by with it. Ruth tested the limits of the rules constantly; this was what made him who he was. He refused to be ordinary; he refused to accept that the rules applied to him, until it was clear that they did. Constantly testing the limits of the rules, as I see him, was Babe Ruth's defining characteristic."

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/2004/12/07/baseballs_oldest_profession_revisited.php

And a post from the BF archives:

http://www.baseball-fever.com/archive/index.php/t-27185.html

[BoofBonser26]

1. according to baseball's rules, boof, only a properly administered drug test that results positive determines whether or not player used. not outside information, no matter how high the stack.

i am not arguing that bonds did not willfully cheat and lie about it.
i am past that.

2. what the san francisco chronicle writers (not sports illustrated. merely excerpts from the book, game of shadows, available in bookstores 27 march appear there) have published seems to be rehash of already-known information and very little new information.

3. for you to equate bonds with "12 other guys guilty under mlb" is incorrect information. when did bonds test positive? i am unaware that it occurred.
this is different than stating "bonds did not use". this is not my claim.
Oh Point #1 we seem to have an ireconsciliable difference, so I'm skipping that one.

Point #2: Everything I've read says that there is subsantial, overwhelming new evidence in this book that Bonds used steroids, yet you say it's all been out there. Howso?

Point #3. Bonds did not test positive under MLB rules. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE DIDN'T USE, not with the overwhelming stack of evidence amounting to proof accumulated outside of MLB.

(I appreciate your willingness to defend a minority position; not many posters would have that courage. But a bit less sarcasm, perhaps? :o )

[west coast orange and black]

#1 we seem to have an ireconsciliable difference, so I'm skipping that one.
i do not understand how you can differ on this.
it is not my opinion, it is mlb's rules.

#2: Everything I've read says that there is subsantial, overwhelming new evidence in this book that Bonds used steroids, yet you say it's all been out there. Howso?
according to the sports illustrated excerpt, the only new evidence is contained in one file that was previously sealed;
i am just over halfway through the book and have read nothing new.

#3. Bonds did not test positive under MLB rules. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE DIDN'T USE, not with the overwhelming stack of evidence amounting to proof accumulated outside of MLB.
it is fine and proper to determine that bonds used, boof, but it is incorrect to state that he tested positive. it is incorrect to lump bonds with those who did.

my apology for the sarcasm. it was unnecessary.

[Mattingly]

You missed my point, clearly.

Pathetic.
In that case, please just re-state your point and leave the "pathetic" out of it.

Thx.

[johnny]

espnfan: ...couldn't Selig trot out the "best intrest of baseball" clause...?

puntos for being creative.:clapping
the players union just might go out on strike over it, though.

imagine, the players walking off the job because of actions against the villified bonds.
it would not surprise me, though. not one bit.

First off, I give you credit for standing in there against some might close pitches. Its gotta feel like Drysdale is comin in sidearm and your Willie Mays. ;)

I was thinking the same thing but came up with the opposite conclusion. Do you really think that players want to take up the Bonds side of this argument. More importantly, do you think that their individual advisors (agents) will tell them its a good decision to do so? Endorsement dollars could go -should go- elsewhere.
Players may say so in public but behind close doors Bonds support could be soft. And this kind of strike would be impromptu so players haven't had a chance to sock away dough and even rich people can have cash flow issues.



Oh sure, players will try and use the 'due process' argument but amongst fans it will boil down to which side of the Bonds/roids/Aaron's Record do you want to be on.

[BoofBonser26]

#1 we seem to have an ireconsciliable difference, so I'm skipping that one.
i do not understand how you can differ on this.
it is not my opinion, it is mlb's rules.

#2: Everything I've read says that there is subsantial, overwhelming new evidence in this book that Bonds used steroids, yet you say it's all been out there. Howso?
according to the sports illustrated excerpt, the only new evidence is contained in one file that was previously sealed;
i am just over halfway through the book and have read nothing new.

#3. Bonds did not test positive under MLB rules. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE DIDN'T USE, not with the overwhelming stack of evidence amounting to proof accumulated outside of MLB.
it is fine and proper to determine that bonds used, boof, but it is incorrect to state that he tested positive. it is incorrect to lump bonds with those who did.

my apology for the sarcasm. it was unnecessary.
Thanks for your response. I conceed on #1. On #3, if I ever stated he tested positive under MLB rules, then I retract that. But he used, and therefore I feel justified in placing him alongside the 12 who tested positive under MLB rules. My list is "steroids users" not "players MLB caught."

[Mattingly]

This is your second post here, and you really shouldn't make a third.

Not worth responding to each and every issue you raised, it's all crap. You clearly don't understand much of anything regarding this issue.
Actually, if you have an issue with a forumer, please PM one of the CE Mods and we'll take care of it. Telling forumers what they can and cannot do here is not permitted by the regular forumers, such as yourself.

Please abide by those simple rules.

[Mattingly]

It might be better to look at a larger span of years. Up until 1998 his SA was around .550. After that, over .725.
What exactly is SA? A SABR stat, by chance?
Mattingly-
See the link I just posted. It's a great article, and directly germane to this conversation.
Thanks. I'm going to print it out and read it.

[west coast orange and black]

johnny: Drysdale comin in sidearm and your Willie Mays.
thanx. but nothin' that a nice hot whirlpool doesn't cure. ;)


Do you really think that players want to take up the Bonds side of this argument.
there isn't any "bonds side". remove the name but keep the union player.
"none is greater, none is lesser." that is the state of mind of unions. that is part of why they exist.


do you think that their individual advisors (agents) will tell them its a good decision to do so?
the players fight hard for the player agreement to end up with their most desirable position(s) possible.
they do not want to relinquish any position.


Players may say so in public but behind close doors Bonds support could be soft.
true. but it's the public statements that are, uh, public. derrek lee commented publicly in favor of bonds, f'rinstance. how would we know if he has stated anything privately?


...amongst fans it will boil down to which side of the Bonds/roids/Aaron's Record do you want to be on.
maybe. but it is complicated for many fans. aaron's numbers, are they 100% clean?
according to many former player, including much-respected hall of famers, no.

[Mattingly]

It definetly was illegal

This is the memo that went out in 1991 from MLB
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=1

Its pretty clearly stated that Anabolic Steroid use was illegal. Now the fact that they didn't or couldn't get testing in place because it had to be collectively bargain for with a players union that seem to be protecting its cheaters in a different story.
I'm reading that memo and one thing strikes me as a glaring omission:

Lack of names of specific drugs which are illegal. To me, it's one thing to say that "no illegal drugs are permitted" (to paraphrase the letter you'd posted). It's another to name what actually is illegal. I don't see that in the link you'd posted.

[west coast orange and black]

ok, boof, here's more whittling: your personal list of "steroid users" is just that, your opinion in written form.

but for the 12 who tested positive it is not a matter of opinion.

i hope that you can appreciate why i believe that there must be a clear distinction.

[Mattingly]

The cream is a drug that was designed specifically for beating drug tests.

When they test players, they look for raised testosterone levels as they compare to other chemical levels.

The cream raised testosterone levels, but had epitestosterone in it, which raised BOTH levels, therefore, not causing a positive drug test.

So while Bonds never tested positive, his high testosterone levels did raise many eyebrows for this very reason.
According to what you've read, is the "cream" something that was also a performance enhancer? Or was it primarily a "masking agent", as is so commonly called?

As to raising "both levels", which level other than the testosterone level was raised? Pardon me if I'm not too familiar with the drug testing process.

[west coast orange and black]

re this memo (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=1):

where did it originate?
when?
by whom was it drafted?
what preceeds it?
what follows?
why only this one particular page?
why no particulars/details?

it seems to be a draft written by a clerk.

[BoofBonser26]

ok, boof, here's more whittling: your personal list of "steroid users" is just that, your opinion in written form.

but for the 12 who tested positive it is not a matter of opinion.

i hope that you can appreciate why i believe that there must be a clear distinction.
No, I do agree with you. There are only 12 MLB official steroid users (at this point). There are other steroid users, none of whom I care for, and while I feel that they have disgraced the game, I understand that they're not among the 12 (inc. Bonds).

And Mattingly: didn't that MLB memo, when saying "illegeal substances" mean anabolic steroids, which were illegal after 1990 by US law? I took "illegal" in MLB's memo to mean "illegeal" by US law.

[Mattingly]

My personal take on this is if it is illegal, then baseball should have no need to ban it. the only substances Baseball needs to ban are legal ones. That is not to say that MLB should not test for illegal substances but if they are illegal it should be understood that it is banned. By contrast McGwire admitted to using Andro in '98. At the time Andro was a legal over the counter product and MLB had not banned it's use. While I believe McGwires use of the substance undermines the integrity of the game he did nothing illegl and he broke no baseball rules. If it is illegal it is illegal whether baseball bans the substance or not. I do not know if this makes any sense but that is just take on it.
To me, if something is illegal to possess, meaning that the law enforcement authorities can haul you into jail for having this on your person or trafficking/selling this, then it should automatically be added to MLB's list of banned substances. By that, it would thus be illegal.

When Mark McGwire took "andro", that was "legal" at the time by MLB standards, meaning it was *NOT* on their list of banned substances, but was illegal by the NFL, meaning that it was on their list banned substances.

To me, the various pro sports leagues should compare notes and if one substance is banned, they should look into banning the others. Why is something legal in one sport but illegal in another? That one, I don't get.

As to Andro being an over-the-counter drug, was it sold at GNC, Vitamin Shoppe and similar places the same way that Creatine is sold?

I'm a little confused with this:

"While I believe McGwires use of the substance undermines the integrity of the game he did nothing illegl and he broke no baseball rules. If it is illegal it is illegal whether baseball bans the substance or not. I do not know if this makes any sense but that is just take on it."

Are you saying in the first sentence that we should just accept McGwire's use of Andro as it was not an illegal drug and thus, McGwire broke no rules? Or are you saying in the 2nd sentence that Andro should've been illegal, whether MLB made it as such in that specific sport or not?

Please clarify.

Thanks.

[Mattingly]

And Mattingly: didn't that MLB memo, when saying "illegeal substances" mean anabolic steroids, which were illegal after 1990 by US law? I took "illegal" in MLB's memo to mean "illegeal" by US law.
When I zipped through that memo, I didn't see the words "anabolic steroids" in there.

As to cream, clear, HGH and the tons of other stuff that's taken in various ways, that was also omitted. I only saw references to illegal drugs, but no mentioning of which specific drugs were illegal.

[west coast orange and black]

two-three, sultan will back me up on this:

"the cream" and "clear/the clear" are each steroids.
neither is a masking agent.

when athletes are tested, detectors look for raised testosterone levels as compared to other chemical levels. (levels must be checked against baseline levels of something.)

"the cream" was found to raise testosterone levels, but "the cream" itself contained epitestosterone, and so levels of both testosterone and epitestosterone were raised. the detectors now did not have a baseline level against which to compare. thus, no positive drug test.

bonds, to my knowledge, has not ever tested positive. but his unusually high testosterone levels did arouse curiosity. the thing is, there are reasons other than illegal drug use that cause high levels of testosterone.

[west coast orange and black]

part of the problem that i have with this memo is that it is open to interpretation.
a well-crafted document leaves room for no such measure.

[Mattingly]

This notion that steroids taints the game is pure crap. Mlb has cheated forever. ruth corked, perry threw spitballs, willie mays and stargell used amphetamines, ty cobb cheated on the basepaths, my god the list goes on and on. There is no proof steroids make anyone hit better. Ask micheal morse, wally joyner, benito santiago, and alex sanchez how steroids helped them hit. Steroids is nothing but a story created by the media. It will blow over eventually when the media moves on to a better story.
If steroids had no effect whatsoever on athletic performance, I do believe we never would've heard much about it. The fact that people have used it, and have been using it for at least 35-40 years (from at least the days of Schwarzenegger's "Pumping Iron" movie circa 1971) shows that its name alone stands as a performance enhancer.

If steroids were not a performance enhancer, it would've been debunked a long time ago.

[BoofBonser26]

When I zipped through that memo, I didn't see the words "anabolic steroids" in there.

As to cream, clear, HGH and the tons of other stuff that's taken in various ways, that was also omitted. I only saw references to illegal drugs, but no mentioning of which specific drugs were illegal.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. The memo only says "illegal drugs." I assumed the memo meant "illegal under US law." Therefore, anabolic steroids.

[Mattingly]

two-three, sultan will back me up on this:

"the cream" and "clear/the clear" are each steroids.
neither is a masking agent.

when athletes are tested, detectors look for raised testosterone levels as compared to other chemical levels. (levels must be checked against baseline levels of something.)

"the cream" was found to raise testosterone levels, but "the cream" itself contained epitestosterone, and so levels of both testosterone and epitestosterone were raised. the detectors now did not have a baseline level against which to compare. thus, no positive drug test.

bonds, to my knowledge, has not ever tested positive. but his unusually high testosterone levels did arouse curiosity. the thing is, there are reasons other than illegal drug use that cause high levels of testosterone.
So could it be said that "the cream" and "the clear" both serve similar purposes, that is to increase athletic performance, as they are anabolic steroids? Or were they non-anabolic steroids?

So when someone gets a drug test for anabolic steroids and other known substances, the level of testosterone is compared directly to the level of epitestosterone? And when the testosterone level is greatly increased in relation to the epitestosterone level (like a ratio), this indicates that the person has used anabolic steroids?

But with the cream and the clear, both the testosterone and epistesterone levels were increased in similar amounts, so that the ratio was not significantly increased, despite the increase in testosterone (and epitestosterone) levels?

[BoofBonser26]

two-three, sultan will back me up on this:

"the cream" and "clear/the clear" are each steroids.
neither is a masking agent.

when athletes are tested, detectors look for raised testosterone levels as compared to other chemical levels. (levels must be checked against baseline levels of something.)

"the cream" was found to raise testosterone levels, but "the cream" itself contained epitestosterone, and so levels of both testosterone and epitestosterone were raised. the detectors now did not have a baseline level against which to compare. thus, no positive drug test.

bonds, to my knowledge, has not ever tested positive. but his unusually high testosterone levels did arouse curiosity. the thing is, there are reasons other than illegal drug use that cause high levels of testosterone.
Now see, that makes "the cream" look like the perfect example of a masking agent. Take the cream, no way to tell if the level actually increased or not, therefore you can't detect other things, therefore masking agent. Thoughts?

[Mattingly]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. The memo only says "illegal drugs." I assumed the memo meant "illegal under US law." Therefore, anabolic steroids.
Thanks. That's the thing. It's too vague. You can't have a drug test policy that vague. You've got a league of guys who were making up to about $8m at the time (whatever the highest salary at the time doesn't concern me), and you have vagueness in there?

If anything, it should be a multi-page thing, and at the back, they should have some exhibits and such to USA law as to what is illegal, and specifically mention that any substance found under USA law (citing this) would thus be illegal under MLB.

This policy is too vague as to what is "illegal" and what is "legal", so any positive drug tester could argue that he didn't know what was legal and what wasn't.

[Mattingly]

Now see, that makes "the cream" look like the perfect example of a masking agent. Take the cream, no way to tell if the level actually increased or not, therefore you can't detect other things, therefore masking agent. Thoughts?
To me, it all depends upon whether or not "the cream" and/or "the clear" had any effects on one's performance. If it actually aided in the hitting of a ball, speed of recovery, etc, then I'd say it's got some kind of performance enhancement. To be a masking agent, in my clearly uninformed view, it would need to mess with the levels of stuff that the drug testers are looking for.

[BoofBonser26]

Thanks. That's the thing. It's too vague. You can't have a drug test policy that vague. You've got a league of guys who were making up to about $8m at the time (whatever the highest salary at the time doesn't concern me), and you have vagueness in there?

If anything, it should be a multi-page thing, and at the back, they should have some exhibits and such to USA law as to what is illegal, and specifically mention that any substance found under USA law (citing this) would thus be illegal under MLB.

This policy is too vague as to what is "illegal" and what is "legal", so any positive drug tester could argue that he didn't know what was legal and what wasn't.
Right. I agree with you completely on that.

Are you all aware of page 2? I just found it. (sorry if I'm slow).
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=2

"This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controled substances, including steroids or prescription drugs for which the individual in possesion of the drug does not have a prescription."

That says steroids straight out, but again, no "illegal" reference point.

[west coast orange and black]

So could it be said that "the cream" and "the clear" both serve similar purposes, that is to increase athletic performance, as they are anabolic steroids?
yes.


So when someone gets a drug test for anabolic steroids and other known substances, the level of testosterone is compared directly to the level of epitestosterone?
yes.

And when the testosterone level is greatly increased in relation to the epitestosterone level (like a ratio), this indicates that the person has used anabolic steroids?
it can, yes. but there are other ways that testosterone levels can increase.

But with the cream and the clear, both the testosterone and epistesterone levels were increased in similar amounts, so that the ratio was not significantly increased, despite the increase in testosterone (and epitestosterone) levels?
similar, yes. similar enough so that it was very close to impossible to conclude that illegal drugs were taken.

[csh19792001]

America knows the truth now. A few people who can't take their Giants goggles off mean nothing. \

This isn't worth the wasted time of effort.

[west coast orange and black]

Now see, that makes "the cream" look like the perfect example of a masking agent. Take the cream, no way to tell if the level actually increased or not, therefore you can't detect other things, therefore masking agent. Thoughts?
now, i agree with you on this boof. sorta.

one of the effects of "the cream" was the increased levels of epitestosterone. however, that is not what it was depended upon to do. it was depended upon as the anabolic steroid that it is.

"the cream" could not be depended upon to mask illegal steroid use, as factors other than testosterone levels are checked.

[BoofBonser26]

Now see, that makes "the cream" look like the perfect example of a masking agent. Take the cream, no way to tell if the level actually increased or not, therefore you can't detect other things, therefore masking agent. Thoughts?
now, i agree with you on this boof. sorta.

one of the effects of "the cream" was the increased levels of epitestosterone. however, that is not what it was depended upon to do. it was depended upon as the anabolic steroid that it is.

"the cream" could not be depended upon to mask illegal steroid use, as factors other than testosterone levels are checked.
So can it be safely said that "the cream" is an imperfect masking agent? I would say so.

[west coast orange and black]

And what egregious "actions against Bonds" would the players walk out on?
should selig encroach bonds and try to toss him outta baseball, as some want selig to do, the players union would go nuts.

vilified need not include slander. what it needs is a maligning statement.
surely you have read a statement or two of this sort against bonds.
also, it makes no difference whether the subject brought about the statements upon himslef, only that they were made.

besides, what are you doing being seen with a person who is an accessory to a crime?
what was it? oh, yeah: i "seem to be complicit with the whole steroid mess, and its perpetrators."
better run, man.

[west coast orange and black]

So can it be safely said that "the cream" is an imperfect masking agent? I would say so.
agreed.

[west coast orange and black]

csh19792001: This isn't worth the wasted time of effort.

apology accepted. :D

[Mattingly]

Since you're such a "stickler" on proof, do you have proof Ruth used a trick bat? Or are you referring to the bat he slammed against the ground, tried to tape and nail it back together, and continued to try and use it because it was his favorite bat. That bat, that he gave to Harry Hooper who later gave it to a museum. You mean that bat? Or do you have other "proof." You should really read up more if you're gonna talk about Ruth.

As far as Cobb, I gather you haven't done much reading on him either. Just throwing stuff out there. That's cool. Throw false stuff out there about legends, and then defend current Aholes who juice. I see the logic.

Steroids don't help hitters? I can tell you've never played baseball. It helps, and I'm NOT going to waste my breath (finger energy) explaining how and why. These topics always bring out the ignorant posters; very frustrating.

You get out of them WHAT YOU WANT TO. Sanchez did not want to become a HR hitter, he did not workout to become one. He obviously wanted speed, stamina, and injury prevention. You honestly think every player that takes them is going to hulk up or hit HR. Doesn't work like that.
That's pretty heavy-handed in its entirety. If you have a difference with someone here, please try addressing the issue they've raised, rather than belittling the person who's raised the issue.

If you feel that the person has misinterpreted your opinion, please correct them without acting like you're above them.

If you're knowledgeable, then acting above anyone doesn't really do anything to bring forth that knowledge. Doesn't take forever to provide a link that supports your point.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Sultan... seeing as how I had rarely seen you around before this thread, you are very rude when someone doesnt agree with you... may I suggest you go read the guidelines, since it is apparent you have not

I'll be leaving Mattingly a PM about this matter... when someone makes a counter point you stoop to the level of badgering them... that said, grow up sir

Likewise.

PM away. Many here will vouch that I don't post with hostile tone often. You brought that out in me, because the Ruth corked bat issue has come up all too often by people trying to defend Bonds or steroids.

Until you've done the research on the matter, rather than simply reading some fact-less account in a Bill James book, you should leave it alone. There was the broken bat Harry Hooper incident, and another during a game where he and another teammate messed with a bat, and tried to give it to Gehrig to use. It was obviously screwed with and Gehrig pushed it away, but they all still got a kick out of it.

Just another Ruth myth. The debunking effort will never stop as you have clearly shown. And as I have pointed out on here before, even if you assume that A) It was Ruth's bat B) It was indeed corked C) He used it in a regular season game, it's been scientifically proven that corking a bat does more harm than good. B and C aren't true, so it's a moot point anyway.

[west coast orange and black]

this is yer lucky day, sultan, not that you need any luck with this one.

i believe that not all cheating is the same.
and i believe that it was not ruth's intention to cheat with the hooper bat.

[Erik Bedard]

Guys... have you looked at the picture of Bonds on that article from around 10 years ago? Well, anyway, here's a few more.

http://crankygreg.blogs.com/crank_gregs_view/barry_batting.jpg

http://www.the-means.com/images/barryold.jpg

There is no way he bulked up this much. As you get past your mid-thirties, your body generally starts to deteriorate, right? Not with Barry.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

this is yer lucky day, sultan, not that you need any luck with this one.

i believe that not all cheating is the same.
and i believe that it was not ruth's intention to cheat with the hooper bat.

Oh but it's such a good story WC, just like the called shot, or him saving a dog, or him holding Huggins off a train, or his bellyache being an STD, or the Yanks inventing pin stripes for him, or the '20 ball being "juiced", or him getting an inside the parker on a pop fly, or him being 300 pounds according to the John Goodman movie. It's all makes such a good story :rolleyes: ;)

[jpenrod]

Okay I realize my original post was poorly put together so let me try to clarify

To me, if something is illegal to possess, meaning that the law enforcement authorities can haul you into jail for having this on your person or trafficking/selling this, then it should automatically be added to MLB's list of banned substances. By that, it would thus be illegal.

I agree and my understanding right now ids that if a substance is listed as a Schedule II Controlled substance by the government it is banned in baseball even if MLB does not specifically list the substance.

When Mark McGwire took "andro", that was "legal" at the time by MLB standards, meaning it was *NOT* on their list of banned substances, but was illegal by the NFL, meaning that it was on their list banned substances.

To me, the various pro sports leagues should compare notes and if one substance is banned, they should look into banning the others. Why is something legal in one sport but illegal in another? That one, I don't get.

It would be nice if they standardized their lists, but until the government steps in and legislates what is banned in professional sports (I hope this never happens) I do not see a scenario were they standardize anything. After all they are completely different organizations.

As to Andro being an over-the-counter drug, was it sold at GNC, Vitamin Shoppe and similar places the same way that Creatine is sold?

It is my understanding that in 1998 this was the case. I have never taken supplements so I can not list specific supplements that contained Andro, but speaking with several close friends that were into this stuff that told me that Andro was indeed readily available. even now if you run a search on Androstenedione you can find supplements for purchase in the USA. It was not until 2005 that "Andro" became a Controlled Substance by the federal government.

I'm a little confused with this:

"While I believe McGwires use of the substance undermines the integrity of the game he did nothing illegal and he broke no baseball rules. If it is illegal it is illegal whether baseball bans the substance or not. I do not know if this makes any sense but that is just take on it."

Are you saying in the first sentence that we should just accept McGwire's use of Andro as it was not an illegal drug and thus, McGwire broke no rules? Or are you saying in the 2nd sentence that Andro should've been illegal, whether MLB made it as such in that specific sport or not?

Please clarify.

Thanks.

These were intended to be two completely independent statements. first of all at the time that McGwire took Andro (1998) it was neither a banned substance nor a controlled substance (illegal to posses). I do not like the fact that he took andro, but he did nothing illegal or against the rules of the game. It is like when I was in college, I had a professor that gave two question tests. He used the same 8 questions over and over and would just mix them up. Some friends had word files for this professor and when it came time for the tests they would study the old tests and memorize the 8 questions. they did not know which two would be on the test, but they knew it would be two of the eight. Some people view this as cheating, some people view this as working the system. There was nothing illegal about them studying the old tests, but it still gave them an unfair advantage. I view what McGwire did in a similar way. He did not take an illegal substance nor did he break an MLB rules, but I just feel cheated that he used something to increase his strength (or whatever Andro did). He obviously felt it gave him some edge or advantage otherwise he would not have done it. Should we just accept it, well to a degree you have to I mean just because you do not like something does not mean anything can be done about it.

As for the second sentence All I was saying was what you said at the beginning of your post. if a substance is illegal I really do not care if it is on the banned list, the player should not posses or use it IT IS AGAINST THE LAW!

I hope this clarifies things at least a little.

[BoofBonser26]

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060308&content_id=1340574&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

[VTSoxFan]

Now, I heard during a WBC broadcast this afternoon that if the US team makes it to the second round, Bonds would be willing to play. I didn't hear any more than that, so there are probably some details I missed.

If this is indeed the case, then what does it say toward this current argument given the intenational testing standards he'd have to meet?

[johnny]

johnny: Drysdale comin in sidearm and your Willie Mays.
thanx. but nothin' that a nice hot whirlpool doesn't cure. ;)

well, you might want to crank that baby up. ;) but i do appreciate your willingness to stand in there.

Do you really think that players want to take up the Bonds side of this argument.
there isn't any "bonds side". remove the name but keep the union player.
"none is greater, none is lesser." that is the state of mind of unions. that is part of why they exist.
these guys are union in name but they ain't a trade union. all of these highly paid professionals have individual advisors and unlike the trades have highly truncated careers and their own stats/goals that may not coincide with a strike over barry's issues.


do you think that their individual advisors (agents) will tell them its a good decision to do so?
the players fight hard for the player agreement to end up with their most desirable position(s) possible.
they do not want to relinquish any position.
again, they may not want to waste capital and public good will/endorsement deals over this fight.


Players may say so in public but behind close doors Bonds support could be soft.
true. but it's the public statements that are, uh, public. derrek lee commented publicly in favor of bonds, f'rinstance. how would we know if he has stated anything privately?
don't know, yet. but its early. the first sign will be from retired hall of famers that will pave the way for current players to let loose.


...amongst fans it will boil down to which side of the Bonds/roids/Aaron's Record do you want to be on.
maybe. but it is complicated for many fans. aaron's numbers, are they 100% clean?
according to many former player, including much-respected hall of famers, no.
in regards to hammerin hank being a cheat i haven't heard that especially from respected hall of famers. so please give some details so i can do a little research on the matter.

Nice article from David Wells speaking on Bonds.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2360259

[Astro]

No, what they said is that he is on the provisional roster... and after each round there can be replacements for other players...

[ESPNFan]

Okay I realize my original post was poorly put together so let me try to clarify



I agree and my understanding right now ids that if a substance is listed as a Schedule II Controlled substance by the government it is banned in baseball even if MLB does not specifically list the substance.



It would be nice if they standardized their lists, but until the government steps in and legislates what is banned in professional sports (I hope this never happens) I do not see a scenario were they standardize anything. After all they are completely different organizations.



It is my understanding that in 1998 this was the case. I have never taken supplements so I can not list specific supplements that contained Andro, but speaking with several close friends that were into this stuff that told me that Andro was indeed readily available. even now if you run a search on Androstenedione you can find supplements for purchase in the USA. It was not until 2005 that "Andro" became a Controlled Substance by the federal government.



These were intended to be two completely independent statements. first of all at the time that McGwire took Andro (1998) it was neither a banned substance nor a controlled substance (illegal to posses). I do not like the fact that he took andro, but he did nothing illegal or against the rules of the game. It is like when I was in college, I had a professor that gave two question tests. He used the same 8 questions over and over and would just mix them up. Some friends had word files for this professor and when it came time for the tests they would study the old tests and memorize the 8 questions. they did not know which two would be on the test, but they knew it would be two of the eight. Some people view this as cheating, some people view this as working the system. There was nothing illegal about them studying the old tests, but it still gave them an unfair advantage. I view what McGwire did in a similar way. He did not take an illegal substance nor did he break an MLB rules, but I just feel cheated that he used something to increase his strength (or whatever Andro did). He obviously felt it gave him some edge or advantage otherwise he would not have done it. Should we just accept it, well to a degree you have to I mean just because you do not like something does not mean anything can be done about it.

As for the second sentence All I was saying was what you said at the beginning of your post. if a substance is illegal I really do not care if it is on the banned list, the player should not posses or use it IT IS AGAINST THE LAW!

I hope this clarifies things at least a little.

To me Andro is a smoking gun of other substanes being used. Andro was used by the East germans in their state dpoing program. By itself it basicly does nothing but has "steroidal properties". But when you use it while also doing Anabolics it increases the effectivenes of the steroid.

And It was pretty much confirmed by the findings of the FBI in this report on "operation Equine":

"Here's a look at the steroid cocktail FBI informants say Mark McGwire took to become big in the '90s:


1/2 cc of testosterone cypionate every three days

1 cc of testosterone enanthate per week

1/4 cc of equipoise and winstrol v every three days, injected into the buttocks, one shot for one cheek, one shot for the other"
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/story/289500p-247837c.html

[FrenchyLefebvre]

Geez, and to think people got all riled up & POed at MLB for letting mere harmless cokeheads have a zillion chances throughout the '80s & '90s!

The Goodens & Howes' illegal substances were indeed "against the rules of society, but NOT of baseball" -- thus, of course, harmless to the "integrity" and "legitimacy" of the Games, right?

This present mess makes me long for those Pasquel Perez & Strawberry headlines again -- yup, the good ol' days :evil

So ironic, it's sickening. Way to go, MLB.
Way to keep fans packin' the parks with your great drug policies -- protecting every repeated illegal drug-using star player throughout the years!!
Like what you have now, MLB??

I'm more disgusted with MLB than Gooden ... Bonds, Raffy & Co.

[ESPNFan]

The ignorance here on steroids is incredible. You can tell none of these kids have ever sampled the drug. Steroids when taken long-term tends to weaken and/or break down cartilage and tendons, and decrease vision acuity. If they do help ( and that's a big IF) it's short-term. Anyway the fact mlb has cheated forever should excuse these 'cheaters'. You cant start banning cheaters now when the hall of fame has a bundle of them already in.

Well Professor If your such an expert please explain to us all how Anabolics "weaken and/or break down cartilage and tendons" when in the same paragraph question wheather or not they even help? Please don't spare us any details as this ought to be very entertaining.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Well Professor If your such an expert please explain to us all how Anabolics "weaken and/or break down cartilage and tendons" when in the same paragraph question wheather or not they even help? Please don't spare us any details as this ought to be very entertaining.

Don't expect any enlightening, original response. Careful how you talk to him though, you can't question the stuff thrown on the wall. Just wait 'til it drips down.

[cavalier1968]

:{<


Cav

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Ruth used illegal trick bats when he played
Cobb sharpened his spikes and slid into fielders to try and injure them


You may have missed it. More than one time I posted a copy of the original article that appeared in a few major newspapers in 1923. Ban Johnson AL president ordered Babe Ruth and Ken Williams to stop using the "Crawford Bat." This was not a corked bat, it was laminated, it was not against any rule that I know of in that year.

Ruth used the bat for a couple or few weeks in that season, Ken Williams part of the season. Ruth was surprised, as was Williams since their was no rule against using that type bat.

[brewcrew82]

Oh boy, now race has been bought into the issue. :ughh

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060309/sp_nm/baseball_bonds_dc;_ylt=AvWb9uv.dFTc0MK4kmDLvcsN97Q F;_ylu=X3oDMTA4aTcxZmtlBHNlYwMxNjk4

[Sultan_1895-1948]

You may have missed it. More than one time I posted a copy of the original article that appeared in a few major newspapers in 1923. Ban Johnson AL president ordered Babe Ruth and Ken Williams to stop using the "Crawford Bat." This was not a corked bat, it was laminated, it was not against any rule that I know of in that year.

Ruth used the bat for a couple or few weeks in that season, Ken Williams part of the season. Ruth was surprised, as was Williams since their was no rule against using that type bat.

Nice work Joe.

In one of the links Astro posted, they referred to a bat made up four pieces of wood glued together.

So there's the Crawford bat

The cracked bat given to Hooper - cracked at the handle. He tried to put it back together with tape and small nails.

Another bat which was part of a practical joke. It was obviously tampered with, they didn't try to hide it. The idea was that when Gehrig hit a ball with it, the pieces would go flying everywhere and they'd all get a big laugh. He never used it though.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Oh boy, now race has been bought into the issue. :ughh

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060309/sp_nm/baseball_bonds_dc;_ylt=AvWb9uv.dFTc0MK4kmDLvcsN97Q F;_ylu=X3oDMTA4aTcxZmtlBHNlYwMxNjk4

Was only a matter of time.

:hp our society

[Astro]

You may have missed it. More than one time I posted a copy of the original article that appeared in a few major newspapers in 1923. Ban Johnson AL president ordered Babe Ruth and Ken Williams to stop using the "Crawford Bat." This was not a corked bat, it was laminated, it was not against any rule that I know of in that year.

Ruth used the bat for a couple or few weeks in that season, Ken Williams part of the season. Ruth was surprised, as was Williams since their was no rule against using that type bat.
Just out of curiosity... steroids werent illegal in the majors when he did it... in the context of the rule, how is it any different?

[FrenchyLefebvre]

<<<McCovey scoffed at the idea but said that, as a black man, Bonds was subject to more scrutiny as he sought to pass Babe Ruth's 714 home runs and Hank Aaron's all-time record of 755. Bonds finished last season at 708. >>>


Did he say Hank Aaron?
I love Willie. But, C'mon. With all due respect, it's different today than when Willie played.
Memo to Willie: Barry's no Derek Jeter or Ernie Banks!

(Somewhere, Michael Jordan is probably scratching his head at this comment, too).

[ESPNFan]

Just out of curiosity... steroids werent illegal in the majors when he did it... in the context of the rule, how is it any different?

It definetly was illegal

This is the memo that went out in 1991 from MLB
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=1


Its pretty cut and dry.
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/steroids/index.html

Anabolics were most definetly illegal.

FIXED THE LINK

[Astro]

It definetly was illegal

This is the memo that went out in 1991 from MLB
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/etick...emo=1991&num=1


Its pretty cut and dry.
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/steroids/index.html

Anabolics were most definetly illegal.
404 - FILE NOT FOUND is what I got when I clicked the 1st link

I know it is illegal in the United States... but in the CONTEXT of the rules, it did not say steroids were against the rules.... I know its unethical and illegal in the country

[DoubleX]

Oh boy, now race has been bought into the issue. :ughh

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060309/sp_nm/baseball_bonds_dc;_ylt=AvWb9uv.dFTc0MK4kmDLvcsN97Q F;_ylu=X3oDMTA4aTcxZmtlBHNlYwMxNjk4

I can't blame McCovey given the environment he grew up in and the kind of things he likely had to endure on his to the Majors and as well as when he got there.

I also think for many, the animosity towards Bonds does have something to do with race. Whether people realize it or not, a great deal of America still has issues with race, at least on the subconcious level, and for many, on a higher level. Think back to the homerun race in '98 - McGwire v. Sosa. Even though Sosa was well-beloved, don't you think most of white America was pulling for McGwire to do it?

I think for a lot of white America, it is much more difficult to bring down a great white hero like McGwire, then it is bring down a black hero (the animosity now towards Sosa reflects this, and there is probably less reason out there to condemn Sosa than McGwire at this point), and on the other end, white America much more quickly raises a white hero then it does a black hero. And considering that many never considered Bonds a hero anyway on the level of McGwire (which could also be due to race in part), it is much easier for people to lash out at Bonds and bring him down. Basically, my point is, if this were McGwire or another white hero, the public reaction would not be so vicious. I also think if Bonds were white, the stuff he was doing in the 90s, the three MVPs, the speed/power combo, would have been better appreciated by America, and he would have been portrayed as more of a hero (despite his surliess - and might not have been so surly if he had received that kind of praise from the general public). There is no question in my mind, that Bonds in the 90s, was under-appreciated as a player. Not saying this at all condones his conduct, just saying there is more than meets the eye to some things.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Just out of curiosity... steroids werent illegal in the majors when he did it... in the context of the rule, how is it any different?

Astro,

Are you honestly going to draw a parallel between using a legal laminated bat, and using steroids?

I can't believe this is still even an issue.

[Astro]

I'm directing this toward ESPN... you will just badger

In the CONTEXT of the rules only, how is there a difference? I'm just asking the question

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I'm directing this toward ESPN... you will just badger

In the CONTEXT of the rules only, how is there a difference? I'm just asking the question

And while you're drowning, you will reach out and try to hold yourself up by drowning the person next to you. The Babe bat issue is a dead one and holds no water. That's not badgering, it's fact. Get over yourself.