# Should Bonds get an Asterisk?



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

With Barry Bonds closing in on the 3rd all time home run mark (and not too far from Hank Aaron???s top spot), the growing steroids controversy is causing some to wonder if current records should carry an asterisk.


----------



## MaxMirkin (Dec 3, 2004)

Yes...cause he's a prick.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

I always thought he was a jerk.


----------



## Twin Peak (Dec 3, 2004)

No.


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Yes


----------



## Twin Peak (Dec 3, 2004)

No.


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 3, 2004)

DEFINATELY!!!    I say give the record back to Maris!!!


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

Archangel said:
			
		

> DEFINATELY!!!    I say give the record back to Maris!!!


Agreed


----------



## Danman (Dec 3, 2004)

yes


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Archangel said:
			
		

> DEFINATELY!!!    I say give the record back to Maris!!!


Agreed, McGuire was another one  juicin.


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Christ, when does it end ? Soon you'll hear Tiger Woods was on the shit.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

i don't think he deserves an asterisk. Steroids may make the ball go slightly farther, but goddamn, give the guy some credit. he's one of the top 2 hitters of all time. pitchers DON'T pitch to the guy, and when they do, it's NOT the steroids that are making contact with the ball...


----------



## Twin Peak (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> i don't think he deserves an asterisk. Steroids may make the ball go slightly farther, but goddamn, give the guy some credit. he's one of the top 2 hitters of all time. pitchers DON'T pitch to the guy, and when they do, it's NOT the steroids that are making contact with the ball...



Bingo.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

I have been playing ball since I can remember, and bodybuilding on and off since I was 16. 
I do  know for sure that when I train that ball travels alot further. My only problem is flexability.

I think it did help him alot, how can his numbers get better at an older age?
Even Jordan slowed down as he got older.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

No bingo


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Stop, no doubt he has the natural ability, but with the help of steroids to increase his bat speed thru the strike zone. Killer combination.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> Stop, no doubt he has the natural ability, but with the help of steroids to increase his bat speed thru the strike zone. Killer combination.


Thank you.


----------



## Twin Peak (Dec 3, 2004)

Steroids (and strength) have relatively little to do with bat speed.  

Hand-eye cooridination is the key, particularly with batting average.

Lastly, probably 75% of athletes use steroids, and Bonds is dominate nonetheless.


----------



## Twin Peak (Dec 3, 2004)

Bingo.


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Twin Peak said:
			
		

> Steroids (and strength) have relatively little to do with bat speed.
> 
> Hand-eye cooridination is the key, particularly with batting average.
> 
> Lastly, probably 75% of athletes use steroids, and Bonds is dominate nonetheless.


So if steroids don't enhance physical performance in baseball, why are they taking them ?


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Next I'll be told that steroids don't help track athletes run faster and jump higher..


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

> Next I'll be told that steroids don't help track athletes run faster and jump higher..


Bingo, thats the main reason they are banned from the olympics


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> So if steroids don't enhance physical performance in baseball, why are they taking them ?


Most of these ballplayers are now spilling their guts now, saying that the reason they take it is to have an advantage over other players.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

Twin Peak said:
			
		

> Steroids (and strength) have relatively little to do with bat speed.
> 
> Hand-eye cooridination is the key, particularly with batting average.
> 
> Lastly, probably 75% of athletes use steroids, and Bonds is dominate nonetheless.



Yup


----------



## I Are Baboon (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> i don't think he deserves an asterisk. Steroids may make the ball go slightly farther, but goddamn, give the guy some credit. he's one of the top 2 hitters of all time. pitchers DON'T pitch to the guy, and when they do, it's NOT the steroids that are making contact with the ball...



Barry Bonds is also a fantastic base runner with speed and he is an above average outfielder.  The 'roids may have helped him hit the ball further, but that is all.  People, let's keep in mind that he won MVP awards in 1990, 1992, and 1993 which were way before his steroid use supposedly began.

I voted NO.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> So if steroids don't enhance physical performance in baseball, why are they taking them ?



They DO enhance their physical performance, but ONLY slightly. 

 The steroids probably make hte ball travel a little further, but that's it. Bonds is the one that makes contact with that homerun swing.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

and bottom line, like i said before, the guy NEVER gets pitched to. Steroids will NOT make him hit that homer on that maybe ONE strike he gets per at bat.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

Sorry, but that's not enough proof.  

I just can't understand how his numbers got better with him getting older.

God.....am I sounding like Johnnny..


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

and guys, please read my letter to the editor of the Hartford Courant sports page in the "Giambi admits use" thread. 

it's right in line with what we're talkin' about...
let me know what you think...


----------



## I Are Baboon (Dec 3, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I just can't understand how his numbers got better with him getting older.



It can happen.  Look at Curt Schilling.  He didn't have his best years until he got into his 30's.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Sorry, but that's not enough proof.
> 
> I just can't understand how his numbers got better with him getting older.
> 
> God.....am I sounding like Johnnny..



Mino-

we have nothing to prove. YOU need to prove that steroids DID in fact make him hit homers. We can't debate something that's subjective when there's nothing to debate (cuz we said steroids DIDN'T do anything)

MY POINT IS: steroids ARE NOT giving him that swing. they ARE NOT making hit that homer on the ONE STRIKE he sees per at bat, if he's even lucky enough to get one pitch at all to hit.

TRUST ME, bro. It's ALL about your swing. Juice may just make the ball go a tad farther. Look at Ken Griffey Jr. Tell me steroids would've made him the greatest homerun hitter of all time had he not gotten injured all the time. 

IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SWING...


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> They DO enhance their physical performance, but ONLY slightly.


Everyone has their own opinion, but even a slight enhancement at a professional's level is the difference between Good and exceptional.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I just can't understand how his numbers got better with him getting older.



Why not  

Just because they are getting older doesn't mean anything. It seems to be a pretty popular thing nowadays anyways...

Brett Favre, Jordan, Schilling, The Unit....


----------



## I Are Baboon (Dec 3, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> Everyone has their own opinion, but even a slight enhancement at a professional's level is the difference between Good and exceptional.



I can agree with that.  You ever see _Bull Durham?_  I didn't care for it myself, but there is a pretty good scene where Crash Davis says the difference between a .275 and a .300 hitter is only one hit per week.

EDIT:  But like I said, Bonds was winning MVP's before this steroid stuff started.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> Everyone has their own opinion, but even a slight enhancement at a professional's level is the difference between Good and exceptional.



See, i disagree, bro.

A SLIGHT enhancement WON'T turn someone into Barry Bonds' caliber, and that's ALL steroids will give you. 

Barry Bonds is one of the top 2 hitters of ALL TIME. Bro, they DON'T pitch to the guy. And every time he's at bat, he does one of four things. 
He: 
a) hits a homer
b) doubles or singles
c) strikes out (once in a blue moon) 
d) walks (most common, b/c they DON"T pitch to him)

I don't care if you're on ALL THE JUICE IN THE WORLD. it Will not make you into someone of Barry Bonds' caliber.


----------



## I Are Baboon (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> I don't care if you're on ALL THE JUICE IN THE WORLD. it Will not make you into someone of Barry Bonds' caliber.



Excellent point.  Just look at JEREMY GIAMBI.


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> Mino-
> 
> we have nothing to prove. YOU need to prove that steroids DID in fact make him hit homers. We can't debate something that's subjective when there's nothing to debate (cuz we said steroids DIDN'T do anything)


Just look at how many home runs he hit before he started the steroids and what he has done since being on them.. Did he ever hit 70 home runs in one year before using steroids. There is really no question what the drugs have done for him, but believe what you want.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> Just look at how many home runs he hit before he started the steroids and what he has done since being on them.. Did he ever hit 70 home runs in one year before using steroids. There is really no question what the drugs have done for him, but believe what you want.



So, you're gonna tell me that steroids gave him Superman vision that allows him to see that ONE strike he gets (AT MOST) per at bat, and then steroids give him the ability to jack that thing outta the park, SO OFTEN?


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

I Are Baboon said:
			
		

> Excellent point. Just look at JEREMY GIAMBI.


Actually he wasn't all that bad, the last 2 years he's been hurt.  
[size=-2][/size]


----------



## BoneCrusher (Dec 3, 2004)

If he took the juice and the risk it carries ... it was for the benifit.  He deserves the asterisk.  He is top shelf, but he knew before he started to hit the gear he would get the * ... so give it too him.  You must with out a doubt still call Bonds ONE of the top players in the game to have ever hit a ball ... but he made his choice for us when he took the juice.


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> So, you're gonna tell me that steroids gave him Superman vision that allows him to see that ONE strike he gets (AT MOST) per at bat, and then steroids give him the ability to jack that thing outta the park, SO OFTEN?


Just saying look at the before and after, and Jeremy Giambi is barely an average player to begin with, all the juice in the world isn't going to make him great, as opposed to Bonds who was  already a multiple MVP .


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

i hear ya, spike.

but seriously, it's not even bout the HR's. 

Look at his OBP and BA compared to the amount he walks. 

ITS UNREAL.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Actually he wasn't all that bad, the last 2 years he's been hurt.


Damn...I need glasses, I thought he wrote Jason


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> i hear ya, spike.
> 
> but seriously, it's not even bout the HR's.
> 
> ...


I hear ya.. It's going to be interesting to see how all this plays out.


----------



## I'm Trying (Dec 3, 2004)

I voted No. I don't care for Bonds as a person he is an outstanding ballplayer. I bet there are several "natural" baseball players around stronger then Barry Bonds and don't hit what he does/did. 
I have no problems with baseball players juiceing. If they get stronger, so be it. If it helps their career by being able to play longer even better. Look at pitchers. Since they came out with "Tommy John" surgery this has help put another 5+ years on most pitchers (John Lieber etc.).


----------



## BoneCrusher (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex his numbers are steller ... fucking awesome.  He has to be held to the same rules as the lesser players do.


----------



## Flex (Dec 3, 2004)

BoneCrusher said:
			
		

> Flex his numbers are steller ... fucking awesome.  He has to be held to the same rules as the lesser players do.



I understand that!

but like i said, all the steriods in the world won't give him that batting average, on base %, walks or even the HR's. they MAY make the balls go a little further cuz he's stronger, but that's it, bro.

and btw, do you honestly believe no one else in MLB is juicin? Or is it just cuz Bonds is succeeding while juicing he should be held accountable?


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

Just did some googling and found this.Quick question results
 It now appears that Barry Bonds has taken performance-enhancing drugs. How should his status in the record book be affected?




[size=-2]* 50.71%
Bonds' records should be stricken from the books*[/size]



[size=-2]* 27.08%
Bonds' records should remain in the books, but include an asterisk*[/size]



[size=-2]* 22.21%
Bonds' records should remain untouched*[/size]



*Total Votes:*3120


----------



## cman (Dec 3, 2004)

Do like in Motorcycle racing, A stock class and an unlimited open.
All the roids you want.


----------



## cappo5150 (Dec 3, 2004)

I voted no. I'm a Giants fan.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 3, 2004)

I tend to wonder myself if he were a more of a likeable player would there be such a public outcry.  Look at *Mark McGuire*, rumors of him using steroids has always followed him yet he is more likeable. I probably wouldn't even post this if it was him. 



I have always found *Bonds* to be an arrogant jerk, *Bonds *and humility 
have not met. He doesn't do humble. He leads the majors in homers and 
arrogance. 

He dissed *Babe Ruth*, now I know he is a Yankee (sorry *Flex* but we got him fair and square  ) but if you???re a true baseball fan you can appreciate who he is and what he has accomplished.



You don't disrespect The *Bambino*; deference to him is baseball law. If 
America's Pastime has a god, it's* Babe Ruth*. 

 Maybe *Bonds *forgets that one of the things the *Babe* is remembered for
 is leading his team to a few World Series championships,                                      something Bonds will never do. The *Babe* also hit his home runs without the use of
 steroids. Oh yeah, *Bonds* one more thing, can you win 20 games like the
 Babe did?

I 'll give you an example.....when *McGuire *broke Maris's record he had enough class to go over to his family, remember that. Very touching moment.

Barry just talks shit,  No class.

Phew I am tired.....


----------



## BoneCrusher (Dec 3, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> I understand that!
> 
> but like i said, all the steriods in the world won't give him that batting average, on base %, walks or even the HR's. they MAY make the balls go a little further cuz he's stronger, but that's it, bro.
> 
> and btw, do you honestly believe no one else in MLB is juicin? Or is it just cuz Bonds is succeeding while juicing he should be held accountable?


 I guess what I am trying to say Flex is that if you do roids you forfit all claims to the records set by the players who set then while clean.  You lose by default regardless of how great of a player you would have been without them.  We have one record book and all entries MUST be on even terms.  No exceptions.  Other wise what wouold be the point of  keeping these records in the first place.    15 years from now we will have the new improved juice allowing guys to hit like no one could in the now.  One set of rules anchanged for all time.  Babe can then be on even ground with Barry and Mark.  Any numbnuts can crunch the numbers to equal out the greater number of games played per season to still keep the legendary Babe Ruth hit per hit with Barry Bonds.  Bands has to have not used the juice to compare raw talent against raw talent.


----------



## soxmuscle (Dec 3, 2004)

I voted No.

Steroids or not, the guy hit 73 home runs.  Records are there for our pleasure only.  If you feel the need to not honor his record, as I will be doing, you can, but the fact still remains:  Barry Bonds hit 73 home runs in one season.


----------



## BoneCrusher (Dec 3, 2004)

I know as well as you a large numbers of pros juice.  I would if I were in their shoes.  We are talking big money here.  Just the same I would not expect to hold my record against heros like the Sultan of Swat if I juiced to get my numbers up.


----------



## brodus (Dec 3, 2004)

I think people have the right to do what they want to their bodies.  What bothers me is:

1. They lie about it all of the time, and do BS "don't do drugs" speeches to kids.
2. They MOST DEFINITELY have an advantage when taking 'roids.  

How can anyone who's tried steroids disagree with point 2.  Haven't you seen your bench press go up rapidly?  If 'roided out muscles have nothing to do with hitting

You can't have it both ways, guys. You want to say steroids rock if used properly, etc., but then you say they don't do anything for performance?  Come on...that's bullshit.  What about enhanced recovery?  In a sport like MLB, where you play every night on end?  It totally matters.  They increase your performance and give you an advantage that clean players don't have.  That's the crux of the issue.

It's akin to peeking at your opponents cards every tenth hand in poker...the advantage does begin to matter, even if both players are experts/pros.

Again, you want to talk base running?  If you're taking EPO and other stuff, your speed gets faster.   Look at the track runners who use/abuse.  They go clean (Marion Jones) and they start running college-level times.  

If steroids didn't work and make you better at sports, no one would care, but the fact is, they sure as hell do.  

I just wish people would be honest.  No one injects themselves with GH and stuff that shrinks your balls AND will violate your contract and public image if its not totally worth it.  If Bonds was so amazing, so "naturally gifted," why would he feel compelled to use steroids, especially given the claim that they don't help?  

Come on. They work. That's why people use them.  That's why he hit 70+ homers.  

Make two leagues--the freak league and the natty league.  At least then people wouldn't lie.  It's the deceipt that is so annoying.


----------



## ponyboy (Dec 4, 2004)

I vote no.  I still think he is talented and I always look at it from another point of view.  How do we know that players didn't use juice in the 50's and 60's too?  It's not like steroids were suddenly invented ten years ago.  Arnold used to take dbol in the 50's.  I'm quite sure that many athletes have been using performance enhancing drugs for many many years - it's just now that the public is much more aware of it through advanced testing and stricter regulations.  One of my favourite sayings is "it's only a crime if you get caught."  

Canseco used steroids in the late 80's.  I'm quite sure there were players 20 years before that who used them as well.


----------



## Flex (Dec 4, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> What bothers me is:
> 
> 1. They lie about it all of the time, and do BS "don't do drugs" speeches to kids.



First of all, i bet your parents NEVER said "ya brodus, i used to get HAMMERED. then i'd drive home. then we'd smoke weed till we were SO high, man". 
Why do you think they do this? Why do you think people DONT come out about EVERYTHING? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Because its NOT your business. b/c it blows up in your face like it is doing right now. B/C they are on a national stage where every single little thing they do is on display, UNLIKE "unfamous" people, who are the first to criticize. Why would Arnold ever lie? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Probably b/c every kid who ever lifted a weight would do roids if he came out one day and said "yes, they're wonderfuL".




			
				brodus said:
			
		

> 2. They MOST DEFINITELY have an advantage when taking 'roids.
> 
> How can anyone who's tried steroids disagree with point 2.  Haven't you seen your bench press go up rapidly?  If 'roided out muscles have nothing to do with hitting




How does anyone disagree? Well, let's see. Because it DOESNT MAKE YOU HIT THE BALL. IT DOESNT GIVE BONDS HIS .380 batting average. IT DOESNT GIVE HIM THAT ABSURD ON BASE %. IT DOESNT MAKE HIM HIT THAT ONE STRIKE, if lucky, HE SEES EVERY AT BAT. 

what it WILL DO is MAYBE make the ball go farther. baseball is not analagous to weightlifting, or track and field, where you strength is perfectly akin to your performance. i'll use my perfect example......KEN GRIFFEY JR.




			
				brodus said:
			
		

> They increase your performance and give you an advantage that clean players don't have.




Sure, they MAY make the ball go a tad farther. but it AINT gonna make you connect with that 95mph fastball.




			
				brodus said:
			
		

> If steroids didn't work and make you better at sports, no one would care, but the fact is, they sure as hell do.




in baseball, not NEARLY as much as you, or anyone, thinks they do. 





			
				brodus said:
			
		

> I just wish people would be honest.  No one injects themselves with GH and stuff that shrinks your balls AND will violate your contract and public image if its not totally worth it.  If Bonds was so amazing, so "naturally gifted," why would he feel compelled to use steroids, especially given the claim that they don't help?




Why? because that way people CANT put all their success and their whole career into one little pill or injection, which people do. IDIOTS think "Oh, if i were to juice, i'd look like Ronnie Coleman". IDIOTS think, "b/c Bonds juiced, he hit 73 HR's"





			
				brodus said:
			
		

> Come on. They work. That's why people use them.  That's why he hit 70+ homers.



ok, this is my last statement. If they worked so well, how come EVERYOne isnt hitting 70 HR's.


----------



## Flex (Dec 4, 2004)

p.s. for the record guys, all of you who voted "yes" and don't like all the "deciet", the integrity of sports went straight out the window when they started doing free agency, then it became all about the $.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

> Sure, they MAY make the ball go a tad farther. but it AINT gonna make you connect with that 95mph fastball.


A tad further you say, as a kid I must have seen *Strawberry *hit a least 10 warning track outs a season to say the least. I do think with some juice those balls would have gone tad further and become homers.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

*Quote from Cecil Fielder*

Steroids issue angers Fielder

Former Tiger questions the big power numbers players have generated

By Peter Kerasotis / Florida TODAY

 



The last legitimate home-run hitter rewinds his mind and pauses on the year 1990, when he did something nobody in the American League had done since 1961 ??? hit more than 50 homers. 

???When I hit 51 (as a Tiger) in 1990,??? Cecil Fielder says, ???it was the first time anybody had broken 50 in, what, almost 30 years? Now you look at it and it???s being done every year. There???s some really funny stuff going on.??? 

Funny, but nobody is laughing. 

As baseball is set to begin its season in earnest, dark clouds of steroids suspicion threaten to rain on its 162-game parade. An estimated 5 percent of players tested positive for steroids last year, and a federal investigation involving a northern California laboratory charged with distributing designer steroids might reach a trial this summer, implicating some of the game???s most glamorous players. 

Says Fielder, ???I think that Reggie, who is one of the guys who is truly a 500-and-above home-run hitter, really spoke his piece about this and said it best.??? 

Reggie would be Hall of Famer Reggie Jackson, who last month told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: ???Somebody definitely is guilty of taking steroids. You can???t be breaking records hitting 200 home runs in three or four seasons. 

???The greatest hitters in the history of the game didn???t do that. Henry Aaron never hit 50 in a season, so you???re going to tell me that you???re a greater hitter than Henry Aaron? Barry Bonds hit 73 in 2001, and he would have hit 100 if they would have pitched to him. 

???I mean, come on now. There is no way you can outperform Henry Aaron and Babe Ruth and Willie Mays at that level.??? 

Fielder echoes Jackson???s sentiments. 

???Barry Bonds hitting 73 home runs. Mark McGwire hitting 70. That???s outrageous. For a guy who hit 50, I can tell you that that???s a task in itself. For a person to hit 70 home runs in a single season, that is outrageous.??? 

Fielder is quick to note Bonds is ???probably the greatest pure hitter??? he???s ever seen and that ???I???m not saying I know anybody in the game who is taking steroids, because I don???t.??? 

Still, he sees what the game has evolved into, and he shakes his head. 

???Everything is speculation. But I look back on some of the guys that hit 50 home runs after I did and say, ???Damn. OK. He did it???? I don???t know.??? 

What he does know is that all the publicity the steroids scandal has generated is troubling and damaging. 

???Baseball is getting some serious bad black eyes because of things that are going on. As an ex-player looking in, I think we need to get things back to normal because baseball is a pure game and, in my opinion, the greatest game in the world. We???ve had some things in the past to deal with, scandals. We don???t need that.??? 

That is what is foremost in his mind ??? the game. After that, Fielder worries about players and their health. He mentions former football player Lyle Alzado, who, at 43, died in 1992 of brain cancer after admitting to more than two decades of steroid use. 

???Nobody really understands the ramifications of doing this,??? Fielder says. 

???Nobody really has any knowledge of what their chances are of living past their 60th birthday. It???s all great and fine and dandy to make all the money and do the things you do in your career. But what will you do when you have to go to the doctor, like Lyle Alzado did, and find out you???re dying? Is it worth it? I don???t think so.??? 

Even if players do avoid the health risks of using steroids, and whatever records or sparkling statistics they accomplish don???t become null and ???roid, Fielder believes there???s an even larger penance that waits. And it resides in a person???s conscience. 

???Those guys, man, are going to have to look at themselves in the mirror one day and say, ???I wasn???t true to the game.??? I think that???s the worst penalty any athlete can inflict on themselves, that, at the end of the day, when it???s all said and done, and they???ve had an incredible career, did wonderful things in the game, they???re going to have to look in a mirror and deal with what they see for the rest of their lives. 

???To me, that???s the worst punishment.??? 

It???s a punishment he knows he???ll never have to face. 

???I???m very comfortable with myself,??? Fielder says of a 13-year career in which he hit 319 home runs. ???I know that what I did was all natural. I don???t have to answer those types of questions from anybody. I don???t have to look in the mirror and know that I cheated.??? 

He pauses. 

???You know, I feel bad we???re even talking about this. Baseball has got to clean the kettle. They???re sitting in their own kettle right now and the kettle they???re sitting in is black and they???ve got to clean the dirt out of it, and they???re going to have to do it themselves. I know they don???t want to have anybody else in there. Both sides have to work to get the game back to where it needs to be.??? 

Back to where it was in 1990, when Cecil Fielder was the game???s last legitimate home-run hitter.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> how come EVERYOne isnt hitting 70 HR's.


 
Explain how at the same time Brady Anderson was rumored to have used steroids his homers went up. I mean Brady of all people.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

*Hall of Famer suspicious of Oriole's output*



*ESPN.com news services*

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- Jim Palmer has questions about Brady Anderson, his 50 homers in 1996 and steroids, but the Hall of Fame pitcher couldn't come up with definitive answers when pinned down about his suspicions.



In an interview broadcast on a Baltimore radio station Sunday, Palmer said that Anderson's Orioles-record 50-homer output might have been tainted by steroid use. Anderson's previous best was 21 homers in 1992 and his subsequent best was 24 in 1999. He hit 16 and 18 the seasons before and after he hit his 50.

"I like Brady, and it doesn't mean he's a bad guy because he took steroids," Palmer said in the interview, which was taped Saturday. "But I'm sure he wanted to enhance his performance.

"I don't know how he hit 29 more homers that year," said Palmer, who announces on Orioles telecasts. "And he hit 31 more on the road that year, so it's not like he took advantage of Camden Yards."

Palmer's quotes appeared in The Baltimore Sun on Tuesday. He was interviewed by radio station 98 Rock.

In the interview, Palmer also questioned Barry Bonds' performance in breaking Mark McGwire's single-season home run record in 2001, noting that his increased size and power could have come from an illegal source.

Asked Monday by The Sun to explain himself, Palmer said, "I don't know if Brady took steroids. How would I know? But he did go from [16] home runs to 50.

"When Bonds goes from 49 to 73, you just wonder," Palmer told the newspaper. "You're trying to have a level playing field and maintain the integrity of the game. I'm sure it was a great year for Brady, and it was a great year when Bonds broke McGwire's record, but you just wonder."

Palmer said he didn't mean to indict Anderson.

"It was a general comment on the state of the game," Palmer said to The Sun. "They need to deal with it, whether it's Congress or the commissioner and the players union, they're going to have to come up with something.

"I'm just saying it's a concern when you have aberrations in people's performances," Palmer said. "I know how hard Brady worked to be a good player. But who knows? You just don't know, and that's the fault of baseball, not Brady."


----------



## Arnold (Dec 4, 2004)

Whether it be Football, Baseball, Bodybuilding or any sport, steroids do not make a champion athlete. If steroids were responsible for great athletes we would have many more John Elways (NFL), Barry Bonds (MLB), Ronnie Colemans (IFBB).

Genetics, hard work and discipline make champions, these athletes would be great with or without steroids. And if anyone thinks they could be a great athlete if they just took steroids is very disillusioned.


----------



## Flex (Dec 4, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Whether it be Football, Baseball, Bodybuilding or any sport, steroids do not make a champion athlete. If steroids were responsible for great athletes we would have many more John Elways (NFL), Barry Bonds (MLB), Ronnie Colemans (IFBB).
> 
> Genetics, hard work and discipline make champions, these athletes would be great with or without steroids. And if anyone thinks they could be a great athlete if they just took steroids is very disillusioned.



THANK YOU, Mr. Dimaggio.


----------



## Flex (Dec 4, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Explain how at the same time Brady Anderson was rumored to have used steroids his homers went up. I mean Brady of all people.



Mino, 

read Mr. D's post. it explains it ALL.

i can't believe you people.


----------



## ponyboy (Dec 4, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Whether it be Football, Baseball, Bodybuilding or any sport, steroids do not make a champion athlete. If steroids were responsible for great athletes we would have many more John Elways (NFL), Barry Bonds (MLB), Ronnie Colemans (IFBB).
> 
> Genetics, hard work and discipline make champions, these athletes would be great with or without steroids. And if anyone thinks they could be a great athlete if they just took steroids is very disillusioned.



Damn Robert, you always come up with the perfect way to sum things up.  You must run a chat board or something.


----------



## cjrmack (Dec 4, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Whether it be Football, Baseball, Bodybuilding or any sport, steroids do not make a champion athlete. If steroids were responsible for great athletes we would have many more John Elways (NFL), Barry Bonds (MLB), Ronnie Colemans (IFBB).
> 
> Genetics, hard work and discipline make champions, these athletes would be great with or without steroids. And if anyone thinks they could be a great athlete if they just took steroids is very disillusioned.



I think more at issue here is that steroids enhance great athletes. The issue of the asterisk is that past athletes did not have steroids to help them and I feel you can no compare the two. It is like comparing apples and oranges taking someone who is not using steroids compared with someone who does. You cannot ignore the fact that when steroids were running rampart and we had McGuire, Sosa, and Bonds all juiced up and banging out 70 homers and now that steroids are being controlled no one can even reach the 50 mark. I think you have to judge them differently then athletes of the past who did not have that advantage.


----------



## Twin Peak (Dec 4, 2004)

Ya'll are dumb.


----------



## Flex (Dec 4, 2004)

cjrmack said:
			
		

> now that steroids are being controlled no one can even reach the 50 mark.



first of all, they are NOT being controlled. it's such a bullshit policy.

secondly, sure, maybe no single athlete reached 50, but i can guarentee you this past year is right up there in total HR's with ANY other year in MLB history...

look how many the freakin' Yankees hit as a team, who cares if no one hit 70?


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

All this babble is irrelevant.  Regardless of whether juice helps or not, the point of the matter is that until now, they weren't illegal in baseball.  Even protein powder and creatine weren't so easily obtained in the 50's, does that mean they should strike all records because the comparison is unfair?  So, let's just say next year they make  creatine illegal to possess.  Does that give Johnny Law the right to come pounding on your door to arrest you because you took it 3 years ago?  Think about it.


----------



## Flex (Dec 4, 2004)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Regardless of whether juice helps or not, the point of the matter is that until now, they weren't illegal in baseball.



THANK YOU, Dale


----------



## brodus (Dec 4, 2004)

You guys are right.  It's totally fair and honest for someone who is talented to lie to his team, his city, and everyone else and collect that $10 million paycheck and trophy that he cheated to get.....

You guys are so funny.  Have any of you competed on a pro level, in sports, that is?  

Steroids totally make a difference in a ton of sports, baseball included.  The only thing you've addressed is ability to react to pitches, hand/eye coordination.  Since you are pretending you don't know what steroids do (and I know you know, which is why this is frusturating), I'll explain:

1. Recovery Time: ESPECIALLY for a sport like baseball, where the season is LONG and persisitent, your ability to enhance tissue recovery and repair is a major advantage.  You can swing for a homer at every at-bat if you never have one of those "Damn, I worked it pretty hard last night" feelings in warm-up.

2. Base Running/Fielding Speed: Do I need to cover this at all?  Or are you going to pretend running isn't enhanced from certain drug combos?  Explain how Marion Jones went from the best in the world to poor performance when the drug testing was turned up a notch?  I can also cite personal experience, post college track.

3. Explosive Speed: Increasing the size (via AAS) and number (via GH/IGF) of fast twitch muscle fibers greatly enhances your explosive speed.  I cannot think of any better example of anerobic explosive movement than swinging a bat, throwing a pitch, or jumping to catch a fly ball.  Again, anyone here who has used AAS/GH/IGF, you know this is true.

4. Agression:  Ever run a high dose of Test or better, a DHT derivative?  Remember how it makes you feel like swinging a baseball bat at everything in your path?  You don't think this helps you hit homers?  You don't think Bonds is a an uncharacteristically agrressive and moody guy, for a millionaire with baseball lineage from heaven?  

5. Attitude:  This is the Superman Complex you get from the better steroids.  If you wake up feeling like Superman, you have a serious psychological advantage on the field.  This is the same reason they attempt to regulate stimulants and cocaine.  

Regarding your argument about "stricter on roids," I agree with Flex, the new rules are just for show BUT the attitude and stakes are much higher now...it's much like the chilling effect in Law.  With all of the scrutiny and Federal investigations and headline news attention, people are playing it safe.  It's like if your neighbor gets busted for weed and you're growing...you'd probably settle down until the heat cools off. 

I worked with a pro baseball pitcher who is now a sports caster in Detroit, and he was convinced that 1: tons of players jucie BUT 2: it's totally unfair to compare clean vs. jucied athletes.

And to whoever made the "creatine/protein" comparison...have you ever done steroids?  That's trhe funniest bullshit I've ever read.  Almost like a MuscleTech ad.  There is a reason steroids are prescription drugs and protein powder isn't, but you already know that.

WHat kills me so much, is the logic behind your vehement defense of balls-out roid use is BECAUSE you KNOW they rock and turn your performance up MANY notches.  Why don't you just be honest and say, yes they make you better, and it's not just 3 feet on a homerun swing.  TOP PROFESSIONAL athletes, who by your own admission are super-gifted, they are choosing to use roids....why?  Because it only gives them 3 feet on a swing...come on.  These guys are good enough to bat over 300 without steroids...You know why they use them, especially if you've ever used steroids.

AND PLEASE UNDERSTAND, I'm not saying that Joe Nobody is going to become a Homerrun hitting MLB player overnight...its that if a group of players agree not to juice, and then a handful do, they're cheating!  If it doesn't piss you off it should.  If you were interested in fairness it should.   I hate cheaters, and I think it's a pussy way out of problems in life.  Anyone with integrity should feel the same way.  Anyone who disagrees hasn't probably come to terms with their own cheatin' ways.  

That's why it's not fair to compare Bonds' record against clean players, and why I say make two leagues.  Like someone posted above, like auto racing: a stock league and a no-holds-barred league.  And if you're not competing, who cares what you do.


----------



## brodus (Dec 4, 2004)

Let me put it this way-->if you had made a decision to stay clean, struggled through injury and practice and long seasons to squeeze out a .250 in the majors, and then was sent back down to AAA-ball, and THEN found out that the guy that got your slot on the roster was juicing, you'd be pissed...that's one reason, among many, it's unfair.

I ran Division I track, and got extremely fast, just shy of Olympic qualifying.  I have excellent genetics and a track coach dad.  I never used any steroids back then.  If I had in college, I'm sure you would have never heard from me on a message board of all things, and I'd be a world-class runner (BTW, in my event the line between fast and Olympic-level was only 2 seconds).   It's like adding nitrous to an already tricked out hot rod.  I've seen it happen.  But I didn't think it was fair, b/c it was against the rules.  As long as the majority of athletes agree with this, we can be content in winning AND losing, and there will be enough of us who are angry when someone is exposed for cheating.

Roids work...that's a big reason these boards are popular.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)




----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> Let me put it this way-->if you had made a decision to stay clean, struggled through injury and practice and long seasons to squeeze out a .250 in the majors, and then was sent back down to AAA-ball, and THEN found out that the guy that got your slot on the roster was juicing, you'd be pissed...that's one reason, among many, it's unfair.
> 
> I ran Division I track, and got extremely fast, just shy of Olympic qualifying.  I have excellent genetics and a track coach dad.  I never used any steroids back then.  If I had in college, I'm sure you would have never heard from me on a message board of all things, and I'd be a world-class runner (BTW, in my event the line between fast and Olympic-level was only 2 seconds).   It's like adding nitrous to an already tricked out hot rod.  I've seen it happen.  But I didn't think it was fair, b/c it was against the rules.  As long as the majority of athletes agree with this, we can be content in winning AND losing, and there will be enough of us who are angry when someone is exposed for cheating.
> 
> Roids work...that's a big reason these boards are popular.



It is still irrelevant since they weren't illegal.  I get what you are saying, but just because someone chooses not to juice doesn't mean others shouldn't be able to if it is not illegal.  

Some people choose not to eat meat, but that doesn't mean people who do eat meat should be banned from competition.


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 4, 2004)

soxmuscle said:
			
		

> I voted No.
> 
> Steroids or not, the guy hit 73 home runs.  Records are there for our pleasure only.  If you feel the need to not honor his record, as I will be doing, you can, but the fact still remains:  Barry Bonds hit 73 home runs in one season.


On steroids...


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

*Quote from Kenny Rogers*

Texas pitcher Kenny Rogers told Sports Illustrated: ''Basically, steroids can jump you a level or two. The average player can become a star and the star player can become a superstar. And the superstar? Forget it. He can do things we've never seen before.''


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 4, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Whether it be Football, Baseball, Bodybuilding or any sport, steroids do not make a champion athlete. If steroids were responsible for great athletes we would have many more John Elways (NFL), Barry Bonds (MLB), Ronnie Colemans (IFBB).
> 
> Genetics, hard work and discipline make champions, these athletes would be great with or without steroids. And if anyone thinks they could be a great athlete if they just took steroids is very disillusioned.


We're not talking about average guys on the street taking steroids to become great athletes, we're talking about great athletes taking steroids to enhance their already gifted genetics in the sport where they already excel.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

*Curt Schilling*

Schilling said pitchers take steroids, too. He knows pitchers who threw 91 mph one year and then showed up the next season throwing 95-96 mph after using steroids. Schilling also quipped that anyone who looks at his body knows he does _*not*_ take steroids.


----------



## SPIKE1257 (Dec 4, 2004)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> All this babble is irrelevant.  Regardless of whether juice helps or not, the point of the matter is that until now, they weren't illegal in baseball.  Even protein powder and creatine weren't so easily obtained in the 50's, does that mean they should strike all records because the comparison is unfair?  So, let's just say next year they make  creatine illegal to possess.  Does that give Johnny Law the right to come pounding on your door to arrest you because you took it 3 years ago?  Think about it.


I thought steroids were illegal in the U.S. unless you had a doctors precription.Why wouldn't they be illegal in baseball ?


----------



## LAM (Dec 4, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> I thought steroids were illegal in the U.S. unless you had a doctors precription.Why wouldn't they be illegal in baseball ?



steroids are still illegal to use with a valid prescription if the use is stritcly for athstetics or for performance enhancement in sports...


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> Stop, no doubt he has the natural ability, but with the help of steroids to increase his bat speed thru the strike zone. Killer combination.


Ditto!!!


----------



## LAM (Dec 4, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Schilling said pitchers take steroids, too.



definetly...any steroid that increases collagen synthesis would be a great help to a pitcher.  GH would also be a big help here also for the same purpose...


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

I Are Baboon said:
			
		

> Barry Bonds is also a fantastic base runner with speed and he is an above average outfielder.  The 'roids may have helped him hit the ball further, but that is all.  People, let's keep in mind that he won MVP awards in 1990, 1992, and 1993 which were way before his steroid use supposedly began.
> 
> I voted NO.


Yes he was an MVP those years, however he never, i repeat never hit more than 46 home runs in his career. Then all of a sudden, one offseason later, he is up in weight by some 30+ pounds, and hits 73. Come on, the juice helped him big time. I voted YES, and give it back to Maris, a true home run record champion!!!


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

MaxMirkin said:
			
		

> Yes...cause he's a prick.


Agreed   

His own players can't even stand him.


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> So, you're gonna tell me that steroids gave him Superman vision that allows him to see that ONE strike he gets (AT MOST) per at bat, and then steroids give him the ability to jack that thing outta the park, SO OFTEN?


Maybe not superman vision, but an advantage to say the least. You keep bringing up the "one" strike that he would see at bat. Any other player would have been called on strikes, but bonds because he is an untouchable icon in baseball because of media whores, rarely had a strike called, because he was supposed to crush the ball, not get struck out like a normal player. And now that you mention the fact that he jacked the ball out of the park, it didn't hurt that he plays in a softball stadium taylormaid for him to steal the HR record from Aaron. I am a Cardinal fan, and even I know Mcgwire used, thats why I say give it back to Maris. He hit 61 Hr's and beat out the more popular Mantle even though the Yankees own fans where against him. A true HR champion!!!


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

BoneCrusher said:
			
		

> If he took the juice and the risk it carries ... it was for the benifit.  He deserves the asterisk.  He is top shelf, but he knew before he started to hit the gear he would get the * ... so give it too him.  You must with out a doubt still call Bonds ONE of the top players in the game to have ever hit a ball ... but he made his choice for us when he took the juice.


I agree, he is an outstanding player, not taking away what he has done in the past, B4 Juicegate that is!!!


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> i hear ya, spike.
> 
> but seriously, it's not even bout the HR's.
> 
> ...


I fully agree with the OBP, and BA. However I do not feel that he had the same strike zone that anyone else did. Look back when McGwire and Sosa where going for the title, they had a smaller strike zone too.


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

I wouldn't dispute the fact that your statement is True Prince.  These athletes have talent with or without steroids or they wouldn't be recruited on the professional teams to begin with.  The point here is that it is not fair to allow some players to have an edge on others with their massive strength gains developed from steroid.

Let say you take 2 equally talented players.  Let's also say these players are top hitters with an identical record.   One of the 2 players then starts taking steroids and within one season puts on 20/30lbs or more in weight and obviously increases his strength gains by huge numbers.    You can't tell me that doesn't hold an advantage for this player.   Where he may have been hitting balls on the average out in the mid outfield, now with this extra power he's knocking homeruns..    Naturally it takes skill...  And again nobody would dispute this.    But I surely don't think it is fair in sports to allow steroids where players who have been using them have obviously been gaining advantage over other players.

Then the question comes up....well lets make it a free for all and allow any player to use steroids in sports.   Well to me first of all it is illegal to use steroids to begin with, and even under a doctors legal administration IMO it is not natural.   

Those that are for steroids in sports can continue to dispute this, but it will never be allowed.  I support this 100 percent.  I hope they continue to make it tougher on these steroid users in sports. 




			
				Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Whether it be Football, Baseball, Bodybuilding or any sport, steroids do not make a champion athlete. If steroids were responsible for great athletes we would have many more John Elways (NFL), Barry Bonds (MLB), Ronnie Colemans (IFBB).
> 
> Genetics, hard work and discipline make champions, these athletes would be great with or without steroids. And if anyone thinks they could be a great athlete if they just took steroids is very disillusioned.


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I tend to wonder myself if he were a more of a likeable player would there be such a public outcry.  Look at *Mark McGuire*, rumors of him using steroids has always followed him yet he is more likeable. I probably wouldn't even post this if it was him.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


AWESOME post


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

BoneCrusher said:
			
		

> I guess what I am trying to say Flex is that if you do roids you forfit all claims to the records set by the players who set then while clean.  You lose by default regardless of how great of a player you would have been without them.  We have one record book and all entries MUST be on even terms.  No exceptions.  Other wise what wouold be the point of  keeping these records in the first place.    15 years from now we will have the new improved juice allowing guys to hit like no one could in the now.  One set of rules anchanged for all time.  Babe can then be on even ground with Barry and Mark.  Any numbnuts can crunch the numbers to equal out the greater number of games played per season to still keep the legendary Babe Ruth hit per hit with Barry Bonds.  Bands has to have not used the juice to compare raw talent against raw talent.


I totally agree with you!!! Back when Babe hit his 60, he had more homeruns than damn near the rest of the league, combined!!!


----------



## Flex (Dec 4, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> You guys are right.  It's totally fair and honest for someone who is talented to lie to his team, his city, and everyone else and collect that $10 million paycheck and trophy that he cheated to get.....
> 
> You guys are so funny.  Have any of you competed on a pro level, in sports, that is?
> 
> ...



OMG

this is a ridiculous arguement, that obviously we can't all agree on.

dude, the MLB steroids laws BARELY existed until this past year, so once again, its NOT cheating.

1. recovery time-"you can swing for a homer every time"? COME ON. i'm not even gonna respond to that. So was freakin Ken Griffey Jr. on steroids, too? He used to jack HR's like nothing, oh but wait, he used to get injured  

2. base running-Bonds USED TO STEAL BASES, WHEN HE WAS SKINNY.

4. Aggression- your b.s. belief of this has just proved to me the extent of knoewledge you have about steroids......not very much. AGRESSION IS BULLSHIT.

5. Attitude-Sure you "feel" like Superman, but are you honestly gonna tell me this is an advantage???????????? Last time i checked, SKILL in sports was the biggest advantage. Who cares if you have an attitude like Ron Artest or like Michael Jordan, as long as you can PERFORM, you have the advantage.


"WHat kills me so much, is the logic behind your vehement defense of balls-out roid use is BECAUSE you KNOW they rock and turn your performance up MANY notches.  Why don't you just be honest and say, yes they make you better, and it's not just 3 feet on a homerun swing.  TOP PROFESSIONAL athletes, who by your own admission are super-gifted, they are choosing to use roids....why?  Because it only gives them 3 feet on a swing...come on.  These guys are good enough to bat over 300 without steroids...You know why they use them, especially if you've ever used steroids."

What kills ME so much is people who makes claims about steroids that know NOTHING about them.

Yes, they make you stronger. Yes, they make you bigger. Yes, they make you feel good. 

Are they gonna make you hit 73 HR's from 45? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Will they give you an "attitude" advantage? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Are they cheating? Well, there were BULLSHIT laws, so look at it anyway you want. Hitting a baseball on steriods, and lifting weights on steriods are TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS. Hitting a baseball is TWO steps away from the juice, whereas lifting weights is DIRECTLY connected. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE YOU HIT MORE HR'S. 

Once again, the guy NEVER EVEN GETS PITCHES TO HIT. His BA and OBP and walk/AB are OUTTA THIS WORLD, not even looking at his HR's. You're gonna tell me steriods let this guy pick that one pitch/at bat out and hit a HR?  Steroids allow him to layoff and walk more than anyone in history? 
Pitchers DONT pitch to the guy cuz they know what a hitter he is, even if he's NOT hitting HR's. 

I can't do this anymore. It's like talking to a brickwall


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> p.s. for the record guys, all of you who voted "yes" and don't like all the "deciet", the integrity of sports went straight out the window when they started doing free agency, then it became all about the $.


Agreed, thanks to Curt Flood, a former Cardinal


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Whether it be Football, Baseball, Bodybuilding or any sport, steroids do not make a champion athlete. If steroids were responsible for great athletes we would have many more John Elways (NFL), Barry Bonds (MLB), Ronnie Colemans (IFBB).
> 
> Genetics, hard work and discipline make champions, these athletes would be great with or without steroids. And if anyone thinks they could be a great athlete if they just took steroids is very disillusioned.


I agree, however, like you said steroids do not make a champion. However, they do make a so so player better than they where, and a good player above average, and a great one into Bonds!!! So they do improve your performance.


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> first of all, they are NOT being controlled. it's such a bullshit policy.
> 
> secondly, sure, maybe no single athlete reached 50, but i can guarentee you this past year is right up there in total HR's with ANY other year in MLB history...
> 
> look how many the freakin' Yankees hit as a team, who cares if no one hit 70?


Your right on with that one!!! the whole thing reaks of BS!!! With all the crap going on, thats why I say give it back to Maris!!!


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> On steroids...


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 4, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> I thought steroids were illegal in the U.S. unless you had a doctors precription.Why wouldn't they be illegal in baseball ?


You beat me to it, why are they not arrested for the juice, we would be!!!


----------



## Arnold (Dec 4, 2004)

Someone said something about taking steroids is unfair because the past athletes did not have steroids and that was the issue at hand here.

First of all do you realize that athletes have been using steroids for the past 50 years?

Secondly, there are advancements every year that help athletes that include diet, nutrition, training methods, supplements, etc. So there are always going to be advantages for next years athlete that will help he or she excel past athletes of the previous generations.


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

Come on now Prince... If your comparing legal advancements then that is not the issue here. 



			
				Robert DiMaggio said:
			
		

> Someone said something about taking steroids is unfair because the past athletes did not have steroids and that was the issue at hand here.
> 
> First of all do you realize that athletes have been using steroids for the past 50 years?
> 
> Secondly, there are advancements every year that help athletes that include diet, nutrition, training methods, supplements, etc. So there are always going to be advantages for next years athlete that will help he or she excel past athletes of the previous generations.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

SPIKE1257 said:
			
		

> I thought steroids were illegal in the U.S. unless you had a doctors precription.Why wouldn't they be illegal in baseball ?



There was no policy outlawing their use in baseball.  They would be illegal to possess by US law, but they were not illegal to use in basebal so everyone had the ability to use them. 

Crack is illegal, but no one is saying that Lawrence Taylor should have an asteriks next to his football stats.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

> Crack is illegal, but no one is saying that Lawrence Taylor should have an asteriks next to his football stats.


I don't think crack gives you an edge.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I don't think crack gives you an edge.




Creatine does, should anyone who uses it have their records taken away?


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

Dale is right as far as his point about no policy.

Players have been exploiting the crack in the legal system governing the rules of baseball and other sports for that matter. This is what all the hype has been about.... closing this crack or loophole and enforcing the laws against steroid use in sports.

I still think players such as bonds, if found to have been taking steroids illegally during the point of establishing his records should have an asterisk pinned next to his name.

Lets also post a big asterisk next to Lawrence Taylor for using Crack.
Would serve him right.  



			
				Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> There was no policy outlawing their use in baseball. They would be illegal to possess by US law, but they were not illegal to use in basebal so everyone had the ability to use them.
> 
> Crack is illegal, but no one is saying that Lawrence Taylor should have an asteriks next to his football stats.


----------



## oaktownboy (Dec 4, 2004)

damn 4 pages..wow ..no he shouldnt have an asterisk by his name..he is the one who hit the homeruns..not the steroids


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Creatine does, should anyone who uses it have their records taken away?


 
Not from creatine, I don't think it's that effective. If it is I must change brands.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

.


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

No doubt...  maybe dale is spiking his creatine with steroids  

But seriously Dale, you're comparing apples to oranges here, not to mention 
Legal to illegal.   Your point is dull...I think you better go sharpen it  




			
				min0 lee said:
			
		

> Not from creatine, I don't think it's that effective. If it is I must change brands.


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

Kewl Spiderman MinO  
He's not taking steroids too is he?  
I suppose he is....how the hell else is he climbing that building?  
But wait!  Or is he sliding down? 





			
				min0 lee said:
			
		

> .


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)




----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> No doubt...  maybe dale is spiking his creatine with steroids
> 
> But seriously Dale, you're comparing apples to oranges here, not to mention
> Legal to illegal.   Your point is dull...I think you better go sharpen it



I think they are very similar since there is a noticeable advantage for people who use creatine, especially with regards to energy levels and generating energy quickly.  I notice a large negative difference in my workout without creatine.  Steroids are illegal, but with no policy I see no reason why they should put an asterisk.  I do think it is unfair to future generations who will try to break his record, though.


We also need to take into consideration that we don't know without a shadow of a doubt that past generations did not use them.


----------



## jack52 (Dec 4, 2004)

No, Maris shouldn't have had an asterisk either. If your going to give Bonds' records an asterisk give them one because pitching sucks now. Bonds is a jerk, no question and if the pitchers Maris faced pitched to Bonds the first time he watched the ball leave the park like he does he'd sit down the next time up instead of walk or he'd catch one in the ribcage. Baseball knew how to deal with jerks back then.


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

There may be a noticeable advantage using creatine, but there is still no comparison to the advantage one would obtain from steroids. Not only that, but again steroids are illegal and creatine is not. 

As for not being in the policy, well that is a loophole as I said.
Just because it is not in the official baseball rule book though doesn't mean it should be excepted. It is still illegal and will be up to the officials to determine what if any action should be taken on the players such as Bonds who has set records during consumption of steroids.

I also remember when players where modifying their bats and filling them with cork I believe. As a result I am pretty sure that Souza was fined big money after he was caught doing that. The point is, I don't believe that was in the rule book either. But does this make it acceptable? It's cheating in my book. There is always loop holes in the system that someone is looking to climb through. In this case though where steroids are obviously illegal to consume without a doctors prescription then I think there is no question here that it is wrong and penalties should be apply. 



			
				Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> I think they are very similar since there is a noticeable advantage for people who use creatine, especially with regards to energy levels and generating energy quickly. I notice a large negative difference in my workout without creatine. Steroids are illegal, but with no policy I see no reason why they should put an asterisk. I do think it is unfair to future generations who will try to break his record, though.
> 
> 
> We also need to take into consideration that we don't know without a shadow of a doubt that past generations did not use them.


----------



## brodus (Dec 4, 2004)

Flex, you talk a lot of shit.  Have you trained with Olympians and Olympic-level coaches?  Do you have pro-athelete friends?   How many world-class athletes (not BBrs) have you spent time with? 

I ask, b/c you speak the language of bro-logic, not someone who has competed at the top in sports, nor spent time with people who have.  If you indeed had, you'd know why people in sports take what the take, and why those who are clean don't want them taking it.

I'm a beta-tester for one of the most potent steroids available right now, a 2-saturated Anadrol derivative, and here's what I've learned about this particular gem:

1. I can get 2 hours less sleep a night with no impact on performance
2. I can lift 10% more per week, on average
3. I am WAY more aggressive and my fuse is shorter
4. I have a faster sprint time and greater overall endurance
5. I have better recovery between sets and between workouts
6. I have a ton of energy and focus and have found time to complete way more shit
7. I can play guitar faster and more precisely

If I was playing sports right now, I would have a massive advantage, and I would be cheating.  

If you don't believe that steroids increase agression, you've never had good gear, you're inherently a softie, or you've never done the kind of cycles pro athletes do.  I don't care how much internet chat bullshit you engage in, you're talking bro-bullshit if you say large doses of Masteron don't make you feel like fucking people up when they cross you.  Talk to boxers much?  How about pro football players?  Ever live with any pro ballers?  Ever train with an Olympian.  I'm calling you out b/c you're talking bullshit.  Hit some Cheque Drops and then tell me steroids don't increase aggression you net monkey.

I'm calling you a person of low integrity and anyone else who uses steroids and then pretends its for other reasons, when we all know the reasons people take steroids.   If you juice, BE FUCKING HONEST...you do it to either get an edge in competition or to look better.  That edge can be manifested in many ways.  I don't know how many pros, coaches, sports casters, and athletes I've spoken with or known who understand this, clean or not...but you can live in your fantasy world.

You go on thinking you're right bro-ham...all the answers are on the internet...Let me guess, you think posting daily in the Sexual Health forum makes you an expert there, too, huh?  Rock on, dude.  I'll submit your name for "coolest internet bro-master," and maybe you'll score some free porn.


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> you speak the language of bro-logic


  

Now that is funny


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE THAT USES BRO-LOGIC
No actually I think he just saw a titty for the first time


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> If you don't believe that steroids increase agression, you've never had good gear, you're inherently a softie, or you've never done the kind of cycles pro athletes do.




I did a real cycle, test/m1t/eq and was never aggressive.  The jury will be out on Superdrol, I remember all the hype that came with mdien and that shit flopped despite having good beta testing results.

I completely agree with you that anyone taking the juice in sports is looking for an edge, but isn't that the reason an athlete does anything?  Wouldn't that be the reason they would choose one training methodology over another?

Would it be cheating if an athlete developed a training method that made them 20% better than his peers and didn't share it.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I also remember when players where modifying their bats and filling them with cork I believe. As a result I am pretty sure that Souza was fined big money after he was caught doing that. The point is, I don't believe that was in the rule book either. But does this make it acceptable? It's cheating in my book.





MLB rule 1.10 -"...The bat shall be one piece of solid wood..."


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMEONE THAT USES BRO-LOGIC
> No actually I think he just saw a titty for the first time



Hey, you leave Buckwheat out of this.  He did nothing to you.


----------



## brodus (Dec 4, 2004)

Why do boxers drop Cheque Drops, Dale?  B/C they like the taste?  B/C they think they might go into heat?

The fact that you compare a controlled substance to a diet or a lifting routine shows your level of understanding of the classes of things we're talking about here.  These are not the same.  I've gained 8 pounds of pure muscle in 3 weeks, and lost an inch off my waist.  This is after training for years, after college sports, etc. How many diets or new routines can do that?  I can tell you right now, but you already know the answer.

YES, a better diet gives you an edge, which is why everyone in pro sports seems to have a nutritionist and a personal trainer, but it only takes you to your genetic potential.  Drugs take you beyond that...this is without debate.   

But, on the other hand, I've hung out with Chris Chelios (Hockey, Detroit RedWings), and Ryan Dempster (pitcher, Chicago Cubs), and it wasn't at the nutrition shop, it was at a bar, Stanley's in Chicago, where I play every other Sunday.  Dempster got so wasted, he streaked the place.  He pitched three days later.


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

Is that really a rule Dale? 
What if they use an aluminum bat?
Actually I can't recall any that use them, but I believe they are legal.  

I would think they would have some type of rule more on the lines of
"Modification of any bats of any kind is prohibited!" 



			
				Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> MLB rule 1.10 -"...The bat shall be one piece of solid wood..."


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> Why do boxers drop Cheque Drops, Dale?  B/C they like the taste?  B/C they think they might go into heat?
> 
> The fact that you compare a controlled substance to a diet or a lifting routine shows your level of understanding of the classes of things we're talking about here.  These are not the same.  I've gained 8 pounds of pure muscle in 3 weeks, and lost an inch off my waist.  This is after training for years, after college sports, etc. How many diets or new routines can do that?  I can tell you right now, but you already know the answer.
> 
> ...



We ARE talking about performance enhancement which is why I think it is a perfectly fine comparison.  I used to work with Vaughn Hebron who won 2 Super Bowl rings with the Broncos.  His pregame supplement of choice was honey.  Even back 6 years ago when he played in the NFL creatine was available, but he chose honey over it.  Creatine DOES take you beyond your genetic potential which is why I used it the first time.  You have an endogenous level of phosphates and creatine adds to this.  So the people who chose to use creatine had an unfair advantage over him?

As for why boxers use cheque drops...It is very androgenic so of course you would expect some aggression from it.  Not all steroids are highly androgenic.  From my understanding superdrol is actually quite low with regards to this.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 4, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Is that really a rule Dale?
> What if they use an aluminum bat.
> Actually I can't recall any that use them, but I believe they are legal.




Yeah, it is a rule.  Pros can't use aluminum bats, imagine if one did though.  I would hate to be the pitcher standing on the mound when a 95mph fastball comes off that bat in my direction.


----------



## DFINEST (Dec 4, 2004)

Archangel said:
			
		

> DEFINATELY!!!    I say give the record back to Maris!!!



Then Maris should get an asterisk as well
because catcher Josh Gibson, an Negro
League All Star has the REAL
record as far as homers in a single season, 80

The Negro Leagues had just as much, if not superior
talent as the Major league
did as the Negro league all stars
consistently WHOOPED the major league
all stars in a match game each year


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

DFINEST said:
			
		

> Then Maris should get an asterisk as well
> because catcher Josh Gibson, an Negro
> League All Star has the REAL
> record as far as homers in a single season, 80
> ...


 
That's fine, but we are talking about Major League Baseball. 
We might as well include Japan, Mexico if you want to include everyone.


----------



## DFINEST (Dec 4, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> That's fine, but we are talking about Major League Baseball.
> We might as well include Japan, Mexico if you want to include everyone.



That's my point, Maris achieved the record WHILE superior talent
wasn't allowed into the league, thus his record
deserving an asterisk....

Don't get me wrong, MARIS acomplished a great feat
with his homers BUT again, someone who had talent
superior to his wasn't afforded the opportunity
to compete because of his skin color

Like I said, the Negro League all stars consistently
DEFEATED the MAjor League all stars in match games
during that time period


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

Maris did play with "superior" stars. He had that record in 1961, blacks were in baseball in the 50's.

We might as well put an asterik on every stat.

Which brings an interesting thing I just realized going thru the net.
Cheating is part of baseball.....read on

"You can???t even talk about taking away his records or diminishing them. He did what he was allowed to do. No one can get punished for that. If you take away his MVPs and home runs, then take away Don Sutton???s and Gaylord Perry???s Hall of Fame plaques. Take way Norm Cash???s batting title. Take away Mike Scott???s perfect game. They all cheated, just as surely as Bonds and Giambi did, as surely as Ken Caminiti did. As surely as more players that you want to know about did.
What Bonds and these others did was deeply rooted in the game. Pete Rose and most players of his generation couldn???t take batting practice without first downing a handful of ???greenies??? ??? amphetamines. Willie Mays kept a bottle of ???red juice??? in his locker ??? the same stuff as greenies, but in a liquid form."


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

I wouldn't want to be a pitcher standing on the mound when a 95mph fastball comes off any bat in my direction  

That reminds me of back when I played ball.  My position was pitcher.  I was assuming my position on the mound while the coach was blasting balls out in the field for practice.  He sends the ball up in the air,  aims for the center fielder as he goes into full swing, and Wack!!!.....   A straight line right into my forehead. (I was seeing little stars for like 30 minutes)  The impact knocked me right on my ass. Besides a major knot on my head, I was ok though.    From that point foreward It sure heightened my awareness on the mound though .




			
				Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Yeah, it is a rule. Pros can't use aluminum bats, imagine if one did though. I would hate to be the pitcher standing on the mound when a 95mph fastball comes off that bat in my direction.


----------



## DFINEST (Dec 4, 2004)

That's correct BUT Gibson wasn't allowed to play in the
majors during his time; Gibson died of a brain tumor
right after Jackie Robinson was allowed into the Majors

MLB would not allow Afro Americans 
into the game when NEGRO league
players consistently out-performed the majority
of major league players


----------



## Randy (Dec 4, 2004)

Those bastards must of been on steroids back then too   



			
				DFINEST said:
			
		

> Like I said, the Negro League all stars consistently
> DEFEATED the MAjor League all stars in match games during that time period


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 4, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Those bastards must of been on steroids back then too


 

Dfinest....I know all about the history and I respect it, it's a shame what happened.


----------



## DFINEST (Dec 4, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> .......We might as well put an asterik on every stat.
> 
> Which brings an interesting thing I just realized going thru the net.
> Cheating is part of baseball.....read on
> ...



Things that make you go


----------



## brodus (Dec 5, 2004)

Mestanolone

Trade Names 
Anavormol Ermalone Preroide 
Andoron Etnabolate Prohormo 
Androne Macrobin Protergine 
Androstalone Mesanolon Restore 
Antalon Methylantalon Tantarone 
Assimil Methybol Yonchlon 

*The appropriate administration of androgenic hormones had a marked effect on the psychophysiological capacity.* Substances that are known to have studied and used for this purpose include mestanolone (methyl DHT), Oral-Turinabol (dehydrochloromethyltestosterone), testosterone, and androstenedione. Of particular significance is the compound mestanolone. This substance is known to have minimal anabolic properties on muscle mass, yet their ability to activate the stress handling capabilities of the CNS are equal to or greater than that of testosterone or other androgenic/anabolic steroids. 
*The oral administration daily of 10mg mestanolone to individuals who had been undergoing long term stress. An alpha wave increase of up to 4 Hertz was observed, and this was associated with a great increase in performance on tasks requiring high physical output, mental concentration, and physical coordination.*


----------



## brodus (Dec 5, 2004)

Most notable in the patent, however, were comments regarding the psychological effects of methyl-DHT. To quote from the patent: 
"This research completely unexpectedly and surprisingly discovered a hitherto unknown further action of mestanolone [methyl-DHT], namely the supply thereof led to an optimization of the central nervous system activation during preparation for the task and to a maintaining of this *optimum activation even under high stresses. Thus, there was an increase [in] psychophysiological capacity.*

"...*The test persons performed difficult exercises requiring high physical capacities linked with high intellectual concentration and muscular coordination with far fewer errors.* Complicated movement sequences with a high degree of stressing did not lead to a reduction in the degree of activation and instead the increased capacity remained after several repeats."


SOURCE:
Mattern et al. Medicament for influencing the degree of activation of the central nervous system. US Patent #5591732, Jan 7 1997.


----------



## Randy (Dec 5, 2004)

Brodus,

Is all that     supposed to impress us or something?
Or did you must smoke a couple doobies and decide to go scientific on us?    

Can you please explain in english WTF you are talking about?  
How does it relate to this thread whether Bonds should get an Asterisk?


----------



## Flex (Dec 5, 2004)

brodus said:
			
		

> I ask, b/c you speak the language of bro-logic, not someone who has competed at the top in sports, nor spent time with people who have.  If you indeed had, you'd know why people in sports take what the take, and why those who are clean don't want them taking it..



First of all, this is HILARIOUS coming from a half-ass college athlete who tells himself if "he took steroids, he'd be in the olympics". You've JUST proved to me you know as much as the rest of society. You all think if "you" took steroids, you'd be the next Arnold or Ronnie Coleman.




			
				brodus said:
			
		

> If you don't believe that steroids increase agression, you've never had good gear, you're inherently a softie, or you've never done the kind of cycles pro athletes do.  I don't care how much internet chat bullshit you engage in, you're talking bro-bullshit if you say large doses of Masteron don't make you feel like fucking people up when they cross you.  Talk to boxers much?  How about pro football players?  Ever live with any pro ballers?  Ever train with an Olympian.  I'm calling you out b/c you're talking bullshit.  Hit some Cheque Drops and then tell me steroids don't increase aggression you net monkey..



This just reinforces your bullshit. ROID RAGE IS BULLSHIT, you "net monkey" (wow, that's real creative). I've never had good gear? Ya, okay. Keep following the 60-minutes story of the week for your bullshit knowledge base, Mr. "If i only juice, i wouldn't be a fatass and i'd be in the Olympics".




			
				brodus said:
			
		

> ...you do it to either get an edge in competition or to look better.  That edge can be manifested in many ways.  I don't know how many pros, coaches, sports casters, and athletes I've spoken with or known who understand this, clean or not...but you can live in your fantasy world..



Surprisingly, i actually agree with you here. One takes steroids to a) get an edge or b) look better. Steroids DO make you stronger/quicker (give you an edge) and make you look bigger/leaner (make you look better). Personally, I took steroids (even though they MUST'VE been watered down cuz i didn't experience the bullshit roid rage) for one reason, to get bigger. The strength was just a bonus. 
But you gotta understand something, they WON'T make you hit more home runs. Just because you're stronger, that WON'T make you hit .380. It won't make you have an outta this world OBP. It's one thing is a pro BB takes them. YES, steroids will DIRECTLY affect his bench press, for example. But BONDS STILL hasta hit the fuckin ball. He STILL hasta look for that one pitch he sees per at bat, if that, you fuckin moron. 




			
				brodus said:
			
		

> You go on thinking you're right bro-ham...all the answers are on the internet...Let me guess, you think posting daily in the Sexual Health forum makes you an expert there, too, huh?  Rock on, dude.  I'll submit your name for "coolest internet bro-master," and maybe you'll score some free porn.



Wow, not only are you a "has-been almost-star in track", but you're also a comedian? Goddamn, you are HILARIOUS. Hey Mr. DiMaggio, where do you FIND people with such great resumes


----------



## Flex (Dec 5, 2004)

Whether Bonds deserves an asterisk is just a matter of opinion. 

Brodus, i apologize if i insulted you, you are entitled to your opinion. But realize, i, and the people who agree with me, are rightfully entitled to ours.

The bottom line is this, If one takes steroids(A), they WILL get stronger/quicker etc.(B). Thus A=B.

You guys are saying A=B=C. Where if one takes steriods (A), they will get stronger/quicker (B), and that in turn will MAKE them hit more HR's (C). 

This is where i disagree. What about the guys who aren't very big/strong (Griffey, Strawberry, Vlad Guerrero etc.) compared to the big guys (Bonds, Sosa, McGwire)??

Vlad is NOT a big guy. He DOESNT carry alot of muscle. Yet the guy has the best arm in the league, can hit as well and has as much power as anyone. You know why? Because of skill.

I guess we hafta just agree to disagree, that's all.


----------



## gr81 (Dec 5, 2004)

I really don't want to waste my breath on all these uninformed and ignorant morons, but I will say that Bonds had a hall of fame MVP filled career before he was juicing, and he is at this point the best player in baseball by far, so what does that say about all the other players juicing in baseball, why are they not all as great as him, especially since supposedly the majority of them are juicing? Oh yeah, and guess what, Babe Ruth corked his bat so if Bonds gets and asterisk then so does Ruth. May I also point out that before te Steroid Fueled HR race of 96 between Sosa and McGwire Baseball was DEAD in America, dead as could be still not recovered from the strike, no one gave a fuck about it, and that HR race brought it back into popularity, so I ask you, does baseball really want to put itself under the lights just to appease a group of ignorant people who have no motivation other than "lets do it for the children.."? Everyone just quite down and let athletes do their thing can we please..


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 5, 2004)

gr81 said:
			
		

> I really don't want to waste my breath on all these uninformed and ignorant morons, but I will say that Bonds had a hall of fame MVP filled career before he was juicing, and he is at this point the best player in baseball by far, so what does that say about all the other players juicing in baseball, why are they not all as great as him, especially since supposedly the majority of them are juicing? Oh yeah, and guess what, Babe Ruth corked his bat so if Bonds gets and asterisk then so does Ruth. May I also point out that before te Steroid Fueled HR race of 96 between Sosa and McGwire Baseball was DEAD in America, dead as could be still not recovered from the strike, no one gave a fuck about it, and that HR race brought it back into popularity, so I ask you, does baseball really want to put itself under the lights just to appease a group of ignorant people who have no motivation other than "lets do it for the children.."? Everyone just quite down and let athletes do their thing can we please..


----------



## SuperFlex (Dec 5, 2004)

He already does and likely always will in everyones mind. As he should...

*BUT *Bonds in the man...


----------



## Randy (Dec 5, 2004)

Ahhhh I see GR81 crawled out from a crack to provide some more if his derogatory insults here in the thread.

Don't you all wish you were as smart as GR81? 
We are all uniformed ignorant morons.


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 5, 2004)

We have different opinions, like Flex stated, we will never change anothers opinion, thats why its called an opinion. Bonds was an all-star player long before the juicegate came along!!!


----------



## Cold Iron (Dec 5, 2004)

Bonds truely became a home run hitter as soon as he got to SF. If that has any relation to when he started juicin', i dont know.

I know for a fact that steroids affect the performance of pitchers. My friend added 6mph on his fastball in an atempt to get drafted.

On the other hand, roid's dont appear to be doing too much for gabe kapler performance wise   

I think they have a slight effect but it appears everyone is cheating in some sense now so....


----------



## gr81 (Dec 5, 2004)

> Don't you all wish you were as smart as GR81?
> We are all uniformed ignorant morons.



no I am fine with you being a piece of shit, it makes me feel better about myself. Hey I thought you had me on ignore anyways, what happened?.. Well hey maybe if you use more smilies in your posts then people will respect you huh, I don't think there are enough there already. Didn't I say earlier for you to keep my name out your fuccin mouth, I never said shit about you here, so don't start with me you faggot mother fucker. Not in the mood for your homosexual antics today


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 5, 2004)

.


----------



## Randy (Dec 5, 2004)

I guess ole GR is wasting more of his breath since I have his ass on ignore . 

One thing is, I sure am not missing anything valuable.

All I see is this  

 >>This message is hidden because *gr81* is on your ignore list.</SPAN>


----------



## Flex (Dec 5, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> I guess ole GR is wasting more of his breath since I have his ass on ignore .



How do you see someone's post if they are on ignore  

That's kinda like "I see dead people".


----------



## Flex (Dec 5, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> .



mino you are hilarious.


----------



## Flex (Dec 5, 2004)

Arnie's left nu said:
			
		

> On the other hand, roid's dont appear to be doing too much for gabe kapler performance wise



HEEEEEY! Don't mess with Gabe!  
Just cuz his forearms are bigger than Ronnie's doesn't mean anything.

Nevermind players, what about ref's that are on steroids? how bout Ed Hocule. Guys a monster, his name should be Ed Hercules


----------



## Ralph Wiggum (Dec 5, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I don't think crack gives you an edge.


It did for LT


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 5, 2004)

I guess that was his fuel. 


He was a joy to watch.


----------



## Randy (Dec 6, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> How do you see someone's post if they are on ignore
> 
> That's kinda like "I see dead people".


Flex,

You do see that a post is made by those listed on your ignore list, but cannot see the contents of those posts... As I mentioned in my previous thread,
this is all I see: This message is hidden because *gr81* is on your ignore list

Now if another member happens to quote his post contents in their own message, then it is visible to me.  This is not a guaranteed block, but it helps one to be shielded from the dirt bags of the forum.


----------



## tucker01 (Dec 6, 2004)

I voted no, clearly Bonds was a phenomenal player before steriod use.  But I do understand the reasoning for considering the Asterick.

Take a look at his stats pre 2000 and post 2000 quite a remarable difference

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_individual_stats_player.jsp?playerID=111188&statType=1

Pre 2000 Avg HR per Season 32
Post 200 Avg HR per Season 52

Pre OB% 407
Post OB% 535

Pre Slug% 561
Post Slug% 611

Pre Bat avg .288
Post Bat avg .341

Obviously Bonds has quite a remarkable improvement to his preformance since 2000, in which it would seem quite obvious Steriods have enhanced his natural abilities.  Let alone the Fact that he should be on the down side of his career not the upswing at the age of 40.

It is foolish to think that steriods have not helped him get the single season record, nor more than likely the Career HR record.  No doubt he has amazing Hand-eye coordination, why else would he be in the major leagues?  Hitting a ball is a matter of hundreths of second for reaction time.  Increased strenght allows one to get the back through the hitting area at a quicker rate, giving Bonds an opportunity to make better contact with the ball.

However,  I voted no, because there are always going to be circumstances that could have impacted ones performance.  He is a great athlete and nothing could take away from that, steroids or no steroids.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 6, 2004)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> I voted no, clearly Bonds was a phenomenal player before steriod use. But I do understand the reasoning for considering the Asterick.
> 
> Take a look at his stats pre 2000 and post 2000 quite a remarable difference
> 
> ...


 
I agree 100 per cent. I am nearly 40 myself, and I can't do nearly half the stuff I did in my early 30's. I can still outlast most of the 20 year olds kids but I am slowing down.


----------



## ChrisROCK (Dec 6, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> i don't think he deserves an asterisk. Steroids may make the ball go slightly farther, but goddamn, give the guy some credit. he's one of the top 2 hitters of all time. pitchers DON'T pitch to the guy, and when they do, it's NOT the steroids that are making contact with the ball...


Oh puhlease... It's a total ripple effect... It turns doubles into HR's, singles into doubles...  That translates into more RBI's, more walks, more runs scored... Everything about the guy is tainted now, not only his ridiculous HR totals and records which he has set.  Quite simply...there are no ifs, ands or buts about it... It's against league rules...period.  How can there NOT be an asterisk next to his "accomplishments"?  

He's a first class asshole!


----------



## Cold Iron (Dec 6, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I agree 100 per cent. I am nearly 40 myself, and I can't do nearly half the stuff I did in my early 30's. I can still outlast most of the 20 year olds kids but I am slowing down.



  

Damn I thought you were like 25!!


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 6, 2004)

Arnie's left nu said:
			
		

> Damn I thought you were like 25!!


Why? Because I am so immature?


----------



## Randy (Dec 6, 2004)

Could our mighty GR have been wrong?  No....! 

It's like bringing a gun to a fist fight.  Is there any advantage there?  




			
				IainDaniel said:
			
		

> I voted no, clearly Bonds was a phenomenal player before steriod use. But I do understand the reasoning for considering the Asterick.
> 
> Take a look at his stats pre 2000 and post 2000 quite a remarable difference
> 
> ...


----------



## Randy (Dec 6, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Why? Because I am so immature?


No, cause you still have milk all around your mouth like a baby


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 6, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> No, cause you still have milk around all around your mouth like a baby


  ouch.


----------



## Randy (Dec 6, 2004)




----------



## gr81 (Dec 6, 2004)

why are you even responding to me, I thought you had me on ignore, so ignore me. jesus your a pathetic blowhard. Stop mentioning my name in your posts, its that simple. I don't post at you, don't post at me. why is that hard to understand?


----------



## Randy (Dec 6, 2004)

Was that GR trying to murmur something again


----------



## Flex (Dec 6, 2004)

ChrisROCK said:
			
		

> It's against league rules...period.



Um, no it wasn't (until this past year).

and i love how all of a sudden its SUCH a big issue, when its OBVIOUS people have been juicin for years.

its all a matter of opinion whether steroids help you hit more HR's, and i'm not changing mine that they don't.

Look at Vlad Guerrero. you think he juices? i think not.


----------



## Flex (Dec 6, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Was that GR trying to murmur something again



damn you must be bored


----------



## Flex (Dec 6, 2004)

gr81 said:
			
		

> I don't post at you, don't post at me. why is that hard to understand?



why not do this^?  If you have him on ignore, then IGNORE him

Gr's actually a good buddy of mine. Leave the fuckin' kid alone


----------



## Randy (Dec 6, 2004)

Flex,

GR may be a good buddy to you, but to me my only experiences from him are derogatory statements launched against me and others. I even tried a few times to hold up a white flag and attempt a peace treaty, but he insisted on insulting me and others.   So based on my 100 percent acuracy of accounts with GR, when I see an ignored post from him I am almost certain he is launching another insult.    

Now I have many friends on the forum too Flex, but if they made a point to going around insulting other members and making a habit of showing up only to put others down, then even though they may be friends I would certainly  leave them to get what they deserve.  Why the hell would I spend my time defending them?  Now I suggest you look back at his first post #138.  There he starts out by calling everyone Ignorant Morons.    Now friend or not Flex,  I'm sick of his bullshit.  If those are the friends you choose to associate with well that is your business.   But I would recommend a better choice of friend.   But I guess if he's not insulting you, then you can deal with him.


----------



## Flex (Dec 6, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> Flex,
> 
> GR may be a good buddy to you, but to me my only experiences from him are derogatory statements launched against me and others. I even tried a few times to hold up a white flag and attempt a peace treaty, but he insisted on insulting me and others.   So based on my 100 percent acuracy of accounts with GR, when I see an ignored post from him I am almost certain he is launching another insult.
> 
> Now I have many friends on the forum too Flex, but if they made a point to going around insulting other members and making a habit of showing up only to put others down, then even though they may be friends I would certainly  leave them to get what they deserve.  Why the hell would I spend my time defending them?  Now I suggest you look back at his first post #138.  There he starts out by calling everyone Ignorant Morons.    Now friend or not Flex,  I'm sick of his bullshit.  If those are the friends you choose to associate with well that is your business.   But I would recommend a better choice of friend.   But I guess if he's not insulting you, then you can deal with him.



The reason he said what he said, in this thread in particular, is b/c society knows little-to-nothing about steriods, and we both are sick of it, and sick of defending it, that's all. We are both very passionate about things in our lives, so when something stupid like "steriods made Bonds hit 73 HR's comes up", and it's made into the biggest issue ever, we are sick and tired of hearing the same shit, when people have no clue.

I understand you two may not get along. So if you're gonna ignore him, then DO IT. Don't worry about what he posts.  But damn man, it seems alls you do is antagonize him. That's the WHOLE reason we had that arguement back then, and that's the whole reason you and Chris Rock had an arguement. You say you're gonna ignore, but you KEEP on sayin' shit. do us a favor and follow through on the IGNORE part when you say "i'm ignoring you". it does NO good to keep on postin'.


----------



## Flex (Dec 6, 2004)

My boy Mike posted this on another forum. It's his view on the whole issue. Notice the 2nd paragraph. he makes a great point....

"this how i feel on the topic. Athletes are getting paid millions of dollars to play at the best of their ability, and doing anything to maximize that ability as well as health seems worth while. Lets not forget, roids help players heal from injuries, as well as a whole plethera of other things. Saying they merely make someone "bigger" or "stronger" is not the whole deal.

Do i blame these athletes? No. Should they have to use? No. The people to blame are us. The members of this society. We want bigger guys on the football field. We wanted faster stronger athletes so we can see those big hits on the highlight reels. We want to see barry hit 50 homeruns in a season. It generates an astonishing amount of revenue, and the fact of the matter is that sports would probably not be as exciting without steriods. It basically all comes down to money.

Once in awhile these sports will catch an athlete, and expose them. They will make an example out of them, and that will be it. All it does is show people that they "care," when in actuality they probably could give two shits.

So many people use in professional sports that its almost a given that an athlete has to use in order to level the playing field. Its a shame that is what has happened, but our materialistic greed-filled society can't do without it. "


----------



## King Silverback (Dec 6, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> My boy Mike posted this on another forum. It's his view on the whole issue. Notice the 2nd paragraph. he makes a great point....
> 
> "this how i feel on the topic. Athletes are getting paid millions of dollars to play at the best of their ability, and doing anything to maximize that ability as well as health seems worth while. Lets not forget, roids help players heal from injuries, as well as a whole plethera of other things. Saying they merely make someone "bigger" or "stronger" is not the whole deal.
> 
> ...


Never really thought about it that way, but we DO pay to be entertained!!!


----------



## ZECH (Dec 6, 2004)

Steriods give him a big advantage. Look how JG dropped off. Bonds will do the same thing!


----------



## Randy (Dec 6, 2004)

People don't have to be steroid users to be able to make educated judgements on the topic. Just because people don't study steroids in depth doesn't mean they are in the dark. One doesn't need to know the entire scientific details about steroids to know they greatly add strength and advantage to most anyone in sports. Does it make them hit home runs, of course not, but as I said before if you take a group of identically equally skilled batters in the top of their league and add steroids to half of them, who will hit the most home runs. Now you can make up fairy tales, but the truth to me and most people is pretty obvious.

As for GR, again I do have him on ignore and I do my best to ignore him. But as I mentioned when I see his post when revealed by quote or otherwise and it is another derogatory comment...I have just as much right to free speech as this dickhead does with his comments. So I would appreciate it Flex, if you mind your own business. I appreciate he is your friend, but again if he's going to insult others, then its an open game my friend. I don't care if he or you are tired of people posting about steroids. People post about whatever they like here my friend, it's an open forum. That doesn't mean they deserve to be insulted for their opinions. That's bullshit period! 

As for ChrisROCK...that was a personal matter between the 2 of us that we worked out.. I don't think that can of worms needs to be opened here.. Again it's a resolved matter.

In conclusion here... I have nothing against GR, never have and mentioned that numerous times. If he can grow up and learn that he doesn't need to insult people to voice his concern or point then I would say nothing to him what-so-ever Flex.


			
				Flex said:
			
		

> The reason he said what he said, in this thread in particular, is b/c society knows little-to-nothing about steriods, and we both are sick of it, and sick of defending it, that's all. We are both very passionate about things in our lives, so when something stupid like "steriods made Bonds hit 73 HR's comes up", and it's made into the biggest issue ever, we are sick and tired of hearing the same shit, when people have no clue.
> 
> 
> I understand you two may not get along. So if you're gonna ignore him, then DO IT. Don't worry about what he posts. But damn man, it seems alls you do is antagonize him. That's the WHOLE reason we had that arguement back then, and that's the whole reason you and Chris Rock had an arguement. You say you're gonna ignore, but you KEEP on sayin' shit. do us a favor and follow through on the IGNORE part when you say "i'm ignoring you". it does NO good to keep on postin'.


----------



## Ralph Wiggum (Dec 7, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> My boy Mike posted this on another forum. It's his view on the whole issue. Notice the 2nd paragraph. he makes a great point....
> 
> "this how i feel on the topic. Athletes are getting paid millions of dollars to play at the best of their ability, and doing anything to maximize that ability as well as health seems worth while. Lets not forget, roids help players heal from injuries, as well as a whole plethera of other things. Saying they merely make someone "bigger" or "stronger" is not the whole deal.
> 
> ...


I totally agree with this post. Let's imagine, that if the media didn't bring up suspicion of steriod use in baseball, do you think Bud Selig would have implemented a steriod-ban this year? awwwwww, no. Why, cause Barry Bonds and all the other players were bringing people back to the game. So IMO, MLB deserves all the negative press that it is receiving right now.


----------



## Flex (Dec 7, 2004)

Randy said:
			
		

> People don't have to be steroid users to be able to make educated judgements on the topic.



From what i remember your "educated judgement" on steroids was that "they are harmful because everyone knows they are". THAT'S the kind of stupid bullshit we are sick and tired of hearing.





			
				Randy said:
			
		

> but the truth to me and most people is pretty obvious.



Riiiiiiiiiiiiight. The "truth" that you see on this week's 20/20 or read in some magazine. See, the "truth" ISNT obvious. the truth ISNT what the you THINK you know.





			
				Randy said:
			
		

> As for GR, again I do have him on ignore and I do my best to ignore him.



Um, no you don't  :



			
				Randy said:
			
		

> I have just as much right to free speech as this dickhead does with his comments.





			
				Randy said:
			
		

> If he can grow up







			
				Randy said:
			
		

> I don't care if he or you are tired of people posting about steroids. People post about whatever they like here my friend, it's an open forum. That doesn't mean they deserve to be insulted for their opinions.



I realize people post whatever they want. Feel free to post your opinion on what you THINK is the best exercize for chest or who you THINK the best team in football is.
BUT, Once again, opinion is DIFFERENT than fact though. So whether you THINK steroids do/don't do something is COMPLETELY different than if they ACTUALLY do. 

See, i'm sick and tired of explaining the SAME shit OVER AND OVER. THATS why gr81 dislikes you. its a neverending bullshit fest that keeps going back and forth. 

After this, i'm out. You can keep on making ignorant statements about steriods (you saying "i think steroids help athletes" is one thing, that's ok. but you saying "steroids are harmful b/c we all know they are" is ridiculous). You can keep on bickering every time he posts. 
I'm just tired of reading it, as i'm sure many others are too, sounds like Johnnnnnnnnnnny.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 7, 2004)

> THATS why gr81 dislikes you


I don't think he likes anyone. I once asked a question in a thread under my first real name and he just went ballistek on me, He tore me up a new asshole.


----------



## Flex (Dec 7, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I don't think he likes anyone. I once asked a question in a thread under my first real name and he just went ballistek on me, He tore me up a new asshole.



Of course i can't speak for him, but i doubt he dislikes you, unless there's a reason for it.

You gotta understand, he, like I, is very passionate about things. So it may seem like he's comin' across aggressive or whatever. It just that he takes his shit very seriously. I talk to him on the phone, he's a real nice guy.


----------



## gr81 (Dec 7, 2004)

> I don't think he likes anyone. I once asked a question in a thread under my first real name and he just went ballistek on me, He tore me up a new asshole.



what was your original name? I am curious. oh and my bad, what was I yelling about. Flex is right, I get worked up when people start misrepresenting thinsg that I am passionate about, its very frustrating. Don't take it personal man


----------



## Dale Mabry (Dec 8, 2004)

dg806 said:
			
		

> Steriods give him a big advantage. Look how JG dropped off. Bonds will do the same thing!




I have no idea how he lost all of what he had gained with what we know about PCT these days.  I think the inuries did him more bad than the juice and it is those injuries that are the reason he sucks ass now.  Whether or not those steroids are the reason he got the injuries I will never know.


----------



## Flex (Dec 9, 2004)

dg806 said:
			
		

> Steriods give him a big advantage. Look how JG dropped off. Bonds will do the same thing!



If you think Giambi lost almost 100 pts on his BA b/c he stopped taking steroids you are


----------



## DFINEST (Dec 9, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> If you think Giambi lost almost 100 pts on his BA b/c he stopped taking steroids you are



Amen....

As far as aging ball players losing the ability
to compete as they age, does anyone remember the age
of the OLDEST rookie of the year in MLB.....

Satchel Paige at age 42, I guess he was on the juice as well


----------



## tucker01 (Dec 9, 2004)

Actually he was the oldest rookie in Baseball

The oldest rookie of the year was Sam Jethone of Boston in 1950 at 32 yo 286 days 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/news/2000/11/06/sasaki_roy_ap/

Even if he did win rookie of the year it would be a fair comparison to this scenario.  He was an elite pitcher in the Negro Leagues for many years before, and wasn't allowed to picther in the Majors until sometime later.  almost any young Rookie in the league will not come in posting hall of fame numbers until they mature.

Bonds Numbers have gone through the roof since 2000, age 37-40 not exactly the prime of his career... Things that make you go hmmmm.


			
				IainDaniel said:
			
		

> http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/s...1188&statType=1
> 
> Pre 2000 Avg HR per Season 32
> Post 200 Avg HR per Season 52
> ...


----------



## DOMS (Dec 9, 2004)

I only read the first page so this may have been covered...

 The thought is that steroids are what allowed Bond to do so well.  If that's true and so many other players probably take steroids, then why don't they hit as well as Bonds?


----------



## tucker01 (Dec 9, 2004)

That isn't really the point.  Everyone has different abilities.  No doubt Bonds is exceptional compared to other players.  But Roids surely enhanced his natural abilities.  There is no lying with numbers since 2000


----------



## DFINEST (Dec 9, 2004)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> Actually he was the oldest rookie in Baseball
> 
> The oldest rookie of the year was Sam Jethone of Boston in 1950 at 32 yo 286 days
> 
> ...




I stand corrected as SATCHEL PAIGE was the oldest rookie.....

At age 42, he pitched LIKE he was in the prime of his career,
pitching 9 inning games; not many 42 yr olds pitching
9 innings today


----------



## tucker01 (Dec 9, 2004)

different era,  relievers were almost non-existant.

But you are damn right he was a phenom, it was too bad he wasn't able to pitch his whole career in the MLB's and get the respect he deserves


----------



## Flex (Dec 16, 2004)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> Bonds Numbers have gone through the roof since 2000, age 37-40 not exactly the prime of his career... Things that make you go hmmmm.



What about other players who got in their prime in their later age...are they on juice too?
Clemens. Shaq. Schilling. Randy. (Vinny Testaverde )


----------



## Flex (Dec 16, 2004)

BTW, IAD...

i assume that's your son in your avi. very cute kid (esp. with that hat )


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 16, 2004)

Flex said:
			
		

> What about other players who got in their prime in their later age...are they on juice too?
> Clemens. Shaq. Schilling. Randy. (Vinny Testaverde )


The thing they all have in common is that they have continued playing at the same or close to the level they have played in their younger years.
Bonds has exceeded that, His homers have doubled since.
If you want to compare them that would mean Shaq would increase his scoring to what.....100 points a game and Clemens would pitch 3 no hitters in a row.
Not the same.


----------



## tucker01 (Dec 17, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> The thing they all have in common is that they have continued playing at the same or close to the level they have played in their younger years.
> Bonds has exceeded that, His homers have doubled since.
> If you want to compare them that would mean Shaq would increase his scoring to what.....100 points a game and Clemens would pitch 3 no hitters in a row.
> Not the same.







			
				Flex said:
			
		

> BTW, IAD...
> 
> i assume that's your son in your avi. very cute kid (esp. with that hat )



Yep it is Flex Thanks   Is there any other Team to cheer for.   Well Maybe the Jays


----------



## Flex (Dec 17, 2004)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> The thing they all have in common is that they have continued playing at the same or close to the level they have played in their younger years.
> Bonds has exceeded that, His homers have doubled since.
> If you want to compare them that would mean Shaq would increase his scoring to what.....100 points a game and Clemens would pitch 3 no hitters in a row.
> Not the same.



Yes, it IS the same.

So you're trying to tell me steroids make you throw a better breaking ball, and would help Shaq shoot better from the foul line?

You guys still don't get it. YES, steroids will make you stronger. YES, they'll make you quicker. But they won't give you an eye for the one strike/at bat you get. They won't make you make contact with the ball. THEY WON"T MAKE YOU HIT MORE HR'S, the ball may just go a little further.


----------



## tucker01 (Dec 17, 2004)

No they won't you are right

Bonds already had an exceptional eye at the plate.  Howvever the increased bat speed will make a huge difference.  Now instead of not being able to get the bat around fast enough to fight off the inside pitch, Bonds can can get the meat of the bat around to make solid contact.  

All those Deep fly balls now become Homruns from the increased BAt speed.  Strike outs where he couldn't get the bat around now have the possibilty of being hits.  There are so many scenarios of improvements to situations from improved bat speed,  I could go on and on.

No one is arguing that he doesn't have a great eye at the plate and there is no doubt that steroids don't enhance that,  but they are allowing him to take better advantage of his abilites.


----------



## min0 lee (Dec 17, 2004)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> No they won't you are right
> 
> Bonds already had an exceptional eye at the plate. Howvever the increased bat speed will make a huge difference. Now instead of not being able to get the bat around fast enough to fight off the inside pitch, Bonds can can get the meat of the bat around to make solid contact.
> 
> ...


He makes a better case.


----------



## Flex (Dec 17, 2004)

So do steroids make him bat .380? Is that from bat speed?

....they ABSOLUTELY DO NOT give him that BA.

Look at Ichiro.


----------



## tucker01 (Dec 17, 2004)

No he gets that batting average.  He has the ability to hit the ball already.... All Steroids to is enhance his natural ability, which he has plenty of.  I am not saying I could take steroids and become an exceptional Baseball player.  I could however with the proper training and effort become a better ball player... Much like Bonds has increased his potential.  Bat Speed is a huge thing when you are already an allstar hitter.  I just don't see how you could think other wise.

And comparing him to Ichiro is like comparing Apples to Oranges everyone has different abilities or we would all be .380 hitters.

I don't think he should get an astericks, his a Hall of Fame player.  But is ludicrous not to think that steroids have inflated his numbers.

Not that us debating this is going to change anything anyways


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 8, 2006)

We now have a time frame on his steroid usage, I'll look up his Bonds lifetime stats when I get home and post them to see if there are any differences.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 8, 2006)

Doesn't matter.  There are other opportunities afforded players today that weren't available back then.  You would have to give everyone who took creatine an asterisk.  Plus they weren't against pro baseball's rules at the time.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 8, 2006)

That's true, but I still think it gives them an edge.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 8, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> That's true, but I still think it gives them an edge.



So doesn't creatine.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 8, 2006)

I don't think to the extreme roids does, in fact I don't even respond to creatine....not like I did when I tried test.   back in the late 80's.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 8, 2006)

I was listening to the radio today and they were debating about this.  They brought up cases that maybe Babe Ruth used a corked bat, or for that matter that batters in previous era may have used things to enhance there batting abilities that were unknown of at the time.

Just something to think about.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 8, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> I voted no, clearly Bonds was a phenomenal player before steriod use. But I do understand the reasoning for considering the Asterick.
> 
> Take a look at his stats pre 2000 and post 2000 quite a remarable difference
> 
> ...


 
Here you go Mino already looked into this earlier in the thread


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 8, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I don't think to the extreme roids does, in fact I don't even respond to creatine....not like I did when I tried test.   back in the late 80's.




So cheating is only wrong if it is extreme?  The fields today are optimal, pitchers are better, there are set up pitchers, I could go on.  If it wasn't against the rules there should be no asterisk.


----------



## Twin Peak (Mar 8, 2006)

Two words -- slippery slope.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 8, 2006)

Twin Peak said:
			
		

> Two words -- slippery slope.




Actually, he is African-American.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 8, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> Here you go Mino already looked into this earlier in the thread


 
Wow, need I say more.

That's the first time I ever heard of Babe Ruth using a corked bat.


----------



## Twin Peak (Mar 8, 2006)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Actually, he is African-American.



You are not at the top of your game today.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 8, 2006)

I thought that was a very nice use of racial epithets.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 8, 2006)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> So cheating is only wrong if it is extreme? The fields today are optimal, pitchers are better, there are set up pitchers, I could go on. If it wasn't against the rules there should be no asterisk.


 
The fields are much smaller and the Baseball is wound much tighter.

Also there is the fatigue factor, you have a lot of ballplayers losing steam late in tthe season.


----------



## bio-chem (Mar 8, 2006)

thats why its a joke to compare different generations. the hall of fame is for the best players of their time. and bond clearly is the best hitter of his generation. regardless of steroids the guy is an offensive machine. steroids (regardless of whether he used them) did not give him great dicipline in the strike zone (as evidenced by the amount of walks he gets a year) or teach him to hit a curve ball or slider. bonds deserves to be in regardless of steroids


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 9, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> That's the first time I ever heard of Babe Ruth using a corked bat.


 
http://catalyst.umdnj.edu/plexus/?article_id=171

not really a great source.

Also tampered bats were banned in 1923 after it was found out that Babe Ruth was using a laminated bat.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

Dear lord....not my Babe. I am going to forget I ever read this.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 9, 2006)

Forget you read what?  That he corked his bat, prolly the least of the ways he attempted to cheat.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

There is no proof.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 9, 2006)

True enough.

Trying to get advantages over you competitors has been around baseball as long as can be remembered.  Should Gaylord Perry with stricken from the hall for using spitballs?  Or Ty Cobb for sharpening his spikes? Or Phil Neikro for using an emery board to scuff the ball?


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

It's just that he's about to break possibly  the most treasured record in Baseball and that would be a crime in my eyes.
Same with the Maris record.


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 9, 2006)

Didn't they make rules in basketball based on the fact that Wilt Chamberlain dominated?  I think they even made the lane wider.  How is it fair that people today are competing under tougher rules?


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Didn't they make rules in basketball based on the fact that Wilt Chamberlain dominated? I think they even made the lane wider. How is it fair that people today are competing under tougher rules?


Not fair at all.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 9, 2006)

Records are there to break if not what is the point of tracking them?


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

True but let it be done without cheating.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 9, 2006)

Cheating has occured in every era.  It seems to be a part of baseball.  

And Steroids weren't cheating in baseball until just recently


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> Cheating has occured in every era. It seems to be a part of baseball.
> 
> And Steroids weren't cheating in baseball until just recently


 
No, technically it wasn't but it's obvious it's banned in Football and the Olympics so these ballplayers should know better.


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 9, 2006)

Players are going to take every rule to the limit to benefit there performance... and I see no problem with that.  If I was a pro athelete,  I would take advantage of every legal (by the rules of the governing sport) way to enhance my performance.  

Who is at fault is MLB...for neglecting to address this, and even the recent applications are really just a slap on the wrist


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 9, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> No, technically it wasn't but it's obvious it's banned in Football and the Olympics so these ballplayers should know better.




Alot of stuff is banned in the olympics that isn't in other sports.  Some over-the-counter cough medicines are.  In a 160+ game season, someone is likely to get a cold.  Do they suffer?

You aren't allowed to use your hands in soccer, should that rule be adopted for football and baseball as well?


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

IainDaniel said:
			
		

> Players are going to take every rule to the limit to benefit there performance... and I see no problem with that. If I was a pro athelete, I would take advantage of every legal (by the rules of the governing sport) way to enhance my performance.
> 
> *Who is at fault is MLB*...for neglecting to address this, and even the recent applications are really just a slap on the wrist


I agree, the Giant management had their a suspicions and knew Anderson was a shady character.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> Alot of stuff is banned in the olympics that isn't in other sports. Some over-the-counter cough medicines are. In a 160+ game season, someone is likely to get a cold. Do they suffer?
> 
> *You aren't allowed to use your hands in soccer*, should that rule be adopted for football and baseball as well?


If they used their hands it would be basketball...you just love using your hands. Ghey


----------



## Dale Mabry (Mar 9, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> If they used their hands it would be basketball...you just love using your hands. Ghey



No, you can't use your feet in basketball, so it is Bizarro Basketball.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 9, 2006)

Dale Mabry said:
			
		

> No, you can't use your feet in basketball, so it is Bizarro Basketball.


 
No, Soccer is just bizarre.


----------



## section8 (Mar 10, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> No, Soccer is just bizarre.


 

anyways, if you give Bonds an asterisk, do you give Big Mac one also?  He used Andro, and like Barry at the time there was no policy in place, but it is now an illegal performance enhancing substance.  Just a thought.  I don't like Bonds and have always thought he was a prick, but take nothing away from him, even before the roid years he was still a damn great hitter and one of the best I have seen.  Like you said earlier if he was a nice guy and media friendly we wouldn't even be talking about this.  I think that it is sad that he will be remembered most for the use of roids than his skills.


----------



## mattd46612 (Mar 12, 2006)

Its all bullshit if it was all the gear then Jose Canseco would have 1000 home runs.  No its still 90% talent,  the guy can flat out hit the ball.


----------



## min0 lee (Mar 12, 2006)

Jose Canseco


----------



## tucker01 (Mar 13, 2006)

mattd46612 said:
			
		

> Its all bullshit if it was all the gear then Jose Canseco would have 1000 home runs. No its still 90% talent, the guy can flat out hit the ball.


 
douche bad say what?  Think a little before you post.  Here is some food for thought



			
				IainDaniel said:
			
		

> No they won't you are right
> 
> Bonds already had an exceptional eye at the plate. Howvever the increased bat speed will make a huge difference. Now instead of not being able to get the bat around fast enough to fight off the inside pitch, Bonds can can get the meat of the bat around to make solid contact.
> 
> ...


----------



## JOHNYORK (Mar 14, 2006)

Bonds already had an exceptional eye at the plate. Howvever the increased bat speed will make a huge difference. Now instead of not being able to get the bat around fast enough to fight off the inside pitch, Bonds can can get the meat of the bat around to make solid contact. 

All those Deep fly balls now become Homruns from the increased BAt speed. Strike outs where he couldn't get the bat around now have the possibilty of being hits. There are so many scenarios of improvements to situations from improved bat speed, I could go on and on.

No one is arguing that he doesn't have a great eye at the plate and there is no doubt that steroids don't enhance that, but they are allowing him to take better advantage of his abilites.


agreed


----------



## JordanMang (May 7, 2006)

JOHNYORK said:
			
		

> Bonds already had an exceptional eye at the plate. Howvever the increased bat speed will make a huge difference. Now instead of not being able to get the bat around fast enough to fight off the inside pitch, Bonds can can get the meat of the bat around to make solid contact.
> 
> All those Deep fly balls now become Homruns from the increased BAt speed. Strike outs where he couldn't get the bat around now have the possibilty of being hits. There are so many scenarios of improvements to situations from improved bat speed, I could go on and on.
> 
> ...




Have you taken into consideration that maybe he's just leveling the playing field? I could careless if the batter is using roids when the 9 guys he's trying to overcome are as well ( including the guy throwing the ball to him ).  I mean - if "so many other guys" in the league are juicing then no he shouldn't be getting an asterik because other players aren't playing handicapped.


----------



## bio-chem (May 7, 2006)

JOHNYORK said:
			
		

> Bonds already had an exceptional eye at the plate. Howvever the increased bat speed will make a huge difference. Now instead of not being able to get the bat around fast enough to fight off the inside pitch, Bonds can can get the meat of the bat around to make solid contact.
> 
> All those Deep fly balls now become Homruns from the increased BAt speed. Strike outs where he couldn't get the bat around now have the possibilty of being hits. There are so many scenarios of improvements to situations from improved bat speed, I could go on and on.
> 
> ...



bat speed is an interesting arguement, but then how do you explain mark mcguires 49 home runs his rookie year or ken griffey jr's 500 plus home runs neither was in mcguire's case or jr's his whole carreer were big men with tremendous bat speed.


----------



## busyLivin (May 7, 2006)

I didn't read the whole thread, but Bonds shouldn't have an asterik, he should be stricken from the record books & banned from baseball.


----------



## bio-chem (May 7, 2006)

busyLivin said:
			
		

> I didn't read the whole thread, but Bonds shouldn't have an asterik, he should be stricken from the record books & banned from baseball.


without ever testing positive for a substance that wasnt illegal in the sport till 2002? seems a little harsh.  especially when a lot of hall of fame ball players have admitted to doing worse stuff


----------



## GFR (May 7, 2006)

busyLivin said:
			
		

> I didn't read the whole thread, but Bonds shouldn't have an asterik, he should be stricken from the record books & banned from baseball.


It is naive to think many  of his peers were not also using banned drugs, steroids and other drugs have been in most sports since the 70's......and who cares.


----------



## busyLivin (May 7, 2006)

it's just an insult to all the natural greats who did it through hard work & talent.  Should Bonds' name really be above Babe Ruth's?

& I think all players who cheat should be banned, not just Bonds.


----------



## min0 lee (May 7, 2006)

Your posts deserve an asterik also since you also a user.
Cheater.


----------



## BigDyl (May 7, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Your posts deserve an asterik also since you also a user.
> Cheater.




True Story.


----------



## BigDyl (May 7, 2006)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> It is naive to think many  of his peers were not also using banned drugs, steroids and other drugs have been in most sports since the 70's......and who cares.


----------



## GFR (May 7, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Your posts deserve an asterik also since you also a *user*.
> Cheater.


I would like to use you next


----------



## min0 lee (May 7, 2006)

BigDyl said:
			
		

> True Story.


 
There's no way he would have been able to have that many posts without the help of some juice.


----------



## bio-chem (May 7, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> There's no way he would have been able to have that many posts without the help of some juice.


apple juice?


----------



## min0 lee (May 8, 2006)

bio-chem said:
			
		

> apple juice?


Not Foreman. The closet he ever got to apple juice was when it was used for moonshine.


----------



## tucker01 (May 8, 2006)

busyLivin said:
			
		

> it's just an insult to all the natural greats who did it through hard work & talent. Should Bonds' name really be above Babe Ruth's?
> 
> & I think all players who cheat should be banned, not just Bonds.


 
There are many known cheats in the hall of fame.


----------



## tucker01 (May 8, 2006)

bio-chem said:
			
		

> bat speed is an interesting arguement, but then how do you explain mark mcguires 49 home runs his rookie year or ken griffey jr's 500 plus home runs neither was in mcguire's case or jr's his whole carreer were big men with tremendous bat speed.


 
Bat speed is only one part of the equation.  There are many players who have more talents at batting, then other players.


----------



## Big Smoothy (May 10, 2006)

Bonds should get an asterisk at the minimum.

He records should not be considered.

As well as others.


It just ain't fair; it just ain't the same. 

The question may be....should there be record of these different eras.


----------



## tucker01 (May 10, 2006)

no he hit the homeruns.  if he beats the record so be it.

This is MLB's problem not Barry, as much of a dick he may be.  MLB was too worried about marketing after the strike in 94, to give two shits about steroids.  Then the homeruns started flying and fans started flocking.

MLB and the owners are the biggest fuck ups here.


----------

