Jason Giambi steroid fiasco [Archive] - Beyond.ca - Car Forums

buh_buh

12-03-2004, 10:24 AM

well in that interview with the BALCO owner, he says athletes must make the choice to either give up their dream of winning a medal in the Olympics, or do steroids. I think the choice is kind of easy if you've been working your whole life towards a goal, and its pretty much the only way you can win since everyone else does it too. Athletes use it to get an edge, and since so many of them already use it, your really only using it to keep up. I'm not trying to justify it, well I guess I am haha. It does make for more homeruns, harder hits, faster sprints, etc. Makes sports more interesting. How do you figure baseball has drawn record selling crowds these past couple years?

B17a

12-03-2004, 10:30 AM

Big friggin surprise! When Ken Caminiti came out I thought that would open the floodgates, baseball just brushed that aside and kept their heads in the sand. Puuuhlease, Bary Bonds is almost 40 years old yet is at least 30% more muscular now then when he was 25. Yeah, "all natural" my ass.

buh_buh

12-03-2004, 10:39 AM

well he said he used it unknowingly:rolleyes:
But on the other hand, the banning of steroids in the MLB wasn't implemented until 2003, and I think even then they didn't know which test belonged to who, they just tested to see how many players used steroids. So really what Giambi, Bonds and Sheffield did wasn't breaking any MLB rules.

And what sort of confuses me is Giambi said he used steroids during 2001-2003, but he won the AL MVP in 2000, and has been a flop ever since. So he's been playing worse with steroids?

B17a

12-03-2004, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by buh_buh
well he said he used it unknowingly:rolleyes:
But on the other hand, the banning of steroids in the MLB wasn't implemented until 2003, and I think even then they didn't know which test belonged to who, they just tested to see how many players used steroids. So really what Giambi, Bonds and Sheffield did wasn't breaking any MLB rules.

And what sort of confuses me is Giambi said he used steroids during 2001-2003, but he won the AL MVP in 2000, and has been a flop ever since. So he's been playing worse with steroids?

Yeah, I thought this cream with no prescription, no medical name in the unlabeled container from an unknown source was legit! Barry should be taking remedial common sense classes instead!

As for Giambi, like most roid monkies he has pushed it too far and is body cannot hold up under the new bulk, hence his whole season lost to injury. Another classic example who will be exposed some day is David Boston for the Dophins, the guy was skinny as a First round draft choice into the NFL, then suddenly puts on 40lbs of muscle without losing a step. Again, puuuhlease, NCAA Div 1 programs have state of the art fitness and dietary support, there's no way he just started eating healthy and lifting right after coming into the NFL.

buh_buh

12-03-2004, 12:21 PM

Well I think Barry knew exactly what it was when he was taking it. He's just trying to cover his own ass (and his records). I think the truth will be revealed pretty soon when this whole BALCO mess gets sorted out.

I also read that Giambi's tumor was actually a side effect of one of the steroids he used, so his injuries (well at least part of them) were due to the steroids. In an interview with the Balco owner, he said that more than 50% of MLB players use anabolic steroids! That doesn't really surprise me though since we're seeing all these homerun records get ahnilated (by numerous players) when they've been untouched for 40 years. Its not even a career year anymore for players unless your hitting 50+ homeruns.

DUBBED

12-03-2004, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by lint

Because doped up athelets perform better, which draws a bigger audience, which generates more $$$.

Then why make a big deal about it in the first place? If your intention is to make more money who cares what the players are taking. I just think that if they're going to outlaw the use of steroids, they should enforce it properly so they can make sure that no player uses it.

lint

12-03-2004, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by DUBBED

Then why make a big deal about it in the first place? If your intention is to make more money who cares what the players are taking. I just think that if they're going to outlaw the use of steroids, they should enforce it properly so they can make sure that no player uses it.

Because they want the best of both worlds. They want bigger stronger faster atheletes because that's what the public wants to see, and will pay top dollar for. They also want to be family entertainment, and right now, steroids, performance enhancing drugs, are not looked upon favorably. So they toe a fine line. They have to outwardly profess that it's against league policy, but inside they're just fuming that giambi testified and is letting the cat out of the bag.

Why do you think there is no drug testing policy in professional body building? Cause you can't get freaks without it, and people aren't going to worship the Average Joe.

B17a

12-03-2004, 01:02 PM

Many good points above:

First Buh Buh, SI did a great article years back when Caminiti came out, 50% of all MLB players doesn't surprise me. I remember reading how it was a big joke when players would come back to spring training 20lbs heavier but also with their facial features changing and heads getting bigger (yeah, that's normal!).

lint - totally agree, we as fans have in a way created these monsters. Everyone wants to see bigger, stronger, faster. Remember the McGwire/Sosa homerun battle, that brought out huge publicity, great for MLB and great for fans. Unfortunately for human beings, sometimes to attain these expectations of fans and leagues, normal training doesn't cut it, you need the extra boost. And that racist bill Romanowski once said he needed to juice to keep up with black players, but the reality is your average pro athlete is always looking for that edge to stay employed.

buh_buh

12-03-2004, 01:31 PM

lint, I think your absolutely right. Baseball wants to continue seeing these huge homeruns and in bulk! That's why they didn't implement any steroid testing until 2003, and no steroid testing attached to players' names until last year!

There is no way a professional athlete of Bonds' caliber would take something without knowing exactly what it was. That is total BS. Bonds also denied using any anabolic steroid even after "the cream" and "the clear" were deemed steroids by the MLB, and now after Giambi comes out he comes out saying he used them unknowingly. And also Bonds never hit more than 46 homeruns before 2000, and then in 2001 he hit 73! All fingers point to steroids.

lint

12-03-2004, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by B17a
Many good points above:

First Buh Buh, SI did a great article years back when Caminiti came out, 50% of all MLB players doesn't surprise me. I remember reading how it was a big joke when players would come back to spring training 20lbs heavier but also with their facial features changing and heads getting bigger (yeah, that's normal!).

lint - totally agree, we as fans have in a way created these monsters. Everyone wants to see bigger, stronger, faster. Remember the McGwire/Sosa homerun battle, that brought out huge publicity, great for MLB and great for fans. Unfortunately for human beings, sometimes to attain these expectations of fans and leagues, normal training doesn't cut it, you need the extra boost. And that racist bill Romanowski once said he needed to juice to keep up with black players, but the reality is your average pro athlete is always looking for that edge to stay employed.

What will really be interesting is genetic modification, gene doping, or gene therapy. The technology is designed to help everyday people and atheletes recover. But it can be used to enhance. The rub now is that this type of performance enhancement has no sides effects (ie growing breasts, kidney, liver damage) There is a thought that the current state of anti-doping is not only about a level playing field, but also about atheletes safety. Now if the atheletes could augment their performance without doing harm (much the same way atheletes do now, with training, nutrition), should there be an issue with it? I mean, there is already an unlevel playing field between nations that spend upteem millions of dollars on their atheletes, from development programs, training funding, etc.

Do those athletes/nations have an unfair advantage? Could this be analogous to performance enhancing drugs?

Discuss

buh_buh

12-03-2004, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by lint

What will really be interesting is genetic modification, gene doping, or gene therapy. The technology is designed to help everyday people and atheletes recover. But it can be used to enhance. The rub now is that this type of performance enhancement has no sides effects (ie growing breasts, kidney, liver damage) There is a thought that the current state of anti-doping is not only about a level playing field, but also about atheletes safety. Now if the atheletes could augment their performance without doing harm (much the same way atheletes do now, with training, nutrition), should there be an issue with it? I mean, there is already an unlevel playing field between nations that spend upteem millions of dollars on their atheletes, from development programs, training funding, etc.

Do those athletes/nations have an unfair advantage? Could this be analogous to performance enhancing drugs?

Discuss
So we're just going to keep seeing all these records get shattered year after year? Yes technology has aided in athletes recover and enhance performance, but this is starting to get out of hand. There is no way a "better workout regimen" and creatine will help you knock out 30 more homeruns in a year. If we see records being shattered every year, what is even a point to having those records? Its just a race to see who can find the next BALCO, or has the best money for all these new designer steroids.

If you want to bring other nations in, what about the countries where steroids aren't outlawed and compete against countries such as the US or Canada? But its not like athletes will deter from using them anyway. Look at Marion Jones and Tim Montgomery.

I'm interested to hear the interview with BALCO owner Victor Conte on 20/20 tonight and what kinds of names he drops in the interview.

B17a

12-03-2004, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by lint

What will really be interesting is genetic modification, gene doping, or gene therapy. The technology is designed to help everyday people and atheletes recover. But it can be used to enhance. The rub now is that this type of performance enhancement has no sides effects (ie growing breasts, kidney, liver damage) There is a thought that the current state of anti-doping is not only about a level playing field, but also about atheletes safety. Now if the atheletes could augment their performance without doing harm (much the same way atheletes do now, with training, nutrition), should there be an issue with it? I mean, there is already an unlevel playing field between nations that spend upteem millions of dollars on their atheletes, from development programs, training funding, etc.

Do those athletes/nations have an unfair advantage? Could this be analogous to performance enhancing drugs?

Discuss

First of all, I am highly skeptical that the Clear is risk free. Guys like Lyle Alzado back in the 80's though taking HGH was safe, look where he ended up (worm food). The US is so busted right now with their Track and Field athletes, its reminisent of the 80's East German teams. You're right though the playing field is not level, money = success, you spend the right amount on coaches, training, and facilities and the formula works, something Canada hasn't yet figured out.

Also, Conte is really stirring some shit up, would not surprise me if he dropped dead soon, questionable circumstances....

buh_buh

12-03-2004, 01:59 PM

the problem with Canada's track team is that they get like 1/10th of the funding the US gets. That is the main reason why nobody has medalled since Donovan Bailey. So its not that Canada hasn't figured it out, they just don't have the money for the facilities and coaches in order to be competitive.

B17a

12-03-2004, 02:13 PM

Look at this skinny bitch before:

B17a

12-03-2004, 02:16 PM

After:

Sure hope my physique improves like that between 25 and 40!

big_k

12-03-2004, 02:40 PM

^athletes have also realized in the last 10 years or so that being in shape and training hard is very important. back in the day, athletes would have beer belly's and what not. so it is possible that lots of them ARE training more and being more concerned about their health and what not. look at golf, before woods came along, golfers didn't go to the gym, they didn't do any of that, they were just your ordinary joes. and now, they are still getting older, but are also bulking up to get better at their sport. I am no saying no one uses steriods, but it is possible that some are just hitting the gym more to be better at their respective sport.

B17a

12-03-2004, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by big_k
^athletes have also realized in the last 10 years or so that being in shape and training hard is very important. back in the day, athletes would have beer belly's and what not. so it is possible that lots of them ARE training more and being more concerned about their health and what not. look at golf, before woods came along, golfers didn't go to the gym, they didn't do any of that, they were just your ordinary joes. and now, they are still getting older, but are also bulking up to get better at their sport. I am no saying no one uses steriods, but it is possible that some are just hitting the gym more to be better at their respective sport.

That is 100% bang on, the point however with my photographic display is that regardless of training, mother nature does not typically allow human beings to grow that much into their 40's. You just can't. Plus Bonds isn't exactly from the Babe "have another donut" Ruth era, training and nutrition were well known through the 90's.

DUBBED

12-03-2004, 03:59 PM

My issue with this whole steroid thing is the nature of competition it promotes. I mean look at that one game in the World Series this year, 20-8 or whatever it was. Thats not exciting baseball. In my opinion if they're going to "allow" steroid use, move the damn wall back another 40-60 feet. That would do two things.

1) Make the outfield bigger, so these bigger stronger "athletes" have to run faster and farther to field hits.

2) Make it harder for people to hit a home run at every at bat in a game.

It would make the game more exciting I think, players would have to run farther, hit farther, throw farther. If you want high scoring games thats the way to do it, not by letting Bonds hit one out of the park everytime he steps up to the plate. That's just my opinion though.

Personally I think doping takes all of the skill out of the game.

5hift

12-05-2004, 10:36 AM

I know most people here think that steriods make hitting home runs a lot easier and I agree that obviously they will make you stronger. But anyone that has played baseball competitively will agree that strength is a very small part in hitting successfully. I am not condoning steriod use, and I do think we need tougher drug testing in the MLB, but at the same time I do not think that is why home runs are hit more often today.

Steriods are used in baseball not to get strong enough to smash home runs at will but just to keep the body from breaking down. I know most people think baseball isnt really a sport because most the game you are standing around, but when you are playing every night in a different city for 5-6 months in a row, your body takes a beating.

When a pitch is thrown close to 100 mph and has movement on it, being able to bench press 500 lbs isnt going to help you. Swinging hard may work once in a while but when the pitcher throws a curveball, being the strongest man in the world wont save you if you dont have amazing hand- eye coordination. Barry may have gotten huge over the past few decades but he is where he is because of his amazing hand eye coordination and lighting quick reflexes. Pictures of when he played for the Pirates and were super skinny were shown but no one showed that when he was skinny he was still putting up good power numbers. Take a look at a lot of different players in the MLB and this is proven. Before he became a injury waiting to happen, Ken Griffey Jr always hit over 50 homers a year and was extremely skinny when he did so. Its the same with Jim Thome, this guy is out of shape and fat and looks like a throwback player from the 50s yet he hits over 40 homers a year consistantly.

So taking steriods may help a bit, but these guys are where they are because of talent not because they juice up as well. So while they do deserve suspensions and such, I don't think their records should be tarnished or removed.

5hift

12-05-2004, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by DUBBED
My issue with this whole steroid thing is the nature of competition it promotes. I mean look at that one game in the World Series this year, 20-8 or whatever it was. Thats not exciting baseball. In my opinion if they're going to "allow" steroid use, move the damn wall back another 40-60 feet. That would do two things.

1) Make the outfield bigger, so these bigger stronger "athletes" have to run faster and farther to field hits.

2) Make it harder for people to hit a home run at every at bat in a game.

It would make the game more exciting I think, players would have to run farther, hit farther, throw farther. If you want high scoring games thats the way to do it, not by letting Bonds hit one out of the park everytime he steps up to the plate. That's just my opinion though.

Personally I think doping takes all of the skill out of the game.

You say baseball's scoring is too high but then you suggest moving the wall back 40-60 feet. What do think is going to happen when 3 outfielders now have to cover a lot more ground? Hitters will just drop singles into areas that the outfielders cannot cover. Home runs may go down but every day pop fly outs will now turn into singles and doubles. Doing this would only increase scoring.

Also if you move the wall back 40-60 feet you will almost never see a home run again. If you actually watch baseball you will see that most home runs barely make if over the wall and if they do its by 10 feet tops. Once in a while you get a monster shot that goes out of the park or in the upper deck but its rare.

This year in the playoffs you would have also seen a guy by the name of Carlos Beltran hit a home run almost every time he was at bat in the first round of the playoffs. He is probably one of the skinniest guys in major league baseball. He must use the special roids that dont make you bigger.

I can see how you dont think a 20-8 game is competitive ( The Red Sox Yankees series), but when you see baseball games this out of hand its for a reason. When you are down in a baseball game and your clearly going to lose, managers will stop sending good pitchers out to the mound and just send regular positional players or really crappy pitchers that dont normally play to pitch. The purpose of this is to give the good pitchers arms rest for the game the next day that will actually matter. Because of this though, the scores get run up and players that dont normally hit home runs do. Also if you watched the playoffs you would know that for every 20-8 game there was , there was about 4 or 5 games where the score was 2-1 or 3-2. Btw, the Red Sox - Yankees series overall was the closest series in the playoffs this year, it was just one game that got out of hand.

Another thing is you can never keep everyone happy. About 10 years ago everyone was complaining that the scores were too low and that pitchers were dominating the league. So they then moved the pitchers mound further back. Now the pitcher is too far away and the hitters are dominating. Its one or the other and im guessing MLB's owners would prefer high scoring games over low scoring games.

I just want to make it clear that im not supporting juicing up baseball players, it's just that it doesnt effect the league or ones hitting as much as people like to think.

DUBBED

12-05-2004, 02:02 PM

If the outfield was bigger at least it would be a more exciting game, I'd rather watch the outfielders run around trying to throw people out then watch them watch balls fly over their head. At least it's an exciting high scoring game.

I just think they should do something about steroid use, inforce it properly or don't inforce it at all.

Skylinelover

12-05-2004, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by DUBBED
I think professional athletes should be tested once a month, I mean how much of a hassle is it to pee in a cup before practice.

$200 per person = alot of $$.

Singel

12-05-2004, 03:16 PM

I'm sick of Bonds getting all of the shit for this, while McGuire and Sosa are still seen as choir boys. Bonds has never been good with the media, and now they're trying to get back at him.

Who cares if he juiced 3 years ago? There was no rule against it, he didn't tarnish the game, MLB by not prohibiting the roids. It's like if I'm a cigarette smoker now, I quit in 3 years and the gov't makes it illegal in 5 years...and they want to throw me in jail. There was no rule, so he didn't break any rules.

The olympics do prohibit roids, so Marion should get stripped of her medals and raped. The olympics are a joke, probly 95% of the athletes in most sports juice, and ti all depends on how well that country protects them...The olympics are so political, I can guarantee that if Kyle Shewfelt was American and the vault score thing got fucked up, he'd have gotten the medal. If Paul Hamm was from most other countries he'd have had his medal reversed for that controversy.

Those massive improvements are possible without steroids. Maybe not for you or I, considering we have work and responsibilities to deal with, but for a guy like Barry Bonds he has nothing to do during the off season. He can easily put in say 3-4 hours a day of work, with the best equipment/technology and trainers. And nutritional information has come a hell of a long way in just 10-15 years. Remember when carbs were the healthiest thing you could eat? What about 3 years ago when they were the worst thing for you...oh shit Dr. Atkins had a heart attack, I guess they were wrong again.

And it doesn't sound like Barry was jamming needles into his veins, like maybe Giambi was? A topical cream doesn't seem as bad to me as even Creatine or something, but I'm not a doctor so I can't really be sure.

Bottomline, I still consider Barry Bonds the greatest baseball player of all time. It doesn't affect my enjoyment of watching him play, or tarnish his records to me. I think its unfair to scapegoat a guy like this, but not certain other athletes. The playing field is going to become less fair, now you're allowed to juice only if you're popular like Big Mac

DUBBED

12-05-2004, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by Skylinelover

$200 per person = alot of $$.

$200 is not a lot of money when you're paying some guys $150,000 a game.

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by Khali
I know most people here think that steriods make hitting home runs a lot easier and I agree that obviously they will make you stronger. But anyone that has played baseball competitively will agree that strength is a very small part in hitting successfully.
I agree, you still have to be able to hit the ball in order to hit it out of the park. But it has been proven that bat speed is extremly important and with added muscle and strength from their roids it will help a lot.

Originally posted by Khali
Steriods are used in baseball not to get strong enough to smash home runs at will but just to keep the body from breaking down. Yes, that may be true, but the use of steroids to prevent the body from breaking down still contributes to more homeruns. If your body typically begins to give up near the end of the season, you will generally hit less homeruns. Now that steroids are used to prevent this from happening, an athlete may hit at the same pace as the beginning of the season, hence more homeruns once again.

Originally posted by Khali
Pictures of when he played for the Pirates and were super skinny were shown but no one showed that when he was skinny he was still putting up good power numbers. Yes Barry was putting up decent numbers, but not the type of numbers he put up in the past couple years. Before 2000 Bonds never hit more than 46 homeruns, then all of the sudden he hits 73? Did he suddenly develop better eye-hand coordination after he reached the age of 37?

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 06:43 PM

Originally posted by Singel
I'm sick of Bonds getting all of the shit for this, while McGuire and Sosa are still seen as choir boys. Bonds has never been good with the media, and now they're trying to get back at him. Your right, and as I previously stated they didn't break any rules. But its more of a moral issue. Also the MLB is not issuing any suspensions to Bonds or Giambi. They admit the use of steroids wasn't prohibited during the years Bonds and Giambi, so they are not doing anything to them.

Originally posted by Singel

And it doesn't sound like Barry was jamming needles into his veins, like maybe Giambi was? A topical cream doesn't seem as bad to me as even Creatine or something, but I'm not a doctor so I can't really be sure.Your right, your not a doctor so please don't make any assumptions such as these. I personally believe creatine isn't nearly as bad as "the clear" or "the cream" but I'm no doctor either.

Originally posted by Singel
It doesn't affect my enjoyment of watching him play, or tarnish his records to me. I don't think it tarnishes his records, but its unfair to compare him to Maris or Aaron or Ruth because those guys didn't juice.

Originally posted by Singel
I think its unfair to scapegoat a guy like this, but not certain other athletes. The playing field is going to become less fair, now you're allowed to juice only if you're popular like Big Mac Nobody is scapegoating anybody. Yeah, Bonds got hassled, but it was because Greg Anderson was his personal trainer. In the 20/20 interview, Conte admitted he personally gave steroids to Greg Anderson. Anybody can put 2 and 2 together. Was there any proof that Big Mac used steroids? Yeah there was speculation he was on Andro but no actual proof. Bonds deserves the attention he's getting from the press.

Singel

12-05-2004, 06:53 PM

As far as his improving numbers later in his career, I think that's just baseball, guys hit their primes later.

Prime ages (Of course depends on position...):
Basketball 25-31
Football 28-32
Hockey 29-35
Baseball 32-38

Of course those numbers aren't exact or scientific, but it isn't that unlikely that a guy gets better later in his career. Considering how mental batting is, Barry's eye for pitches and swing get better with age.

And Bonds is just one helluvan athlete: Gold Gloves, Stolen bases and high batting average...unlike McGuire and Sosa who are only good for 1 thing. I'd suspect them of juicin' a lot more than Barry. And when Barry hits a dinger, they're usually GONE. Anyone remember Big Mac's $62? It was a crappy line drive that he sort of shanked but still just barely got out, Barry don't have many of those.

So all I'm saying is Barry's a fantastic player without roids, so it is definatley possible that he achieved his power without the juice (Although he very well may have)

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 07:20 PM

yeah, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that baseball players hit their prime later. But going from 49 in one year to 73 in the next? Thats 2/3 of the production going from one year to the next with an aging player. I agree Barry's a great hitter and definately a hall of fame player, but is he a Ruth/Aaron caliber hitter without the juice?

Wildcat

12-05-2004, 07:33 PM

bonds, giambi, and mcguire are all pussy bitches. they made a life decision to take a performance enhancing drugs essentially to be better than the competition inorder to sign another ridiculous contract next season. way to bitch out guys, way to level the playing field, way to set an example. wtf happened to sportsmanship/ commeradory/ even fucking talent? remove them all from the record books, theyre not athletes theyre cheaters.

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 07:51 PM

how are they cheating if its not illegal? I've already said this numerous times in this thread. The banning of steroids in MLB wasn't implemented until 2003! They did not break any rules! And in the 20/20 interview with Victor Conte, he said "over 50% of major league baseball players use steroids!" Is it cheating if everyone else does it? Is it cheating if its not in the rulebook?

Wildcat

12-05-2004, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by buh_buh
how are they cheating if its not illegal? I've already said this numerous times in this thread. The banning of steroids in MLB wasn't implemented until 2003! They did not break any rules! And in the 20/20 interview with Victor Conte, he said "over 50% of major league baseball players use steroids!" Is it cheating if everyone else does it? Is it cheating if its not in the rulebook?

i didnt know that. and thats something that shouldve been implemented way sooner. whats the purpose of steriods in baseball? theyre not bodybuilders and it shouldnt be part of the sport.

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 07:58 PM

I already said this earlier too, but the purpose of steroids is to increase strength! Increased strength = faster bat speed. Faster bat speed = more/bigger homeruns.

Wildcat

12-05-2004, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by buh_buh
I already said this earlier too, but the purpose of steroids is to increase strength! Increased strength = faster bat speed. Faster bat speed = more/bigger homeruns.

so essentially men are whoring themselves. more homeruns= more $$$.

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 08:16 PM

haha yeap.
But I'd whore myself if I made as much money as Bonds.:D

Wildcat

12-05-2004, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by buh_buh
haha yeap.
But I'd whore myself if I made as much money as Bonds.:D

essentially my arguement is this; i dont think the up and coming player/ rookie should be pressured into taking steroids in order to compete on a level playing field. Players should perform based on their own born talent, not what they inject in their ass.

max_boost

12-05-2004, 08:26 PM

The records are tainted! haha
It makes you appreciate the hitters from way back. Mickey Mantle, greatest hitter ever!! The man can hit a 500ft home run during a game when he was drunk! :thumbsup:

max_boost

12-05-2004, 08:27 PM

Blame it on baseball, they never had strict mandatory testing, or testing at all, LOL What the hell do you expect?

IN regards to Marion Jones, something about her legal team pursuing legal matters because the allegations are false?

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 09:03 PM

yea she's suing Conte for defamation, but I think there's way too much evidence against her. Probably a PR move to deny allegations further.

Singel

12-05-2004, 10:15 PM

Originally posted by buh_buh
but is he a Ruth/Aaron caliber hitter without the juice?

I think so, but I guess we'll never know. He wouldn't be that much smaller/weaker if he trained conventionally.

Originally posted by max_boost
The records are tainted! haha
It makes you appreciate the hitters from way back. Mickey Mantle, greatest hitter ever!! The man can hit a 500ft home run during a game when he was drunk! :thumbsup:

Different game, no relief pitchers, not much junk back then...That's why its so hard to compare athletes from different eras

Originally posted by max_boost
Blame it on baseball, they never had strict mandatory testing, or testing at all, LOL What the hell do you expect?

:werd: Exactly, MLB pretty much allowed it to be "If you're not cheating, you're not trying", even though they technically weren't cheating. It was basically a personal moral/ethical choice for the players, and I just think its ridiculous that Bonds is getting all of the blame for all of them, when really MLB should have been ahead of this years ago.

max_boost

12-05-2004, 10:36 PM

I think Jim Rome said it best, if there is a steroid scandal, expect the normal response from all the athletes. "I didn't know what I was taking"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Why can't they just admit it, denying it won't change anything, the truth always prevails.

Bunch of morons. :rofl: :banghead:

sexualbanana

12-05-2004, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by max_boost
I think Jim Rome said it best, if there is a steroid scandal, expect the normal response from all the athletes. "I didn't know what I was taking"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Why can't they just admit it, denying it won't change anything, the truth always prevails.

Bunch of morons. :rofl: :banghead:

Because you're always innocent until proven guilty. The onus is on the media/investigator/police to prove that the person is in fact guilty. Otherwise, (s)he is still innocent.

At this point, because people like Jones and Bonds have not explicitly said they took steroids, or that an investigating/judicial/enforcement body has not found them guilty. All we can do is speculate.

Albeit, in some cases they are very educated guesses. But still guesses none the less.

buh_buh

12-05-2004, 11:14 PM

They don't really have anything to lose by denying it, and everything to gain. If they're proven guilty, well they're fucked anyways, so why not deny it from the beginning? If investigation fails, it appears as tho they were right all along

Singel

12-05-2004, 11:54 PM

Its a bit of a gamble:

Admit it and its not proven = ur a dumbass
Admit it and it is proven = Public isnt quite as angry
Deny and unproven = Brillian
Deny and proven = Ur fucked

Meh, I just wouldn't shoot to begin with

buh_buh

12-06-2004, 12:07 AM

well i think regardless of whether you admit it or deny it, if you juice the media will shun you anyways and your career will pretty much be tainted anyways.

Singel

12-06-2004, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by buh_buh
well i think regardless of whether you admit it or deny it, if you juice the media will shun you anyways and your career will pretty much be tainted anyways.

Big Mac could come out and admit it right now and they'd still love him. Sammy's a bitch of a teammate and shit, but they'd still praise him more than Bonds. Giambi isn't going to look as bad as bonds becausehe admitted it...

Z_Fan

12-06-2004, 01:23 AM

So here is an idea.

Why not advance science even further with the use of performance enhancing drug technology. The fastest, strongest drugged up human wins. Everyone can utilize any drug they see fit - whatever works best for them - and everyone who competes is simply a drugged up super human.

It levels the playing field because no one is actually cheating, but instead they are all competing to win and set the best time or best record a human can set with current technological aid.

Guess no one is gonna go for that, eh? :dunno:

Besides, it's not like our record books for athletic feats aren't already riddled with 'record holders' that were doped up. A lot of existing 'records' were from drugged up cheating atheletes that just didn't get caught! It's quite unfair...

buh_buh

12-06-2004, 01:38 AM

Well I think in reality, that is what is actually happening. Its not really a competition to see who can run the fastest, or hit the most homeruns. Its who has access to the best technology. That is sort of what Victor Conte was saying in the interview, that most Olympic athletes take it to level the playing field, which is pretty sad considering what the Olympics is supposed to stand for. But I guess its not cheating if everyone's doing it....

max_boost

12-06-2004, 01:49 AM

Originally posted by sexualbanana

Because you're always innocent until proven guilty. The onus is on the media/investigator/police to prove that the person is in fact guilty. Otherwise, (s)he is still innocent.

At this point, because people like Jones and Bonds have not explicitly said they took steroids, or that an investigating/judicial/enforcement body has not found them guilty. All we can do is speculate.

Albeit, in some cases they are very educated guesses. But still guesses none the less.

Oh Please Gavin, are you trying to mimic GTSJeff by talking down to me like I don't understand any of this legal bull shit? :nut: :rolleyes: :rofl:

In these cases, unless the media is overhyping some stuff, if the fucking guy (don't know his name) came out and said he gave the steroids to Barry Bonds, now what more is there to speculate? LOL

Ok, give him the benefit of the doubt the guy is just trying to hurt Barry's image. BUt really, look at Barry Bonds, did Michael Jordan come back and fly higher than his early days? If MJ continued to dominate at age 40 like when he was 25 and dunking over guys like Lebron and Carmelo, then obviously something is fucked! haha But I guess you can argue Baseball is a much different sport. Like Hank Aaron said earlier, when you get older, you get slower. Something is up with Barry and time will reveal whatever it is that he was taking.

max_boost

12-06-2004, 01:53 AM

One more point I wanted to make, it's obvious Barry is on something, what it is, we don't know. Anyhow, since Baseball doesn't have a drug policy in place, what is banned and what isn't? Or what if Barry is taking something that is exclusive to him only? And that the entire world hasn't even heard of it, is that really illegal? It's top secret between him and Balco! haha

buh_buh

12-06-2004, 01:54 AM

Well Greg Anderson (his trainer) never came out and said he gave steroids to Barry. He was caught with steroids in his home, and Conte admitted giving steroids to Anderson. Conte even said he never discussed who the steroids went to, he just gave them to Anderson. It is still speculation as to whether Anderson gave the steroids to Barry, but I think the answer is obvious.

But Barry could also be telling the truth. He could've suspected they were steroids, but specifically told Anderson not to tell him exactly what it was, and that he's just going to take whatever Anderson's giving him. So he doesn't REALLY know if they're steroids or not. So knowing less is actually better in this case.

max_boost

12-06-2004, 01:59 AM

Hmmm.......will the dummy response 'I didn't know what I was taking' thing work though?

Seriously, I jacked 73 homeruns this year, keep giving me whatever it is I am on, but don't tell me what it is ok trainer? LOL

It just doesn't add up! Unless there is even more, Anderson was lying to Barry all along about the supplements and kept telling him to keep on taking them! haha Who knows......

sexualbanana

12-06-2004, 02:02 AM

Well than I guess Kobe really is guilty because his accuser said he raped her. So what else is there to speculate?

The fact of the matter is, it is still speculation because he doesn't have proof. He could say he gave them to Bonds, he could say he saw Bonds take them knowing fully well they were steroids. But unless Conte can show a video tape of Bonds, or a audio recording of Bonds taking it. It is still an educated guess, because like you said. Bonds' physical progression does suggest that he might be on steroids, but it may also be he takes a lot better care of himself.

On that note, you could also argue players like Scottie Pippen and Michael Jordan may have also taken steroids, because as rookies, they were rather small. But as they got into their later years. They have gotten quite muscular and more athletic.

buh_buh

12-06-2004, 02:03 AM

well its not if its going to work or not, but it could actually be the case. He could suspect its steroids, but continue to take it if Anderson doesn't tell him its steroids. He could be 100% sure its steroids, but if his trainer doesn't tell him, then all he's doing is speculating. I'm sure Barry as a professional athlete wouldn't take some random substance his trainer told him to take unless he knew exactly what it was. So I think he knew, even if they didn't actually use the word steroid. So he is sort of playing dumb, but is actually being smart at the same time (if this is actually the case)

max_boost

12-06-2004, 02:04 AM

What's the NBA's stance on drug use? I know in the NFL, you get in shit for smoking weed! haha What's the danger in that?

GAvin, people just get fat over time. They better be in good shape, because all they do is work out and play a sport they love while making millions and millions :D

max_boost

12-06-2004, 02:07 AM

Exactly KeV!

That's why the whole argument of 'I don't know what I was taking' is so puzzling! LOL

Hell even us average people wouldn't take something unless we had a really good idea what it is.

Anyway, it's pretty good with Bonds the last few years, I've never seen a hitter so in the zone before. If pitchers would pitch to him, the dude could smack 100 homeruns easily. He can't miss, it's insanity.

buh_buh

12-06-2004, 02:09 AM

Originally posted by sexualbanana
Well than I guess Kobe really is guilty because his accuser said he raped her. So what else is there to speculate?

The fact of the matter is, it is still speculation because he doesn't have proof. He could say he gave them to Bonds, he could say he saw Bonds take them knowing fully well they were steroids. But unless Conte can show a video tape of Bonds, or a audio recording of Bonds taking it. It is still an educated guess, because like you said. Bonds' physical progression does suggest that he might be on steroids, but it may also be he takes a lot better care of himself.

On that note, you could also argue players like Scottie Pippen and Michael Jordan may have also taken steroids, because as rookies, they were rather small. But as they got into their later years. They have gotten quite muscular and more athletic. Where's the evidence that Kobe raped her? Did she get knocked up? Does she have a baby that's half black? No. There's no evidence to prove Bonds did it either, but lots of signs point in that direction.

Your Michael Jordan Scottie Pippen theory is just ludicrous. Just because someone gets big doesn't mean they are on roids. And plus, basketball is a finesse sport where roids couldn't really even help you that much.

I think the problem with smoking weed in the NFL is not really a safety issue, but more of a moral issue with the fans.

Wildcat

12-06-2004, 02:36 AM

Originally posted by buh_buh
Well I think in reality, that is what is actually happening. Its not really a competition to see who can run the fastest, or hit the most homeruns. Its who has access to the best technology. That is sort of what Victor Conte was saying in the interview, that most Olympic athletes take it to level the playing field, which is pretty sad considering what the Olympics is supposed to stand for. But I guess its not cheating if everyone's doing it....

thats why america wins the most medals. its not the people its the funding. they engineer athletes so they can be the best, its the american stigma to be the best, whether its by bombing foreign countries or by outrunning the foreigners.

RiCE-DaDDy

12-06-2004, 07:44 AM

Here's something interesting...

David Boston (WR) was justed tested postive for steroids....
But check out his buddies from Arizona

Boston
http://img37.exs.cx/img37/3387/n3rbostonguns.png

Micheal Pittman (RB for the Bucs)
http://img37.exs.cx/img37/8982/p1dmikepittman.jpg :eek:

And Thomas Jones (RB for the Bears, have him on my fantasy team :D )
http://img37.exs.cx/img37/6794/j9ethomasjones.jpg

B17a

12-06-2004, 09:11 AM

IF you check out all three of those guys when they came out of college, they were nowhere near as big! Interesting, ESPN did a good interview with Boston where just like Romo, he takes a billion pills a day, I wonder how many are vitamins and how many are bull elephant hormones!

buh_buh

12-06-2004, 12:31 PM

wow its so obvious those 2 guys are on roids.
You would think when its THAT obvious, they would stop because its easier to get caught.:dunno:
And Michael Pittman still isn't even that good:rofl: He's friggin huge though!!!:eek:

Wildcat

12-06-2004, 12:52 PM

geez, dont even get started on football. no surprises there.

DUBBED

12-06-2004, 02:18 PM

It's so funny how out of proportion those guys are.

RiCE-DaDDy

12-06-2004, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by Wildcat
geez, dont even get started on football. no surprises there.

Actually if u look at these guys and most of the other players, it would be hard to come to that conclusion.

i.e. Boston is a WR, but look at the other top WR's. Randy Moss is a skinny-ass, Harrison looks normal, TO looks big, but nothing crazy.

Singel

12-06-2004, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by buh_buh
Where's the evidence that Kobe raped her? Did she get knocked up? Does she have a baby that's half black? No. There's no evidence to prove Bonds did it either, but lots of signs point in that direction.

Your Michael Jordan Scottie Pippen theory is just ludicrous. Just because someone gets big doesn't mean they are on roids. And plus, basketball is a finesse sport where roids couldn't really even help you that much.

I think the problem with smoking weed in the NFL is not really a safety issue, but more of a moral issue with the fans.

Just as many signs point to Kobe raping her as Bonds doin' the juice. I don't see your point...(And Kobe's guilty :D)

Just because Bonds got big then doesn't mean he's on roids...And I dunno if Ben Wallace is on roids, but his strength certainly helps gim, or hell, Shaq came back leaner and stronger, he must be cheating!

Roids is really a moral issue with the fans too...I dunno if MLB has to decide to preotect the players from themselves, ideally they should, and should have years ago.

Basically I don't see how anyone can justify guys getting bigger differently, the reason Bonds is still playing at such a high level is that he put in the work, and MJ obviously didn't. Just because a player you don't like gets bigger doesn't mean he's on roids, and a guy u love put in the hard work it takes to get there naturally.

B17a

12-06-2004, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by Singel

Just because Bonds got big then doesn't mean he's on roids.... Just because a player you don't like gets bigger doesn't mean he's on roids, and a guy u love put in the hard work it takes to get there naturally.

Your point is valid if you're talking about a guy who's 26 years old. 40 year old's just don't bulk up that much naturally, doesn't happen.

One last point I'd like to make, $50 says all these guys who have been "uncovered" (ie. David Boston, Bonds, Giambi, etc. etc.) will have shitty seasons next year and will never be the same. Some will say, too much attention and pressure from the media and fans, some will say age, some (like me) will say this is what all natural looks like.

awdterror

12-06-2004, 06:41 PM

Bonds is on roids, period, amen. You do not double your home run output and put on 40 pounds of muscle from the age of 30-35 naturally. Good training had a lot to do with it, but he is on the juice. Boston and others are just making it blatant, I think they're doing it more for the attention they get from women for having huge pipes rather than to play the game, because you don't need 23" biceps to be a good wide reciever.

FWIW, I think the NFL really needs to make an example out of Boston, not with suspensions and fines, but to say "Look at what 'Roids do for you." He's missed ALL of this year with a knee injury. He's got acne, and the bulging stomache from his organs growing when they shouldn't be. Go see where David Boston is when he's 45, he's going to be fucked with tons of joint problems and will probably be using a cane. Kids see him all crippled and shit,t hey'll think twice before sticking in that needle.

buh_buh

12-06-2004, 06:46 PM

Originally posted by Singel

Just as many signs point to Kobe raping her as Bonds doin' the juice. I don't see your point...(And Kobe's guilty :D)

Just because Bonds got big then doesn't mean he's on roids...And I dunno if Ben Wallace is on roids, but his strength certainly helps gim, or hell, Shaq came back leaner and stronger, he must be cheating!

Roids is really a moral issue with the fans too...I dunno if MLB has to decide to preotect the players from themselves, ideally they should, and should have years ago.

Basically I don't see how anyone can justify guys getting bigger differently, the reason Bonds is still playing at such a high level is that he put in the work, and MJ obviously didn't. Just because a player you don't like gets bigger doesn't mean he's on roids, and a guy u love put in the hard work it takes to get there naturally. What are the signs that Kobe raped her? With Bonds, yeah he got bigger, but also look at his stats. Going from 49 from one year (which would be considered a career year pre-roid days) to 73 the next is pretty crazy. You say its due to him working harder? So your saying Bonds didn't give a shit about his work ethic when he hit 49, then he decided all of the sudden to put in some effort and he bangs out 73? C'mon man, open your eyes. I don't see why your still even arguing about this. He even ADMITTED he used the cream and the clear. So I don't even know why I wrote this post. Are you in denial that Barry did 'roids? Just because a player you do like gets bigger, jacks out 73 homeruns, and admits he did steroids on national TV doesn't mean he really did it... it was flaxseed oil... i swear....:rofl: