Bonds hits 756

[Keller]

Just wondered what people thought.

Personally, I think he owns the record fair and square. He's been a professional his whole career. He was the best hitter of his generation. He has played well beyond his prime, continue to pursue his goal of 756. I'm not naive enough to pretend he wasn't on steroids, but I'm also not naive enough to think he's the first or the last. Every professional athlete takes competitive advantages when they are presented to them, whether they are considered cheating or not is a matter of perception.

[RichardCranium]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=26383

[Skirmisher]

In my opinion he was an extremely talented player who through his own stupidity turned himself into a loser with a fake record.

[Keller]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=26383


Oh, I thought this was a sports topic.

[RichardCranium]

Just wondered what people thought.

I think it's retarded that you feel it's okay to cheat as long as other people are cheating too.

[Keller]

I think it's retarded that you feel it's okay to cheat as long as other people are cheating too.

Did I say that?

[RichardCranium]

Did I say that?




Personally, I think he owns the record fair and square....

...I'm not naive enough to pretend he wasn't on steroids, but I'm also not naive enough to think he's the first or the last. Every professional athlete takes competitive advantages when they are presented to them, whether they are considered cheating or not is a matter of perception.

Yes, you did.

[Keller]

Yes, you did.

Actually, I didn't. But thanks for playing!

In case you're going to press the issue, I'll elaborate since you don't comprehend English.

There is a numerical record. It was 755. It is now 756. Who are we to decide what is and what is not cheating? It's a fucking game with numbers that people track to compare who is "better" than everyone else at certain aspects of that game. If we start a trend of qualifying records based on different circumstances surround the game at different times in it's history the records wont mean a damn thing. It's not my (or your) place to determine which records are recorded and which are ignored.

Barry Bonds has hit 756 little round balls out of a park and Hank Aaron has hit 755. It's a record, which used to belong to Hank Aaron and now belongs to Barry Bonds.

[RichardCranium]

Using anabolic steroids to enhance the performance of an athlete isn't 'circumstances', it's cheating. And illegal. Spin it however you'd like but breaking a record by ill-gotten means isn't breaking a record at all. Much less fair and square.

Way to resort to english comprehension, thanks for playing! spiel though. It's original.

[Keller]

Using anabolic steroids to enhance the performance of an athlete isn't 'circumstances', it's cheating. And illegal. Spin it however you'd like but breaking a record by ill-gotten means isn't breaking a record at all. Much less fair and square.

Let me be even more clear than I was earlier.

Hank Aaron hit 755 home runs. Barry Bonds hit 756 home runs. There are people who track who has hit the most home runs. Barry Bonds has hit more home runs than Hank Aaron. Ipso facto, he owns the record fair and square.


Way to resort to english comprehension, thanks for playing! spiel though. It's original.

Don't put words in my mouth and I wont complain that you don't comprehend what I am saying.

[Sean]

Actually it wasn't against the rules so how exactly was it cheating?

[RichardCranium]

Because it's illegal?

Edited to add: Not to mention unfair to the athletes who do it on pure talent.

[RichardCranium]

I can't argue against the logic that you believe Bonds took steroids yet he won the record fair and square.

[Keller]

I can't argue against the logic that you believe Bonds took steroids yet he won the record fair and square.

I said he fucking OWNS the record fair and square.

I also said it's not my fucking place to judge what is cheating and what is not for everyone else.

Personally, I think he took steroids, which is cheating. I think he didn't achieve the record in a fair or sporting manner. But I think, when you consider the nature of records, that he owns it fair and square.

I'll refrain from commenting, again, that you lack reading comprehension. Oops, I guess I wont.

[Anebriated]

.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y249/Kyrthos/bonds-1.jpg

[Gan]

:lol:

^^^^ FTMFW

[Some Rogue]

Apparently you don't understand what the term fair and square means....

[Skeeter]

How do you factor in the pitchers that were taking steroids that he hit HRs off of?

[Keller]

Apparently you don't understand what the term fair and square means....

I'm moreso mocking the fact that people get so worked up over a number. If Barry Bonds had been on steroids when he hit the most consecutive foul balls on a Thursday afternoon before 3 pm on July 18th in Yankee Stadium off of a left-handed pitched who weighs less than 187 lbs and has a pixie smoking a hookah tattoo'd on his left shoulder, no one would care whether he was cheating or not.

It's a number. Barry Bonds hit 756 of them. Hank Aaron hit 755. I don't know how it could be more plainly obvious.

[RichardCranium]

It's not my reading comprehension that's lacking, it's your understanding of groups of words commonly referred to as phrases. In this case the phrase 'fair and square'. He can't own the record fair and square while at the same time using an unfair means to achieve it. It's one or the other, but not both.

In summation you are in fact a retard and your cutdowns and retorts are lame in the extreme.

[Some Rogue]

You're assuming no one would care. I disagree; a lot of people do care that the players cheat. Whether they're good, bad or mediocre.

[Danical]

I think all this controversy is great for baseball. It's intriguing and certainly brings in more viewers/tickets so it's good overall.

I've always been more about team records like championships won or penalties allowed per season (yay raiders!).

Now, if you want to talk about cheating, let's address the retarded huge payroll gaps between teams. Cheating is defined by unfair advantage. I would be far more concerned with cheating as a team can have 2, or 3, or 5 times the payroll of another.

One player making a few more dingers a year is dandy but when you can wrangle the highest caliber players in the league, well, that's retarded.

[Anebriated]

The difference between Bonds and those Pitchers are that Bonds has already admitted to taking steroids(although it was against his knowledge) and the pitchers arent chasing one of baseballs most prestigious milestones. Not saying the steroids arent a big deal, just that the pitchers arent under the microscope yet. Im a big fan of the sign that read "Ruth did it on hot dogs and beer".

[Sean]

I really don't get the big deal over any record in professional sports. Sports aren't static as rules change, level of competitive increases/decreases, new facilities are built, etc. all records are apples and oranges. Bonds is abrasive and egotistical and I can for the most part understand why people don't like him. He's become the poster boy for the steroids era because of his achievements and the cloud of unproven allegations surrounding him. But until people start caring about doctored balls, corked bats, greenies, and all the other methods of finding competitive edges in baseball i can't bring myself to really care about steroids.

[Keller]

It's not my reading comprehension that's lacking, it's your understanding of groups of words commonly referred to as phrases. In this case the phrase 'fair and square'. He can't own the record fair and square while at the same time using an unfair means to achieve it. It's one or the other, but not both.

In summation you are in fact a retard and your cutdowns and retorts are lame in the extreme.

Right. If you can't draw a simple distinction, then I'm not going to continue to try and explain it to you. Just be confused and happy.

[Keller]

I really don't get the big deal over any record in professional sports. Sports aren't static as rules change, level of competitive increases/decreases, new facilities are built, etc. all records are apples and oranges. Bonds is abrasive and egotistical and I can for the most part understand why people don't like him. He's become the poster boy for the steroids era because of his achievements and the cloud of unproven allegations surrounding him. But until people start caring about doctored balls, corked bats, greenies, and all the other methods of finding competitive edges in baseball i can't bring myself to really care about steroids.

Well said.

[Anebriated]

Records are meant to be broken. I cant argue with that. Bonds is a player who HAS ADMITTED to taking steroids in his career. That is why he is the posterboy for steroids. He claimed they were given to him without his knowing. I find that hard to believe.

[Gan]

Well said.

/Agreed.

[Sean]

What he admitted the the grand jury alone isn't what makes him the poster boy. Mark McGuire never admitted anything and he's also one of the poster children for Steroids. Neifi Perez was busted 2-3 times this season alone for banned substances but no one gives a fuck about Neifi Perez because what has he done? It's the fact that the Bonds and the McGuires of the world actually have accomplished things amid the cloud that makes them poster children.

[DeV]

Don't forget Sammy Sosa. Corked bat king.

[CrystalTears]

I'm not sure why any of you care, none of you play professional baseball.

*flees

[Gan]

I'm not sure why any of you care, none of you play professional baseball.

*flees

ROFL

+100 for linked reference.

[Celephais]

I'm not sure why any of you care, none of you play professional baseball.

*flees

:rofl:
Nice!

[Mistomeer]

He's become the poster boy for the steroids era because of his achievements and the cloud of unproven allegations surrounding him.

The allegations aren't unproven. They're fact. He's admitted to unknowingly using steroids. Whether he knew it or not, he used illegal drugs to help him break the record. Further, look at his numbers. He started consistently putting up really big numbers in 2000 when he was 36 years old. At a time when most professional athletes decline, he vastly improved. So it's pretty obvious that he was always a great HR hitter, but he transformed from a great to HR hitter to the best HR hitter and then later admitted to steroid use. In short, he broke the law, thus not "square" and he admitted to using the drugs thus not "unproven."

[Sean]

I couldn't care less about whether or not he broke the law there is no morality clause on holding records. How many athletes in the 80s used coke? Astrix for all of them! It wasn't against the rules (to my understanding) as set forth by the MLB and it's unions to take steroids until recently. Hell we still use Doc Gooden as the definition for an amazing rookie pitchers. King Felix the next Doc Gooden! Whose the next Barry Bonds?

[Skeeter]

A-Rod

[Blazing247]

I couldn't care less about whether or not he broke the law there is no morality clause on holding records. How many athletes in the 80s used coke? Astrix for all of them! It wasn't against the rules (to my understanding) as set forth by the MLB and it's unions to take steroids until recently. Hell we still use Doc Gooden as the definition for an amazing rookie pitchers. King Felix the next Doc Gooden! Whose the next Barry Bonds?

Baseball does not exist in a bubble, though. It is illegal, in the US of A, to take non-prescribed steroids. While these records may never be revoked, they are not true records. Proof? See Floyd Landis' yellow shirt, Carl Lewis' gold medal, etc.

[Mistomeer]

I couldn't care less about whether or not he broke the law there is no morality clause on holding records. How many athletes in the 80s used coke? Astrix for all of them! It wasn't against the rules (to my understanding) as set forth by the MLB and it's unions to take steroids until recently.

It wasn't against the rules because it's against the law. There's no rule in baseball that says you can't shoot the batter and kill him in order to strike him out either. The guy admittedly cheated in order to get ahead. If you don't care that he cheated, cool, but it doesn't justify it.

[Sean]

If some pitcher pulled out a gun and shot a batter people wouldn't be clamoring to put an asterix next to all the stats that the pitcher compiled either.

[Anebriated]

thats because the gun isnt enhancing his performance on the field.

[RichardCranium]

A-Rod


As much as I dislike Alex Rodriguez I believe that he does what he does with pure talent.

[Sean]

Killing players on an opposing team certainly unevens the playing field and puts that team at a disadvantage of having to replace that player.

[Danical]

Intro to the Last Boy Scout?

[Ilvane]

Did Bonds ever get tested positive for steroids in his career? I don't follow this stuff as much as others, but it seems like I heard he never did.

Is it just word of mouth from other people?

Angela

[DeV]

Guy who caught the ball is gonna be one lucky son of a bitch if he decides to sell.

[Sean]

It's from a leaked grand jury testimony. No he's never failed a roid test I think he failed an amphetamines test though.

[Ilvane]

Ah, okay. Thanks, Sean.

Yeah, Dev, I heard earlier on CNN they are putting the value at about 400-500k right now.

Angela

[Bobmuhthol]

He did fail an amphetamines test.

"Under baseball's amphetamines policy, which went into effect last season, players are not publicly identified for a first positive test. A second positive test for amphetamines results in a 25-game suspension. The first failed steroids test costs a player 50 games."

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2727325

[Mistomeer]

If some pitcher pulled out a gun and shot a batter people wouldn't be clamoring to put an asterix next to all the stats that the pitcher compiled either.

No, they'd just put an asterisk next to the one where he broke the law. Bonds admitted steroid use and then broke records, thus the asterisk. I'm not anti-Bonds I'm anti-cheating. McGwire, Sosa and the rest deserve the same criticism, but they just happened to retire before it all hit.

[Sean]

We can't really prove that either way until someone shoots someone in the middle of a game.

[Gan]

http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1650788,00.html
The Man with the Million Dollar Balls

Dont think he'll be buying this one, but he's definately waiting for one of Bond's homers (the last one).

[DeV]

But I'm thinking 20 years in the future, this doesn't matter. You can bellyache all you want, public: it's still going to be in the record book. Get over it! It doesn't matter what you think; what matters is what is. There's not going to be an asterisk. There's going to be a number in a book. I know people who don't think Bush was really elected president, but there he is. You don't have to accept it personally. He'll still be in the history books.

This is sort of touching on what Sean was trying to get across earlier. I tend to agree.

[Latrinsorm]

Who are we to decide what is and what is not cheating?Doing something that's against the rules is cheating. Doing steroids is (and was) against the rules.
If we start a trend of qualifying records based on different circumstances surround the game at different times in it's history the records wont mean a damn thing. It's not my (or your) place to determine which records are recorded and which are ignored.People can (and have) done analysis based on era. The vital (and fairly obvious) distinction here is that a player cannot choose which era he plays in while a player can very easily choose to play by the rules.
I'm moreso mocking the fact that people get so worked up over a number.If you're purposefully trolling, then I suppose there's no point demonstrating how incorrect you are, but it's already all typed out so I guess I'll leave it.
How do you factor in the pitchers that were taking steroids that he hit HRs off of?It can't be done. It also has no bearing on whether or not Bonds cheated.
Actually it wasn't against the rules so how exactly was it cheating?1991: "The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players and personnel is strictly prohibited ... [and those players involved] are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game.... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids…"

An unenforced rule is still a rule.

[Some Rogue]

This is sort of touching on what Sean was trying to get across earlier. I tend to agree.

I like this editorial better.
Hollowed, not Hallowed. (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AiVsx9.YXuMLDANPzdwSIgMRvLYF?slug=dw-756bonds080707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)



If this was supposedly the making of history, then realize history isn't going to make much of this. Ten, 30, 50 years from now, it will be looked upon with bewilderment – did people really celebrate a phony number that punctuated a fraudulent era of the game? No one will give much credence to what happened in Major League Baseball from, say, 1996 to the advent of mandatory steroids testing.

Technically, Bonds swung, connected and sent a ball out of the park 756 different times in his 22-season career. But it takes Easter Bunny-level gullibility to believe he did it naturally.

His numbers are nonsensical – most notably the absurd 73 homers in 2001, a total 19.7 percent greater than Roger Maris' mark of 61, which hasn't been touched without massive suspicion in 46 years and counting.

Forty-six year old records don't just fall by 19.7 percent. Or even by the 14.7 percent Mark McGwire exceeded Maris' record in 1998. If someone were to shave 19.7 percent off the current world record in the mile run (3:43.13), he'd finish at 2:59.2. Yes, a three-minute mile. You think you'd believe something so statistically improbable? How about 100-meter dash in 7.8 seconds? You think your grandkids would buy that one, or mock it as some old fish story?

Guess what, they aren't going to believe 73, either. And without those, Bonds didn't pass Aaron.

[Skeeter]

It absolutely has bearing if you are saying he had an unfair competitive advantage.

[Bobmuhthol]

The issue isn't whether he had an advantage over the pitcher, it's whether he was breaking rules.

[Some Rogue]

People can (and have) done analysis based on era. The vital (and fairly obvious) distinction here is that a player cannot choose which era he plays in while a player can very easily choose to play by the rules.

From that editorial I posted above:

In 1904, considered part of the "modern era," Jack Chesbro won 41 games and recorded a 1.82 ERA, pitching all season on two days rest. Does anyone consider that the greatest season of all time by a starting pitcher? Or do you scoff at the competition considering that today's far better conditioned pitchers – some on juice themselves – only start about 34 games a year?

[Sean]

1991: "The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players and personnel is strictly prohibited ... [and those players involved] are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game.... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids…"

An unenforced rule is still a rule.


Wikipedia:
Tetrahydrogestrinone (often referred to as THG or "the clear") is an anabolic steroid. It has affinity to the androgen receptor and the progesterone receptor, but not to the estrogen receptor.[1] The drug has been considered a "designer drug", closely related to the banned anabolic steroids gestrinone and trenbolone,[2] and was banned by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) at the end of 2003.[3]

It was created by Patrick Arnold.

2003 =! 1991

[Bobmuhthol]

Oh, is that the only thing he used, and he stopped immediately after it was banned? Okay then!

[Sean]

Well since we keep harping on his grand jury testimony leak as his admission that he did steroids then yes thats all he's used. Unless you have another theory what the substance his trainer rubbed on his is/was?

[Blazing247]

Well since we keep harping on his grand jury testimony leak as his admission that he did steroids then yes thats all he's used. Unless you have another theory what the substance his trainer rubbed on his is/was?

Man juice, cause Bonds is a homo. Duh.

[Bobmuhthol]

... you're the guy that brought up Bonds failing the amphetamine test, so that right there is an illegal substance that he definitely used.

[Sean]

You got me, he used or got caught with amphetamines in his system once. Kill that man!

[Latrinsorm]

It absolutely has bearing if you are saying he had an unfair competitive advantage.I said he cheated, but I would also say he has an unfair competitive advantage over other hitters, a class that includes Hank Aaron.
2003 =! 1991It doesn't matter when it was banned, anabolic steroids are controlled substances. "...This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances..."

[Sean]

A controlled substance by definition is something thats regulated by the government. The Clear was not regulated by the Gov't until 2003.

[Bobmuhthol]

<<You got me, he used or got caught with amphetamines in his system once. Kill that man!>>

What a great way to respond after saying "that's all he's used" with regard to what's more or less hearsay. Not directly addressing issues is always the best way to resolve them.

[Latrinsorm]

A controlled substance by definition is something thats regulated by the government. The Clear was not regulated by the Gov't until 2003.From your own source, sir:
"Anabolic steroids are controlled substances in many countries, including the United States (U.S.)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolic_steroid

That this was a new kind of anabolic steroid doesn't make it somehow uncontrolled.

[Sean]

Amphetamines aren't steroids. I guess I could have been more clear but I thought you of all people would get the gist. I was mistaken. But that said, the issue of what? Amphetamines have been in the game for decades. Even the commish has said it's use in the sport has probably been around for 7 or 8 decades. That includes the era that Hank Aaron played in. Can you prove that The Hammer never used an amphetamine? What about Willie Mays? Theres testimony out there that he supplied it to another player.

If your argument is that we should asterix Bonds for his (1) failed amphetamines test then by all means make the argument. If it's not your argument what exactly is your point? Where do you actually stand on the issues in this thread?

[Bobmuhthol]

<<If your argument is that we should asterix Bonds for his (1) failed amphetamines test then by all means make the argument. If it's not your argument what exactly is your point? Where do you actually stand on the issues in this thread?>>

Personally, I think the entire hunt for juiced players is too little too late, and retroactively putting in the * to counteract it is a bad idea. Bonds should get the record. However, my concern specifically in this thread is the arguments supporting Bonds. To cite him directly breaking rules and then saying, "Oh but that's totally negligible, lol," is plain contradictory. I don't feel that there's been any consistency in bringing people down for steroid use, unfortunately, so targeting specific players shouldn't be put into practice.

[Sean]

Fair enough. It's 2 seperate rules though (in terms of the MLB) 1 set of rules for steroid usage and another for amphetamines usage. Linking them together to make a counter point to my claim that Bonds only used "the clear" in terms of steroids isn't really useful. Unless it's the slippery slope argument that well if he did 1 he's more likely to do the other. But maybe thats because I wasn't clear.

[TheEschaton]

Controlled substances are, legally, just something that the government has a stance on. Cocaine is a controlled substance - it's controlled in that the government has made it illegal. That's all that's needed for it to be "controlled".

And non-prescription steroids are illegal.

-TheE-

[Sean of the Thread]

ATTICA! ATTICA! ATTICA!

[Warriorbird]

Super Deluxe asks, "What if Barry Bonds never took steroids?"

http://www.superdeluxe.com/sd/contentDetail.do?id=D81F2344BF5AC7BBBA9C162C218F49 D0AC1943DD7C50AA35

[Tsa`ah]

Don't forget Sammy Sosa. Corked bat king.

And Mark's Andro brother.

[Keller]

And now, according to Chipper, the cloud begins to follow A-Rod.

Maybe we should just call this the steroids era and vacate all statistics because people cheated.

[Tsa`ah]

Is the record less valid when you consider the competition is also likely to use steroids?

One could say Ruth's single season record wasn't valid because he wasn't competing against a field of the best possible athletes (meaning he wasn't competing against anyone but whites). Since he was competeting on an even playing field ... well the record was valid no?

It would be one thing if Bonds were THE ONLY roid baby in MLB, but he's not. The field was just as level as it was during the white boy days.

And before someone throws out the argument that roids won't help you hit the ball ... consider what they do and consider what the essentials are for hitting a ball. (tranlation ... roids will improve your hitting game in almost every aspect).

[Keller]

Is the record less valid when you consider the competition is also likely to use steroids?

If you think a record is more than a statistic and actually has some moral component, then I suppose you can say that Hank likely wasn't on steroids.

But I'd also say that argument is vulnerable to expansion. Even if A-Rod isn't on steroids, should we put an asterix next to his name because athletes now have much better nutrition/exercise? It lacks the legality issue, but it's not fair to allow A-Rod's numbers, inflated by a more professional approach to athletics, to be judged against Aarons.

[Tsa`ah]

Eh, that's not my point at all.

The point was simply that the field was just as level back in the day of "innocence" as it was for Bonds when he set the record.

I don't like the fact that he's going down in history only because of a short cut ... but he was competing on a field where he wasn't the only one doing it.

I think the only opinion in this whole scenario that would actually hold merit would be the opinion of Hank ... and he doesn't give a shit and has stated as much.

I think more to the point is that if you want to get out the marker and place an asterisk by Bonds' name in the record book, you can't stop with Bonds and there will be many an asterisk by the time you're done.

[Latrinsorm]

But I'd also say that argument is vulnerable to expansion. Even if A-Rod isn't on steroids, should we put an asterix next to his name because athletes now have much better nutrition/exercise? It lacks the legality issue, but it's not fair to allow A-Rod's numbers, inflated by a more professional approach to athletics, to be judged against Aarons.
Once again, A-Rod didn't choose to live in an era where people figured out that training = good rather than the era where ballplayers had to sell washing machines in the off-season. Barry Bonds chose to use MLB-prohibited and illegal substances.
The point was simply that the field was just as level back in the day of "innocence" as it was for Bonds when he set the record.Similarly, Babe Ruth didn't choose to play in an era of segregation rather than an era of integration. The competitive advantage afforded by steroids is irrelevant: Barry Bonds cheated. +1 or +100 HRs doesn't matter.

[Skeeter]

Babe Ruth had melanin in his system. He cheated as well.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Latrinsorm
Barry Bonds chose to use MLB-prohibited and illegal substances.

I presume we will continue to go back and forth on this however THG wasn't declared illegal or classified as an anabolic steroid until the FDA made it's ruling in 2003. Previously to that it was marketed as a dietary supplement.

[Latrinsorm]

I presume we will continue to go back and forth on this however THG wasn't declared illegal or classified as an anabolic steroid until the FDA made it's ruling in 2003. Previously to that it was marketed as a dietary supplement.Chemically, THG has always been an anabolic steroid. That the FDA hadn't tested it yet in no way changes its chemical structure. Both the letter and the spirit of the law are clear here, wouldn't you say?

[Sean]

Clearly I wouldn't say.