I’m picturing Bonds in the off season, strapped into a chair and being forced to watch movies of little league slow-pitch softball, grinding his teeth into powder ala Speed Racer after being doped on V-gas to master the infamous GRX.
what?
Bah. Hulk SMASH puny baseball 
Some good posts, but you guys missed a few things:
- Bonds never admitted to using steroids, nor has he ever tested positive. He did say that he used flaxseed oil, and this is the source of the false meme that he admitted using steroids (the suspicion is that the flaxseed oil was actually steroids, however Bonds never admitted this or tested positive). If Bonds had actually made a confession of steroid use, it would get MUCH more coverage.
- Many hitters reach their home run peak late in a career, including Hank Aaron in his late thirties. When you take into account a new approach to hitting, the decline in speed which puts a premium on power instead, natural weight gain as one ages, workout techniques unheard of in the past, increase in skill and experience, and legal supplements, steroids are not a necessary conclusion. If steroids were necessary, how did Aaron peak when he was almost 40? If making a big jump in home run production is impossible, explain Maris?
- If Bonds had been pumping himself full of steroids back before testing, his body would likely have fallen apart in the 4-5 years that they have been testing for it. On the contrary, he is playing at an unheard of level for someone as old as he is. This indicates that steroids are not the explanation for Bonds’ feats.
The truth is, most if not all ballplayers have always used something. How much more do they use now than in the past? We don’t know. Where does Bonds fall on the spectrum? We don’t know. He could very well be on the cleaner side. Even according to the anti Bonds crowd he only started using after the country embraced the Big Mac and Sosa steroids show. He could have been one of the last holdouts. And we still don’t know what he used… steroids, HGH, or legal supplements.
All we know is that we desperately want a scapegoat, and Bonds is our man.
It would be quite a spectacle if MLB grew some balls, started doing serious testing for steroids and HGH, and banned anyone doping from the game at 1st offense. This includes those who’ve already confessed, such as Ken Caminiti, Jose Conseco (he confessed, right?), and Barry. It’d be too bad if McGuire wouldn’t be able to get caught anymore, though.
Oh, and expunging all the doper’s stats from the record books would be the ultimate. If there’s a way to backtrace steroid use, maybe we’d be back to having Roger Maris as the single season HR king (is Sosa suspected of taking?). Maybe Pete Rose and Barry Bonds could go on a whinging asshole tour together, talking about conspiracies and racism and using cuss words in front of impressionable 8-year olds.
'twould send the entire baseball world in a headless-chicken frenzy 'twill, but hey, there’s no such thing as bad press, right?
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaw!
Point well taken,I wouldn’t call you an ignorant Brit either.
Monavis
You should read the other posts to see where you are mistaken on point one. As for point two AAron and Bonds did both peak at the age of 37 home run wise, of course for Aaron this was 2 more than his previous best, while for Bonds it was 24 more than his previous best. A better example (than maris)for a one season burst in home run production, batting average, rbi’s and everything is Norm Cash, the same year as Maris (I believe). He had a simple explanation for his results, he admitted that he cheated.
As for point 3, a scenario which I have read and do not discount is that Bonds was determined to achieve the fame and notoriety that MGwire achieved and that it was only at that point that he started the steroids regimen. As for HGH, who knows.
This is just factually incorrect.
Bonds admitted to taking the cream and the clear, but said that he thought at the time that they were flaxseed oil. Even if you believe that (which you would have to be ridiculously naive to believe), then that is an admission that he took a very powerful anabolic steroid, even if unknowingly.
It DID get much coverage when it was uncovered several years ago. This was all leaked grand jury testimony. That the testimony was leaked is abhorrent, but the validity of it is not diminished.
What you are saying is factually incorrect.
Bonds has never admitted to using steroids. He said he used flaxseed oil, and from the description many have suspected that it was actually steroids. But Bonds has never admitted that it was steroids and has never tested positive.
Yes they did.
Maris is a good example.
61 home runs, when he never hit 40 before or since?
61 home runs, when he only even hit 30 two other times?
61 home runs, when half his career he hit under 20?
That is far more surprising than Bonds. Maris must have been on twice the juice.
(only partially joking here, Aaron and Maris both used amphetamines which are probably more beneficial than steroids)
Again, most or all ballplayers have always used performance enhancers. We don’t know where Bonds falls on the spectrum, but he has never admitted using, never tested positive, and continues to play at a high level despite old age when his body should be broken down if he used steroids.
It is fitting that Bonds’ 755th home run was against a pitcher who used steroids. That just illustrates the hypocrisy involved here. Bonds was up against a league of users, a league that didn’t test despite knowing full well what was going on, a league that celebrated far inferior players like McGwire for their steroid fueled stats. Bonds would have had to be a saint not to do anything. I hope he didn’t use steroids for those few years after the McGwire/Sosa farce, hope that he settled for legal supplements. I don’t know for sure what he did. But I also think it is pretty disgusting that people try to use Bonds as a scapegoat for this whole thing.
Yes — depending on what one means by a rise in home run production.
For the first 10 seasons of his career, Bonds averaged about 20 plate appearances per home run. The next 5, he averaged 14 PA/HR. In the last 5, he’s been averaging 10 PA/HR. (Or so I recall from having calculated this a few months ago.)
His HR production doubled. That’s not just a normal trend for “peak late in a career.” If an older baseball player could have double the HR production without losing batting average, then why are teams bothering to hire all these young guys?
Aaron did not peak at 40, he peaked (in home run production) at 37. And a lot of that is simply contextual illusion; Aaron at age 32 moved froma park very bad for home run hitters (Milwaukee County Stadium) to a park great for home run hitters (Fulton County Stadium, akak “The Launching Pad”) and then in 1969 you had the benefit of rule changes designed to increase hitting.
Actually, home run hitters peaking past 32 are VERY rare; Aaron is famous in part because of that rarity. You remember the Aarons and the Bondses, but don’t remember that most sluggers were done long before they turned 37. Jesse Barfield won a home run title and was out of baseball by age 30. Jim Rice led the league with 39 homers at age 30 and never hit 30 again. I could name scores of examples.
No. Bonds told the grand jury " that he used a clear substance and a cream supplied by the Burlingame laboratory now enmeshed in a sports doping scandal, but he said he never thought they were steroids"
He has admitted to using the clear and the cream, which are designer steroids. He says he didn’t think they were steroids, and was told that one was flaxseed oil and the other was an arthritis balm. This is different then what you are saying.
I’ve just spend some instructive time with Excel. Here are some stats for you:
Age | Maris | Mantle | Bonds | Aaron
20 | | 29.5 | | 38.2
21 | | 27.1 | | 24.1
22 | | 25.7 | 29.9 | 24.8
23 | 29.9 | 23.9 | 24.2 | 15.3
24 | 18.9 | 17.0 | 25.4 | 22.0
25 | 30.7 | 12.4 | 35.4 | 17.4
26 | 14.6 | 18.2 | 18.5 | 16.3
27 | 11.2 | 15.4 | 24.7 | 19.4
28 | 20.5 | 20.5 | 17.6 | 14.6
29 | 15.1 | 16.0 | 14.5 | 16.1
30 | 22.1 | 11.9 | 12.6 | 26.3
31 | 23.0 | 16.6 | 19.0 | 19.7
32 | 29.5 | 14.1 | 15.9 | 15.4
33 | 51.3 | 16.1 | 16.9 | 17.0
34 | 66.8 | 22.8 | 18.4 | 23.1
35 | | 17.0 | 12.6 | 14.4
36 | | 24.9 | 12.2 | 15.5
37 | | 30.1 | 8.9 | 12.0
38 | | | 13.1 | 15.9
39 | | | 12.0 | 11.5
40 | | | 13.4 | 19.0
41 | | | 10.2 | 44.6
42 | | | 18.5 | 30.6
43 | | | 16.2 |
Above is a chart of Plate Appearances per Home Run, sorted by age. Plate Appearances were calculated by adding AB + BB.
From the linked article:
“Bonds told a U.S. grand jury that he used undetectable steroids known as “the cream” and “the clear,” which he received from personal trainer Greg Anderson during the 2003 season. According to Bonds, the trainer told him the substances were the nutritional supplement flaxseed oil and a pain-relieving balm for the player’s arthritis.” (bolding mine)
And once again, The Onion article gets right to the heart of the matter. (My husband dared me to post the link here. 
)
You know, I take flaxseed oil every day, and have for years. I have never measured my head, though. I have missed an opportunity to find out if flaxseed oil makes your head grow, too.
Sorry to hijack, but is that a Kurt Vonnegut-style asshole?
First of all amphetamines are not banned by baseball, maybe they should be.
Second please provide a cite for the argument that they are probably more beneficial than steroids. (It is my understanding that players who go home to bed at night after the game have no need of amphetamines, that they are not performance enhancers, but performance enablers.)
Third, please provide some evidence that Maris used amphetamines an “Ball Four” is not evidence. Bouton says he does not remember who used and who didn’t. Evidence that Aaron used would be nice as well.
Yes Maris had one amazing season (where he batted in front of one of the greatest players who ever lived and therefore received a lot of good pitches, played in Yankee stadium, which is very friendly to lefties and did it in an expansion year when all of baseball had improved batting stats.) There is nothing in his history to indicate that he would have such a breakout year, but of course there is also nothing in his history to suggest he did anything questionable to achieve it. Why tarnish the reputation and image of a great player with no evidence just to make an ethically challenged player like Bonds look less culpable. That is pretty shameful.
One thing that’s legit is we have a lot of people on this board who know an awful lot about baseball.
You have both been misled by your articles. Bonds never admitted to using steroids of any kind.
He stated that he used substances he believed were flaxseed oil and an arthritis balm. The way the article is worded implies that he now thinks they were steroids, but this is untrue. In fact, from your own article:
Bonds still believes that it was not steroids. He has never admitted to using steroids and does not believe he has ever taken steroids.
The prosecutors thought that the flaxseed oil and arthritis balm were actually steroids. Bonds does not, and therefore cannot have “admitted” it.
Yeah, remember the good old days when MLB knew about the widespread steroid use, but tacitly approved by not testing for it and by lavishly celebrating the steroid-fueled accomplishments of mediocre players.
Clearly Bonds was the bad guy. The best player in the game, being overshadowed by hacks who used steroids with the blessing of MLB. One of the best of all time, watching these chumps break all time records.
Did Bonds use steroids, HGH, or legal supplements from 1999 to 2002 to try to level the playing field? I don’t know. The fact that he is still playing so well at his age after years of testing makes me strongly doubt he used steroids, at least to an extent that would have any significant effect. Maybe he experimented with them but got little result so he stopped. Maybe he never tried them.
And so, finally, Bonds hits 755 against a known steroid using pitcher. Clearly Bonds is the bad guy in all this.
This article seems to contradict you:
So obviously we shall now call into every record from the late 1970’s to 200X because they were all enhanced athletes, right?
That’s an interesting distinction you make between a performance enhancer and a performance enabler. Consider this hypothetical: A player has played in 100 games this year. He’s dog tired and sore. His performance is going to drop if he doesn’t take the amphetamines to get “up” for the next game. Was his performance enhanced or enabled? I don’t see the distinction you are making. If he doesn’t take them, then his performance drops. If he takes them, his performance stays sharp and is “enhanced” because he continues to put up stronger numbers than he otherwise would have. What’s the difference?