Greenies = Steroids = Pine Tar

[Horror]

Most know the game has never been totally clean at every level of cheating. The reason there's an uproar about this cheating is because of it's impact on the game from a historical perspective. There's an uproar because it should have been tested for long ago and it wasn't, and this past couple decades is one big cloud of dust; we wonder what happened. The game isn't the same, and records have been shattered. That's why there's an uproar. Cork, amphetamines, and spitballs, are no secret, they just have never impacted the game like steroids.

I see your point sort of, but that still doesnt change the fact that baseball players and pitchers have cheated for years. Those same guy's who used amphetamines, corked their bats, threw spitballs, etc, I'm sure would of used steroids to " enhance " their performance if it was available to them backthen.

BTW, wasn't the deadball era caused by multiple pitchers cheating ?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I agree with this.

Throughout time baseball players have been looking for an edge, something to improve their on field performance. Perry and others used a spit ball. Greg Nettles got caught with super balls in his bat in 1974. Many have used corked bats. There's also many who have used amphetamines.

IMO, steroids Is just another way to " cheat ", just like a spitball, corkedbat, or amphetamines.

Most know the game has never been totally clean at every level of cheating. The reason there's an uproar about this cheating is because of it's impact on the game from a historical perspective. There's an uproar because it should have been tested for long ago and it wasn't, and this past couple decades is one big cloud of dust; we wonder what happened. The game isn't the same, and records have been shattered. That's why there's an uproar. Cork, amphetamines, and spitballs, are no secret, they just have never impacted the game like steroids.

[Horror]

Absolutely. The game has NEVER been clean. Its just now you people know whats going on and before you had no clue and the players had you snowed. Just go back to being fans of the game enjoying us do what we do, like you did 20yrs ago when players were juicing up, taking greenies and whatever else they could.

I agree with this.

Throughout time baseball players have been looking for an edge, something to improve their on field performance. Perry and others used a spit ball. Greg Nettles got caught with super balls in his bat in 1974. Many have used corked bats. There's also many who have used amphetamines.

IMO, steroids Is just another way to " cheat ", just like a spitball, corkedbat, or amphetamines.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I guess I'm not a baseball fan either, nor apparently do I have a clue . . . .was it Col. Mustard in the kitchen with the wrench?

Anyone got a match?

I think it's about the differences in the game and the evolution in technology/knowledge that has allowed todays players to appear better. When you get right down to their actual raw baseball ability, there's no difference whatsoever, and players of the past actually had better all around skills because that's the style the game required, and they did it with inferior equipment, knowledge, training, and luxuries.

Today's game discourages the perfection of all around abilities, instead focusing on home runs and station to station baseball. Can't really blame todays players for lack of defensive skills, or hustle, or solid fundamentals; because that's not where the money is; it's not setup for that style to thrive. It's really about what you prefer. I'd prefer to watch Japan play 162 games instead of the HR derby that gets pushed on us every year.

[Ubiquitous]

Once again proving you're not a baseball fan. If you think players of today are better than yesterday, then you just don't have a clue. You think because someone puts up 70 homers or hits .385 against today's dreck that that makes them better players or hitters than a Yaz hitting .301 or Schmidt topping out at 48 homers against much tougher pitching? Please don't make those kinds of unenlightened blanket statements. They make you look as foolish as your previous comments did.

I guess I'm not a baseball fan either, nor apparently do I have a clue . . . .was it Col. Mustard in the kitchen with the wrench?

Anyone got a match?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

you are wrong...cork makes the bat lighter and creates more bat speed inturn hitting the ball at a greater speed

You'd think so.

"The collision with a well-hit ball takes about 1/2,000 of a second, and that's not enough time for [any foreign substance] in the bat to contribute," said Adair. "Basically the added material does nothing. It's a superstition that doesn't do anything, in fact. It adds the worst kind of weight. A heavy bat, where some of that weight is superballs, doesn't do any good. The collision takes place too fast for the balls to do any good, so that's a negative."

"While cork typically is four times springier than wood, it cannot store the energy that comes from the pitched ball. A hollowed bat filled with a foreign substance is no longer as stiff, lowering the efficiency of energy being transferred into the bat. Because a ball comes off a bat faster than cork can store energy, the speed and distance of a batted ball actually are reduced."

http://www.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/news/mlb_news.jsp?ymd=20030605&content_id=356737&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A quicker bat may help a struggling hitter catch up with pitches, but it actually reduces his ability to smack long drives. The primary equation that determines a batted ball's distance is p = mv, where "p" is momentum, "m" is mass, and "v" is velocity. Though a corked bat will travel at a greater velocity, the tail-off in weight lessens the mass. As a result, sluggers like Sosa will actually see the length of their moon shots decrease. In his book The Physics of Baseball, Yale physicist Robert K. Adair estimated that a corked bat will shave about a yard off a 400-foot tater."

http://www.slate.com/id/2083972

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SI: So, does corking a bat work?

Nye: It makes the bat lighter in the business end, and there's a pseudoscientific notion that it makes the bat springier, but this turns out not to be the case.

SI: Why not?

Nye: The ball's only in contact with the bat for one one-thousandth of a second, and there's just not time to transfer the energy from the cork to the ball.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_online/QandA/2003/0616/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Swinging the same bat faster can help a batter hit the ball harder, but swinging a lighter bat faster doesn't necessarily improve performance. One of the basic laws of physics that affects a ball's flight, force, is a product of mass times acceleration. If a batter increases the rate of acceleration of a swing at the expense of reducing the mass of the bat, the net result can be the same as if he didn't do anything to change the bat. For example, take a basic scenario in which a batter swings a 35-ounce bat at 90 miles per hour:

Force = Mass x Acceleration
Force = 35 ounces x 90 mph/s
Force = 3150

Now suppose the batter corked the bat, reduced its weight by an ounce, and can now swing it faster.

Force = 34 ounces x 92 mph/s
Force = 3128

http://www.wood-tang.com/2003/06/the-physics-of-corking-a-bat

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

[johncap]

once again; na-na-na-na-na-na! I am a baseball fan, sorry i don't have huge erections over players from the past. Todays players are by far better so if anything, we should look at past players as inferior. Like i said, intelligent people will wait some time before flying off the handle about records and baseball integrity. This "integrity" talk makes me sick. NOTHING has integrity. It's all made up and for some reason people have this romantic view of the past.

Once again proving you're not a baseball fan. If you think players of today are better than yesterday, then you just don't have a clue. You think because someone puts up 70 homers or hits .385 against today's dreck that that makes them better players or hitters than a Yaz hitting .301 or Schmidt topping out at 48 homers against much tougher pitching? Please don't make those kinds of unenlightened blanket statements. They make you look as foolish as your previous comments did.

[Boston Boxer]

Ok, I understand your point, but I still believe that if you abolish Bonds' juiced up homers, then, for the sake of fairness, you MUST also abolish any strikeout caused by an illegal pitch, any homer caused by a corked bat, any stolen base caused by a runner taking some sort of pill. And to do this would be absolutely impossible.

You can say that Bonds' homers aren't as impressive as Ruth's- I can understand that point of view. But if you ban Bonds from the record books, I really feel like you are opening up a Pandora's Box to the point where so much dirt will be uncovered it will cause the fans to look away in disgust as to how much "cheating" has occurred throughout baseball history.

And as to the unfair prejudice towards Bonds, who here was complaining during '98 when McGwire and Sosa were going at it. Raise your hand. Oh? You didn't know they were on the juice?? You just didn't want to know, because you were having so much fun. But now a jerk is setting the records, and it seems like a great time to attack him.

Players have always been stretching the rules.

your posts in this thread have been right on, and this one is no exception...my thinking is the same as yours...thank you

[Boston Boxer]

I wasn't trying to insult you, just pointing something out.

You could bring up corked bats, but they do nothing for a HR hitter. Honestly , you'd have a better case with the pine tar on that one

you are wrong...cork makes the bat lighter and creates more bat speed inturn hitting the ball at a greater speed

[Captain Cold Nose]

once again; na-na-na-na-na-na! I am a baseball fan, sorry i don't have huge erections over players from the past. Todays players are by far better so if anything, we should look at past players as inferior. Like i said, intelligent people will wait some time before flying off the handle about records and baseball integrity. This "integrity" talk makes me sick. NOTHING has integrity. It's all made up and for some reason people have this romantic view of the past.

While your point is understood, the taunting nature of your posts is uncalled for and absolutely frowned upon on this site. We don't do that here.

[jaquish]

You're not a baseball fan. I can't print here what my opinon of your obnoxious comments is. It's also clearly between the lines exactly where you're coming from. Go wipe.

once again; na-na-na-na-na-na! I am a baseball fan, sorry i don't have huge erections over players from the past. Todays players are by far better so if anything, we should look at past players as inferior. Like i said, intelligent people will wait some time before flying off the handle about records and baseball integrity. This "integrity" talk makes me sick. NOTHING has integrity. It's all made up and for some reason people have this romantic view of the past.

[johncap]

i hope bonds wipes all records off the charts so he can laugh at them all. Because no one will be able to do anything without legal recourse. Get 800 Barry, and laugh at them as they cry about it. For one thing, remember people, he feeds off everyone who hates him. He gets better as mor epeople hate him.

You're not a baseball fan. I can't print here what my opinon of your obnoxious comments is. It's also clearly between the lines exactly where you're coming from. Go wipe.

[jaquish]

forgot one thing

i hope bonds wipes all records off the charts so he can laugh at them all. Because no one will be able to do anything without legal recourse. Get 800 Barry, and laugh at them as they cry about it. For one thing, remember people, he feeds off everyone who hates him. He gets better as mor epeople hate him.

[jaquish]

The future

im curious to know ur opinion on this steroid haters. What if in 10 years they create safe products that get players bigger and stronger, with the same effects as the really good steroids. And it is made legal. Do we still look at Bonds in a bad lite, or as a guy ahead of his time? Or do we still hold it against players who use any means to break records set by players from a far away era that we hold on too high a pedistool?

In my humble opinion, i have more respect for guys who juice and work at their hitting more than guys in the past who drank, got fat, and did nothing to acheive their goals. They only used their god given talent, and maybe som eworked at improving themselves as players, but not to the degree players do today.

Only with the advancement of sport supplement science in the next 50 years can we truly judge the records and players of today.

[west coast orange and black]

stm: "he is a HOF'er for sure"
if it is a person's opinion that the voters will vote bonds in, how is bonds gaining entrance tantamount to that person condoning illegal activity?

"he did not break any baseball rules"
does not equal "he did not break the rules of society". one can quite easily agree to both at once.

"I need more evidence"
maybe not everyone is as insightful as others.

"he was a HOF'er before he took anything"
suppose bonds used on 1 jan 1999. before that date he did not have hof credentials is what you believe? right on, man.

Anything other than NOT voting him in the HOF with the facts we currently have is condining illegal activity, IMO.
coolio. it's yer opinion.
what say you to the voters who knowingly voted for players who used illegal drugs, or those who used drugs illegally?