Announcement

**Honus Wagner Rules** · 11-25-2005, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by west coast orange and black

Honus Wagner Rules: Three things that lead me to beleive t hat he did take steroids.

1) The leaked grand jury testimony
2) Bonds ex-girlfriend statements that Bonds told her he took steriods
3) His large increase in size

Now, one can argue that #2 and #3 is just circumstantial evidence and that his ex is lying to get back at him. But if the grand jury testimony then Bonds admitted under oath that he took steriods.

no one has yet been able to produce the passage(s) of "the leaked grand jury testimony" that contain(s) an admittance of bonds using steroids.

the authors of the original san francisco chronicle bonds/federal grand jury stories, mark fainaru-wada and lance williams, in fact have not included any such language in any of their dozens of stories.

this is not to claim that bonds has not used banned substances. it is only to refute the urban myth that bonds, in his federal grand jury testimony in san francisco on 4 december 2003, confessed to using banned substances.

believe that bonds used. point to any evidence - circumstantial or otherwise - you wish.
but to say that bonds admitted to using is just plain inaccurate.

West Coast,

I did not know this. Wow. What was the date of the original SF Chronicle article. I'd like to read it for myself.

**Honus Wagner Rules** · 11-25-2005, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by Victory Faust

For those of you who keep saying, "you can't prove Barry Bonds ever did steroids," I ask one simple question:

Are you aware of an exercise one can do that will increase the girth of their head by three hat sizes in just a few years?

See, I want to make my head look like a bobble-head doll, just like Barry. So, should I do head curls? I'm really eager to get started on my head-training program, but I can't seem to find the head-curl machine in my gym.

Can't prove he didn't do steroids? Please. Spare me. How can anyone say that with a straight face?

Can you give actual evidence that his head sise has increased instead of just rhetoric? I have a rather large head 7-5/8. I've had the same head size since I can remember. In me early 20s I used to collect many hats and I always looked for a 7-5/8. I'm 37 today and I still wear the same hat size. But I've gained quite a bit of weight since my early 20s. My head l"ooks" bigger today because my checks are fuller and I'm heavier overall. But, my hat size is still 7-5/8. To increase one's hat size one would have to increase the thickness of one's skull. A perosn's skull and other bones stop growing by age 25 or so. To claim that Bonds' hat size has increased three hat sizes is just silly. Again, if you have actual evidence please post it.

**SHOELESSJOE3** · 11-25-2005, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by CTaka

"Bonds testified that he had received and used clear and cream substances from his personal strength trainer, Greg Anderson, during the 2003 baseball season but was told they were the nutritional supplement flaxseed oil and a rubbing balm for arthritis, according to a transcript of his testimony reviewed by The Chronicle. ...Bonds testified that he had received and used clear and cream substances from his personal strength trainer, Greg Anderson, during the 2003 baseball season but was told they were the nutritional supplement flaxseed oil and a rubbing balm for arthritis, according to a transcript of his testimony reviewed by The Chronicle. "

All of the above did appear in the San Fransisco Chronical on Friday December 3, 2004. The info is available to any who wish to see it, go to the Chronical website.

It's true he never admitted to using steroids, but he did state the above, he received and he used the clear and the cream.

**jalbright** · 11-25-2005, 07:23 PM

I don't think so in view of my understanding that HGH can do precisely that. But if you disagree, that's fine. You still haven't addressed how Bonds was so tight with Conti, and taking Conti-provided items. I personally doubt he was unaware what he was taking since he seems to be like most athletes and very concerned with what he's doing to his body in all respects (rightfully so). But even if Bonds was ignorant, do you really think Conti changed his modus operandi because the player was Barry Bonds? Furthermore, if Bonds truly was in the dark but ingested PEDs, I feel it was only because he wanted to be--which to me is a distinction without a difference.

Jim Albright

**SHOELESSJOE3** · 11-26-2005, 05:24 AM

Unfortunate but true, we will probably never know any more than we do now about Barry, Sheffield and some others. Any one that thinks Selig and MLB will really look into the whole matter, dig deeper, don't hold your breath.

Why would Bud want the whole matter to surface, to find out any more than we do now. I picture Bud every night on his knees praying to God that the whole matter just disappears.

Bud and the union played around way too long on getting a program in place. Would an earlier program been a cure all, no but it may have discouraged some, lessened the problem. The steroids and amhetamines discussion has been a topic for years with many saying some day the whole issue will explode and it finally did. Just as many suspected some players were juicing up, from way back.

In some ways not fair to Barry but since he has put up the big numbers the spotlight is on him.

This can be discussed for all time, what will some think of Barry and the answer will never change. Some will always defend him others not. One thing is for sure, proven guilty or not there are some who will always question, doubt some of his numbers. Fair to Barry or not, that the way it's going to be.

**SHOELESSJOE3** · 11-28-2005, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by Ubiquitous

If I use a cream does that mean I used "the cream"? No, Bonds testified that his trainer applied a cream and a clear like substance. It turns out that his trainer and balco have a cream and a clear like substance that contains steroids. But the two have not been put together by any court of law or by Bonds himself. Bonds did not say that his trainer game him "the clear" or "the cream". He never once said my trainer gave me something and it turned out to have steroids. He never said it, he has not admitted to taking anything intentionally or unintentionally.

Well, he would have to be a fool to use the word "the".

What a coincidence there is a clear that is called "the" clear and and a cream called "the" cream that contain a steroid. Bonds says he used "a" clear and "a" cream, so because he does not use the word "the" we have to interpret this to mean he was speaking of two substances that were not steroid substances.

Would he be dumb enough to use "the" clear and "the" cream, I doubt that. We're playing word games with the "a" and the word "the".

I've said in the past that I think Barry did use steroids and I've always ended with the same thought. No matter what I or others think, means nothing, Barry has to be presumed innocent, no admittance or any proof he ever used a steroid.

With that said I don't make anything of his using the word "a" instead of "the" in statements about clear and cream substances he used. They may have been a steroid and they may not.

**west coast orange and black** · 11-29-2005, 07:05 AM

XX: of what i have read and been told, i believe that there is enough circumstantial and anecdotal evidence to point an accusing finger at bonds... and also enough circumstantial and anecdotal evidence to exonerate him.

the end result so far: i do not know one way or the other.

some posters have posted "seeing is believing".
coolio.
but there also seems to a whole lotta "believing is seeing" goin' 'round.

**jalbright** · 11-29-2005, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by west coast orange and black

jalbright, i believe that all athletes who are serious about their sport and train rigorously try to do what is best for their body.

but re bonds, specifically: what leads you to believe that anderson might have wanted to hurt bonds?

i imagine that there was much trust between bonds and anderson, a friend since childhood. why would bonds have absolutely needed to know the exact composition of the substances given to him by anderson, one of his personal trainers?

one of my clients is a very rich, well-connected socialite.
she relies on the advice and handiwork of her staff, most of the time accepting what is presented to her without blinking, wihout asking about it. this is not foolish behavior on her part - her staff works in her best interests, and there is much trust.

should bonds have known what he was applying? probably.
is it conceivable and understandable that he did not? i think so, yes.

now, there is anecdotal evidence that bonds used.
and for that reason i am not surprised that many believe that bonds used.

That assumes a) Bond didn't know what he was being given and didn't even ask, but more importantly that Anderson wasn't of the view that his job was to help Barry in the short term with his athletic career A true friend should IMO take a longer view than that, and should know that the stuff he gave Barry would not be good for him long term.

I think a part of the problem is you're using a higher standard to "convict" Barry than most of us are. Most of us are satisfied with the more likely than not standard, while you want something closer to the criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt", though perhaps not that far. In a criminal court, it should be that way, given the stakes and the great power of the government. However, in the court of public opinion, the stakes are not as high, nor is the "public's" power great to do much in this situation. Thus, a lower standard is appropriate. You can give Barry a greater degree of the benefit of the doubt if you wish. If you asked me if Barry is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or maybe even if I needed "clear and convincing" evidence to "convict" him of that "charge", I couldn't say yes either. But it seems we both agree it is more likely than not that he did use PEDs. I can't strip him of his records on that basis, but I sure feel it's fair to see his career home run mark as tainted and to downgrade him below where his numbers would otherwise dictate he belongs.

Jim Albright

**jalbright** · 11-29-2005, 12:37 PM

As for the other guys, I understand the suspicions. If you want to hammer McGwire for his admitted use of andro, or Sosa for his corked bat, so be it. Certainly, one can pummel Palmiero for getting caught juicing. Beyond that, though, while I'm not pollyanna enough to say it can't be so, we just don't have enough proof IMO to hang these guys. We have suspicions which are reasonable, but no more. If it weren't for the Balco connection, the case against Bonds would be about like the case against Sosa after excluding the corked bat. Once the suspicious evidence is viewed in light of the Balco connection and what we know Balco has been proven conclusively to be all about, I can no longer give Bonds the benefit of the doubt. Canseco's charges against Palmiero take on a greater credibility given Raffy's juicing suspension, so I can see hanging him out to dry. The other guys are entitled to the benefit of the doubt beyond the specifics I've mentioned--but if you want to go after them on those grounds, you won't hear me saying you're being unfair.

Jim Albright

**Ubiquitous** · 11-29-2005, 07:33 PM

Yeah how can we let a cheater have a plaque that sits next to Whitey Ford's, Gaylord Perry's, John McGraw's, Don Drysdale's, Willie Mays, Ed Walsh's, Burleigh Grimes, and others.

**Honus Wagner Rules** · 11-30-2005, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by History Of Baseball Fan

we don't know if he did or didn't before, but something is "fishy" about the homerun explosion since 1998. its more than a coincidence.

His best years before 2001 were all before when you say the home run explosion started.

before 2000, he hit 40 + HR 3 times. from 2000 - 2004 he hit :

49, 73, 46, 45, 45

before 2000 he hit : 46, 42, 40,

from 1986 - 1999 he hit 40 + HR only 3 times.... yet in his last 5 full years, he meraculously hits an AVG of almost 52 HRs a year. and you're saying that this just coincidence ???

in his last 7 full years, he has almost as many HR in his first 12

so, to say that his best years for HR was before isn't really true. the pitching wasn't very good in those years, but that doesn;t explain the sudden boost of HR's out of nowhere from alot of major leaguers.

You forgot to count 1994. He had 37 HRs, in 112 games, when the strike hit. That's 53 HR pace.

**Ubiquitous** · 12-01-2005, 06:48 AM

Why is it convenient for me? Do you know my stance?

None of you have any kind of factual evidence, so you take half-truths, innuendos, rumors, and misuqotes and turn them into rock solid facts of guilt.

you say common sense, well fine then stick to common sense. But you guys don't don't. You guys can't just say I think Barry used drugs, you guys almost always have to think you have facts on your side. You say enough is there then why use misquotes and innuendos?

**SHOELESSJOE3** · 12-01-2005, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules

You forgot to count 1994. He had 37 HRs, in 112 games, when the strike hit. That's 53 HR pace.

Let me say that I won't make a factual accusation that Barry's explosion was because of steroid use. I've said before "I' think he has used steroids but will still say he has to innocent, just my thoughts, that he may have used steroids.

Anyway that not the point of my post. My point, that Barry took off late in his career. Again, I can't say with certainty that it was steroids but for anyone to deny it took place rings hollow. Whether it was steroids, a change in his hitting strategy, better pitch selection, working out harder, take your choice, he took off late in his career, like no hitter ever has.

I saw on another board where some pointed out that Ted Willams and Hank Aaron had some good seasons after age 35, what were they looking at, compared to Barry, not even close. It seemed to me and some other posters that they were trying to make the point that Barry after age 35 was not an unusual case, look at Ted and Hank.

Well take a look at those three in percentage based stats from age 36 to 39, Barry almost makes the other two greats look puny. Especially when the after age 35 numbers are compared to the earlier part of their careers.

**Ubiquitous** · 12-01-2005, 09:22 PM

Denials? What have I denied? Defending? Who have I defended? People are throwing around half-truths, rumors, and misquotes on this thread as if they are 100% true or accurate. They are not, its not as simple as the end justifies the means. If Barry Bonds is convicted based on a web of lies then you know what is going to happen? He is going to end up looking like the victim and he will get away with whatever crime you think he is guilty of.

I believe that Barry did not know he was using steroids, when his trainer gave him Clear/Cream.	2.56%	8 votes
I believe that Barry was aware he was using steroids, when given Clear/Cream.	83.07%	260 votes
I have now dropped Barry Bonds below my Top 10 Position Players.	28.43%	89 votes
I still have Barry Bonds in my Top 10 Position Players.	41.85%	131 votes

Announcement

Let's Deal With Barry Bonds.

Let's Deal With Barry Bonds.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Ad Widget