Posted on 03/07/2006 4:13:52 PM PST by indcons
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A new book about Barry Bonds says he used steroids for at least five seasons, casting new doubts about the baseball superstar's exploits as he seeks to pass Babe Ruth for second place on the all-time home run list.
The book "Game of Shadows", an excerpt of which was on the "Sports Illustrated" Web site on Tuesday, said the San Francisco Giants outfielder took steroids via injections, pills, creams and liquid starting in 1998. His most productive seasons followed while he was in his mid-to-late 30s, most notably in 2001 when he hit a single-season record 73 home runs.
"If it really is true, I'm sorry to hear it because it does cast a shadow," Babe Ruth's last surviving daughter, Julia Ruth Stevens, 88, told Reuters.
"I don't know if daddy were here what he would say," she continued. "He was always on the side of ballplayers."
Asked if it might be appropriate for Bonds to retire before passing her father in the home run record books, she said: "I certainly would not have any objections to that."
(Excerpt) Read more at today.reuters.com ...
Did you read what you just wrote? He admitted to steroid use! He said he took the cream and the clear--that's admitting to steroid use.
He might not have admitted to knowingly using steroids, but at this point, it's getting more and more difficult to deny that he knowingly used it.
What I've read so far of this book--the documentation that they've used--is pretty damning. In particular, you talk about his size earlier; one of the more interesting parts of the article is a method that uses a height to weight to body fat percentage to come up with a ratio that predicts steroid use. Any number over 25, it noted, was indicative of steroid use. Pre-1998, Bonds was at 24.7 on this scale. Recently, however, his number was approaching 29.
"Bonds testified that he had received and used clear and cream substances from his personal strength trainer, Greg Anderson"
I just quoted your own qoute to prove that he has admitted to using it. And if you believe he didn't know what it was, I have a bridge to sell you.
Stop it ..he's a junkie and you know it ...FRAUD ..Should be run out of town with the rest of the drug addict "stars"
Geeez,,,,,did it ever occur to you that ONLY the top home runs hitters might cause that big increase (Sosa, Bonds, McGuire, Palmeiro and a few others) because of THEIR juicing and not the whole league? The WHOLE LEAGUE? Heck, if the whole league is juicing no problem then--because Bond's cheating is NOT giving him any advantage, right?...lol
For the 1993-1997, Bonds accounted for 2.02% of all home runs hit in the National League. For 1998-2002, he accounted for 1.71% of the total. That includes his 73 home run season of 2001!
The fact is that during this timeframe the TOTAL number of home runs hit in the National League grew DRAMATICALLY! That wasn't just Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds. It was across the board.
If you follow others' reasoning on this thread, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the whole League was juicing.
Further, the average number of home runs per year for the first time frame was 1957.6/year; the second, 2802.6/year. Now, surely you're not implying that little old Bonds, Sosa, and McGwire accounted for an extra 845 homeruns per year!
hahahhahahah.......
are you a complete idiot? or just an idiot?
ok.....from now on....if you believe barry is innocent...then.....isn't it completely plausible that keith richards never used drugs? completely clean i tell ya!!!
hahahhahahah.......
That's not the way it happens. You don't "develop" power in your mid thirties without pharmaceutical help, you begin to lose eyesight and reflexes. The body begins to wear down from years of playing ball.
Your head doesn't expand eight hat sizes either...
You can worship at the altar of your favorite player, but don't expect everyone else to suspend common sense.
Great post!
I remember Barry Sr. commenting on his recurring ankle injuries. He explained the problem as being "no meat." He gentically did not carry large muscle mass and it caused him some injury problems. Barry has the same genetics as evidenced in the pictures displayed of his younger years in this thread. You don't go from a stringbean to moose by drinking protein shakes and lifting weights in your late 30s. He used lots of illegal supplements (illegal by criminal law).
Barry Bonds the younger is a blight on the sport.
Another juicer.
I assume by Barry Sr. you mean Bobby Bonds, his dad.
This isn't a thread about Hank Aaron. It's not about anyone except Barry Bonds and your refusal to acknowledge the obvious.
Name one other player that added thirty pounds of lean muscle at age thirty five.
I know....You're Barry's lawyer. Am I right?
Isn't Bonds the player who had that little sit down with his son and some sports reporters last year and did a minor kookout on them? Hasn't he been flipping out and had a 'woe is me' negative attitude with the sports journalists, or am I thinkig of someone else?
The bottom line is short of your sitting on Barry Bonds' shoulder for the past seven years or a documented failed drug test, EVERYTHING is conjecture. No one has presented a single piece of evidence other than "He looks big, and plays ball too good for a forty-year old." Heck, even Nolan Ryan threw a no-hitter at 44. You want to talk about the improbability of THAT?
G 145
AB 506
R 104
H 146
2B 30
3B 5
HR 31
RBI 91
SB 35
CS 10
BB 102
SO 80
BA .288
These are Bonds average yearly stats through 1997 when he turned 34. Mid to late 30's is when a lotta careers start to tank. And this twelve year career certainly did not merit HOF consideration. Assuming he averaged the 31 Hr/yr pace, he would have needed 5 more years to hit 500. without the 'roids -- NO WAY!
If you want to see his average stats for the 1998-2003 seasons...you see an entirely different story. He has his best years when he is physically past his prime.
G 138
AB 443
R 116
H 141
2B 30
3B 3
HR 47
RBI 108
SB 14
CS 4
BB 141
SO 72
BA .318
Nuff said. The guy is ferakazoid cheater who has been allowed to perpetrate fraud by a lotta people...his managers (Dusty Baker comes to mind), his ownership, the league offices...they all had to know.
Baseball is no better than the WWF in my mind now.
He may have juiced until the cows come home, but not one single person on this thread has come up with anything other than "he bulked up and he doesn't play like a forty year old." For this, they're ready to tear up his stat sheet, kick him out of baseball, and ban him from the Hall of Fame.
And I have absolutely no doubt that at least half of the people here would claim that Pete Rose belongs in the Hall, and all he did was violate a decades-old rule that's posted in every single clubhouse in major league baseball.
That is a strawman and you know it. Aaron hit between 35-45 every year. Bonds suddenly became stronger at age 35, and no one does that. Don't look at one year at a time..look at the entire period of production. Let me demonstrat with the top 5 HR hitters of all time -- thier numbers age 30-34, and 35-39, let's see if we can identify a pattern and if one of the group is not like the others.
HANK AARON 30-34 168HR -- 35-39 203HR
BABE RUTH 30-34 232HR -- 35-39 186HR
WILLIE MAYS 30-34 226HR -- 35-39 123HR
FRANK ROBINSON 30-34 151HR -- 35-39 108HR
BARRY BONDS 30-34 186HR -- 35-39 258HR
Everyone Had a sharp decline after age 35 except Aaron, and his numbers reflect the move from Milwaukee County Stadium where he was held to 24 and 32 HR at age 30-31 to Atlanta Fulton County Stadium where everyones HR numbers became inflated. (See Darrell Evens/Davey Johnson -- 20-25 HR a year before Atlanta, 40 HR hitters in Atlanta).
The empirical evidence is there. Bonds became much larger and much stronger at an age when most players decline in ability. Aaron stayed at the same level he had been at his entire career, Bonds Got better -- not only did his HR totals skyrocket, but his Batting Ave went up 30-50 points from .290-.310 to .340-.370 during those years. Aaron was still hitting HR but his Batting Average dropped during those years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.