• SPORTS
    AND
    GAMING
  • Welcome Guest!
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
  • Sports & Gaming Moderators: ghostfreak

Steroids/PED's & baseball...do you really care?

KStoner6tb

KStoner6tb

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
6,006
Location
Perth, Melbourne, Sydney, or Brisbane
So they just released two more names from the 2003 initial juice pop. David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez(who obviously failed one THIS season) But Big Papi??? Damn man, I'm beginning to think that every big bat from the mid/late 90s through early '00s was on the sauce.

So there's the arguement on if you think steroids even help batters? Damn right they do. True, you have to put the bat on the ball first and foremost. But getting around on inside pitches with a lot more ease and just being able to drive the ball further is no doubt a huge benefit from steroids. If they didn't work, why would these guys keep taking them; even once MLB started cracking down??

So what do yall think? Would you still vote somebody to the HOF if they've failed a drug test? Do you even give two shits if they're juicing?
 
Ideally, I'd envision all sports divided into natural and non-natural groups, like bodybuilding is. I think fans are divided; in baseball, some fans just want to see HRs, whereas others want to feel more connected to the common man who has worked his ass off and is now actually on the field. Clearly this split cannot happen, though. So because as I believe the playing field should be level, I am against such drugs in professional sports; not every professional morally wants to make such an "improvement" and I don't think they should be punished for that hesitation.

What substances are allowed verses prohibited is a different argument. If something was allowed in the 80s that is not allowed now (or vise-versa), then I think it's unfair to compare the two HOF candidates. IMO, hall-of-fame is meant to show that you ranked best of class given what was available over the course of your career (both to you and to everyone else).
 
fuck roids.

you can't allow juicers such success, for then you open it up so that only juicers would have a chance, and with the amounts of money behind these popular sports, this will inevitably lead to many destroyed lives.

i have no problem with people who choose to juice (for whatever reason), but when it becomes a requirement in such big business, it crosses the line since the choice is removed. sure you can say no, but that would also saying no to a chance of success in your choice of career, your dream, etc. This is no choice at all at the ages these athletes start their training.

it's inhumane to force people to mess with their hormones for such a thing (entertainment).
 
you misunderstand, this isn't just about freedom of choice.

exercise has countless positive long term effects on the body and mind, whereas excessive hormone manipulation have serious health consequences.

when it comes to the money involved in professional sports and the insane competition, excess would be inevitable. i think it's clear that the allowance of ANY juicing is opening a terrible pandora's box.


besides, i kinda wish now that i was pushed harder to play football (soccer) well as a kid.
 
Not really

Steroids can't make someone hit a major league curve any better. Maybe help them get around a tad faster on a 95 mph fastball, but they still have to be a great hitter anyway.

All the other training programs put into place since the 70's and 80's have done 10 times more then steroids ever have.
Should we say home runs post 1990 all have an *.


Plus 80% of all NBA players smoke dope, lets ping on them for awhile.
They probably couldn't even put together a full NFL season with out roids.
I bet the NHL is the worst for steroids. I've watched it since the 70's, and back then they all we're normal sized big guys. Now look at them, they're huge. That's a sport that only wants TV deals so who cares.


I don't like Barry Bonds, but if he doesn't get in the hall that's bullshit.
 
At first, I couldn't make up my mind about the HOF. But now it's coming out that EVERY freakin player was on it, so that ain't going to work. The asterisks and stuff...shit Pete rose was amped outta his mind, along with the majority of pro athletes in the 70s. I do however, still believe that the roids help tremendously. EVen with already "great hitters." Why would Manny Ramirez still be taking shit this year if it wasn't vastly helping his game? Besides Bonds, probably the best hitter of the generation.

TBH, I firmly believe the roids helped pitchers a lot more than hitters. Ive saw one guy interviewed who was a borderline pro ball player, with a sub 90 mph fastball, go to throwing mid 90s with the "assistance." He straight up admitted he wouldn't have been a big league pitcher without them.


It's such a big deal in baseball and not so much other sports because records are everything to the sport. It's just such a numbers game.

The NBA players smoking dope isn't going to enhance their performance on the court. That's comparing apples to oranges. Hahah reminds me of that goofy skier, or snowboarder who tested positive for marijuana during the Winter Olympics and they claimed it was a "performance enhancing drug" LOL... Bodie Miller
 
KStoner6tb said:
^do you juice?
Click to expand...

Nope, but I did enjoy some of the historic baseball that happened during the steroid era...good stuff! 40/40, the home run chase, some of the best world series ever, etc.

Baseball has forever been a cheater's sport. Performance enhancing only continues that tradition.
 
no, its baseball, even cricket is more interesting, let em' roid
 
Pander Bear said:
either compare excessivecases of both, or compare responsible uses of both-- its a false choice, otherwise.
Click to expand...

they don't compare. that's the point in my reply.

now either you are completely missing my points or i'm completely missing yours. care to elaborate?
 
I don't see any major leaguers keeling over dead from their steroid use-- most of them have a doc who is cool with it to monitor them, I'm sure. And overexertion during training certainly is lethal, and can ruin your body. So I don't see that as a sound argument for banning them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top