Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is baseball finally dirtier than track?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Smoke
    Baseball is far dirtier. They have proven to be the dirtiest sport.
    Hardly . . .

    Comment


    • #17
      Of course baseball is dirtier. Track has no Union to protect players. The only reason track seems dirtier is because everyone is actually tested and very few people are protected from bans. If this kinda testing existed in baseball, there would be at least one player busted for dope every week.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Smoke
        ... we operate around 1%.....
        Boy, do I have a bridge for you!

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Smoke
          Baseball is far dirtier. They have proven to be the dirtiest sport. Secret paneling that turned up 105 positives? How many players in the league? I think thats around 30%, we operate around 1%.
          And sadder still baseballs top stars are ALL falling off, not just a few
          How are you getting to 30%?

          The 2003 tests were done on everyone on the mlb 40-man rosters, which meant testing on a pool of 1200 eligible players at any given moment, with perhaps as many as 1300 over the course of a season.

          We're probably talking in the range of 8%. That's still well beyond what we're CATCHING in t&f, but baseball clearly had many very unsophisticated users because there were no penalties.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Is baseball finally dirtier than track?

            Originally posted by go pre
            just wondering, because our sport has taken a lot of crap the past several years.

            and to think there are still 100+ names who tested positive earlier in the decade that we don't know about.
            I think that there is not comparison. Out of 600 tests or so there were 104 positives for steroids alone; they knew they were going to have a single test and some just did not bother to wait until after they were tested. I suspect the rate of usage has gone down and the tactics of usage have been 'sharpened'.

            As a recent article speculated, there is just too much money in pro sports for them to want to diminish it by getting systematic testing and systematically failing at a far higher rate then those dirty sports of cycling and track and field, despite the fact that the drugs are probably more crucial to cycling and then t&f.

            Comment


            • #21
              you can succeed at any position in baseball without roiding up; I suspect the same can no longer be said about the NFL with any great degree of certainty.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by gh
                you can succeed at any position in baseball without roiding up; I suspect the same can no longer be said about the NFL with any great degree of certainty.
                So, Gary, what about track???

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by gh
                  you can succeed at any position in baseball without roiding up; I suspect the same can no longer be said about the NFL with any great degree of certainty.
                  kicker?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by 26mi235
                    Originally posted by gh
                    you can succeed at any position in baseball without roiding up; I suspect the same can no longer be said about the NFL with any great degree of certainty.
                    kicker?
                    Todd Sauerbrun

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X