Are things getting back to normal?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Rick2583

Rick2583

Chairman of the board
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
15,629
Likes
719
Points
113
1990-1999 The 40 HR mark was reached 72 times. The 50 HR mark 12 times.

2000-2009 The 40 HR mark was reached 87 times. The 50 HR mark 12 times

This decade we're on pace for.....................

2010-2019 The 40 HR mark 26 times & the 50 HR mark 4 times.

Back to the good old days????
 
Looks Like PEDs left there indelible mark.....?
 
Let's make up a new thread and spin this another way? Lol!
 
Rick2583 said:
Another way would be you saying that its wasn't the player, it was the ball that was juiced.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what Tote is doing. Stating the ball was juiced, yet there is no proof at all. NONE.

However there is plenty of proof to reveal balls hit, travel an additional 50 feet on the average, by batters who were juiced. To say otherwise it to say, I did not break the law because there was no law, yet perjury doesn't count?

give me an effing break, none of us here are dummies......!!! :tiphat:
 
The ball tolerances were shit...that has been verified. Now show me to correlation of tester one levels and hr.
 
^^^well, if that's true, it suggests that there were likely also balls that were wounds loosely than specs actually called for.

...And if that's true it means that there were some balls that did not go as far as they should.

... And if that's true, it means that there should have been near median HR numbers if balls were in fact inconsistent.
 
yankeesince59 said:
^^^well, if that's true, it suggests that there were likely also balls that were wounds loosely than specs actually called for.

...And if that's true it means that there were some balls that did not go as far as they should.

... And if that's true, it means that there should have been near median HR numbers if balls were in fact inconsistent.
Click to expand...

Not quite be a use we do not have good statistics of the tolerance distribution. It could easily be interpreted that balls with lo get flight tolerances were produced and it coincided with the juicing era. Specs were changed and tightened to coincide with led testing resulting in less hr. We just dont have the necessary data to make accurate interpretations.

I just get a bit peeved when I'm being told to accept circumstantial evidence as whole cloth truth.
 
...^^^ well, you said it had been verified.

...can't have it both ways, tote.
 
Last edited:
totus44 said:
Not quite be a use we do not have good statistics of the tolerance distribution. It could easily be interpreted that balls with lo get flight tolerances were produced and it coincided with the juicing era. Specs were changed and tightened to coincide with led testing resulting in less hr. We just dont have the necessary data to make accurate interpretations.

I just get a bit peeved when I'm being told to accept circumstantial evidence as whole cloth truth.
Click to expand...

I can understand anyone's frustration, yet seems, being our resident Scientist, shouldn't it be you showing the rest of the baseball world, the actual honest, (not circumstantial) conclusions, and or tests, to prove as much.

Work, in many scientist heads, and tests have proven as much, that more HR's equate to driving the ball further....ie, Roids do as much, and IT IS NO SECRET, NO LONGER CIRCUMSTANTIAL EITHER...!!!

So Tom, please play the Devils advocate here, and look thru the eyes, of one who can and will prove, using scientific data to reveal, the very truth your denying, or trying to defend that which no longer can be defended. It's really quit simple. The facts have been in for some years now, and it is NOT circumstantial...

Or- are you waiting for me to do the homework, math to prove as much, if so, that is not much of a problem either, and ya' know it. Details, baby details.......

Of all people on the board, you of all should now this....

and to use your own words quote: "I expect more from you Rick, Rob too." Please include your self, in this indicting sentence.....I have nothing to gain or lose in this convo. So please take no offense, and show us your own calculations, and details, defending your position. I know your previous post attempted to do as much, now can you please share with us, your own scientific calculations, which disprove a ball travels further, or more HR"s are not a result of PED usage. I'd love to see it.....:tiphat:
 
Last edited:
Mattingly23NY said:
I can understand anyone's frustration, yet seems, being our resident Scientist, shouldn't it be you showing the rest of the baseball world, the actual honest, (not circumstantial) conclusions, and or tests, to prove as much.

Work, in many scientist heads, and tests have proven as much, that more HR's equate to driving the ball further....ie, Roids do as much, and IT IS NO SECRET, NO LONGER CIRCUMSTANTIAL EITHER...!!!

So Tom, please play the Devils advocate here, and look thru the eyes, of one who can and will prove, using scientific data to reveal, the very truth your denying, or trying to defend that which no longer can be defended. It's really quit simple. The facts have been in for some years now, and it is NOT circumstantial...

Or- are you waiting for me to do the homework, math to prove as much, if so, that is not much of a problem either, and ya' know it. Details, baby details.......

Of all people on the board, you of all should now this....

and to use your own words quote: "I expect more from you Rick, Rob too." Please include your self, in this indicting sentence.....I have nothing to gain or lose in this convo. So please take no offense, and show us your own calculations, and details, defending your position. I know your previous post attempted to do as much, now can you please share with us, your own scientific calculations, which disprove a ball travels further, or more HR"s are not a result of PED usage. I'd love to see it.....:tiphat:
Click to expand...

Not to mention that some players have even admitted to using PEDs. Look I've no doubt that there are several reasons for the increase in HRs during the steroid era but only someone with blinders on can't see that the #1 reason was PEDs. Why is this even an argument?
 
Rick2583 said:
Not to mention that some players have even admitted to using PEDs. Look I've no doubt that there are several reasons for the increase in HRs during the steroid era but only someone with blinders on can't see that the #1 reason was PEDs. Why is this even an argument?
Click to expand...

Its an argument because you can't fucking prove its the #1 reason. I'll let this go when you stop making definitive statements. You suspect, you do not know. Your opinions are unsubstantiated. You regurgitate circumstantial evidence and ignore all other variables. You're wrong and I won't let that go until your admit it and apologize for the personal attacks you have made against me.
 
To the Post OP, will someone please define "NORMAL"...?

I'm not sure anything is normal in LIfe these days?????? Nothing, perhaps the Marlins continued Fan Scams, that may be as close to normal as Bugs Bunny, yet Bugs is abnormal, he talks....now that is abnormal.....not to mention a Coyote can run up to 43 mph, a road runner approx 30, so Wily Coyote fkd that road runner, beep beep, and we were all raised in a life of lies....LMAO,,,,
 
...I've personally never been inside a refrigerator either.

...but I don't need a double blind test to confirm that the light truly does go off when you close the door.
 
yankeesince59 said:
...I've personally never been inside a refrigerator either.

...but I don't need a double blind test to confirm that the light truly does go off when you close the door.
Click to expand...


Everybody gets it except totus. Hell maybe we should all just throw our hands up & say, "Tom you're right we're all wrong".
 
Unless I missed something, since prior to WW2, there were only two A.L. players (Mantle '56, Maris '61) who hit at least 50 HRs in a season until 1990 when Cecil Fielder did it.
 
blgridesagain said:
Unless I missed something, since prior to WW2, there were only two A.L. players (Mantle '56, Maris '61) who hit at least 50 HRs in a season until 1990 when Cecil Fielder did it.
Click to expand...


Yes 2 AL players but 3 times. 56, 61 & 61
 
blgridesagain said:
______________________

yep

Look at it another way....Mantle is the only A.L. player to do it twice since 1939.
Five decades- 50 years. lol

yeesh
Click to expand...



And yet Sosa & McGwire did it 4 years in a row including five 60+ seasons between them. And all on just talent & god given ability.
 
Rick2583 said:
And yet Sosa & McGwire did it 4 years in a row including five 60+ seasons between them. And all on just talent & god given ability.
Click to expand...

_____________________________

Yep, it's disgusting, and at the risk of getting nauseated, take a look at Barry Bonds.
He averaged 52 HRs per year 2000-04, through the ages of 35-39 including 73 one year-
prior to that, he averaged approx 32 HR per year and hit 40 or more HRs 3 times from 1986-1999.

There's more.... lol


He miraculously became a multiple batting title winner 2000-04 with BAs over .360 and .370 after being a career .288 hitter from the ages of 21-34 (1986-99 )

From 1986-99 his OBP was .409
His five year OBP (ages 35-39) from 2000-'04 was .535.

THE ALL TIME STAT KING ROIDER - Barry Bonds.....excuse me, I gotta puke.
 
Last edited:
blgridesagain said:
_____________________________

Yep, it's disgusting, and at the risk of getting nauseated, take a look at Barry Bonds.
He averaged 52 HRs per year 2000-04, through the ages of 35-39 including 73 one year-
prior to that, he averaged approx 32 HR per year and hit 40 or more HRs 3 times from 1986-1999.

There's more.... lol


He miraculously became a multiple batting title winner 2000-04 with BAs over .360 and .370 after being a career .288 hitter from the ages of 21-34 (1986-99 )

From 1986-99 his OBP was .409
His five year OBP (ages 35-39) from 2000-'04 was .535.

THE ALL TIME STAT KING ROIDER - Barry Bonds.....excuse me, I gotta puke.
Click to expand...


I really wouldn't put much stock in Bonds OBP because most of that was due to him being walked so much. And without appearing to sound ignorant the two batting titles he won were aided a little by all the HRs but the man was a good hitter (11 seasons over 300) & its never been proven that any form of PEDs help hand / coordination. You still have to be able to hit the damn ball. But the fact that he hit all those HRs later in his career is a joke. I mean even Aaron showed great power later in his career. Not to Bonds extent but Aaron averaged over 40 HRs per year between the same ages as Bonds 35-39.

But going on just HR totals Sosa had the highest 5 year total in history 292 HRs between 1998-2002. That's AVERAGE of 58.2 HRs per season. McGwire is 2nd with 284 between 1995-1999 for an average of 56.4 Bonds rounds out the top 3 with 258 HRs between 2000-2004 for an average of 51.3


Footnote to this & this is a scary thought, between those Bonds years mentioned 2000-2004 he was walked 872 times. Thats around 175 times a year. That's eqivilent to approx a year & a half of baseball. and at the rate he was hitting them you have to figure he would have been good for AT LEAST another 60-70 more HRs to his 762 total.
 
Last edited:
Rick2583 said:
I really wouldn't put much stock in Bonds OBP because most of that was due to him being walked so much. And without appearing to sound ignorant the two batting titles he won were aided a little by all the HRs but the man was a good hitter (11 seasons over 300) & its never been proven that any form of PEDs help hand / coordination. You still have to be able to hit the damn ball. But the fact that he hit all those HRs later in his career is a joke. I mean even Aaron showed great power later in his career. Not to Bonds extent but Aaron averaged over 40 HRs per year between the same ages as Bonds 35-39.

But going on just HR totals Sosa had the highest 5 year total in history 292 HRs between 1998-2002. That's AVERAGE of 58.2 HRs per season. McGwire is 2nd with 284 between 1995-1999 for an average of 56.4 Bonds rounds out the top 3 with 258 HRs between 2000-2004 for an average of 51.



Footnote to this & this is a scary thought, between those Bonds years mentioned 2000-2004 he was walked 872 times. Thats around 175 times a year. That's eqivilent to approx a year & a half of baseball. and at the rate he was hitting them you have to figure he would have been good for AT LEAST another 60-70 more HRs to his 762 total.
Click to expand...

-_________________________________________


okay
 
Rick2583 said:
Everybody gets it except totus. Hell maybe we should all just throw our hands up & say, "Tom you're right we're all wrong".
Click to expand...

Heisenberg uncertainty principle, gentlemen. You either know the lights on with the door open, or that the door is closed, period.

Until we have validated evidence that PEDs translate into better performance stats, all you have are assumptions. And unfortunately thus far none of your assumptions correlate.
 
totus44 said:
Heisenberg uncertainty principle, gentlemen. You either know the lights on with the door open, or that the door is closed, period.

Until we have validated evidence that PEDs translate into better performance stats, all you have are assumptions. And unfortunately thus far none of your assumptions correlate.
Click to expand...


...nothing but "assumptions" ?...lol...this is coming from the same person who only last week sided with their own personal version of "logic" in lieu of facts.


...and "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle" ?...please.
 
yankeesince59 said:
...nothing but "assumptions" ?...lol...this is coming from the same person who only last week sided with their own personal version of "logic" in lieu of facts.


...and "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle" ?...please.
Click to expand...

Wanting a thing to be a fact, and proving it are not the same. Repeating your point, being sarcastic and even insulting the person challenging your point does not prove your point. I'm not going to be intimidated, thuggee, trolled or flamed from my position of challenging you to prove your side with real correlated evidence.

So yeah, got climb inside your fridge. Lol!
 
...you mean like you preferring to see Cervelli as a victim?...that's wasn't an "assumption"?

..."intimidated, thuggee, trolled or flamed"?...please, I did none of those things.



...try taking some of your own advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top