Ortiz not sure if he took steroids

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Canseco stated quite clearly in his book that he injected McGwire. Also' date=' did you forget, McGwire's little stunt where he refused to discuss steroid use at a Congressional hearing? As for Sosa, there is less evidence against him, but he did drop about 30 lbs in one off season after BALCO broke and had to resort to a new way of cheating-- caulked bats. In case you haven't noticed, Sosa is not under investigation and there isn't a lot of buzz about him these days, except from idiots in sports forums. No one is suspecting or investigating Ortiz, [b']no matter how hard you are trying to smear him in your pathetic way[/b].

 

It drives you crazy that so many Yankees have been outed as cheaters and liars and that HOF election may no longer be possible for some of them. It bothers you even more that no prominant Red Sox has been named or implicated. You are engaging in a desperate smear campaign that you are hoping people will notice. Maybe some Sox are on the list or maybe not. If they did it, they probably stopped after the 2003 season after the random testing and the BALCO hearing in the off season. Lots of guys went off the juice in that off season, like IRod, Giambi and Sosa (sneezed and went on the DL for a month). It doesn't matter to me, because there is no evidence anywhere that a single Red Sox player used PED s during the 2004 or 2007 seasons. The Red Sox championship clubhouse was clean compared to the crack den in the Yankee Championship clubhouses. The Yankees were universally praised for playing the game the right way, but they were cheating and doping up like common criminals while Joe Torre willingly turned to look the other way. The beloved, trusted father figure admits in his book that he should have known. That was among dozens of other revelations where the trusting father figure ratted out his players like a scandal sheet author. Your championships were tainted and sullied by a bunch of cheaters , thugs, crooks and phonies (Torre). Let's face it, the 1996 team featured two disgraced Mets who were serial drug policy violators who have never been able to get their lives on track.

 

Are you on crack?

[schillingouttheks]

Yes. That was my sole purpose in starting this thread. Are you psychic?

 

Seeing as this is very old news, and the timing of the thread is more than questionable, it's kind of easy to see that you are trying to take the attention off of the Yankees and placing some of it on the Red Sox. As already shown, this has nothing to do with regards to A-Rod's situation, nor any evidence to support what you are trying to suggest by creating the thread.

 

EDIT: wait, who were you before you changed your name? I am so effing confused.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

I am the artist formerly known as Jacoby_Ellsbury.

[yeszir]

I am the artist formerly known as Jacoby_Ellsbury.

 

Yea, I should have cleared this up probably.

 

He asked to have his name changed. I'm pretty sure he didn't switch over to being a yankee fan as well. :dunno:

[a700hitter]

Ho-ly s***. I didn't say anything about the press' date=' I don't give a f*** about the press. The press kept touting as A-Rod as the future 'clean' home run king. f*** 'em. I said 'knowledgable fans'.[/quote']There are lots of knowledgeable fans on this forum who don't suspect Ortiz at all or no more than any other player, so it is not an issue. You are the only one making it an issue with your 2007 article, which is proof of nothing

Ding ding ding! That MUST be it, I'm biased against DAVID ORTIZ, ONE OF MY FAVORITE PLAYERS ON MY FAVORITE TEAM.

 

My god.

My god... indeed. You are insisting upon smearing your favorite player on your favorite team with repeated baseless innuendo. I hope that you are not the president of his fan club. I think that you might really be hearing that "Ding Ding Ding" in your head or that is the alarm that sounds when the mental facility goes into lock down.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Yea, I should have cleared this up probably.

 

He asked to have his name changed. I'm pretty sure he didn't switch over to being a yankee fan as well. :dunno:

I didn't think it would be that hard to figure out, since I kept my avatar and my location listing the same.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

There are lots of knowledgeable fans on this forum who don't suspect Ortiz at all or no more than any other player' date=' so it is not an issue. You are the only one making it an issue with your 2007 article, which is proof of nothing.[/quote']

 

Heavily biased Sox fan no want talkie talkie about possible steroid use by Sox player in forum. I see.

 

My god... indeed. You are insisting upon smearing your favorite player on your favorite team with repeated baseless innuendo. I hope that you are not the president of his fan club. I think that you might really be hearing that "Ding Ding Ding" in your head or that is the alarm that sounds when the mental facility goes into lock down.

 

Fail.

[a700hitter]

Well a700hitter is all about the big C word (conjecture)' date=' so I figured I'd show him that if thinking that Ortiz juiced is conjecture, because of the lack of proof, well then we don't have any cold hard proof for McGwire and Sosa, other than word of mouth.[/quote']There are eyewitness accounts regarding McGwire-- Canseco and McGwire's brother. That is evidence that is admissible in court. Plus, McGwire did refuse to address the steroid issue under oath at a congressional hearing. You consider this nothing?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

There are eyewitness accounts regarding McGwire-- Cnaseco and McGwire's brother. That is evidence that is admissible in court. Plus' date=' McGwire did refuse to address the steroid issue under oath at a congressional hearing. You consider this nothing?[/quote']

 

So what have they been convicted of? What do we know, for sure, 100%, and provide me cold hard proof from something other than random word of mouth and meltdowns on Capitol Hill.

[a700hitter]

Heavily biased Sox fan no want talkie talkie about possible steroid use by Sox player in forum. I see.

Not interseted in baseless conjecture about any players.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Not interseted in baseless conjecture about any players.

Sorry to hear that.

[a700hitter]

So what have they been convicted of? What do we know' date=' for sure, 100%, and provide me cold hard proof from something other than random word of mouth and meltdowns on Capitol Hill.[/quote']The fact that there is evidence means that the accusation or speculation is not baseless. Don't ever apply for law School. You would certainly fail the evidence course.

[a700hitter]

Yea, I should have cleared this up probably.

 

He asked to have his name changed. I'm pretty sure he didn't switch over to being a yankee fan as well. :dunno:

Doesn't matter. I've been itching to write an anti-Yankee post that would get all of the Yankee fans twisted. Buzz was just a convenient excuse for me to go off about the Yankees.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

The fact that there is evidence means that the accusation or speculation is not baseless. Don't ever apply for law School. You would certainly fail the evidence course.

 

So both cases (Ortiz, McGwire/Sosa) are indeed conjecture, just on different levels. One is just more acceptable to you than the other, despite the lack of actual convictions and proof anywhere, which makes you biased. Props.

 

 

I'll thank your lack of a brain for helping me prove that.

[a700hitter]

So both cases (Ortiz, McGwire/Sosa) are indeed conjecture, just on different levels. One is just more acceptable to you than the other, despite the lack of actual convictions and proof anywhere, which makes you biased. Props.

 

 

I'll thank your lack of a brain for helping me prove that.

Wrong. Conjecture is an inference from defective or presumptive evidence or a conclusion deduced by surmise or guesswork. There are multiple eyewitness accounts against McGwire-- one being his brother. Until that evidence is discredited in court upon cross examination, we are not in the realm of conjecture. People saw him using and they have given their first hand accounts of what they had witnessed. There's no guesswork involved. Concluding that Ortiz used steroids based on quotes from an article discussing how things worked in the DR when he was a kid, is not evidence of anything. You are engaging in some sort of mind reading. You're conclusion is based on presumptive evidence making conjecture. It's too bad that you can't understand the distinction.

[rician blast]

If they did it' date=' they probably stopped after the 2003 season after the random testing and the BALCO hearing in the off season. Lots of guys went off the juice in that off season, like IRod, Giambi and Sosa[/quote']

 

I think many just changed what they were using, and HGH entered the picture more prominently. I suspect that there'll be many players using HGH for the next two years, or until the drug policy is amended and they begin testing for it. By then? They'll find some other supplements to use.

[a700hitter]

I didn't think it would be that hard to figure out' date=' since I kept my avatar and my location listing the same.[/quote']I really never paid much attention to your posts under your prior identity, so why would I notice?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Wrong. Conjecture is an inference from defective or presumptive evidence or a conclusion deduced by surmise or guesswork. There are multiple eyewitness accounts against McGwire-- one being his brother. Until that evidence is discredited in court upon cross examination' date=' we are not in the realm of conjecture. People saw him using and they have given their first hand accounts of what they had witnessed. There's no guesswork involved. Concluding that Ortiz used steroids based on quotes from an article discussing how things worked in the DR when he was a kid, is not evidence of anything. You are engaging in some sort of mind reading. You're conclusion is based on presumptive evidence making conjecture. It's too bad that you can't understand the distinction.[/quote']

There haven't been any convictions for McGwire or Sosa. Obviously there haven't been any for Ortiz. There's no proof in either case. You're just all set to believe one case, while completely dismissing the other, without any cold hard proof anywhere. That's okay, just own up to it.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

I really never paid much attention to your posts under your prior identity' date=' so why would I notice?[/quote']

lol sho-wa.

[schillingouttheks]

So both cases (Ortiz, McGwire/Sosa) are indeed conjecture, just on different levels. One is just more acceptable to you than the other, despite the lack of actual convictions and proof anywhere, which makes you biased. Props.

 

 

I'll thank your lack of a brain for helping me prove that.

 

I fail to see how Ortiz's case is anywhere close to McGwire's or Sosa's. You are heavily generalizing their situations, which is the only way they can be comparable, if at all. There are eye-witness accounts against the latter two players, along with physical evidence. Thus, there is a base for speculation. What's the base for Ortiz?

[a700hitter]

I think many just changed what they were using' date=' and HGH entered the picture more prominently. I suspect that there'll be many players using HGH for the next two years, or until the drug policy is amended and they begin testing for it. By then? They'll find some other supplements to use.[/quote']Just because HGH is undetectable doesn't mean that there is no risk of getting caught. I think a lot of guys went off the juice once the feds started flipping suppliers. Getting caught on a drug test and being suspended is child's play compared to being caught in the web of a federal investigation. Bonds and Clemens, the two biggest stars of their generation might go to jail. Tejada is a convicted felon. Prominent players having their careers ruined and going to jail can be a tremendous deterrent to future users. Does that mean no one is using? No, but I don't think there is any comfort in taking a non detectable substance. McGwire, Clemens, and Bonds did not get in trouble because they failed a drug test.

[a700hitter]

There haven't been any convictions for McGwire or Sosa. Obviously there haven't been any for Ortiz. There's no proof in either case. You're just all set to believe one case' date=' while completely dismissing the other, without any cold hard proof anywhere. That's okay, just own up to it.[/quote']A brilliant legal mind. Were you on the OJ jury?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

I fail to see how Ortiz's case is anywhere close to McGwire's or Sosa's. You are heavily generalizing their situations' date=' which is the only way they can be comparable, if at all. There are eye-witness accounts against the latter two players, along with physical evidence. Thus, there is a base for speculation. What's the base for Ortiz?[/quote']

 

I'm not trying to convict anyone. I'm just saying a700 is believing one case that doesn't have cold hard proof to it, yet completely dismisses the other for lack of cold hard proof. The degree to which these stories may be believable is meaningless.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

A brilliant legal mind. Were you on the OJ jury?

I was not.

[a700hitter]

I'm not trying to convict anyone. I'm just saying a700 is believing one case that doesn't have cold hard proof to it' date=' yet completely dismisses the other for lack of cold hard proof. The degree to which these stories may be believable is meaningless.[/quote']One case has evidence. The other has none. You are skipping over this point as if it is meaningless. Based on what you have presented, a judge would not let the case against Ortiz go to trial. It would be dismissed for lack of evidence. The case against McGwire would certainly go to trial.

[schillingouttheks]

I'm not trying to convict anyone. I'm just saying a700 is believing one case that doesn't have cold hard proof to it' date=' yet completely dismisses the other for lack of cold hard proof. The degree to which these stories may be believable is meaningless.[/quote']

 

No, 700 is discussing the relevance of McGwire and Sosa to the recent A-Rod revelations. You brought up a story about Ortiz and are trying to tie it in to the A-Rod situation. It doesn't fit. There are at least other first-hand eyewitnesses to McGwire and Sosa and they have accusers. Ortiz doesn't. See what I mean?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Where's the convictions, where's the proof?

 

 

 

It doesn't really matter, I've accomplished all I wanted to accomplish in this discussion.

[schillingouttheks]

Where's the convictions, where's the proof?

 

 

 

It doesn't really matter, I've accomplished all I wanted to accomplish in this discussion.

 

Jesus Christ you sound like Hamas after its conflict with Israel.

[a700hitter]

Where's the convictions, where's the proof?

 

 

 

It doesn't really matter, I've accomplished all I wanted to accomplish in this discussion.

Change your name again. Your reputation under this new name is already shot to hell.

[kreinbihl34]

Where's the convictions, where's the proof?

 

 

 

It doesn't really matter, I've accomplished all I wanted to accomplish in this discussion.

 

Convictions aren't necessary to understand what Sosa and McGwire were doing during their careers. Just because there is no hard evidence doesn't mean they're any less guilty. First hand sightings of injections, along with evidence that both were on amphetamines, can lead to more than speculation that both were on PEDs while active players. Add to evidence of Sosa's weight lost and McGwire's inability to admit to anything in front of Congress results in both being highly likely to be involved with steroids.

 

Now with Ortiz we have an overweight slugger who resembles a fast food abuser, compared to a steroid junkie. Realize that Ortiz has never be accused, never had a significant weight loss or gain in his career, and asides from a breakout season, has no evidence of every taking PEDs. Steroids taken whether while working out or not would lead to a weight increase, or most likely a muscle increase. There are other results but the muscle gaining is ideal one. Can you honestly sit and argue that Ortiz has gained muscle/lost weight in a dramatic fashion?

 

Seriously just take of the middle school girl panties and man up. There's no sense in acting like a punk, kid.