What a Surprise!
December 12, 2004
It just gets better and better, doesn't it?
The steroid controversy is about to go nuclear with the latest
revelations by the news media that both Bonds and Giambi admitted
before a grand jury last year that they used steroids. Both
players have spent the past year vehemently denying using steroids
at any point during their careers after testifying under oath
otherwise. Giambi
came clean on everything in his grand jury testimony, stating that he
had been using them for
several years (since 2001) and that he had petitioned Bonds' personal
trainer and long-time friend Greg Anderson in November of 2002
for
whatever Bonds was using. Despite being given immunity from
further prosecution in the case, Giambi will undoubtedly become the
primary target of public ridicule in this sordid episode for his
candor. Bonds, on the other hand, will probably get off lightly
because a) he said he didn't know he was using steroids, b)
he said he only used them for one year (2003), c) he said he didn't
think they affected his performance and d) because baseball will want
to mute the steroid issue as much as possible as he passes Ruth and
Aaron on the all-time home run list.
But for us to believe Bonds' statement that he only began
using steroids in 2003 and even then he did so unknowingly, we'd have
to believe that the written schedules that show Bonds taking HGH,
Depo-Testosterone, Clomid, Modafinil, Trenbolone, insulin and EPO
(along with the pricing information) beginning in
2001 that were found in Anderson's possession were falsified, and that
his
long time friend and personal trainer would deliberately jeopardize his
relationship by lying to his most prominent client by secretly giving
him steroids. Also, how does Bonds know that he unknowingly took
steroids? Did Anderson tell him afterwards? If the person
telling Bonds that he took steroids lied to him in the first place
about giving them to him, why would that person be trustworthy after
the fact? Every
baseball player who was called to testify in the case is linked to
Anderson, and only because they approached him about getting whatever
it was that Bonds was taking. In Giambi's
testimony, he plainly stated that Anderson specified everything that he
gave him in 2003 and that both had acknowledged that each product was a
steroid.
Bonds says he didn't know he was using until after the 2003 season, and
was only using in 2003. Should we then imagine that Anderson
casually confessed to him in one of his post-season workout sessions,
"Oh, by the way, I've been giving you steroids for the past year" with
Bonds then replying, "Whatever"? He certainly didn't fire
Anderson for a deception that could've cost him his health, career and
legacy. In his testimony, Bonds says he was interested in
"nutritional issues" even going so far as to hire a personal cook and a
"nutritionist at Stanford", yet never bothered to ask what supplements
his friend and trainer was giving him on a daily basis. Bonds
also states that he didn't feel he was getting anything out of the
stuff Anderson was giving him, but continued to use it anyway because
Anderson "was his friend"; this despite paying him $15,000 a
year. If the supplements weren't working, is it realistic that a
man making $17 million per year would not shell out a little extra to
get supplements that worked? Is it me or could anyone who would
buy Bonds' story at this point probably also be immune to repeated
hammer blows to
the skull?
If you need help understanding what Bonds was reportedly taking, you're
not alone... I did too. So I did some research. One of the
most effective methods for stacking (or combining steroids and
supplements in body building) especially with older athletes is mixing
HGH injections, a steroid like Depo-Testosterone or Trenbolone plus
insulin injections. The HGH or Human Growth Hormone is naturally
produced by the body throughout one's life but production peaks from
adolescence until the early 20s. Then the body slowly decreases
production by between 1% and 3% each year afterwards. It is
impossible for the body to build new muscle without it, but it also
helps metabolism, brain function and regeneration of damaged
tissue. Insulin injections are used to offset the down regulation
of insulin sensitivity (insulin resistance) that commonly accompany HGH
injections. Combined, they give the body the muscle generation
potential of a 20-year old; adding a steroid yeilds muscle mass gains
that would otherwise be physically impossible. EPO improves cell
oxagenation, allowing for longer and more strenuous workouts.
Clomid is a testosterone stimulant that helps the body stave off many
of the cosmetically unpleasant side-effects that are common to
prolonged steroid use. HGH also helps in this capacity as well,
but it's common side effect is an enlargement of the skull, something
that has been noted of Bonds by many observers. Modafinil is a
stimulant which would be used to keep energy levels high during
workouts. In short, using all these drugs in concert creates a
superhuman workout machine capable of prolonged strenuous workouts and
quick recovery. It's safe to say that no high profile athlete
with Bonds' natural ability has ever stacked that combination before
because some of the drugs are fairly new and it would require a
particular and specific knowledge to get the mix right. Given his
associations with Anderson and Conte, this may explain why no one has
ever done what Bonds is currently doing and why his contemporaries who
have been using lesser steroids like THG, or using steroids but not in
concert with other drugs have not reached the same levels. Given
the lack of a drug policy in 2001 and the new vigor with which baseball
seeks to implement a competent policy now, it's unlikely anyone will
ever have that opportunity again. Athletes who go off steroids
are commonly able to maintain 80%-90% of their gains in the short term
as long as they stay healthy and continue their workout regimen.
Lost in the cacophony surrounding this "news" is the fact that a
federal crime was committed when this grand jury testimony was leaked
to the San Francisco Chronicle. Many in the media are pointing
the finger at the government for the leaks, but why would the
government jeopardize having their own case thrown out of court?
Because it's not strong
enough? Given the amount of taped testimony and documented proof
they obtained from their raids, that seems somewhat far-fetched.
I do
think it's interesting that Greg Anderson's attorney keeps beating
everyone to the microphone every time there is a leak about how this
case should be dismissed. All of the significant players in the
scenario seem to be fingering Anderson as the BALCO fall guy - BALCO
prez Victor Conte says in interviews
on both ABC and ESPN that he gave Anderson the steroids, and the
players say they got them from Anderson -
so doesn't Anderson stand to benefit the most from a dismissal of the
charges due to the leaks? Is this a case, like when someone farts
silently amidst company, that he/she who smelled it first, likely dealt
it? It's not like they can blame this stink on the sleeping dog
nearby. But I digress...
I'm not going to advocate for Giambi, but it is a shame that for his
openness and honesty in his testimony he will likely suffer the
most.
We teach our children that honesty is the best policy, but in our
actions (at least in these actions) we demonstrate that honesty is a
path that sometimes leads
to ruin and public contempt. The
Yankees are trying to void his contract, which is frankly pretty
hilarious. They
are
hoping to claim that they didn't know that Giambi was using steroids
when they signed him to what now looks like one of the worst contracts
in
recent memory. They
will
try to convince anyone who will listen that they didn't have the
wherewithal for due diligence on one of the five most high profile
players in all of baseball when they signed him. What a
joke! Their desperate attempt to play the victim is nearly
as absurd as the steroid
scandal itself.
And this notion that is coming out of the New
York media that the Yankees are the standard
of virtue and integrity is particularly ridiculous. The team
came into being because Joseph Gordon
and Frank Farrell, significant players in one of the most corrupt city
governments in US history, Tammany Hall, lifted the team from
Baltimore. Farrell himself
was the head of one of New York's largest gambling syndicates.
The award-winning book,
Where
They Ain't by Burt Solomon details how the move came
about. Fast forward a hundred years and one finds similar
corruption at the top. George Steinbrenner is the only person in
the history of
baseball to
have been
banned twice:
once
for making illegal campaign contributions (indicted on multiple counts
but plea bargained a cozy settlement) and the second time for
paying a loan shark to find (or as it turned out in this case,
manufacture)
information that would be used to discredit and potentially indict one
of his own
players! The more
one knows about the history of baseball, the
more one understands that the Yankees are at the farthest reaches away
from virtue and integrity. Their entire history is a
textbook on immoral behavior and corporate excess. They deserve
Jason Giambi and his bloated contract.
And what about the media? After months of cautioning
that people should shut up about Bonds and the steroids until something
was proven, despite
inescapable statistical, anecdotal and photographic evidence, they now
act shocked that the allegations have proved to be true. This is
like
the Pete Rose situation all over again. It took them 14 years to
accept the Dowd
Report's findings. Even then it wasn't until Rose admitted to his
gambling in his own book that they finally accepted it as true.
The Dowd
Report presented a mountain of evidence against Rose, and when I say a
mountain I mean literally a conference room full of depositions, phone
records
and affidavits chronicling over 400 bets that Rose placed on
baseball. And yet, most of the sportswriters kept saying "until
there is proof, we have to believe he is innocent" while celebrating
him solely as the Hit King. Apparently "proof", in this case,
could only take the form of a
signed confession by Rose.
The fact is, the sports media so badly wanted to believe that Rose was
innocent that they went out of their way to
not look at the evidence until Rose
himself actually came forth with a mea culpa. They wanted to look
the other way as long as Rose was willing to deny it. And
so was Major League Baseball, who in recent years had considered
re-instating him to the game despite the findings of
their own
investigation.
Just in case you missed out on Rose, we are seeing a repeat performance
with the steroids.
Once again we heard loud pronouncements of innocence and defenses
of virtue and honor from the sportswriters despite obvious evidence
that Giambi and
Bonds have been using for several years. Very
few talked about how much farther
Bonds was
suddenly able to hit the ball since 2001. Even fewer looked
at
the unchanged rate of his other numbers
when the statistical noise
of
the intentional walks were removed. Some talked about how
much muscle mass he gained in such a short period of time, but dared
not speculate how he could have bulked up so quickly.
Jon
Saraceno and
Christine
Brennan were the only major sports
columnists I know of who dared to state the obvious. Once
again, the vast majority in the sports media went out of their way to
not see the evidence. Until
now.
So where do we go from here? We will undoubtedly hear pundits and
fans call for the banishment of both players, or that their records be
stricken. We will undoubtedly hear some say that Bonds is being
unfairly prosecuted because of his race, that Mark McGwire's records
were never tainted despite his use of androstendione, a supplement with
steroid-like effects. There will even be some who ask us to
consider the possibility that the steroids had no effect on these
players' performances. And we will undoubtedly hear more and more
sportswriters express their surprise that the allegations of steroid
use turned out to be true. These notions and the people who
forward them should be ignored. Moreover, the last thing that the
game needs is moralizing from sportswriters who
were too cowardly to expose cheating when they saw it.
We do know that Bonds wasn't considered the greatest player ever before
he started taking steroids - he was, however, among the top 10 - and we
certainly will never know what he would have done without them although
his numbers in the preceding seasons give us a pretty good idea that
they would be substantially less than what they were with them.
But just like we don't know how many home runs Ruth might have hit had
he not spent the first six seasons of his career as a pitcher or how
many he would have hit had he faced integrated competition, each person
will have to come to their own conclusions about what is missing, what
was unfairly added and where Bonds' place in history should
be. If there is one good thing that has come out of these
revelations, it is that we now have two more important data points in a
study of how much steroids affect performance in baseball.