Ryan Braun going down?

[M2]

Originally Posted by alwaysawarrior

A career of baseball testing at this point is an occasional test. Do you think they are sticking needles in these guys arms after every game and doing extensive blood work? It has been proven that it isn't that hard to beat the tests. Feel free to keep sticking your head in the sand and believing whatever it is exactly that you are arguing.

He's been around long enough to have taken dozens of tests. He took them in the minors. He's taken them in the majors. He's been randomly tested and tested during the offseason.

If you're going to insist that Braun was guilty as sin in 2011 (again, I don't care) and that it absolutely boosted his performance, it leaves you in the uncomfortable position of explaining why he's been awesome all the way back to college. Seriously, this guy would need to be pretty much the best and most precocious PED user ever to pull it off. Good luck proving that.

The problem with damning Braun as a dirty player is you've got a lot of explaining to do. It requires an extensive narrative for which we don't have any evidence at this time. Brisco's one-time screw up suggestion at least makes sense, but then why keep kicking a dead horse?

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by M2

So he's a master criminal who slipped up that one time? He came into MLB dirty, has always been dirty and no one ever had a clue until that test?

If that's the case, then I'm a big Ryan Braun fan. Apparently he's an evil genius.

You are suggesting that baseball's testing process is hard to beat...it's not a blood test; that would be hard to beat. MLB is doing the minimum they think they can to appease the fans and media. Until they do real testing nobody is really going to know what is going on. Of course, if they ever start real testing, players will have to stop or suffer the consequences. One doesn't need a team of people to get around these tests that MLB uses.

Bum

[jojo]

Originally Posted by JayStubbs

Lol. How do you know that Braun's "clean" sample factored into Das' decision if we don't have his actual report? That's why the whole "we don't have the actual report" argument is an absurd distraction. If that's the case, the we can't comment at all on anything related to this issue. If that's the case, then we can't say anything about what or why Das ruled the way we did.

And this whole second issue, of Braun's name being in the books of Bosch is also a leaked story. Nothing has been officially released. We have not seen the actual records. All we have is what respectable reporters have said they have seen in those records. That's exactly what we have in the Das case. We have two reports, from two different reporters, who claimed they have read the actual report.

If we need the actual reports officially released before we believe anything, then we would believe practically nothing these days.

You're being pedantic. I've read about 5 different leaked versions of how the sample was stored. We need Das' actual report in order to understand his argument and how he specifically arrived at his conclusion which is a central issue being argued.

[M2]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

You are suggesting that baseball's testing process is hard to beat

No, I'm saying you're constructing a narrative where Braun figured all of this out at a remarkably young age and never aroused a trace of suspicion until 2011. I suggest trying to grow a tail and chasing it rather than go after that one.

The first thing you'll need to explain to me is how Ryan Braun, who apparently had the entire system figured out before he entered it, got caught in 2011? The profile you're creating of Braun is not that of a guy who's sloppy.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

You are suggesting that baseball's testing process is hard to beat...it's not a blood test; that would be hard to beat. MLB is doing the minimum they think they can to appease the fans and media. Until they do real testing nobody is really going to know what is going on. Of course, if they ever start real testing, players will have to stop or suffer the consequences. One doesn't need a team of people to get around these tests that MLB uses.

Bum

What's "real testing"? Are any of these acceptable?

baseball - MLB

How often do they test? At least twice per year -- once early in spring training, once later at a random date.
How many athletes get tested? 600 players three times a year, and up to 60 in the offseason.

Football - NFL

How often do they test? 12,000 tests are conducted during the season, including 10 randomly selected players from each team in every week of the season. Players can also be randomly selected for testing up to six times each off-season.
How many athletes get tested? Every NFL player is tested at least once per year.


Basketball - NBA & WNBA

How often do they test? The NBA tests every player at random between 0-4 times per year (0-3 times for WNBA players). Tests only occur at practices and games; none are conducted during the offseason.
How many athletes get tested? Every player is eligible, though not all will be tested in a given season. Rookies have a higher probability (and frequency) of testing than veterans.

Hockey - NHL

How often do they test? The NHL tests every player at random between 0-3 times per year. Most tests are conducted during off-days. Tests only occur during the regular season, not during the playoffs or offseason.
How many athletes get tested? Every player is eligible, though not all will be tested in a given season.



olympic Sports

How often do they test? Players are eligible for random, unannounced tests on a 24/7/365 basis, but the rate of testing depends on sport and athletic rank. 61 percent of tests are out-of-competition.

What kinds of tests do they run? Blood and urine tests.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by westofyou

What's "real testing"? Are any of these acceptable?

Not to the players.

[bigredmechanism]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

So, do masking agents exist that the tests can't detect? Yes. Does MLB test for HGH? No. The assumption you are making is that MLB testing is foolproof. It's not even particularly good. Players have to make mistakes to get caught. Braun made a mistake and then got lucky with the technicality. IMHO.

Bum

I am pretty sure MLB does test for HGH now.

edit: http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/72...ording-sources

[757690]

Originally Posted by Brisco

Not sure this is a safe assumption.

Forgive the length of this... but I decided to do some detailed research and I think I may have found something.

I looked over the CBA and I think I may have found THE loophole. If I am correct this was a drafting error on the part of the MLB lawyers. Any cites to the Drug policy can be found at
http://mlb.mlb.com/pa/pdf/jda.pdf


8(B)(2)
2. Challenges to the Proof of the Violation: The Player may challenge the initial showing by the Commissioner’s Office that the result was "positive" or that it was obtained pursuant to a test authorized under the Program and was conducted in accordance with the Collection Procedures.
If the Player alleges a deviation from the Collection Procedures, the
Commissioner’s Office will carry its burden (a) by demonstrating that there was no deviation; (b) by demonstrating that the deviation was authorized by the parties or by the IPA in an individual case (provided that the IPA acted within the authority delegated to him under the Program); or (c) by demonstrating that the deviation did not affect the accuracy or reliability of the test result.

Do you see those words... "did not affect"... OUCH. They failed to put the key word "significantly" before the word "affect". The uncontroverted science says that any delay causes the sample to start to degrade, and the Montreal test procedures (agreed upon under paragraph 3E) state that any degradation less than 5% is insignificant. Thus, while a 1% degradation will not have a significant affect on the accuracy or reliability of a result, it will still have an effect. Read literally, if the accuracy of the result drops from 99.9999% to 99.9998% then MLB did not meet their burden under (c), above.

Such a strict reading would probably not be considered reasonable by most and probably infuriated MLB... and that explains why MLB fired Shyman Das on May 21st when he made the same ruling in the "nearly identical" case of Eliezer Alfonzo. and then made an official public pronouncement that the challenge raised by Braun and Alfonzo would never be an issue again. Since MLB cannot control future facts, (mistakes happen)... the only thing they could be referring to is a matter of legal wording or interpretation.

http://www.sportsandentertainmentlaw...ok.com/sports/
and
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ap/index.html#

After Das' ruling on the Alfonzo case, MLB and the Player's Union reached an "Agreement" (see cite above). Pursuant to that agreement, Alfonzo would not be suspended, BUT he was immediately dropped by Colorado. Read paragraph 7(M) of the drug policy. Under those circumstances, Colorado could NOT have dropped Alfonzo without the agreement of the Players Association/Union. Why did the the Union agree?

MLB then made a public statement that it would not be an issue ever again. Why was MLB so certain that it would never be an issue again? It would have to be based on a change in legal interpretation, since no one can control future facts.

My simple conspiracy theory is this.

A. Das' ruling was based on the pure literal reading technicality I discussed above.
B. Alfonzo had the same facts so decided to appeal after the Braun ruling.
C. Das made the same ruling.
D. MLB said that this was too much and wanted to renege on the agreement not to publish Das' Braun opinion.
E. To protect one of their biggest stars, MLB and The Player's Association agreed to

1) Fire Das (but MLB would take the public heat)
2) Thenceforth interpret rule 8(B)(2) to include the word "significant."
3) Throw Alfonzo under the bus.

I believe this theory complies with every statment made by every party involved with the single exception of Braun's self-serving denial.

Can anyone provide an equally plausible explanation given all the facts?
If the Union felt that the Braun, and therefore also the Alfonzo tests were not reliable... why did they agree to allow Alfonzo to be cut in violation of the CBA?

Excellent research.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by Bumstead

Not to the players.

??

But that is the testing they undergo, so thus the PA's agreed to them and that means they are acceptable to the players if the union ok'd it

[alwaysawarrior]

Originally Posted by M2

He's been around long enough to have taken dozens of tests. He took them in the minors. He's taken them in the majors. He's been randomly tested and tested during the offseason.

If you're going to insist that Braun was guilty as sin in 2011 (again, I don't care) and that it absolutely boosted his performance, it leaves you in the uncomfortable position of explaining why he's been awesome all the way back to college. Seriously, this guy would need to be pretty much the best and most precocious PED user ever to pull it off. Good luck proving that.

The problem with damning Braun as a dirty player is you've got a lot of explaining to do. It requires an extensive narrative for which we don't have any evidence at this time. Brisco's one-time screw up suggestion at least makes sense, but then why keep kicking a dead horse?

Again you are acting like testing was hard to beat, it wasn't. I don't have any explaining to do because I really don't care if he was dirty, clean, or in between. But when presented with the question I have serious doubts regarding his innocence. You obviously don't.

[757690]

Originally Posted by M2

Sure, and Armstrong had an entire team working in concert to do it, from doctors to managers to trainers to teammates. I'm not saying it can't be done, but for Braun to have done this he would have had to come into MLB using and done this largely by himself. And if he and his personal chemist are that brilliant, then how did they get caught in 2011?

Braun has already made more money off of Baseball than Armstrong could ever dream of making off of cycling. I can think of 105 million reasons why Braun would and could hire anyone he needed to help pass the drug tests.

Braun played at the University of Miami, where many of the PED users came from. It's likely that he's been using PED's since before he was drafted.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by M2

No, I'm saying you're constructing a narrative where Braun figured all of this out at a remarkably young age and never aroused a trace of suspicion until 2011. I suggest trying to grow a tail and chasing it rather than go after that one.

The first thing you'll need to explain to me is how Ryan Braun, who apparently had the entire system figured out before he entered it, got caught in 2011? The profile you're creating of Braun is not that of a guy who's sloppy.

Personally, I don't know what the effects are of a player taking steroids and I haven't argued one way or the other. It is illegal and I, personally, think baseball needs to put an end to it for their own "image."

Why would Braun have needed to start taking steroids at a young age? He is clearly a really good hitter. I'm not sure what he would have needed the additional advantage for at the lower levels or in little league? Your exaggeration is mostly a distraction from the point of the topic IMO.

If baseball wants to stop it and the players want to "clear their image" (cause none of them are doing it) then baseball needs to test for HGH and Steroids with blood testing. If they want to continue with the "image" that they are doing something and then "puffing" about all they are doing, then they should carry on with the current process.

It is odd isn't that the power numbers are pretty much down all over baseball with even the current testing process in place? So, are we to believe that Steroids/HGH had no effect on players abilities in the 80's and 90's? Maybe it was just a blip of so many great hitters? Or really bad pitchers? So confusing...

Bum

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by 757690

Braun has already made more money off of Baseball than Armstrong could ever dream of making off of cycling. I can think of 105 million reasons why Braun would and could hire anyone he needed to help pass the drug tests.

Braun played at the University of Miami, where many of the PED users came from. It's likely that he's been using PED's since before he was drafted.

Yep, the U might have some issues here.

[Bumstead]

Originally Posted by westofyou

??

But that is the testing they undergo, so thus the PA's agreed to them and that means they are acceptable to the players if the union ok'd it

The current testing, yes, they agreed to. They have fought the more stringent testing. I'm not sure how hard MLB has pressed the issue of more stringent testing. They "puff" about how much they are doing, but this form of testing won't end HGH/Steroid use or even make it minimal.

Bum

[wolfboy]

Originally Posted by M2

Sure, and Armstrong had an entire team working in concert to do it, from doctors to managers to trainers to teammates. I'm not saying it can't be done, but for Braun to have done this he would have had to come into MLB using and done this largely by himself. And if he and his personal chemist are that brilliant, then how did they get caught in 2011?

I just don't understand how you can insist that it's so unlikely that Braun may have been doping since he was in college. Unfortunately, we don't have the benefit of the whole story for most athletes, but Armstrong is certainly an interesting case study. Armstrong, just like Braun, was one hell of an athlete before he started doping. Read up on how highly regarded he was even as a teenage athlete.

Armstrong (by his own admission) started doping in his early twenties, almost twenty years ago. He never got caught during that entire time. While he had an elaborate system in place by the end of it all, I have serious doubts that was the case in the early 90s when he started, or at every point along the way. Make no mistake about it, his elaborate steroid regime became more and more complex as the promotional dollars started pouring in.