Juiced 381
| Juiced: Wild Times, Rampant 'Roids, Smash Hits, and How Baseball Got Big. | |
| author | Jose Canseco |
| pages | 290 |
| publisher | Regan Books |
| rating | 6 |
| reviewer | Adam Barr |
| ISBN | 0060746408 |
| summary | Canseco used steroids and maybe we should too. |
Canseco, for those who spent the last 15 years hidden under a rock, played major league baseball for 17 seasons, from 1985 to 2001. He was most famous for belting massive home runs, but he was also pretty fast: in 1988 he became the first player in history to hit at least 40 home runs and steal at least 40 bases in a single season. For his career he hit .266, with 462 home runs and a .515 slugging percentage. He was a 6-time All-Star, won a Rookie-of-the-Year and MVP award, and picked up two World Series rings.
(How good was Canseco as a player? In his book Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?, Bill James presents several methods of estimating how likely someone is to be voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. On the "Hall of Fame Standards" test, where 60 percent of players with a score of 40-49 have gotten into the Hall of Fame, Canseco scores a 38. On the "Hall of Fame Monitor" test, where a score of 100 indicates someone is likely to get in, Canseco scores an 103. So Canseco may not get elected to the Hall of Fame (and likely won't, after the publication of his book), but a reasonable case could be made that he belongs there. The answer to the question of how good Canseco was is "very, very good.")
What's important about Juiced, especially to the average Slashdot reader who may not know a baseball diamond from the Hope diamond? The answer is buried in the subtitle's heap of verbiage: "Wild Times, Rampant 'Roids, Smash Hits, and How Baseball Got Big." Canseco's book is about the growing user of steroids in baseball, something you hear a lot about today. But Canseco has an unusual opinion: steroids in baseball are not bad; in fact they are very, very good.
Spurred in large part by Canseco's book, the U.S. House Government Reforms Committee subpoenaed some of the biggest names in baseball -- including Mark McGwire, Jason Giambi, and Sammy Sosa -- to testify at a hearing on March 17. Allegations are flying that Barry Bonds was on steroids when he set the single-season mark of 73 home runs in 2001. The typical press reaction to this is one of disgust: words such as "tainted," "artificial," and "cheating" are common.
Not so fast, says Canseco. Steroids in baseball are good. Steroids help players get stronger, and enjoy longer careers. And it's not just baseball players who can benefit: steroids can help almost anyone live a longer, healthier life. His book is a wakeup call not just for baseball, or sports in general, but for all mankind. That's his view, anyway, but he makes a decent case for it, using himself as an example.
Canseco explains how he used steroids (which in this context really means a combination of steroids and human growth hormone) to transform himself from a skinny kid to the beefed up example of manhood that gazes soulfully at you from above a bulging bicep on the back cover of his book. He gained confidence as well, and there's no doubt his ego was pumped up: the book is full of references to how good-looking he is, with some attempts to balance those with descriptions of how ugly he was as a kid.
The book also has a B storyline, which is that the media discriminated against Canseco because he is Cuban, in comparison to the All-American image of Mark McGwire. The current media dismissal of Canseco's claims that McGwire took steroids only adds fuel to his conspiracy theory. If you read the book, you would be hard-pressed to doubt that McGwire took steroids on a regular basis. Canseco is not describing rumor or innuendo; he is talking about obtaining steroids and then personally sticking a needle containing them into McGwire's gluteus maximus, repeatedly, over a period of years when they were both with the Oakland A's, and then later injecting his Texas Ranger teammates Rafael Palmeiro, Juan Gonzalez, and Ivan Rodriguez.
A glance at the rookie cards of players like McGwire and Barry Bonds shows that those guys have put on a lot of muscle since they reached the majors (rookie cards are a good source of pictures since a hitter with no action photos from major-league games usually gets the basic pose of bent elbow, bat over shoulder). A Giambi minor-league card shows a lot of loose sleeve around the bicep. If Canseco is making all this up, he is doing an excellent job, and the fact that nobody is threatening to sue him over the book lends credence to the accuracy of his claims.
Remember, Canseco is not "accusing" anyone of using steroids, in the usual negative sense of an accusation. He is merely stating that people used them, and in fact applauds them, considering it a wise decision both medically and financially. Unlike almost every other media report, Canseco's book discusses steroid use in a factual way, absent the finger-pointing and hand-wringing. He presents steroid users not as cheaters, but as vanguards of a new era of athletic performance.
So how should a libertarian, "I'll believe it when I see it" cynic view the accomplishments of juiced-up baseball players? People are talking about asterisks on records, Hall of Fame bans, revoking MVP awards. Is this reasonable?
It's a fact that in sports where achievement is measured in objective terms, athletes today are much better than they used to be. Yet in sports where opinions are subjective, the older athletes are usually recalled as being better than their modern counterparts. In 1920, the year that Babe Ruth began hitting home runs at a previously unprecedented pace, the world record for the mile was 4 minutes, 12.6 seconds; today it is 3 minutes, 43.13 seconds. That doesn't sound like a huge difference, but if you picture the race as four laps of a quarter-mile oval, as it is usually run, the modern miler would finish almost half a lap ahead of his 1920 counterpart, an obviously dominating victory. Today a good college runner can run the mile faster than the 1920 world-record-holder. It would seem logical to assume that a good college hitter (a good college power hitter, anyway), if magically transported back to 1920, could hit more home runs than Babe Ruth.
Almost any baseball analyst today would laugh at that notion. I think they are wrong; I think a modern hitter, or pitcher, would in fact completely dominate their counterparts from early in the last century (even if you let the pitchers throw spitballs, which have now been banned from baseball, yet their erstwhile practitioners are considered crafty, not cheaters, and their statistics remain unblemished by any asterisks). It's documented that pitchers of yore could mostly take it easy out on the mound. In books like Christy Mathewson's Pitching in a Pinch, it was explained that pitchers could save their energy for the dozen or so times in a game that they really had to bear down.
I'm not saying that Babe Ruth or Christy Mathewson, if born today, could not become great major-league players. They obviously had natural talents that separated them from their peers. What they were lacking was all the knowledge that has been built up over the years. It's not just diet and conditioning -- it's all the miracles of modern life that keep us going. Even up to the 1970s, pitchers could never see video of themselves pitching (a huge advantage in correcting flaws in their pitching motion) unless they happened to pitch in the World Series. Jose Canseco had surgery three times for back injuries, any one of which presumably would have ended, or severely curtailed, his career 85 years ago, yet nobody accuses him of cheating for undergoing surgery.
One of the miracles of modern baseball medicine is "Tommy John surgery", named after the pitcher on whom it was first performed. It involves repairing the ulnar collateral ligament in the elbow using a ligament from another part of the body. A pitcher who undergoes this surgery is not only avoiding a career-ending injury (the linked article above says that Sandy Koufax, who retired due to a self-described "dead arm," is thought to have had damaged UCL). The surgery usually leaves the elbow stronger than it was before. And more than 10% of major-league pitchers today have had this surgery. Are they cheating? Do they need an asterisk next to their records? There is no doubt that in the near future, athletes will undergo surgery not to repair injuries, but to prevent injuries that have not yet occurred. One day athletes with artificial limbs will be relegated to their own Olympics not because they perform worse than their non-bionic counterparts, but because they perform better.
The Olympics, of course, have taken a hard line on pharmaceuticals: popping a Sudafed before the big event will disqualify you. Nobody is suggesting that baseball go that far, but what is the dividing line between steroids and a lot of other substances that athletes put in their bodies? As Jim Bouton points out in his classic book Ball Four, baseball players have long been searching for that extra chemical edge. His diary of the 1969 Seattle Pilots describes rampant use of "greenies," or amphetamines. Bouton expounds further on this topic:
"I've tried a lot of other things through the years -- like butazolidin, which is what they give to horses. And D.M.S.O. -- dimethyl suloxide. Whitey Ford used that for a while. You rub it on with a plastic glove and as soon as it gets in your arm you can taste it in your mouth. It's not available anymore, though. Word is it can blind you. I've also taken shots -- novocain, cortisone, and xylocaine. Baseball players will take anything. If you had a pill that would guarantee a pitcher 20 wins but might take five years off his life, he'd take it."
The issue with steroids, of course, is that they really work. They're not magic: you still have to work out, hard. But you do get stronger, and according to Canseco, even more important is the increased stamina, the ability to hit as well at the end of a 6-month season as you do at the beginning. Canseco also points out that baseball players used to be known for drinking and recreational drug use. But a steroid-user can't afford to tax their liver with alcohol and drugs, and they don't need to mess around with greenies, so Canseco feels that the arrival of steroids also ushered in a time of "clean living" among baseball players.
Canseco presents himself as "The Chemist," the one who did the experiments with steroids, learned how to use them properly, and then passed his knowledge on to others. He maintains that he taught McGwire in Oakland, then Palmeiro, Gonzalez and Rodriguez in Texas (and that McGwire taught Giambi), and when Canseco returned to Oakland, he taught Miguel Tejada. Canseco views the $72-million, 6-year contract that Tejada signed with Baltimore in December 2003 as proof that Tejada made a wise decision to increase his physical ability (although Canseco adds a disclaimer in this case: although he claims to have taught Tejada about steroids and saw him grow bigger and stronger, he did not actually witness Tejada using steroids).
Fans, of course, do love home runs. I saw a baseball game in St. Louis in 1999, and I have never seen an audience so clearly devoted to a single player. The only jersey you saw in the stands was Mark McGwire's number 25. The fans loved him, and the place came alive when he was batting. And when, mirabile dictu, he cranked a four-bagger over the left-field fence, the place went nuts, and I bet every fan felt they got their money's worth. What about those kids, the ones in the stands, when McGwire is revealed to have feet of clay?
Canseco has an answer: we shouldn't worry about those kids having fallen heroes, because in his eyes, they aren't fallen. Furthermore, he accuses baseball's owners and management of being complicit in trying to hush up steroid use, in order to give the fans what they wanted.
Juiced, as mentioned earlier, has problems. Canseco states that young athletes should not use steroids, but beyond a blanket disclaimer at the beginning of the book, does little to discourage teenagers from attempting to emulate the professionals. He gives an unsurprisingly sympathetic and glossy account of his various run-ins with the law: gun possession charge, a couple of domestic violence cases, a bar fight, three months in jail in 2003. He tosses around the names of various steroids, but for someone who claims to know so much about the subject, he gives little background on them: how they were discovered, the legal uses for which they are manufactured, how suppliers obtain them.
But as background reading for today's steroids controversy, and as a potential harbinger of the future of our species, it's worth a look.
You can purchase Juiced from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
SlashJock (Score:5, Funny)
Nonsense! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Nonsense! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:SlashJock (Score:2)
Would you prefer a dupe?
How about 3 stories all on "Linux Distros Found Vulnerable By Default" but with different titles (which by slashdot convention means they are different subjects)
Re:SlashJock (Score:2)
Baseball nerds (Score:4, Insightful)
Wrong! (Score:4, Insightful)
How are you going to like it when you want to inject some longevity nanobots or install cybereyes, and you're not allowed to, because the government has declared you're not allowed to modify your body as you please?
Re:SlashJock (Score:2)
Or he watches too fucking much CNN...
Drugs = Biotech? (Score:4, Insightful)
Uhm, yeah. Steroids are "biotech". Nice justification for submitting a baseball story review to /.
Re:Drugs = Biotech? (Score:5, Funny)
What would it take to satisfy you? Sordid accounts of Jose Canstrikeout injecting nanoprobes into the ass of McGwire ("Mack McGwaa" as Ted Kennedy calls him).... followed by rhe recruitment of "Inning 7 of 9" to the Toronto Blueborg team?
Deal. (Score:5, Insightful)
And we sports fans put up with similar lame justifications for submitting a story about the latest inane Star Trek/Wars spinoff/episode/whatever. So deal with it.
Regardless of the merits of the Congressional focus on baseball, it's a whole lot more newsworthy than the usual popular media related drivel on slashdot.
Re:Deal. (Score:4, Insightful)
- golf ball dimple patterns (planned using computer simulations)
- baseball bat swing motion (motion tracking and computer analysis is used in the pros)
- football game planning (teams keep extensive stats that are used to find weaknesses in defenses)
That's just touching the surface, too. There's a LOT of really cool tech being used in sports these days.
Re:Deal. (Score:4, Informative)
*I have no affiliation with that blog, it was just a handy link.
Re:Deal. (Score:4, Insightful)
that nicely sums up what's wrong with slashdot nowadays. users that want just MAINSTREAM NEWS THEY WOULD GET FROM THEIR NEWSPAPER.
slashdot is NEWS FOR NERDS. now, baseball isn't NEWS FOR NERDS. some geeky electric circuits project would have been, or some nice memoriable on computer gaming. but fucking book about baseball? no way.
Re:Deal. (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm a nerd. I like baseball. I'm not the only one. QED.
And if you want to maintain that lofty standard, then /. should stop accepting stories about Buffy.
Re:Deal. (Score:2)
yes it should.
that a nerd likes baseball doesn't mean that baseball is 'nerdy'. I'm sure a lot of nerds like death metal but should we announce slayer gigs on slashdot? no.
Re:Deal. (Score:2)
But is it really? It seems to me that these hearings are based on media drivel, as you put it. Congress doubtlessly doesn't have a heavy concern about the industry. but you know with MSNBC and their ilk running big big headlines about it that eventually someone somewhere is going to put the political spin on this and come next elections we're going to hear the roar of the crowd; "What about the steriods they ignored?
Re:Drugs = Biotech? (Score:3, Funny)
That's great. And when someone posts a review of a book regarding Balco and Victor Conte, I'll be the first to read it.
This submission, however, is a review about a user of steroids, and how steroids affects baseball. The only science involved in this book, and its review, is how many times Jose stuck a needle in someo
Simpson Joke (Score:5, Funny)
Wasn't that Nicole Brown Simpson's Biography title.
Sorry.
Sorry (Score:2)
Maybe he'll get around to a steroid book someday. I'll have to wait until his "Roidless Joe" novel.
Unless You're Still Under a Rock (Score:4, Interesting)
I think that's fair for here, too.
There's a reason why I no longer follow baseball, do you think they can figure it out without first going through a lot of ass-covering and denial?
showboating bitches, EAT MY COCK! (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not like there's more important issues to delve into currently.
I'm sure Eliott Spitzer has time to add investigations on the abuses carried out in the name of "Teh war on tERROR" along with Tycho, Worldcom, Enron and George II's plan to destroy social security and medicare (actually, that's his brother -- so far).
Re:showboating bitches, EAT MY COCK! (Score:2)
Exactly my sentiment. I wince every time I hear about Congress taking up an issue related to MLB. Remember that tired old phrase? "For the good of baseball." Whatever- maybe that was something to be concerned about 80 years ago when it was one of a handful of entertainment outlets, but not any more.
The needle and the damage done (Score:2)
Check Canseco's account. There's ass-UNcovering and denial.
Do you get Karma for submissions? (Score:2)
If so, this is the best thing ever. I could submit a review of an Alton Brown cookbook, because it at least has some geek appeal.
Er, um, excuse me. I have something to do.
(Rushes off to submit another worthless book review to /.)
Re:Do you get Karma for submissions? (Score:2)
and it's not like you could sell your karma anyways...hmm..
anyone who wants to buy excellent karma slashdot account? 4818 comments, ~40 fans(hey that's more than in my computers). 50 bucks or 4 slices of pizza(or highest bid).
(I write like shit yeah, but fuck, I'm not pretending that I'm writing a review of a book. if i were i'd probably spell check it.. though what would matter more would be content checking)
WOOHOO!!! BASEBALL!!!! (Score:2, Funny)
Please post more sports stories.
okay (Score:2, Funny)
this book was written by JOSE CANSECO!. The man is a moron. His knowledge of anything 'biotech' is right up there with my knowledge of the female psyche.
Just to make sure we're all clear... (Score:2)
(Yes, I'm being sarcastic.)
Re:Just to make sure we're all clear... (Score:2)
Re:Just to make sure we're all clear... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Just to make sure we're all clear... (Score:2)
see... now thats a funny comment.
unfortunately EA lost the MLB license starting next year... I believe it was take two that has the license now.
there was an article on slashdot about it I think.
So how should a libertarian... (Score:2, Insightful)
womanlike? (Score:2, Funny)
do you wonder why you don't have a girlfriend ?
Re:womanlike? (Score:2)
Re:womanlike? (Score:2, Funny)
Am I missing something (Score:3, Interesting)
So the book sucks and has nothing to do with Sci-Fi, Fantasy or Technology. I'm confused, why is it being reviewed here?
Relevance: EA (Score:2)
This has everything to do with tech, as in videogames. What is MLB any more than something that provides material to EA for one of its sports games? After reading this, you will not be surprised when they add the hypo needle icon to the setup for the players in the game.
Re:Am I missing something (Score:4, Insightful)
As such, the social issues of "new technology" ARE what "Nerds and Geeks and Libertarians" should be thinking about... and while Canseco is no genius philospher, he appears to have guts and some degree of vision. His stance is important, if not correct or wise. This article is more about "tommorow's technology today" than any other I've seen on Slashdot in recent memory.
G
DMSO widely available, and stinky! (Score:5, Informative)
I've tried a lot of other things through the years -- like butazolidin, which is what they give to horses. And D.M.S.O. -- dimethyl suloxide. Whitey Ford used that for a while. You rub it on with a plastic glove and as soon as it gets in your arm you can taste it in your mouth. It's not available anymore, though. Word is it can blind you.
Butazolidin is commonly known as Bute (byoot), and it's available in tablets (those work best if you grind them up and mix with molasses in the horse's feed) or as a paste you squirt into your horse's mouth (whether they like it or not).
DMSO is hardly "not available anymore." One informative article [horses-and...mation.com] notes that "there is hardly a trainer's trunk that is without DMSO. It is used because it works."
But I wouldn't use it on my own horses -- it has a distinctive and somewhat nauseating odor. A fellow boarder at one stable used it on his mare, and it was hard to even walk past her stall. It's hard to see how something that smells that bad could be doing any good. If a ballplayer were using DMSO (either on its own or as a carrier for some other drug), the fans behind home plate would know as soon as he came up to bat.
Extra Special Olympics (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Extra Special Olympics (Score:4, Funny)
Ask Vince McMahon (Score:2)
Phil Hartman (Score:2)
Curt Schilling was right (Score:2)
But is he really lying? And is everything about this book bad (talking about how steroids helped him, how it helps other professionals = bad influence)? This book is the only reason a congressional hearing was called so they could force a clean up of america's (former) favorite pastime. Witho
Re:Curt Schilling was right (Score:2)
Re:Curt Schilling was right (Score:2)
Our Fearless Leaders at Work (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Our Fearless Leaders at Work (Score:5, Informative)
That's a pretty typical criticism of these hearings, and there is no doubt that there are many important things congress should be directing their energies towards. With that said,
(1) Baseball is exempt from some anti-trust laws. For example, Major League Baseball (MLB) gets to decide how many teams there are and more importantly, where those teams are located. There are very densely populated parts of this country that have no chance in getting a baseball team because MLB says no. No one can override MLB's decision because MLB is free to run their shop and determine the economical competitiveness of their own decisions without worrying about someone else stepping in to compete. They are a congressionally protected monopoly.
(2) Tax payer dollars have subsidized something like 1/2 of the current major league stadiums. Yes it can bring revenue into the area, but MLB and team owners are the ones to most benefit from these added tax dollars because it reduces the financial burden on team owners.
Here is a nice summary article from Sports Illustrated (SI) detailing some of the times when congress has involved itself in the game of baseball:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/baseball/
so its hardly a new phenomena. I don't disagree that there are more pressing matters going on right now, but i'm not sure it's entirely out of whack either.
jeff
Re:Our Fearless Leaders at Work (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Our Fearless Leaders at Work (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not sure I understand this. MLB is under scrutiny by congress. Not the players themselves. Congress subpoened players to hear from line level personnel what kind of steroid problems exist in MLB. They weren't after the players. If every player on that panel had admitted to steroid use, the congressiona
Re:Our Fearless Leaders at Work (Score:2)
This is not the first time that baseball has taken a hit for America. Consider what Congress would be doing if they weren't obsessing about baseball, then be thankful that Congress's priorities are so out of whack that they give baseball a higher priority than business as usual.
This book is nothing but lies (Score:5, Informative)
Let's have a look ...
On his rookie season (1986):
We went to Detroit ... Walt Terrell gave me a good pitch to hit. I took a big swing and hit a home run to center field that ended up in the Tiger Stadium upper deck. They told me afterward that I had already hit a home run in every AL ballpark as a rookie.
-- p. 65
Jose Canseco
Jose Canseco back in his heyday with the A's.
Canseco didn't hit a home run in Detroit in 1986. Or in Kansas City, for that matter. So what "they" told him about hitting a homer in every ballpark as a rookie was wrong, even if you take into account his 1985 September callup.
According to Retrosheet, Jose went 4-for-8 (three singles and a triple) in three games against Terrell in 1986. That monster shot? Canseco is probably remembering Mark McGwire's first major league homer, a colossal 450-foot blast off Terrell in Detroit on August 25.
On Bret Boone:
I remember one day during 2001 spring training, when I was with the Anaheim Angels in a game against the Seattle Mariners, Bret Boone's new team. I hit a double, and when I got out there to second base I got a good look at Boone. I couldn't believe my eyes. He was enormous. "Oh my God," I said to him. "What have you been doing?"
"Shhh," he said. "Don't tell anybody." Whispers like that were a sign that you were part of the club ...
-- p. 264
This conversation almost certainly didn't take place.
The Mariners and Angels played five spring training games in 2001.
On Friday, March 2, the Angels beat the Mariners, 5-2. Jose went 0-for-2 as a DH, and did not reach base.
On Friday, March 9, the Mariners beat the Angels, 8-3. Canseco struck out twice in two at-bats. Boone did not play.
On Sunday, March 11, the Angels beat the Mariners, 5-4. Neither Canseco or Boone played.
On Monday, March 12, a Mariners split-squad beat an Angels split squad, 4-2. Canseco did not play.
On Tuesday, March 27, the Mariners beat the Angels, 15-2. Canseco did not play.
In spring training 2001, Canseco hit only one double in 39 at bats. He did not steal a base.
On the 2000 Subway Series against the Mets:
In Game 6, though, I was sitting there on the Yankee bench on a cold night at Shea Stadium ... But all of a sudden, Torre called down to me. "Canseco, you're hitting." ...
I went up to the plate to pinch-hit for David Cone, and it was bad. Three strikes and you're out.
-- pp. 232-233
There was no Game 6 of the 2000 World Series!
Re:This book is nothing but lies (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, did he not pitch-hit against David Cone in 2000? Or was it just in Game 4, not 6?
Maybe you're poking some tiny holes in his accuracy, but even if he's confused about some at-bat against Walt Terrell 20 years ago, I can still believe he remembers whether he did or did not inject steroids into Mark McGwire's ass.
Re:This book is nothing but lies (Score:2)
It's amazing that this book would have so many detailed facts that are flat-out incorrect, however. You'd think, given the dangerous topics that are being broached, that the publisher's lawyers
Re:This book is nothing but lies (Score:2, Interesting)
Bush, Steroids and smokescreens (Score:5, Insightful)
This baseball steroid issue is a great smokescreen to distract the media from several much more important stories:
1) Jeff Gannon - gay prostitute/republican media plant gains access to Whitehouse without security clearance, the second gay hooker security controversy in as many Bush administrations
2) Propaganda - Whitehouse pre-packaging new stories for anonymous airing, secretly hiring pundits like Armstrong Williams to advocate policy, coordinating political coverage with Roger Ailes at Fox news
3) Iraqi Corruption - Who walked off with $9,000,000,000 in cash?
4) Political Appointments - Karen Hughes (no experience) at State, Bolton to the U.N., Wolfowitz to the Wold Bank
The whole world is talking about steroids in baseball and it's hardly an important issue. That W. staked out this political cover years ago is a testament to Karl Rove's genius.
evil bastard,
-dameron
Not only that... (Score:2)
Canseco's paychecks '92, '93, '94 (Score:2, Interesting)
They asked for a "zero tolerance" policy for baseball because steroids are illegal, but they change the House ethics rules so DeLay can stay in power even 'though he's going to be indicted in Texas, and there's certainly now "one strike" rule for getting kicked out of the government for breaking the l
Re:Bush, Steroids and smokescreens (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Bush, Steroids and smokescreens --READ ME! (Score:3, Interesting)
This steroid controversy is nothing but a distraction. The federal prosecutor in this case could investigate anything he wants to. There are huge looming issues with MediCaid, America's waning financial strength, corruption in the Iraqi occupation with poor pentagon accountability, war crimes committed. But what does he investigate? A poorly hidden scandal of athlete performance enhancement.
But what of the children?
Well, now the children know more, don't they? I don't see any p
consider the source? (Score:2, Insightful)
quote (Score:5, Insightful)
"Baseball players will take anything. If you had a pill that would guarantee a pitcher 20 wins but might take five years off his life, he'd take it."
I had to ask myself, if I could take a pill that increased my IQ by 60 points, but might take five years off my life would I take it?Yep.
Re:quote (Score:2, Insightful)
And with your IQ so increased, you might understand that it wasn't worth five years off your life ?
Re:quote (Score:3, Funny)
Oh, come on (Score:2)
Slashdot needs open voting on the submission queue.
Russian Roulette (Score:2)
It's one thing to use them to treat real medical problems, after having weighed the risks and benefits. Using them to outperform the non-juiced competition is dishonest, unethical and stupid. I don't care if J. Random Ballplayer smokes dope or snorts cocaine. I do care if he uses drugs that artificial
Steroids are a terrible thing (Score:2)
Once you walk down the path of comparing these people, not on the basis of what they can do with their bodies, but how augmented their bodies are, we begin to dehumanize the concept of sports, and as long as you're paying $1m for "the best", you'll get a constant lineup of folks who will subject themselves to ANYTHING in order to be the best.
I don't want to watch several hours of the finest machines money can buy slugging balls out of the park. I want to watch human beings doing w
Great start (Score:2)
[sniff] You had me at hello. [sniff]
This baseball you speak of (Score:3, Funny)
Baseball IS for nerds.. (Score:2, Insightful)
condensed version (Score:2)
News for nerds?? (Score:2)
Man, the slippery slope is getting steeper and steeper!!
Summary quip reminds me of another book.... (Score:2)
Charles Dickens' Great Expectations, anyone?
I don't think I've despised any other main character as much as that sniveling spoiled ass, Pip.
Why this is biotech and why it matters (Score:3, Interesting)
This is especially important because some docs are thinking HGH/bioidentical hormonal supplementation just may have life extension possibilities. Whether life extension technology takes off-and how it is accepted is an important question. It would be a shame IMHO if baseball players were prevented from using the best available medical technology for purposes of life extension. There is a fine line between experimental life extension treatments and risky practices.
SlashMockery aside... (Score:2)
Unfortunately, people think of Canseco in the same breath as Pete Rose and John Rocker - people who have destroyed their reputations on bad judgement. This book, as the reviewer describes, could prove amongst the most important baseball books ever.
If this book really breaks open the steroid concerns, and bett
A new name for "the rest of the world"? (Score:4, Insightful)
I suppose that's American for "those who don't live in baseball-speaking countries"?
I mean, there are more countries that play cricket at the top level than baseball. And an order of magnitude more people who follow it.
Clarification (replying to myself...) (Score:2)
That's 10 "Test-playing" countries (really only 8 good teams though), in case you were wondering.
And an order of magnitude more people who follow it.
And that's because one of them is India with a billion people.
Oh, sweet merciful Azathoth of Infinite Chaos... (Score:4, Funny)
Gah.
Well-written (Score:5, Insightful)
And secondly, despite that, this is one of the best-written articles to appear on Slashdot in some time. It smacks of actual journalism, which isn't something that happens often here.
how good was he? (Score:2)
He was good, all right, but he's no Clem Johnson. And Johnson played back in the days before steroid injections were mandatory!
It's Dimethyl Sul-F-oxide (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
The whole issue of who is juicing and who is not now puts into question all of the records and stats assocaited with Baseball. Does McGuire's HR record still count or not? I'm sure that there are plenty of Sabermaticians who will debate that for quite some time ...
Re:Huh? (Score:2, Interesting)
The premier game for nerds? (Score:2)
Not to mention Canseco is an idiot. (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
When I was growing up, Canseco was my idol. I had all his baseball cards, jerseys, posters, etc.
It's kind of sad to hear he was juiced, but oh well...
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
I was never a huge fan of Jose but I also find it hypocrictical for so many players to
Re:Huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
If steriods are actually a good thing, as claimed in the book, maybe lots of people will start using them.
Maybe all sorts of other performance enhancing (not just physical, but mental performance enhancing drugs) will become both popular and actually legal.
Right now the only mental performance enhancing drug that is widely used and actually promoted by employers giving it free to employees is caffiene.
What if the coffee room in your workplace had not only coffee but a whole rack of various drugs which would make you better able to concentrate, work longer, even just smarter?
I'm a software developer, and if stuff like this was both safe (REALLY safe) and available I think I'd use it, especially during crunch time.
So that's why this review is on Slashdot. The attitude behind the book matters, even to non-sports-fan nerds.
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
This may come as complete shock, but there are already LOTS of people using them. Next time you are at your local gym (or if you don't have a gym membership go get a free trial) look around. There is a limit to the size and shape most people can acquire naturally and the odds are good that some of the people in your local gym didn't acquire their size and shape naturally. Most competitive (not pro
yeah ! (Score:2)
yeah. something REAL like.... Star Trek! Yeah, you tell em!
Neither did. (Score:2)
Neither did, when you look into it. Clinton was not actually dodge, and Bush served (albeit what many would call poorly) in a section of the United States military during the time. Partisan enemies of both have trumped up false accusations.
Re:Neither did. (Score:2)
That is one of the fake partisan claims. AWOL is a specific charge, and no-one felt that Bush committed this crime or brought him up on it. The "Bush went AWOL" claim is a false charge and a litmus test of a (left) wingnut sure as Clinton causing Arkansas suicides is a litmus test of a (right) wingnut.
"And at the time, being in the Air National Guard (and even showing up) wasn't serving either."
Like it ir not, it is a branch of the military, and
Re:Let's All Have Some Misogyny, Yay! (Score:2)
Hockey is pretty cool (Score:2)
Yeah, hockey is cool. The college playoffs have been exciting. You know, someone out to try making big national professional leagues to play ice hockey. It might go somewhere.
Re:as long as we're offsubject... (Score:2)
Re:Prolly get modded for redundant... (Score:2)
The fact that they they don't try.
They just sit and whine and then make fun of the less intelligent in math class
mod parent up (Score:2)