Baseball

Alex Rodriguez Facing Seasons-Long Steroid-Related Suspension

Will play tonight, but faces a suspension through next year

|

impossible count
Reason

The steroid era of baseball continues.

From Fox News:

Alex Rodriguez is expected to play third base for the New York Yankees Monday night as the Bronx Bombers open up a series against the White Sox in Chicago. Hours before first pitch, however, Major League Baseball is expected to announce that Rodriguez will be banned for at least the remainder of the 2013 season and possibly all of the 2014 season as a result of MLB's investigation into a Miami clinic accused of distributing banned performance-enhancing drugs to baseball players. 

This seemingly contradictory state of affairs is explained by the fact that Rodriguez's lengthy suspension is likely to be tied only to a drug policy violation, making it eligible to be appealed, sources confirmed to Ken Rosenthal and Jon Morosi of FoxSports.com.

Up to 50 players are expected to receive suspensions of some kind, but only A-Rod is expected to appeal. The first baseman accused Major League Baseball and the Yankees of conspiring to void his contract. Read Nick Gillespie's defense of Alex Rodriguez here.

Follow these stories and more at Reason 24/7 and don't forget you can e-mail stories to us at 24_7@reason.com and tweet us at @reason247.

NEXT: Archaeologists in Turkey Say They May Have Found Piece of Jesus' Cross

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Unless you are a Yankee fan praying they get out of that horrible contract, I can’t see why you should care about this.

    1. Depends on who else they suspend. This could turn the second half of the season on its head.

      1. I disagree. The only ones involved in a pennant race are Cruz and Peralta, and the latter is already covered by the Tigers grabbing Iglesias in the Peavy deal. All 146 Oakland fans have to be happy, but beyond that there isn’t much impact.

        1. I hadn’t read the suspension list until now. It’s amazing how only players from incredibly shitty teams are the ones who got caught using those dirty dirty drugs.

          1. Why? The only people where the risk/reward profile is right are (a)players on the major/minors cusp and (b) players on the superstar/daily player cusp. PEDs don’t turn normal guys into super-stars, they give elite atheletes an extra 1 or 2 percent when that makes all the difference.

            1. Usually, yes, but I’d say Ken Caminiti was an exception.

              1. PEDs (specifically, HGH) also gives long-term veterans the opportunity to eek out one or two more years on the long tail of their career, where the money is.

                I’d really prefer if they allowed some of the PEDs, and got them out of the shadows. Perhaps then we could begin to determine what long term use of those substances do?

        2. I was none to happy with the Red Sox giving up Iglesias. He is special.

          1. He is a wizard with the glove no doubt but he has no bat. And he’ll never have one. Cherrington sold high.

            1. Agreed, but that’s a special glove. He’s probably Vizquel 2.0, and with Detroit’s defensive deficiencies he’s probably more valuable to them than anyone else.

            2. He is a streak hitter who will be okay long-term. He is deceptively quick on the bases too. Did not want to see him go.

        3. Have you forgotten Bartolo Colon?

          1. I believe Bartolo’s getting off with time served, just like Melky. These suspensions are for the guys that got away with it.

    2. Maybe some people have this crazy belief in self-ownership, and that if people own their own bodies then it is nobody’s business but their own of what they put into those bodies, regardless of which team they play for.

      Not only that, but the fans in general don’t care. They like performance enhancing drugs. If they didn’t, then why to they keep buying tickets and merchandise?

      Self-ownership. What a larf.

      1. Their game, their rules.

        1. Their game, their rules.

          This. If MLB has determined that fans want steroids out of baseball, and it seems like that’s what they’ve determined, then they’re on the right course. It’s their product and their brand.

          1. The banners are the loud minority. The ones that wouldn’t mind if they were legal don’t care enough to make a huge fuss over it and most of the fans simply don’t care one way or the other so long as their team is winning.

            1. Then taking all the indifferent people out of the equation, if the minority that cares about it is larger (or spends more money on baseball) than the minority that doesn’t, you cater to them.

              1. if the minority that cares about it is larger (or spends more money on baseball) than the minority that doesn’t, you cater to them.

                I completely agree.

                Does that mean the league shouldn’t punish those players who get DUIs or (allegedly) shoot people?

                I’d prefer it if they (and every other employer) actually allowed for the presumption of innocence, but that’s their business. Also, do you think I’m going to favor the additional punishment of someone that was convicted of a victimless crime? Come on.

                Though while we’re on the subject, I question the decision making ability of any organization that considers the utterance of a racial slur to be more worthy of punishment than vehicular manslaughter.

            2. Most NFL fans apparently on’t care that half the players in the league get arrested during the off-season, they’ll show up anyway or tune in.

              Does that mean the league shouldn’t punish those players who get DUIs or (allegedly) shoot people?

              1. If there was a group of NFL fans that objected to that, maybe.

              2. Why should the NFL be taking any action regarding stuff that has nothing to with football?

                1. It’s all about PR. And, I suppose, a chance for litigation against the NFL if a known thug thugs one of the other thugs.

                2. Why should the NFL be taking any action regarding stuff that has nothing to with football?

                  As Pro. L said, public relations and image. The fact is kids are watching and viewing these people as role models and I really don’t think it good to promote a “win-at-any-cost” philosophy to kids.

                  1. How about promoting a “we don’t meddle in players’ business when it has nothing to do with football” philosophy?

                    The whole kids/role models argument is some warmed over nannyist bullshit.

                    1. It’s pretty typical of any corporation with public-facing employees. Really, I’m surprised the NFL tolerates what it does.

                    2. I gotta tell ya, I disagree w/ you here Epi. Shocker, I know.

                      I don’t give a shit about the “role models” angle. The fact is, nobody is forced at gunpoint to play in the NFL. If you do, you agree to their rules. I don’t see this as being any different than the contract someone has with any private employer.

                      If I freely agree to accept a job that comes with certain conditions, regardless of whether those conditions are specifically job-related or not, I am bound to those conditions as long as I remain employed.

                      Indeed, the fact that their contracts cover such situations makes them football related, IMO.

                    3. Without the powerful unions, I bet the leagues would be even harsher with their criminal and/or rule-breaking players.

                  2. The fact is kids are watching and viewing these people as role models

                    That’s the part I don’t get. Who the fuck sees these people as role models? They are elite athletes. Odds are almost nil that any kid is going to be able to follow their example, no matter how hard they work (or what PEDs they take). Sounds like a terrible choice of a role model.

              3. Does that mean the league shouldn’t punish those players who get DUIs or (allegedly) shoot people?

                That’s racist!

        2. Not their bodies. Not their game.

          1. That’s nonsense. They can make rules like this. It’s not like the players aren’t represented by counsel, agents, and, of course, a very powerful union. The players agreed to these rules.

      2. Not only that, but the fans in general don’t care. They like performance enhancing drugs. If they didn’t, then why to they keep buying tickets and merchandise?

        Because they love the game even though they disparage liars and cheats?

        Self-ownership. What a larf.

        Sure, and let’s also allow the players to gamble on their games. Why not? Self-ownership and free enterprise. Why is baseball so anti-capitalist?

        1. If you run to Congress and ask for special favors exempting you from the rigors of the marketplace, what word better describes their actions?

          1. Anti-trust laws are capitalistic?

            1. Libertymike believes in the State when it’s convenient for him to do so.

              1. Restrictions on the free flow of labor are not capitalistic.

                TAO, your assertion is baseless. Do I favor anti-trust laws? Of course not.

      3. Self-ownership means I don’t have to follow the rules of the game in which I play. Hey, ump, I’ll tell you when I’m out!

      4. This sounds a lot like the “You can’t tell me that I can’t bring guns into your parking lot” view of self-ownership.

      5. They signed the CBA didn’t they? If Rodriguez wants to use steroids, he shouldn’t have joined the union or gone to play baseball somewhere else. MLB is private business. If they don’t want their employees using steroids and will punish those who do, that is their business. If you don’t like that, start your own baseball league.

        This is strictly a contractual issue. This is not the government trying to throw him in jail.

        1. If you don’t like that, start your own baseball league.

          Trying to convince MLB to change policies and pointlessly complaining about on blogs are two other perfectly reasonable options.

  2. Never feel sorry for anyone who makes more money than you.

    1. Never feel sorry for anyone who makes more money than you lies and cheats in violation of a signed contract.

      FTFY.

      1. I’ll feel sorry for whomever I want, thank-you-very-much.

  3. But what does Peter King think?

    1. That the Rays, Red Sox, and Orioles should be drone-murdered.

      1. Finally something we can all agree on.

        1. I can see drone-murdering the Red Sox and the Orioles, but the Rays? That’s like drone-murdering a wedding.

          1. Of all the things to drone strike in Baltimore, does it have to be Camden Yards?

            1. They’ll hit em on the tarmac at the airport before they take off on their road trip.

            2. I doubt the Yankees care about the stadium itself. Heck, if it’s stadiums they’re after, I’d be pleased if they’d hit the Trop while it’s unoccupied.

              1. I’ll give them a few bucks to help fund their deconstruction of Fenway.

                1. What? What’s the point of the Red Sox without the park?

                  1. Being first in the AL East and having more than 0 World Series titles?

                    1. Yeah, I wouldn’t count on that first place thingee for very long.

                  2. The worst part about Fenway is actually watching the game. It’s a cool place and a fun time, but I’d hate it too if it was the only place around.

                    1. The only other one I’ve been to is Comerica, and it’s sooo much better. I’ll shortly be seeing Wrigley, but it’s also old as shit so I don’t expect it to be very nice either.

                    2. I loved Wrigley. Beats the fuck out of the Trop, which has gone downhill ever since they stopped calling it the Thunderdome.

                    3. Yes, someone need to tell the people of Tampa/St Pete that baseball is an outdoor game. I don’t care if it does rain there everyday at 2. I saw a game there a couple years back and it just felt wrong. Also, I was incredibly hungover, so that didn’t help.

                    4. At least a retractable dome, though I agree.

                    5. Of the 15 or so I’ve been to my favorites are Angels Stadium, Camden, and PNC, with Camden slightly ahead of the others. Camden is the blueprint for a reason, it’s everything you want out of a baseball stadium. Just make sure you walk east after the game.

              2. Sadly for years Camden was another home game for them. It has been nice to see the stadium filled with Orioles fans the last two years for Yankee games.

              3. I’d be pleased if they’d hit the Trop while it’s unoccupied.

                This is the first year that last qualifier would make a statistical difference in the fatality count.

                1. They’d just classify them all as enemy combatants anyway.

          2. Kind of OT, but I bought a 10 game package of hockey tickets. No Lightening though. I wanted to see my preferred team of Canadians beat the Canadiens too much.

            1. This only makes sense to hockey fans.

              1. I think our Canadians and their Russian friends will be decent next year.

                1. I considered getting the opening day package, which included the first game against the sun loving Canadians, but it was more expensive per game and involved buying a preseason game. Also, it didn’t have any games against those damn French bastards.

                2. My teams’s Russian player is a pussy who quit to go home. 🙁

          3. Dude, the Rays play at Tropicana Field. That tops the list of “MLB stadiums most desperately in need of being drone-murdered.”

    2. Peter King primarily writes about football for Sports Illustrated, but he did weigh in on this issue last month.

      1. I’ll reveal my answer to the question I pose below here. I’d rather watch NY Peter King speak than SI Peter King.

        1. Because the former is more of a hypocrite?

    3. Probably more concerned with the Cleveland Browns.

    4. Never ask what a Peter King thinks about:

      http://mmqb.si.com/2013/08/05/…..terback/7/

      Now, which Peter King is dumber. SI Peter King, or NY Peter King?

  4. Dude knows exactly whats going on over there. Wow.

    http://www.Privacy-Rox.tk

  5. I think baseball should ban anybody who has had surgery to repair an injury. Also, anybody who eats anything other than the Babe Ruth Diet of whiskey, beer, and hot dogs. Also, they should all work as railroad porters during the off season.

    1. Is chicken and beer acceptable?

    2. Your kind of thinking will end the only way it can: With total robot domination of all sports.

      1. I might be misreading your tone, but that sounds like the best possible outcome.

        1. I make no moral judgments. I merely observe the only possible consequences.

      2. I can get behind this.

      3. A-Rod? That skin bag wouldn’t have lasted one pitch in the old Robot Leagues! Now Wireless Joe Jackson, there was a blern hitting machine!

        1. The Commissioner: Skipper, we’re losing the crowd. Put in our new novelty act – Leela.

          Manager: Darn it! I already put in the circus clown.

          The Commissioner: Yeah, but he bunted. Clowns are only funny when they swing away.

          1. Boring! Baseball wasn’t.. Hm. So they finally jazzed it up?

    3. Let’s allow players and managers to gamble on baseball too. I mean why not? The game has no integrity since apparently it’s all about which individual player can make the most money.

    4. This. I don’t now if another subculture is as prone to luddism as sports fans.

      1. It seems to be around all sports in regards to PEDs, but baseball has an extra dose of it. Heaven forbid instant replay remove the “human element of the game”. What’s the point of the “human element” of determining if a ball is within a rectangle?

        1. There is a heavy amount of retard when it comes to baseball, I think because it’s both the classic American game and is so stat-based, that any whiff of “unfairness” just turns normally reasonable people into fools about it.

          1. Fools about what? Just because technology enables you to do something doesn’t you mean you should do it.

            Shit then, let’s break out the adatanium bats and let players with bionic arms pitch. That wouldn’t completely eclipse the sense of human accomplishment in the game.

            1. “Sense of human accomplishment” is some vague-ass shit. What does that mean, exactly? I wouldn’t mind seeing games between space clowns and atomic monsters myself. I don’t have some nebulous “sense of human accomplishment” requirement whatsoever.

            2. Shit then, let’s break out the adatanium bats and let players with bionic arms pitch

              Boooooring!

              I want to see a modified howitzer do the pitching.

            3. Replacing the umpires with machines doesn’t eclipse any of the human accomplishment of the game.

              1. I’m fine with instant replay on home runs and for plays at the plate.

                Anything else, like balls and strikes or fair/foul down the line is a judgement call to be left to the umps. Baseball doesn’t need to move any slower because of replay.

                1. Computers would be just as fast as a person at determining “was the ball on this side of the line or not”, except more accurate.

            4. “Sense of human accomplishment” is some vague-ass shit. What does that mean, exactly? I wouldn’t mind seeing games between space clowns and atomic monsters myself. I don’t have some nebulous “sense of human accomplishment” requirement whatsoever.

              If that many people feel the same was as you then you are free to form your Atomic-Space Clown Baseball League.

              But the fact is, I think it’s more impressive that a person can hit a baseball 400+ feet on his own, without the benefit of performance enhancing drugs.

              1. “Some even call me mad. And why? Because I dared to dream of my own race of atomic monsters”

              2. But really, what is the difference between performance enhancing drugs and performance enhancing surgery, training, equipment, diet, clothing, etc. Why are drugs the only form of enhancing technology that is completely forbidden?

                I know it’s the rules of a game, so it is all arbitrary, and I have no problem with that. But that doesn’t mean people can’t have an opinion about it.

          2. It’s so stat based, but the retard got kicked up to plaid when a bunch of smart people had the temerity to point out that most people were looking at the wrong numbers. This mentality mostly exists in other sports with regard to quantitative analysis, though basketball seems to be much more open minded to it.

          3. It is a game epsiarch. It is not life. Saying you don’t want new technology in a game is not being a luddite. It is saying you want your game to stay the same.

            Again, if you don’t like it, start your own league. There are independent leagues all over America. If there is a market for free roid baseball, go find it.

      2. Funny, a few years ago a bunch of family members were complaining about men’s tennis – that it had become totally dominated by power and they blamed technology and wanted to go back to wood racquets.

        I pointed out to them that the athletes also train constantly and are bigger, stronger, and faster than they were in the wooden raquet days – and suggested that the court needs to be bigger and the net higher.

        OUTRAGE!!!

        1. It’s especially amusing when you consider that Roger Federer is considered by many to be possibly the best tennis player of all time, and he’s not known as a power player.

          With polyester strings and high racket head speed from new materials, you get fucktons of topspin. That’s just the way it goes.

          1. I would love to see say Dokovic and Federer play a match with 70s era wooden rackets. Just to see what it would look like and how different the game would be.

            1. I’d like to see Nadal play without the strings that give him all that spin. And with chair umpires strictly calling the time limits.

              You’d never hear the end of Nadal’s bitching.

            2. That would actually be pretty awesome.

              1. I am surprised someone hasn’t setup such a match. I bet a lot of people would watch.

  6. Chicken is acceptable, but only if it has been fried in lard.

    1. Well, of course. I should have specified that it was fried chicken and beer. Though will they have to give up the in-clubhouse video games?

  7. Sluggerbot 3000 is nearly complete.

    1. Think of the boon to technological advance that will come as companies compete in an everlasting war between robot pitching and robot hitting. We’ll see home run balls hitting the Moon, and batters totally incinerated by pitches.

      1. And think about those hitters playing on the Moon!

        1. They’d have to play on the far side, to avoid bombarding the Earth with baseballs. Or maybe not–I suppose baseballs traveling at high speeds would burn up in the upper atmosphere.

          1. Sure, your old-fashioned human-compliant baseballs would.

            1. You’re right, I didn’t think it through. The materials would have to change radically, as the robot hitters would otherwise blast the balls into dust.

              1. Every game would have to be played in remote areas of Nevada due to the hazards involved, which would limit live attendance stats.

                1. Yes, but the TV rating would be through the roof.

                    1. No, just one rating because after the first pitch, no one would be left in the rubble of North America to watch.

                    2. In fact, I think nuclear powered robot baseball is the initiating event of the Singularity.

                    3. The solution is a robot/superhuman championship game. No one’s going to complain about a few little PEDs and cyborg limbs when a team’s competing against nuclear powered robots with hypersonic fastballs.

  8. I think this whole witch hunt is stupid. What’s the problem with performance enhancing drugs? Don’t we want people to perform at their peak ability? Those drugs enhance. They don’t create. They won’t turn just anyone into a star. You must have something to start with first. So why not? I honestly don’t get it.

    Is it about some notion of fairness? Some people don’t want to use the drugs so it gives the ones that do an advantage? So fucking what? Form your own league.

    I would think fans would want these drugs because I would think it would make for a better game.

    Then again I don’t give a shit about sports, so whatever.

    1. Some people don’t want to use the drugs so it gives the ones that do an advantage? So fucking what? Form your own league.

      You could say the exact same thing to the people who do want to use.

    2. Good points and fair, sarcasmic. Personally, I prefer to watch athletic entertainers who are not enhanced. Not everyone does but to each his own.

      However, the players agreed in their contract with the league to not use PEDs, and failure to comply has definitive outcomes. You get busted, you get banned.

    3. In baseball it is pure nastalgia. People love the idea of the game having a sense of continuity and being able to compare one era to another.

      Other sports don’t have that sense and thus are not as concerned with steroids. Football bans them. But users are never stigmatized the way baseball players are.

      Mostly what drives the need to ban in those sports is the fact that it is illegal and fears over potential liability for not doing something and a player later dying from use. The NFL is terrified of player injury lawsuits right now.

    4. All good except for your last sentence.
      If you lived at my house, you would not be given control of the remote. Especially if we were smoking my dope.

      1. John, my last post was directed at sarc.

      2. Why would I ever live at your house? Do you mean visit as a guest? If so, and if sports would be on the whole time I was there, the chances of a second visit would be very slight. Nothing personal. Oh, and I’ve got my own dope thank you very much.

        1. Somebody is a bit cranky this afternoon.

    5. I tend to agree with sarcasmic here (and I also don’t care too much about sports, so I’m not going to get too worked up about it either way). PEDs don’t make a great athlete. And it seems to me that a lot of these drugs like steroids and HGH have a lot of potential to make a career as a pro athlete a lot safer by improving the ability to heal from injuries and making training more efficient.
      I think a big part of the problem is that the use of these drugs is also illegal in many cases. If it were just against the rules of the league, that’s fine. They do get to make their own rules. But the fact that there really isn’t an option of forming an all PED league kind of spoils the “if you don’t like it then form your own league” argument.

  9. 1) Sign Contract
    2) Play the game
    3) Break the rules
    4) Get fired

    It matters not the littlest bit if the rules are stupid.

    1. Sure, it does. To argue otherwise, is to be ignorant of both history and human nature.

      1. You can say that rule-breaking is endemic to professional sports, but that is not really justification for approving or ignoring current rule-breaking.

        Either amend the rules or fire the fucker for breaking the rules. (we’re talking about Lance right?)

        1. Its the whole picture, kinnath.

          If the rules are made by a party that has asked for and received special goodies from the state, like MLB, we cannot, in good conscience elevate observance of the rules over individual liberty and dignity.

          What is good about deferring to the rules of an entity which has received special goodies from the state and that same state is now going to be asked to enforce the rules?

          MLB has sought and has received protection from the RULES OF THE MARKET. In a perfectly free enterprise regime, A does not get to restrict employment or get subsidies.

          In a perfectly free enterprise regime, A could not impose rules upon B through collective bargaining as there would be no such thing.

          1. Mike,

            MLB’s fans prefer their baseball to be played without PEDs. MLB is doing nothing but giving its customers what they want. Who are you to tell them they can’t?

            You are just pissed because the market isn’t catering to your tastes. Life is like that. Start your own league if you don’t like what MLB is selling.

            1. MLB’s fans prefer their baseball to be played without PEDs.

              Is it clear that this is the case? It seems to me that Baseball got a lot more attention when home run records were being set all the time. Though that may just be that I was paying more attention to baseball at that point.

              1. The vast majority of the anti-PED chorus consists of reporters who view themselves as the moral gatekeepers of the game along with the usual busybody, cloveristic, do-gooder petty totalitarians.

                Sure, there are other motivations, such as fearing Congressional intervention if “something isn’t done” and the commissioner’s quest to salvage his legacy.

  10. Why are we discussing baseball, while the turrurists are winning?

    Shut down this silly game, stadiums are just another target for turrurists! For the children!

  11. 50 players? Not 12 plus A-rod? Who, by the way, plays third-base (or pretends too since he actually SUCKS).

  12. Reason just love their ped using liars. Alex Rodriguez is a hero America, don’t you know!

  13. This is another distraction on what is really happening.

  14. And, while we’re at it, we should make all World Cup skiers compete in leather boots, on edgeless wooden skis.

    And those carbon fibre rackets should definitely be outlawed at Wimbledon. And no synthetic strings.

    1. All athletics should be done nude.

  15. The appeal should be interesting since Rodriguez did not test positive this time.

    1. None of the players who got suspended today failed a test recently. The CBA specifically allows for suspensions to be levied for “non-analytical positives”, meaning strong evidence of doping other than a failed test.

      If the CBA did not allow for that, all of these players would fight their suspensions, and they would all win their cases.

      1. Like I said – interesting. Doesn’t mean he’ll win, but it will be a hell of a fight.

  16. and suggested that the court needs to be bigger and the net higher.

    I have heard this about basketball.

    also- jinx.

    1. I don’t know anyone who cares about basketball at all.

    2. I’ve heard the same with respect to football. That “effectively” the field has gotten smaller because players are so much faster.

      The last time they expanded the size of the fields it lowered injury rates a lot.

        1. I didn’t say I bought the arguments.

          1. The Lunar Football League, will naturally need a much larger field. Much larger.

      1. Not to mention the players are the size of, well, refrigerators.

  17. Speaking of the REAL scourge of steroids; I had a passing interest in bodybuilding back in the glory days of Arnold and Franco Columbu. Not as a participant, but just as an amazed observer. None of those guys even bothered to pretend they weren’t juicing, and there was an inevitable deluge of whining about “natural” vs “cheat”.

    It doesn’t matter what you shoot up with, you still have to be in the gym every fucking day, working with weights which verge on cripplingly injurious, or you’re gonna get laughed off the fucking stage.

    Bodybuilding is weirdly fascinating, but the athleticism of Olympic lifters is truly amazing.

    1. All that be true.

      At 18, I wanted to be the next guy on the cover of Muscle Mag. In February of my senior year in high school, I began training in earnest. Supersets, tri-sets, overload and muscle confusion concepts, the Weider priority training principle, all of it.

      I eventually competed in a couple of shows. Natural. In one show, I placed fourth. The three guys ahead of me were all juicers.

      It took a little bit of time, but I eventually recognized that training and diet alone were not going to win my the Olympia.

      How about Arnold, as a guest of Johnny Carson, circa 1973 or 1974, telling Ed and Johnny and America that he had a quart of ice cream every night?

      1. I am told that steroids are a bit like speed. It is not just that your muscles recover so much faster. It is also that you get a lot of energy and you want to work out more. The people I have known who have used them tell me that you feel this really intense rush and you want to work out more than you ever have in your life.

        1. Yep. When your body is recovering that fast, it isn’t nearly as hard to force yourself to lift, run, whatever.

          1. Yes, that is what many guys who have juiced have told me.

    2. Olympic lifting is a sport. It takes years to perfect a cling and jerk and whatever the other lift they do. That is a ballet. Powerlifting is just monkeys lifting heavy shit. But Olympic weightlifting is a very highly skilled sport. Technique means a hell of a lot. I don’t care how strong you are, without proper technique you are never getting to that level.

      1. clean and jerk
        snatch

  18. I used to know some of the guys on the U S Olympic weightlifting team, many many moons ago. One of them was a superheavyweight who weighed about 325 pounds and could dunk a basketball two-handed from a standing start.

  19. only A-Rod is expected to appeal. The first baseman

  20. Cuba or Venezuela should offer A-Rod “asylum” to play in their national leagues until his suspension is over, just for shits and giggles.

    1. I am sure one of the independent leagues in the US would gladly take him. He would be good box office.

  21. The big story here is that Rodriguez apparently plays first base.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.