Does this Tejada mess change things for Raffy...?

[El Gordo]

No, we don't know if he tested positive in 2003. Congress had nothing to do with it initially. Those tests were supposed to be anonymous. Do you know the agreement reached between the Player's Union and MLB? Could Congress get access to those files? Most likely. But the fact of the matter is that we don't know who else is on that list. It wouldn't shock me one bit if Palmeiro is on there, and I think you're being a bit naive to positively say that he's not on that list.

I'm well aware of what you're saying regarding outmoding. It's not missing the point. It's looking at it from a bigger picture. Your rampant use of outmoded aside, Winstrol is still used today. MLB Players in 2003, 2004, and 2005 were failing tests for Winstrol. Palmeiro included. Why are you excluding him and ignoring the facts about Winstrol use in MLB? At the time use was rampant. As I said earlier, Deca is the one used more often, but Winstrol certainly found its fair share. Then you have the designer drugs from BALCO that guys like Palmeiro, Bonds, Clemens, and Canseco cocktailed with Winstrol.

Congress sought all records of Palmeiro's tests prior to his Congessional testimony. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9907E1D91F3FF937A3575BC0A9639C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all "In a statement, Davis and Waxman said they were seeking the results of Palmeiro's drug tests, the date of the tests and other information. The panel is interested in whether Palmeiro misled Congress and why it took so long -- about three months -- between the time Palmeiro's urine was tested and the announcement of a positive result.

Rob White, a spokesman for Davis, said the request was sent to baseball's representatives in Washington, seeking:

The results of all drug tests taken by Palmeiro, including the identity and level of all substances detected. "

I would assume that included the 2003 tests. The agreement between the Players Union amd MLB would not deter a Federal investigation. My use of the word out moded is not "rampant" I am merely quoting a Nationally recognized expert. Again by saying it is outmoded he was saying there were much better options available, in terms of avoiding detection, in 2004. Did you read the article by Welch Suggs I included in an earlier post?

[Frobby]

We need the other 103 names at this point. It's only fair to A-Rod that they all come out.

That is ridiculous. What would be fair to A-Rod would be for the Justice Department to investigate and determine who leaked the information about the test, and prosecute that person for violating the rules relating to confidentiality of information obtained pursuant to a criminal subpoena. Violating that rule as to the other 103 persons only compounds a wrongful act.

[El Gordo]

That is ridiculous. What would be fair to A-Rod would be for the Justice Department to investigate and determine who leaked the information about the test, and prosecute that person for violating the rules relating to confidentiality of information obtained pursuant to a criminal subpoena. Violating that rule as to the other 103 persons only compounds a wrongful act.

Question. Did the government order those records sealed after they seized them? The Government was not obligated to observe the confidentiality agreement between the Players Union and the MLB was it?

[jcroemer]

That is ridiculous. What would be fair to A-Rod would be for the Justice Department to investigate and determine who leaked the information about the test, and prosecute that person for violating the rules relating to confidentiality of information obtained pursuant to a criminal subpoena. Violating that rule as to the other 103 persons only compounds a wrongful act.

What's ridiculous is that there was a confidentiality agreement in the first place, in this case. MLB and MLBPA sohuld be intelligent enough to recognize that getting doping out of their industry should have been priority number one. They tiptoed and farted around long enough that Congress took up the cause.

What's compounding a wrongful act is that they were covering up for these dopers in the first place. Rules were broken to uncover rules being broken.

[LookitsPuck]

Congress sought all records of Palmeiro's tests prior to his Congessional testimony. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9907E1D91F3FF937A3575BC0A9639C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all "In a statement, Davis and Waxman said they were seeking the results of Palmeiro's drug tests, the date of the tests and other information. The panel is interested in whether Palmeiro misled Congress and why it took so long -- about three months -- between the time Palmeiro's urine was tested and the announcement of a positive result.

Rob White, a spokesman for Davis, said the request was sent to baseball's representatives in Washington, seeking:

The results of all drug tests taken by Palmeiro, including the identity and level of all substances detected. "

I would assume that included the 2003 tests. The agreement between the Players Union amd MLB would not deter a Federal investigation. My use of the word out moded is not "rampant" I am merely quoting a Nationally recognized expert. Again by saying it is outmoded he was saying there were much better options available, in terms of avoiding detection, in 2004. Did you read the article by Welch Suggs I included in an earlier post?

Yes, and it doesn't mean anything to me in the grand scheme of things. Did you read this from your own article?

Major League Baseball previously furnished the Congressional committee with the steroid test results from 2003 and 2004, the first two years when testing was conducted. But in each instance, no players were identified. The request for Palmeiro's records raises questions about the confidentiality that is supposed to cover all aspects of the testing, except for the announcement that a player has been suspended. Those announcements do not specify what substances led to a positive test or when the test occurred.

In another words: we just don't know. So you can't say definitively that Palmeiro isn't on the 2003 list.

Either way, you're campaigning that Palmeiro is innocent. I'm saying he's not. I also don't think it's outside the realm of absolute certainly that Palmeiro willingly took Winstrol with his failed test in 2005. As I said before, if MLB players are failing drug tests in 2003, 2004, and 2005 for use of Winstrol, and if big name guys like Barry Bonds, Jose Canseco, and Roger Clemens are using it in addition to designer steroids, then it doesn't matter what term you throw around about the steroid. Palmeiro failed a drug test. Canseco outted him as a steroid user back in his days with Texas. Larry Bigbie outted Palmeiro as inquiring about his steroids and HGH supplier. This isn't some massive conspiracy here, man. Winstrol was prevalent back in the day, no matter how many times you want to say its outmoded. That does not matter. One bit.

[El Gordo]

Yes, and it doesn't mean anything to me in the grand scheme of things. Did you read this from your own article?

In another words: we just don't know. So you can't say definitively that Palmeiro isn't on the 2003 list.

Either way, you're campaigning that Palmeiro is innocent. I'm saying he's not. I also don't think it's outside the realm of absolute certainly that Palmeiro willingly took Winstrol with his failed test in 2005. As I said before, if MLB players are failing drug tests in 2003, 2004, and 2005 for use of Winstrol, and if big name guys like Barry Bonds, Jose Canseco, and Roger Clemens are using it in addition to designer steroids, then it doesn't matter what term you throw around about the steroid. Palmeiro failed a drug test. Canseco outted him as a steroid user back in his days with Texas. Larry Bigbie outted Palmeiro as inquiring about his steroids and HGH supplier. This isn't some massive conspiracy here, man. Winstrol was prevalent back in the day, no matter how many times you want to say its outmoded. That does not matter. One bit.

Im not campaigning for anything or advocating conspiracy, I don't know were you get that? I'm simply offering an argument in logic. Using words like this and obsessing over the meaning of outmoded are examples of what I would call hyperbole in place of argument. As I see it there are several explanation for Palmeiro's positive test in 2005:

1)Palmeiro always used just easily detectable stanozolol, since Texas, never tested positive because he was lucky, or warned, lied to Congress, and was unlucky when he continued to do so afterwards. This I take it would be your argument.

2)Palmeiro never used steroids, did not lie to Congress, used stanozolol for the first time knowingly or unknowingly in spring of 2005. In this scenario it make more sense to me that the use was accidental. As he said himself, having never used before, it would be crazy to jepardize his career at that point.

3)Palmiero used sophisticted steroids or combinations of PED's, which were relatively undetectable, lied to Congress, but then for some unexplanable reason used just stanozolol in spring of 2005 and got caught. This IMO is the least likely explanation.

[LookitsPuck]

1)Palmeiro always used just easily detectable stanozolol, since Texas, never tested positive because he was lucky, or warned, lied to Congress, and was unlucky when he continued to do so afterwards. This I take it would be your argument.

Something like this. But:

1. Always used Winstrol (or off and on) as well as a myriad of others (the Cream, the Clear, maybe Deca, HGH, who knows)

2. He was with the Rangers up until 93, then from '99-'03. He used steroids with Canseco ('92-'94 Rangers) multiple times. Probably even when Canseco wasn't on the Rangers. Apparently players didn't just shoot up with players on their own team, although this was more common of an occurrence.

3. He never tested positive prior to 2005 because they only did steroid testing from 2003 and up. And 2003 wasn't used to penalize you, and it wouldn't go public. It was just used to determine if random testing should occur. So, we can't say he didn't test positive in 2003 as I said before.

4. He tested positive in 2005 because he didn't get tipped off or knew he was getting a drug test then. Winstrol has a relatively short time period in the body (depending on type: pill or injection). So it could have been 3 weeks in his system (short) or 2 months (relatively short compared to other drugs). It's always been a pretty potent steroid, and was definitely popular as can be seen in the numbers I posted earlier of positive tests in 2003, 2004, 2005. Not to mention the myriad of other athletes testing positive for it even up until recently...

Hell, put it this way, other players were tested positive for steroids and were ousted in the media from 2004 and up, and they weren't just the superstars. If they can screw up, so can Palmeiro. I don't in the least bit feel that Palmeiro is innocent.

[camdenyardbird]

None of this matters anyway. Palmiero was a RANGER at heart, he was never an Oriole (Have you ever heard him wax nostalgic about The Orioles like he does about The Rangers? NOPE). He only came back to The O's to cash in on some easy money. His name put B.I.T.S.(butts in the seats). PLEASE don't shed any tears for "Raffy". The guy was an oxygen thief and took up space at Camden Yards.

[El Gordo]

Something like this. But:

1. Always used Winstrol (or off and on) as well as a myriad of others (the Cream, the Clear, maybe Deca, HGH, who knows)

2. He was with the Rangers up until 93, then from '99-'03. He used steroids with Canseco ('92-'94 Rangers) multiple times. Probably even when Canseco wasn't on the Rangers. Apparently players didn't just shoot up with players on their own team, although this was more common of an occurrence.

3. He never tested positive prior to 2005 because they only did steroid testing from 2003 and up. And 2003 wasn't used to penalize you, and it wouldn't go public. It was just used to determine if random testing should occur. So, we can't say he didn't test positive in 2003 as I said before.

4. He tested positive in 2005 because he didn't get tipped off or knew he was getting a drug test then. Winstrol has a relatively short time period in the body (depending on type: pill or injection). So it could have been 3 weeks in his system (short) or 2 months (relatively short compared to other drugs). It's always been a pretty potent steroid, and was definitely popular as can be seen in the numbers I posted earlier of positive tests in 2003, 2004, 2005. Not to mention the myriad of other athletes testing positive for it even up until recently...

Hell, put it this way, other players were tested positive for steroids and were ousted in the media from 2004 and up, and they weren't just the superstars. If they can screw up, so can Palmeiro. I don't in the least bit feel that Palmeiro is innocent.

Other than Canseco's accusations, there is no evidence that he ever used steroids prior to 2005, just your conjecture. There is evidence that he didn't because Congress investigated him and found none. You have no evidence that Congress didn't get access to his 2003 results The confidentiality wouldn't have been an obstacle and they weren't anonymous, otherwise Arod wouldn't have been outed. He had to know he would be targeted for testing after his tesimony before Congress, so it would have been uncharacteristically reckless on his part to use them, especially an easily detctable steroid shortly thereafter.

[LookitsPuck]

It was leaked results that outted ARod. Do you not know that? Hell, Barry Bonds had his grand jury testimony leaked. If it didn't leak, the public would have never known.

And you have no idea whether Raffy is on that list from 2003. And neither do I.

All I know is Raffy failed his test, he's been outted by Canseco (as well as others, and they did steroids), and Bigbie has some stuff to say about Raffy as well.

[El Gordo]

It was leaked results that outted ARod. Do you not know that? Hell, Barry Bonds had his grand jury testimony leaked. If it didn't leak, the public would have never known.

And you have no idea whether Raffy is on that list from 2003. And neither do I.

All I know is Raffy failed his test, he's been outted by Canseco (as well as others, and they did steroids), and Bigbie has some stuff to say about Raffy as well.

Of course I knew that, why did you have to ask? But that's not the point. To say they were anonymous is to say names weren't attached to the samples, but they were.

I do have an idea that Raffy wasn't on the list, because Congress would have had access to those records(actually I remember reading something to that effect, but I can't find the source, it has been a few years, never mind I found it, here it is:http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/9980963/"There is no evidence that Rafael used steroids prior to his testimony to Congress in March. He took previously undisclosed drug tests in 2003 and 2004, and tested negative for steroids on both occasions.") and they found nothing. Also they questioned others about it as well. Sorry, but Canseco and Bigbie don't hold much water with me with out corroborating evidence. Edit: Here I found the source: There is no evidence that Rafael used steroids prior to his testimony to Congress in March. He took previously undisclosed drug tests in 2003 and 2004, and tested negative for steroids on both occasions. " http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/9980963/

[LookitsPuck]

The reason why I had to ask, is because you brought up ARod in this manner:

The confidentiality wouldn't have been an obstacle and they weren't anonymous, otherwise Arod wouldn't have been outed.

It was anonymous. There was an agreement. A few sources came out and said it. It was supposed to be anonymous. But much in the same vain as grand jury testimony a la Bonds, people are not trustworthy...so ARod got screwed.

The 2003 and 2004 tests, what tests were they? Was the 2003 test the infamous one that was leaked in regards to ARod? Or other tests? We don't know. We don't know if Raffy got tipped off in regards to steroid testing and finally it came back to bite him in 2005.

And you can choose not to believe Canseco, but home slice has been right about everyone he's outted: McGwire, Giambi, Tejada, Ivan Rodriguez, Alex Rodriguez, and another host of others. That's your prerogative.

Put it this way, if Palmeiro was innocent, he'd be doing everything in his power to clear his name. A Hall of Famer wouldn't put up with being completely slighted by MLB and its fans if he wasn't guilty. He failed a drug test, Canseco outted him, Bigbie outted him, and he's not exactly making a decent attempt to clear his name.

[El Gordo]

The reason why I had to ask, is because you brought up ARod in this manner:

It was anonymous. There was an agreement. A few sources came out and said it. It was supposed to be anonymous. But much in the same vain as grand jury testimony a la Bonds, people are not trustworthy...so ARod got screwed.

The 2003 and 2004 tests, what tests were they? Was the 2003 test the infamous one that was leaked in regards to ARod? Or other tests? We don't know. We don't know if Raffy got tipped off in regards to steroid testing and finally it came back to bite him in 2005.

And you can choose not to believe Canseco, but home slice has been right about everyone he's outted: McGwire, Giambi, Tejada, Ivan Rodriguez, Alex Rodriguez, and another host of others. That's your prerogative.

Put it this way, if Palmeiro was innocent, he'd be doing everything in his power to clear his name. A Hall of Famer wouldn't put up with being completely slighted by MLB and its fans if he wasn't guilty. He failed a drug test, Canseco outted him, Bigbie outted him, and he's not exactly making a decent attempt to clear his name.

I think you are confusing anonymous with confidential. There was an agreement of confidentiality, but as I said in my previous post and you must have missed;"To say they were anonymous is to say names weren't attached to the samples, but they were." If the test results were to remain anonymous they would have just numbered them and never attached names to them. There were no other tests in 2003 save the one agreed to by the MLB and the MLBPA. The 2003 test was a survey to ascertain the prevalence of steroid use and thus see if a full scale testing program was required. Hard to believe you don't know this.

[LookitsPuck]

Sorry, confidential..anonymous. You know what I'm driving at here, though. I'm well aware of the 2003 test being confidential and used to determine full scale testing. Hell, I brought it up like a million times in this thread. Please don't try to even push that crap on me that I don't know this.

Instead of playing semantics, how about you tackle my argument? Hell, you completely walked away from the stats regarding 2003, 2004, and 2005 all the players testing positive for the steroid that you say is outmoded, and somehow Palmeiro is above those players. And you completely write off Canseco and Bigbie. And the test he failed, because you think it was spiked. Just say it. You think Palmeiro is innocent, else I have no idea what you're trying to argue...in case you're just arguing for the hell of it.

Oh, fwiw, ultimately drug tests have a certain level of anonymity to them. I was in the pharmacy business for 4 years while in college, and talked to a few pharmacists who worked drug testing, and the level of security is pretty ridiculous, especially for doping testing. But it certainly depends. A lot of places use strictly numbers when associating people. I hate to keep referencing it, but read Game of Shadows and the doping organization they use for testing Olympic athletes as well as guys like Bonds. Hell, the ARod situation could be that a person who was intimate with the testing was shocked that ARod tested positive, and said something to someone. And here we are now. We don't know how that happened.

[El Gordo]

Sorry, confidential..anonymous. You know what I'm driving at here, though. I'm well aware of the 2003 test being confidential and used to determine full scale testing. Hell, I brought it up like a million times in this thread. Please don't try to even push that crap on me that I don't know this.

Instead of playing semantics, how about you tackle my argument? Hell, you completely walked away from the stats regarding 2003, 2004, and 2005 all the players testing positive for the steroid that you say is outmoded, and somehow Palmeiro is above those players. And you completely write off Canseco and Bigbie. And the test he failed, because you think it was spiked. Just say it. You think Palmeiro is innocent, else I have no idea what you're trying to argue...in case you're just arguing for the hell of it.

Oh, fwiw, ultimately drug tests have a certain level of anonymity to them. I was in the pharmacy business for 4 years while in college, and talked to a few pharmacists who worked drug testing, and the level of security is pretty ridiculous, especially for doping testing. But it certainly depends. A lot of places use strictly numbers when associating people. I hate to keep referencing it, but read Game of Shadows and the doping organization they use for testing Olympic athletes as well as guys like Bonds. Hell, the ARod situation could be that a person who was intimate with the testing was shocked that ARod tested positive, and said something to someone. And here we are now. We don't know how that happened.

If this is true why would you suggest there were more than one test in 2003? Confidential/anonymous? I don't know what you are driving at here. You said the tests were anonymous. If that were true the samples would have simply been numbered and it would have been impossible for anyone to leak results for specific players. I have tried to address your "arguments", but I am not sure you really read and comprehend my posts. I have laid out a simple logical line of questioning of the conclusion that Raffy intentionally used steroids. I have tried to demonstrate why it doesn't make sense to me, for him to be that self destructive, regardless of whether he used steroids prior or not. I am not trying to change your mind. I doubt that could ever be possible.