[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm still hoping I can get someone to respond from the "This record is steroid-enhanced" camp to clarify that statement a bit. It is one of those comments that seems logical and rational if you only think about it for like ten seconds, but is actually incredibly stupid and incorrect when you think about it for eleven or more. I hear it a lot with regards to modern equipment and weight training, and it is just as stupid there.

This record was not steroid-enhanced. It might be tainted, because thats a subjective, public opinion type deal, but it wasn't enhanced.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand what you are saying.

Steroids absolutely enhance the effectiveness of the home run hitter. Are you seriously disputing THAT?

And please, don't trot out the strawman "Steroids don't help you connect with the baseball," because no one's ever claimed that they do. They just make the ball go farther and faster when you connect.

Also, weight training and superior nutrition are not against the rules, which is how sentient beings distinguish between them and steroids on the culpability scale.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't get the point. The only way you can make the argument that this record is steroid-enhanced is if you somehow believe ONLY Barry, or at least Barry and a very small minority of other players, are on steroids. This is obviously ridiculous, and is just as silly as claiming Bonds never juiced.

The point of the weight lifting comparison is that people also foolishly list weight-training and workout regimens as an added benefit that todays player has. What they forget is that this added benefit helps ALL players, hitters, pitchers, everyone, so it isn't an individual benefit. Barry may have been aided by steroids, but so were most of the pitchers he faced. Why do they help him more than hurt him?

The record is small-park-enhanced, its nature-of-todays-game-enhanced, its small-modern-strikezone-enhanced, but it is NOT steroid-enhanced. Its neutral with regards to steroids.