lol agame

Wouldn't it already be in a special, sealed package from the beginning? Was it in a dixie cup covered with saran wrap for awhile?

<--------owned

After HU4ROLLZ, IQTEST4ROLLZ and WIFFLEBALL4ROLLZ, here comes PSYCHEVALUATION4ROLLZ. AGame stepping his game up, I like it.

All of this exactly. Both sides agreed on the arbitrators and both sides must stand by the decision.

More importantly is the last line of your post. It sucks this got leaked. Changed everything.. If the test results can be repeated there are a lot of people who need to own up and apologize.

Also http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...raun-ped-case/

Just some more food for thought here, however as I said before if the result can be replicated I don't see how he can be suspended at all.

except this time, they started it!

lolz o no, pls don't think i'm a bad poster. sorry i missed your 5 min deadline, but sure, i'll tell you where your missing the boat.

this is not evidence. "officer, i've been pulled over 25 times and i've never been caught driving drunk. your breathalyzer MUST be broken"

side note here, braun gained 15 lbs last offseason. maaaaybe that's natural, but it certainly hints he was using for the first time. (i told my wife i was suspicious the first game i went to last april)

in today's designer steroid era, this means absolutely nothing. new steroids can be flushed from your system in days.

he was tested in october. the story didn't come out till december. the appeal process had already been started. he absolutely DID know about the improper protocol when the news surfaced. it's 100% for sure that you're wrong on this point.

again, with today's designer steroids, this isn't even a little bit surprising. (assume he WAS guilty. would you really be surprised that he's taking really good ****?)

who would tamper with this sample and why? take off your tin foil hat...
i'll certainly admit that i don't know how a urine sample would be affected by sitting for 2 days. i doubt you do either.

bottom line is that there is a non-zero chance that braun wasn't using and the test (both A and B samples) were false positives. but it's quite a strech. it's certainly much much more likely that he was using and got off on a technicality. which is why the arbiter said the appeal was overturned b/c of the chain of custody, NOT b/c of a false positive.

you have 5 min to respond or i win

It's not REALLY a panel of independent arbitrators. One member is from the MLBPA, one is from MLB. They are almost always going to rule along party lines (which is really stupid, since an MLBPA rep shouldn't rule a player is innocent if he's obviously guilty and an MLB rep shouldn't want a player to be guilty just to protect MLB's testing process). So, really, it's one independent arbitrator, but your point remains valid.

And you're right about the results being leaked. MLB handled his so, so, so badly.

There's another guy on the same board I referenced earlier who knows A LOT about drug testing. I forget his background, but I believe he works in the field or general lab testing of some sort - he's provided board members a great education on the process, what T:E ratios are, etc. Here's one thing he said:
Also, Will Carroll has written a story with more info/detail and is just waiting for SI to publish it. popcorn.gif.

See, you're making a definitive statement to help prove your point, which is not the point of my statement and not fair as an assessment. OF COURSE the fact that someone who tested clean 25 times isn't PROOF that he's clean, just like being pulled over 25 times and always being sober isn't PROOF that you're sober the 26th time, but it's also NOT IRRELEVANT information.

If I meant it to be the opposite definitive statement of yours, i.e. "he's always been clean before so he's clearly clean now too," then I would've stopped there and I wouldn't have more things to comment on below. It's just one piece of information on a long list of information.

There is a reason why if you are a convicted felon, and I am trying to have you thrown in jail for robbing my store, my attorney would point out your priors to the jury. It makes you less credible and more likely to be guilty again. Well, the opposite is also true.
link?

I admittedly don't know enough about steroids to agree it means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, though I agree that it seems highly likely it means very close to nothing. But again, if there's even a 1% chance that it does mean something (as in certain types of steroids would stay in your system for longer lengths of time) then it seems silly for me not to include that in a list of facts.
Although, was it not noted that he took a banned substance, not a steroid?


Again, it's quite possible I am, but I'm going to make an educated guess that you have no proof I'm wrong. I shouldn't have said "almost for sure" because that's not true, but it's very far from zero percent.


Again, I was under the impression it wasn't steroids that "he took," but assuming it was, then yes, I would be surprised. His T/E ratio was supposedly more than double anyone ever tested, that is indeed, very surprising. I think it's more of a reason to think something was out of whack, or tampered with (perhaps even incidentally but who knows), and clearly the arbitrator agreed.


Maybe it was a Cards fan! I'm only half-joking. Of course I don't know how or why someone would do it but to suggest it clearly wasn't tampered with is ridiculous. I'm not saying it clearly was, or even that it more than likely was, but it's a nonzero chance, and we can just throw it on the list of evidence.

Yea, I don't agree. I think all the evidence creates much more than even normal reasonable doubt. I have no idea of percentages, but I'd have no problem saying that I think it's quite likely a false positive. Btw, what A and B samples? AFAIK there was only one sample.

And, an important point of clarification, the ARBITRATOR never said anything to the public about why he ruled in favor of Braun. Analysts and fans have decided on the technicality aspect after hearing the evidence Braun's representatives supposedly used at the hearing.

dude all the "evidence" you're talking about is like 0.05% stuff. a whole lot of circumstances would have to line up perfectly for your scenario to be plausible. all these points you're trying to make are insignificant on their own. adding them all up doesn't make a case.

sorry i'm not gonna provide a link to his weight. it was common knowledge that he gained weight, beyond the fact that my seats are in left field and i could visibly see his thighs were much bigger.

what CAN'T be argued is that mlb messed up their procedures and that's why he's getting off. it does not and can not prove his innocence. its far more likely he's guilty.

lots of mad sports writers this morning

reading FTL