That’s not really true. We don’t know who the experts that the defense used are (if they used any) so we can’t really say these people are meaningless. For all we know, they could be leaders in their fields. Sure they could be quacks but we can’t just assume that. Essentially this is what you are doing. Also, it’s not like this would be the first time that an athlete used science to prove innocence. As others have provided this link:

http://www.open.edu/openlearn/whats-on/ou-on-the-bbc-background-brief-testing-the-best-the-story-so-far

“The vast majority of scientific opinion and indeed practice of world athletics (including MLB Players association) are solid in their belief of the accuracy and reliability of the test……After all their are experts who believe in creationism, vaccinations cause autism or drinking herbal tea will cure cancer”

Again without knowing who the experts are we can’t really say they are quacks right? After all many scientific discoveries that made it into biology and science textbooks are being refined and in some cases even questioned with sound experimental evidence. It wouldn’t be unheard of for two sound scientific studies to conflict. Go explore primary literature and it’s all over the place. Sound scientific evidence can be sound and still disagree.

Having an open mind means that there CAN be other possibilities that, as long as they are supported with sound evidence. Having an open mind that your brain falls out is believing things that aren’t based in fact or tested scientifically (in this case).

We don’t know how true anything we hear is. He could be 100% guilty or he could be 100% innocent. Until we know, we can’t make any decisions and we can’t just equate experts on any side as quacks.

If that is what Das based his decision on, I would think he made the wong decision. But, I don’t know what he based his decision on so I’m not going to speculate.

I had never taken the time to look at the lab’s website. Thanks for the information. I also never said they made a mistake. I feel like I was pretty clear on that, too. I only allowed for the possibility.

You insinuated that I was ignoring parts of the story to fit my narrative, which I wasn’t. Plus, the manner in which you stated it was very condescending. I don’t know if that was your intention, but it is how it came across. If that wasn’t the intention – I get it. Tone often gets lost in this medium.

And the “asshole switch” thing was an acknowledgement of jokes I made that made me seem like an asshole. I wanted to make the reading minds jokes, but knew that they would come across a certain way. I was just recognizing that. If you were offended, my apologies.

Here is the official documentation of MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL’S JOINT DRUG PREVENTION AND TREATMENT PROGRAM http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/jda.pdf “Absent unusual circumstances, the specimens should be sent by FedEx to the Laboratory on the same day they are collected.” The only argument I can see it the Arbiter didn’t think the samples sitting in a Fed Ex location for 2 days would count as “unusual circumstances.” And yet the same document allows for just such a delay “If the specimen is not immediately prepared for shipment, the Collector shall ensure that it is appropriately safeguarded during temporary storage.” This is crucial: There is no 24 hour requirement for shipping. The document says “should” not “must be” and, as shown, it allows for delay.

Let me ask you this… If this is what the Arbiter is hanging his hat on to dismiss this case, do you personally accept his logic?

Here is the labs site http://www.cdtsolutions.com/testing_collectionsoverview.html The labs evidence handling procedures, involving checks and balances, have been well documented in various cases and no one has questioned their validity here, not even Braun. Braun has never contested the sample’s identity. It’s his. Braun has never contested the seals placed on the samples. They were intact, and thus the samples were untampered with.

FWIW: Asking me not to talk down to you while turning off and on your self proclaimed “asshole switch” seems disingenuous to me. But I am sorry if I came off as pedantic. I will try to be better.

Can anyone be found guilty of any wrongdoing in this country anymore and simply own up to it?

You are free to believe whatever you like. Just don’t talk down to people that want more information before making a decision. You know what logic and reason tell me? That I don’t have enough information to say one way or the other and neither do you.

I will admit that, gun to my head, I would say Braun used, but that isn’t going to happen so I can wait.

So it seems to me that you think testosterone is this magic drug that within 24 hours will make someone perform significantly better than another player. I’m not arguing about the medical effects that testosterone has on people. But two things

1) I asked for a primary article to back up your claims. That means not Wikipedia. Wikipedia isn’t always right and has a LOT of misinformation. This statement doesn’t mean that those effects listed on Wikipedia are wrong, but my guess is that there is a LOT more physiological things that go into establishing those connections and it’s not quite as simple as those things you pasted directly from Wikipedia.

2) More to the point of testosterone and steroids, it has never been shown how much better they make players. Does taking steroids result in an extra 10 HR or 1HR? They don’t improve swing paths, throwing motions, baseball instincts though. I’m not saying they don’t help, but I’m saying that their effect is probably overblown

(Ed Note: This post is not intended to be read as support for Braun)

” Two of testosterone’s effects are: 1) mental and physical energy (boy would that help in a playoff game) a”

- There are lots of things that give people mental and physical energy. Caffeine is legal right? That has an effect on energy levels. Natural sugars can also have a short term effect on energy levels.

“maintenance of muscle trophism (nothing quite like having those tired muscles rejuvenated after a tough game the night before).”

- Do you know what trophism means? It means, loosely, that the muscles still have nerves, blood supply etc to maitin their function (so they don’t atrophy).

It seems to me that you think testosterone is a magic drug

1. I understand why people feel the need to attack Braun’s credibility, or atr the very least find his account less than credible. At the same time, I’m not sure why the collector’s credibility is taken for granted. His resume is nice, but it’s about as relevant to the debate as Braun saying he never failed a test before. Everything else in his statement may well be true, but it was not enough for the one independant party who has heard all the facts to rule against Braun’s appeal. Obviously, we don’t have Das’ final opinion, so we don’t know whom he found credible or the specific reason he believed the process failed.

2. I understand that people believe Braun is guilty based on the fact that the test was positive, but until Das’ written ruling is made public, that is a conclusion built on quicksand. As I’ve said before, if the process is invalid, then so is the test result. It doesn’t matter if the test revealed that Braun’s DNA was engineered by Dr. Mindbender in an effort to create a new Cobra leader — the result is non-existent. Now, that doesn’t mean squat in the court of public opinion, but we still don’t know what the alleged test result said. So it’s all conjecture based on incomplete information; in other words, it’s approximately as credible as a statement by any politician.

3. I still submit that a billion-dollar industry needs a better set of protocols for something so many people consider important to the integrity of the game. It is not that difficult to arrange for a truly secure storage facility or a trusted courier when the lab is closed for the weekend or Fed Ex is no longer open. Seriously, you’re storing the guy’s urine in a Rubbermaid container over the weekend in the courier’s basement office (which has presumably not been examined to verify his claim that it is “sufficiently cool” to store the samples), and the defense is, “we’ve always done it this way”? we’re talking about someone’s good name, livelihood, and millions of dollars, and this is the protocol deemed sufficient? I’m assuming the union and MLB didn’t agree on something this moronic in the CBA, instead leaving the specifics to be determined later. The fact that the specifics were seemingly developed with an eye toward practicality is fine, but it leaves open the door to claims that the procedures were insufficient.

4. I think the leaks, wherever they came from, are reprehensible but to be expected. I don’t know who leaked it, and I’m not sure I care. MLB seems to leak like a sieve on this stuff when the test result involves a big name player, and neither they nor the union have spent time figuring a way to effectively deter leaks. And the name of the collector was almost certain to become public once Braun was cleared on process grounds. That’s not really fair to him, but again, no one seems interested in implementing procedures designed to prevent this.

Fact is Braun’s “statement” doesn’t really conflict with anything the collector said. Except that he also insinuated that the collector was suspicious for unknown reasons. Braun has been purposefully vague in his language when it comes to specifics in the case. The collector was over the top specific in his. I wonder who’s afraid of legal action?

if the lab made a mistake and admitted it, they might suffer a small hit, but if they admitted it would establish trust. If they lied about it the business goes away, plain and simple. Their business is about truth in process. One lie destroys all credibility.

You can ignore the undisputed fact that there are checks and balances in the system to report the slightest mistake and that the system has been used on many occasions to do just that. You can ignore the undisputed fact multiple witnesses have verified the collectors story. You can ignore the undisputed fact the triple sealed and signed off by Braun himself sample came up positive. And you can believe the rumors and innuendo (no facts) the Braun camp has spread in the media without any verification. Bonds, Clemens, Palmiero, Sosa, McGuire, etc… all totally innocent by similar standards. That is your right.

If the Arbiter’s report counters those facts in a reasonable way I will come back here and admit my mistake, but logic and reason tells me that won’t be the case.

Thanks for the discussion. Talk to you in a couple of weeks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone

The link details testosterone’s effects on humans in general and males in particular. Do you seriously think that testosterone has no affect on performance? Two of testosterone’s effects are: 1) mental and physical energy (boy would that help in a playoff game) and 2) maintenance of muscle trophism (nothing quite like having those tired muscles rejuvenated after a tough game the night before).

You use the name of the best pitcher of my 81 year old lifetime, and I certainly resent your childish and horribly biased comments. Since you won’t change your thinking, how about dropping the Koufax from your posts? Thank you for your consideration.

Got your response, just thought you were calling the scenario shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit…. though I think that is an apt description of much of the Braun reporting

I think the generally accepted definition of that phrase is when someone avoids penalty by winning on anything except the merits. It could be a lot of things, and one of them is a procedural defect. Braun isn’t getting off because it wasn’t found to be his urine. He’s not getting off because he was found to have not had anything wrong with his urine. He’s not even getting off because there was a problem with his urine found. He’s getting off, apparently, because the arbitrator has found that, in his opinion, the standard operating procedure in drug testing does not match the CBA.

That, my friends, is a technicality.

I’m well aware the lab isn’t one person. But, I don’t think they would admit a mistake for the same reason you don’t think they would cover it up. It would hurt their reputation no matter what. Once again, I don’t think the lab made a mistake, but I would be very surprised for them to come out and say it.

I also am not making any assumptions about the sample being more secure no matter if it was stored in a basement or a Fed Ex location. I’m waiting for more information to form an opinion on weather I believe that Braun took a PED or not. I, personally, think this is the best way to go in this situation because I we don’t know enough undisputed facts.

I’m also very interested in the arbiter’s report. I am curious on what facts he based his report on.

What part of my scenario is not possible or at odds with the facts?

Why would you assume the lab wouldn’t admit to a mistake? They actually have a process in place to admit when mistakes are made. The “lab” isn’t one person, your talking multiple people witnessing a cover up, one that would surely destroy the company if it were to leak.. With as many cross checks as are required in this process, too many people would know the lie was being spread to keep it under wraps.

I’m very interested in the arbiter’s statement. He has a LOT of factual evidence to counter if he’s to come out of this unscathed. I don’t see how it’s possible at this point but I will give his statement the same rational examination as the rest of the facts.

Now that it has come out that the guy finished up around 5:00 (and this is easily verifiable through park security cameras). So, if using FedEx (which is the carrier stipulated in the agreement), the soonest it could have gotten to the lab is Tuesday.

So do you think that a drop box is a better (more secure) location to leave the sample of a private residence?

Again, this is all easily verifiable information that shoots down yet another lie out of the Braun camp.

Carry on….

1) Great name
2) Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit – This is an appropriate response, right?

It really is true, though, that some people will argue anything, just to be making noise. Semantic arguments, rumor arguments, verb tense arguments, argue, argue, argue. All of it based on a ridiculously incomplete information set. Oy.

Again, you don’t have enough information to say that MLB would win any type of lawsuit to overturn the decision. We have information from three sources. All three have a lot to lose. The only person who really has nothing to lose is the arbitrator. We’ll see his reasons for his ruling sometime in the future. Even after that we may not have enough information to say that any party could win a lawsuit.

Your opinion seems to be that Braun took PED’s and got away with it (correct me if I’m wrong). You are entitled to that opinion. But that’s all it is at this point, your opinion. I don’t know if I agree with that opinion or not. I don’t have enough information from less biased sources to feel like I can form one, right now. I really only took issue with you saying that MLB would for sure win a lawsuit. That is as far from a fact as you can get.