Cocaine's a helluva drug?

will this never end?

How many pitchers do you think he ended their careers by hitting numbers of home runs off them?

Besides Brad Lidge?

That must be why so few people hit home runs off Fergie.

I'm weary of this tacit notion in the mainstream press that only hitters benefited from the "steroids era." I don't know that anyone benefited to any meaningful extent (although I some probably did), but where's the hand-wringing over how many home runs Clemens and Pettitte deprived hitters of?

Now we've got to listen to sermons from the cokehead?

Swell.

I want Ferguson Jenkins to apologize for being a dirty, moose-sniffing Canadian.

For a more eloquent, nuanced take on this whole mess by an ex-ballplayer, without the righteous indignation, I urge to read Doug Glanville's take.

Seriously. It's the best take I've read on this whole sorry mess.

“He wasn’t going to stay in hiding the rest of his life. Why did it take five years? Why didn’t he come clean as soon as he quit?” Jenkins said. “They’ll be a lot of pressure put on him by a lot more reporters come spring training.”

It won't surprise me if McGwire is going to have to quit as hitting coach before pitchers and catchers report. This shows no sign of dying down.

If my memory serves me correctly, the reason McGwire delayed saying anything between the hearings and now was that he was afraid the Congressional Committee could 'get' him for perjury or something prior to this year. He said something along those lines in the Costas interview.

Seriously. It's the best take I've read on this whole sorry mess.

Glanville is awesome, so I was prepared to post that to give it its own thread, but... after reading, I don't see where it says much of anything new at all in my opinion. It's a pretty standard and specific stance we've already seen a lot of. It's not histrionic and it is thoughtful, but I was hoping for more somehow from Glanville. He may have been hurt in my mind by the standards he's already set for himself.

I'm weary of this tacit notion in the mainstream press that only hitters benefited from the "steroids era." I don't know that anyone benefited to any meaningful extent (although I some probably did), but where's the hand-wringing over how many home runs Clemens and Pettitte deprived hitters of?

Every once in a while, I like to post the fact that Barry Bonds' 755th home run was hit off a pitcher who'd already served a suspension for using steroids. Just one small but adorable facet of the glittering jewel that iswas "the Steroid Era."

“It’s tough to hit a home run off your back,” Jenkins said. “In my era, Seaver, Gibson, Drysdale, Carlton, there were so many guys that would have probably knocked him on his butt. He wouldn’t have hit home runs the way he did in that era.”

Hmm, I'm not sure if it would be the suspensions Fergie would have faced for repeatedly throwing at batters, the threat of a bulked up hitter charging the mound and kicking the #### out of him, or the likelihood that Jenkins would have been using himself that puts the lie to his statement.

Glanville is awesome, so I was prepared to post that to give it its own thread, but... after reading, I don't see where it says much of anything new at all in my opinion. It's a pretty standard and specific stance we've already seen a lot of. It's not histrionic and it is thoughtful, but I was hoping for more somehow from Glanville. He may have been hurt in my mind by the standards he's already set for himself.

"Entertaining, but contrived" is a punchy, literate, and accurate coda.

I'm a big Fergie fan. I know it's fun to tag him with the cocaine rap, but I thought all charges were dropped and that it was well-accepted that he had not done anything wrong. (Admittedly, I am not sure about this.)

I don't remember Fergie being a head-hunter at all. He barely nicked the guys who hit the most HR off him.

Player HR hit off Fergie
Fergie HBP
Tony Perez 8 0
John Mayberry 6 0
Don Money 6 0
Tommie Agee 6 0
Roberto Clemente6 0
Richie Hebner 5 0
Jim Ray Hart 5 0
Bobby Bonds 5 2
Joe Torre 5 2
Lee May 5 0
Bob Bailey 5 0
Graig Nettles 5 0

Glanville's usually better than this.

Pitchers get off way too easy with PED's. As noticeable as the shrunken batters are, the numbers of middle relievers that no longer throw in the mid-90's have gone down dramatically as well.

Glanville's take is indeed interesting. FWIW, HR distance measurement had not reached the sophistication of Hit Tracker in the 1990s, but my 1998 Stats Baseball Scoreboard book lists the longest 1997 homers by distance- it reads "McGwire 540@Seattle, Galarraga 530@Florida, McGwire 520@St. Louis, McGwire 500@Florida, McGwire 500@St. Louis...". After that, you get a lot of Colorado homers (of course, including many by McGwire).

For a more eloquent, nuanced take on this whole mess by an ex-ballplayer, without the righteous indignation, I urge to read Doug Glanville's take.

I have to agree---Glanville refrains from Fiskian levels of moralizing and yet still calls a spade a spade. And I second SBB's comment that "'Entertaining, but contrived' is a punchy, literate, and accurate coda."

Glanville is awesome, so I was prepared to post that to give it its own thread, but... after reading, I don't see where it says much of anything new at all in my opinion. It's a pretty standard and specific stance we've already seen a lot of.

I don't recall any other players who claim to have played the game without PEDs who critically admit that their silence was as self-centered and career-driven as those who took PEDs. As Glanville said,

Yet the “race for the record” was smoke and mirrors, and I probably knew that when it was happening. But like many others, I didn’t really know how to deal with it because it was ruinous to our game — to my profession — and I was in self-centered career-survival mode, looking after many other things in my own life.

I don't recall any other players who claim to have played the game without PEDs who critically admit that their silence was as self-centered and career-driven as those who took PEDs. As Glanville said,

Yet the “race for the record” was smoke and mirrors, and I probably knew that when it was happening. But like many others, I didn’t really know how to deal with it because it was ruinous to our game — to my profession — and I was in self-centered career-survival mode, looking after many other things in my own life.

That was a great quote by Glanville. Here's a marginal Major Leaguer who knows that the juicers are getting an edge over him, and possibly even pushing him below that 25th roster spot. And yet beyond a natural reluctance to be a rat, he also is aware that on another level he's benefiting from a kind of trickle-down theory: Some of the extra money that comes from "growing the game" by means of steroid-aided home run spectacles eventually trickles down to players like him. I'm sure that many other players shared that sort of dual awareness, but this is the first time I've ever seen it put that way on paper.

[T]he numbers of middle relievers that no longer throw in the mid-90's have gone down dramatically as well.

So steroids make your velocity decrease?

the threat of a bulked up hitter charging the mound and kicking the #### out of him

I don't think there's but half-a-dozen guys in MLB who can fight any better than a schoolgirl, steroids or no. Pumping iron isn't a form of self-defense unless you can clobber someone with your dumbell.

How many pitchers do you think he ended their careers by hitting numbers of home runs off them?

Besides Brad Lidge?

It was Pujols, not Mac, who KO'd Lidge.

Hey Yankee Redneck, from one "neck" to another, who's baseball's best practitioner of the manly art of fistiana? The young Billy Martin? Nolan Ryan in the freestyle division? And what was Art Shires' real speed?

Pumping iron isn't a form of self-defense

This is not completely true, of course. Mass alone, particularly muscle mass, is very good self-defense. Certainly we note this almost every time a domestic violence incident occurs. And there are weight classes in fighting for a reason.

“How many pitchers do you think he ended their careers by hitting numbers of home runs off them?” Jenkins said during a telephone interview Wednesday.

I would say none.

McGwire hit 4 or more home runs off of 25 pitchers (see list below) in his career. Most of them had rather long careers and the numbers McGwire put up against them made no difference at all. The one possible exception might be Eric King, who threw 863.33 innings in the American League (Det, Chi, Cle) from 1986-1992.

Off of all batters he faced, King gave up 73 home runs (in 3,688 PA). McGwire hit 5 of those home runs (in 28 PA). For King's career, opposition batters had a batting average of .249, on-base .322, slugging avg. .365 and OPS .687. If you subtract out McGwire's line (.259/.286/.815), King's career becomes: BA .249; OBP .322; SLG .361; and OPS .683.

In other words, McGwire made no difference. Without McGwire, King's opponents' batting average does not change, on-base pct. does not change, slugging falls by .004 and OPS falls by .004.


*7- Frank Tanana
6 - Jim Abbott
5 - Brian Bohanon, Ron Villone, Livan Hernandez, Andy Ashby, Orel Hershiser, Eric King, Alex Fernandez, Scott Erickson, Tom Gordon and Mark Langston
4 - Kevin Gross, Scott Kamieniecki, Curt Schilling, Jose Lima, Pedro Astacio, Jason Bere, Charlie Leibrandt, Greg Harris, Kenny Rogers, Scott Karl, Mike Boddicker, Jack McDowell and Kevin Tapani**

** Little known fact: Kevin's great-great grandfather (on his dad's side) was the first doctor to come up with the test for involuntary reflex action of the patellar plexus nerve. After he did that, he was known as Dr. Tap-a-knee.

Pitchers get off way too easy with PED's.

Part of the problem seems to be the near idolatry accorded to home run records by so many fans. But I think a large part of the problem is also that the main stream media much prefers stories that can be summed up in nice, simple sentences. Steroid Era = large behemoths hitting mammoth home runs. Adding pitchers to the equation means having to tell a much more complex story, something that the MSM does not do. I think that is also why you so rarely hear the MSM mention "steroid cheats" such as Alex Sanchez, he of the six lifetime homeruns. Incorporating pitchers, plus players like Sanchez into the narrative complicates the storyline, and reporting issues in all their complexity (regardless of the topic) is something the MSM avoids at all costs.

The glaring exception to the above, of course, is Roger Clemens. The only explanation I can give in this regard is that:

1) Clemens ardent pursuit of clearing his name has made his story impossible to ignore; and

2) Nobody ever really liked Roger anyway.

While I'm on the subject of pitchers getting off easy [ed. - gee, that sounds all wrong], I'd also like to add that it's not just PEDs. For whatever reason, very few people seem to have a real problem with pitchers who cheated during their playing days, and have openly admitted to cheating. There is no groundswell to kick Whitey Ford out of the Hall of Fame. Gaylord Perry wrote "Me And the Spitter" while he was still pitching, and everyone just had a good laugh (well, most everyone). It would be a fascinating study to learn exactly why so many fans who scream "Cheater" at PED using hitters have seemingly no problem with pitchers doctoring the ball to get into the HoF. At least, in my humble opinion.

DB

“It’s tough to hit a home run off your back,” Jenkins said. “In my era, Seaver, Gibson, Drysdale, Carlton, there were so many guys that would have probably knocked him on his butt. He wouldn’t have hit home runs the way he did in that era.”

At least 4 of the 5 pitchers that appear in this sentence used drugs.

Steve Carlton-Greenies
Jenkins-Cocaine
Gibson-was popping pain meds during the World Series
Seaver-At the very least greenies
Drysdale-Wasn't he a ball defacer?

Hey Yankee Redneck, from one "neck" to another, who's baseball's best practitioner of the manly art of fistiana?

John L Sullivan, who pitched one exhibition game for the Giants in the 1880s.

On a global scale, my guess is these are the three most famous people named Fergie in the history of the world:

1. The Duchess.
2. The singer.
3. The Ranger.

The talk show host, Craig Ferguson, would be No. 3. Wikipedia lists him among the people called Fergie. However, I have never heard anyone refer to Craig as Fergie, so he does not crack the top 3.

John L Sullivan, who pitched one exhibition game for the Giants in the 1880s.

Awww, you know what I mean. As a Yankee fan, I'm pulling for the young Billy Martin. Not to be confused with the 50-something version.

---------------------

It would be a fascinating study to learn exactly why so many fans who scream "Cheater" at PED using hitters have seemingly no problem with pitchers doctoring the ball to get into the HoF. At least, in my humble opinion.

DB

I guess it's because the hitters seem to have every other advantage handed to them on a silver platter: Rabbit baseballs, shrunken outfield dimensions, and a strike zone the size of a postage stamp. And although this is dismissed by those who have a "cheating is cheating" mentality, ball scuffing and ball sliming really are a longstanding (if not exactly noble) baseball tradition.

And of course if the pitcher is a vegetarian, that makes it all the cleaner, since no animals would have been harmed in producing the product in question.

On Drysdale, from this 1981 Sports Illustrated article

Thanks to the research of such pioneers as Lew Burdette, Whitey Ford, Don Drysdale and Gaylord Perry, the spitball has given way to the mudball, the shineball, the shampoo ball, the pine tar ball, the sandpaper ball, the petroleum jelly ball, the belt buckle ball and the puffball.

And that's before you get into the allegations that the Dodger Stadium mound was higher than regulation (Drysdale was notably better at Chavez Ravine than on the road).

It is quite interesting to revisit that whole SI article on "The Tricks of the Trade" in the current context.

This is not completely true, of course. Mass alone, particularly muscle mass, is very good self-defense.

Not really, or at best, only in the complete absence of any actual training. I'll say something that should be very obvious to anyone who watched the early, bare-knuckle days of the UFC when there were no weight classes - size may be something, but skill is everything else. That's why a skinny, fuzzy guy from Brazil with the physique of an accountant went undefeated for several years, beating 230lb steroid-chugging brawlers (Kimo Leopaldo), 240lb amateur wrestling champions (Dan Severn), and all manner of goons and toughs in-between.

Certainly we note this almost every time a domestic violence incident occurs.

It isn't pumping iron that makes a man more athletic than a woman. The best female fighter in the world is probably Christiane "Cyborg" Santos and she wouldn't be top-50 against men in her exact weight class.

And there are weight classes in fighting for a reason.

It might not be the reason you think. When the UFC was open-weight, smaller fighters typically won out over the oversized lummoxes who typically lack stamina; in 1998 they tried a "Dave vs Goliath" tournament matching 4 260lb+ fighters against 4 200lb fighters, a tournament won by a "David". The best heavyweight in the world today, the great Fedor Emelianenko, regularly gives up 30lb to his opponents, and is in fact such a small heavyweight that he could easily fight at light-heavyweight if he chose to.

Boxing ignored any formal weight classes in practice for decades - the legendary Robert Fitzsimmons won the middleweight championship of the world weighing 160lb, then gave up the title to knock out heavyweight champ Jim Corbett while tipping the scales at 167lb. And both the boxing and MMA examples are with trained professional fighters, not baseball players who haven't been in a fair fight since middle school.

Weight classes serve some sorting purpose and help generate championships, which makes money, and that's a good thing (although today's boxing classifications are something of a joke, with new divisions every 3-5lb) but back before the weight classes were rigorously enforced by athletic comissions it was quite common for the best smaller fighters to run roughshod over bigger men - even very good bigger men. Middleweight Harry Greb thrashed almost every major heavyweight contender in the 1920s, and then boxed Jack Dempsey's ears to the astonishment of many when he served as Jack's sparring partner in 1920. Jimmy Wilde, a *flyweight* (<110 lb) rose to fame by taking on all-comers of any size in the UK and knocking most of them out cold.

Of course, as mentioned before, we're talking about trained fighters here, not iron-pumping dimwits who have never thrown a proper punch in their lives, but I see no reason - none - to think that the largest, most juiced-up muscle head baseball player would have better than coin-flips chance of beating, say, Marcus Giles in an actual fight. Jose Canseco's bulging biceps didn't even help him get past Danny Partridge.

Not really, or at best, only in the complete absence of any actual training.

So you mean, in the situation of a muscled behemoth batter against a less muscled pitcher, there would be an advantage. Which was the context, of course. Unless you're saying that Jenkins has extensive martial arts training, I will take this as an admission that Jenkins would have something to fear against a larger batter he was repeatedly throwing at. The Canseco comment is irrelevant, since Canseco obviously spent no real time learning to fight, while he was going against someone who made some effort to prepare.

So you mean, in the situation of a muscled behemoth batter against a less muscled pitcher, there would be an advantage.

In an actual fight, or in a 5-second scrum between the plate and the mound? I'll give even money on a fight.

The Canseco comment is irrelevant, since Canseco obviously spent no real time learning to fight, while he was going against someone who made some effort to prepare.

What makes you think Canseco took his training any less seriously than Danny Partridge or Vai Sikahema (both of whom he towered over, IIRC)?

In an actual fight, or in a 5-second scrum between the plate and the mound? I'll give even money on a fight.


Obviously, when the batter is charging the mound, the first five seconds is key. After that players are trying to separate them. But a lot of damage can be done in five seconds. And Jenkins seems to be saying that he would be trying to hurt the batter - sooner or later a batter would snap.

What makes you think Canseco took his training any less seriously than Danny Partridge or Vai Sikahema (both of whom he towered over, IIRC)?

Well, reports on Canseco at the time, for instance. He went in cocky, with zero reports that he was actually training as a fighter.

Incidentally, you don't help your credibility with your insistence that muscle mass is irrelevant (with provisos that you throw in that you then ignore). Yes, superior training can win out within limits. But the relevant situation isn't one of an untrained fighter against an expert fighter - it is of two athletes who don't have fight training. Maybe the stronger won't always win - but you'd be a fool to bet otherwise, absent being given longshot odds. In the real world, absent at least as large a difference in skill as there is in muscle mass, the larger stronger guy tends to win.

On a global scale, my guess is these are the three most famous people named Fergie in the history of the world:

1. The Duchess.
2. The singer.
3. The Ranger.

The talk show host, Craig Ferguson, would be No. 3. Wikipedia lists him among the people called Fergie. However, I have never heard anyone refer to Craig as Fergie, so he does not crack the top 3.

I think I'd put The Manager at #3, at least.

I have an older brother and a younger brother. Mass is a huge advantage. Yes, training can overcome some or all of that advantage, but are you really going to pretend the advantage does not exist? C'mon man wake up.

When you play the game long enough, you develop a sixth sense for the realm of the possible. You learn your body’s limitations (and your opponents’ bodies) in short order, because knowing is integral to your longevity. Sure, limits are pushed, but it doesn’t happen overnight. I played centerfield and had to know that when Chad Kreuter or Todd Zeile hit a ball, there was a good chance it would come off their bats with no spin, making it dance unpredictably while I was trying to catch it in the outfield. I could tell from the angle of Vladimir Guerrero’s bat and the location of the pitch when the ball was going to slice away from me. From bat-ball contact I could tell to a fine degree where a ball would end up long before I got there. As the Phillies announcers always used to say to me, “I knew right away when you had the ball in your sights, and then you would just be there.”


Maybe in his first year in Philly. He always played a too shallow centerfield.

Ferguson Jenkins says Mark McGwire owes an apology to all those pitchers who gave up his home runs.

Is Jenkins on drugs?

Cokeheads like Fergie Jenkins and Keith Hernandez like to criticize PED juicers the same way George Brunet liked to yell fat insults at Mickey Lolich.

the largest, most juiced-up muscle head baseball player would have better than coin-flips chance of beating, say, Marcus Giles in an actual fight.

I left after the Fernando Vina -- Albert Belle undercard.

who's baseball's best practitioner of the manly art of fistiana

Since you seemed to be talking all time, I'd have to go with Boss Schmidt. Only player I'm aware of to regularly spar with the current heavyweight champ (Jack Johnson). And in practice damned near killed Ty Cobb twice.

I remember that Howard Cosell said only one or two baseball players could fight. I know that one of Don Hoak or Dick Groat was on his list but I just can't remember which.

I thinking deadball and before saw a lot of guys in baseball that could fight, at least they could do it better than modern playaers.

Heavyweight champion Gentleman Jim Corbett played in some minor league games in the 19th century as a publicity gimmick. Was a slap hitter, according to some SABR journal buried in the attic. His brother Joe pitched for Ned Hanlon's Baltimore Orioles.

Billy Mertin was pretty good fighting because he always got the first punch in and made sure it was a good one.

Unless there is huge skill difference, you need to have some muscles and mass for fighting. Without any muscles, you simply can't do any damage with kicks and punches (although you still can defeat the other guy using throws and such). But all professional sportsmen have enough muscle mass and quickness to do some damage, if they know how. Fergie would never be able to beat McGwire in slugging match, matching him punch for punch. But if he has enough agility to evade McGwire and to throw punches at much higher rate, muscle mass would not be an issue.
I don't know why athletes rarely try other activities that develop balance, coordination and such, like martial arts. If I remember correctly, while repetitive action is extremely important in Most sports, training your brain do solve the same problems in different situations makes your whole body and mind more flexible and easily adaptable. I know that Selane (hockey) took juggling to train hand-eye coordination and I know that some players are martial arts experts, but those are exceptions.
Judo, and maybe even karate are too dangerous for athletes, because of all the injuries one can suffer while training them. But aikido, jiu-jitcu, that Brasilian capoeira, maybe even nanbudo, are not specially risky, and can significantly increase balance, agility and quickness.

Maybe the stronger won't always win - but you'd be a fool to bet otherwise

The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet -- Damon Runyon.

I'd have to go with Boss Schmidt. Only player I'm aware of to regularly spar with the current heavyweight champ (Jack Johnson). And in practice damned near killed Ty Cobb twice.

Good memory jag about Schmidt. IIRC Cobb eventually learned his lesson and steered clear of him. Pound for pound, though, the young Billy Martin was not only tough as nails, but he also had plenty of fighting skills that he'd developed back on the streets of the Berkeley slums where he grew up. That famous schnozzle of his was the product of many boyhood fights.

I remember that Howard Cosell said only one or two baseball players could fight. I know that one of Don Hoak or Dick Groat was on his list but I just can't remember which.

I don't remember much about Groat's ever getting into brawls, but Hoak was a classic baseball redneck who had several memorable ballpark scraps.

Hoak died during the 1969 World Series in one of the more comic-tragic sequences ever. He'd thought he was about to be named manager of the Pirates, and called some reporters to his house to wait for the official phone call. At the very moment John Galbraith called to tell him that the rumor in the paper was untrue, someone made off with his car that had been sitting in his driveway. Hoak then took a reporter's car and made off after the thief, only to die of a heart attack in the ensuing chase.

Worst day that anyone in baseball ever had---lost a job, a car, and his life. Ray Chapman still had his car when he got conked by Carl Mays, and had to settle for the silver medal.

The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet -- Damon Runyon.

Why should the race always be to the swift or the jumble to the quick-witted? Should they be allowed to win merely because of the gifts God gave them? Well, I say cheating is the gift man gives himself! - Mr. Burns.

Obviously, when the batter is charging the mound, the first five seconds is key. After that players are trying to separate them.

Well that's not really a fight. For 5 seconds nobody could give you more hell than a sumo wrestler with pendulous man boobs. After 30 seconds you may need to call an EMT.

But a lot of damage can be done in five seconds.

Between baseball players? Maybe if you're very, very lucky. You'd essentially have to land your first telegraphed haymaker, the kind of blow you really couldn't land against anyone other than a complete novice. Your best chance of being injured in a baseball fight, given the almost universal inability of baseball players to fight with any notable ability, is by falling awkwardly.

Well, reports on Canseco at the time, for instance. He went in cocky, with zero reports that he was actually training as a fighter.

Canseco claims to have trained in kung-fu, tae-kwon-do, and muay thai for 20 years. And "zero reports the he was actually training"? Who are we to believe, you or

our lying eyes?

My lord, those muscles!

Incidentally, you don't help your credibility with your insistence that muscle mass is irrelevant (with provisos that you throw in that you then ignore).

I don't think you're particularly well-suited to assess anybody's credibility on the topic.

Yes, superior training can win out within limits.

It doesn't have to be superior training. Size is just one small characteristic that contributes to fighting ability. There's also speed, quickness, balance, coordination, proper biomechanics of ballistic movement, and perhaps most importantly mental focus. Oversized bullies can get away with cowing opponents into submission in grade school, it doesn't really work against serious adults who are hellbent to scrap. There's a reason why superheavyweights have never dominated any fighting sport except sumo and why bodybuilders avoid fighting altogether.

But the relevant situation isn't one of an untrained fighter against an expert fighter - it is of two athletes who don't have fight training.

I've never said anything different, nor supported my claims with descriptions of world champions beating up oversized porters or farmhands. But you're operating under a fairly common misconception held mainly by people with very limited fighting experience - that mere size is an overwhelming factor in predicting a winner between two combatants. It ain't so. The odds of an overmuscled lummox being able to accurately throw an effective punch better than a smaller, quicker, equally untrained man can get out of the way are surprising small.

Maybe the stronger won't always win - but you'd be a fool to bet otherwise

I'll take that action about as often as not, and I'll venture the guess that I've wagered on more combat sporting events than you have.

In the real world, absent at least as large a difference in skill as there is in muscle mass, the larger stronger guy tends to win.

I don't think you're as well-acquainted with the situation in the real world as you think. In the real world, the larger, stronger guy typically hasn't had much reason to fight in his life, his size serving as adequate deterrent to being challenged while at the same time providing no actual advantage in his ability to fight effectively. Being able to hold your chums down for unstoppable noogies has limited efficacy against an actual determined opponent who hasn't had that intimidation advantage to protect him in the past.

I played centerfield and had to know that when Chad Kreuter or Todd Zeile hit a ball, there was a good chance it would come off their bats with no spin, making it dance unpredictably while I was trying to catch it in the outfield

and unfortunately I sometimes had to take the Bob Uecker approach to catching a knuckleball: wait until it stops rolling and pick it up. I hated those.

Kyle Farnsworth put on a brief but impressive pugilistic display a few years ago. He uses/used martial arts as a part of his training regimen and seemed to know exactly what he was doing.

#25 As has been pointed out before McGwire's not competing with pitchers for jobs so if PEDs actually made him a better hitter the effects would be broadly equal to all pitchers.

And an unenhanced McGwire would always have been playing on merit, so it wasn't costing some guy in AAA a job. If however it explains his sudden health, different story -- but one nobody seems too concerned about.