Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, March 03, 2012

ESPN: Cubs call Braun collector a pro

“Who knows what was going on with [Braun’s] situation, but for the most part the drug tester that we worked with ... we all know him as well, and he handles his business pretty professionally. And I think that everyone in this clubhouse would agree with me,” Cubs outfielder Reed Johnson said Friday on “The Waddle & Silvy Show” on ESPN 1000.

Cubs infielder Jeff Baker told the Chicago Sun-Times that he has had no problems with Laurenzi.

“Just from knowing Dino the three years I’ve been here, he’s been nothing but professional,” Baker told the paper. “He’s been very, very thorough. I have no concerns and no qualms.’” . . .

The process to me is something a lot of the guys in the clubhouse really trust,” Johnson said. “Obviously, you don’t want your sample going to somebody’s house and sitting around for a couple of days, but you know that that process of them taking your sample and sealing it inside a case, stickers over it and that’s inside a bag, stickers over that and that’s inside a sealed box, stickers over that.

“When you see the process and the detail that goes into that type of drug testing, you really do feel safe that nothing is going to happen.”

Cubs outfielder Alfonso Soriano said he would not be worried about his sample regardless of who is collecting it.

“I’m not worried that it’s the same guy,” Soriano told the Sun-Times. “‘I’m not worried because I know what I take. It doesn’t matter who takes the sample. If you don’t take nothing, he can take [the specimen] home for a week and nothing will come out.”

JE (Jason) Posted: March 03, 2012 at 08:40 AM | 63 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: cubs, reds, steroids

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Koot Posted: March 03, 2012 at 09:03 AM (#4073230)
Before all this... did anyone question the professionalism of the guy taking the urine sample? I mean, aside from making stage fright jokes or constantly dropping the jar of piss on the floor, what could he do that would make you think "Wow, this guy really isn't cut out for this"?
   2. Eugene Freedman Posted: March 03, 2012 at 10:12 AM (#4073242)
I consider it a bit odd that the same tester handles the same teams year after year. The ability of them to get to know the tester would be a concern for me. It should be a different lab tech every time so that no relationships can be made.
   3. pthomas Posted: March 03, 2012 at 10:28 AM (#4073245)
Stockholm Syndrome for your drug tester?
   4. KronicFatigue Posted: March 03, 2012 at 12:22 PM (#4073269)
Funny, [1] and [2] go together in my mind. I didn't question this guy until I heard that the cubs were sticking up for him. There is absolutely no reason for the company to put a person in the position where he can become friendly w/ the players. Way too easy to manipulate the system this way.
   5. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 03, 2012 at 12:59 PM (#4073286)
The best way to help this guy would be to, you know, stop talking about him already.
   6. Joey B. "disrespects the A" Posted: March 03, 2012 at 01:13 PM (#4073291)
Before all this... did anyone question the professionalism of the guy taking the urine sample?

Given that he's obviously been doing this for a while and the general public never heard of the guy until a few days ago, I'm going to say no.
   7. Brian C Posted: March 03, 2012 at 01:13 PM (#4073292)
The process to me is something a lot of the guys in the clubhouse really trust,” Johnson said. “Obviously, you don’t want your sample going to somebody’s house and sitting around for a couple of days..."

This is called "cognitive dissonance", right?
   8. valuearbitrageur Posted: March 03, 2012 at 01:18 PM (#4073293)
Given that he's obviously been doing this for a while and the general public never heard of the guy until a few days ago, I'm going to say no.


Just like Tim Donaghy, right?
   9. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 03, 2012 at 01:55 PM (#4073307)
Of course he's a pro. Who the hell would collect urine as a ####### hobby?
   10. Best Regards, President of Comfort, Esq. Posted: March 03, 2012 at 01:56 PM (#4073308)
Before all this... did anyone question the professionalism of the guy taking the urine sample?
No, he was definitely getting paid to do this.
   11. DA Baracus Posted: March 03, 2012 at 02:00 PM (#4073310)
This is called "cognitive dissonance", right?


Undetected sarcasm perhaps? Probably not but you can't tell from a quote. I liked Soriano's unintentional (maybe?) shot at Braun.
   12. Walt Davis Posted: March 03, 2012 at 03:25 PM (#4073360)
Who the hell would collect urine as a ####### hobby?

I shudder to think what Braun's pee would get on E-Bay.

And nobody answered in the other thread so since some eyeballs on this one -- not accusing the guy of anything but how hard would it be to tamper with the vial before Braun pissed in it? Rub a drop of something around the vial? Or just get contaminated somehow?

I'm assuming still not very easy since I assume it's in some sort of "hygienic" wrapping.
   13. Walks Clog Up the Bases Posted: March 03, 2012 at 03:28 PM (#4073362)
Who the hell would collect urine as a ####### hobby?


Moises Alou?
   14. Barnaby Jones Posted: March 03, 2012 at 03:42 PM (#4073369)
I'm assuming still not very easy since I assume it's in some sort of "hygienic" wrapping.


The cup I pissed in at a physical yesterday was sealed with a sticker; if I had wanted to, I could easily have removed and then replaced it. I would hope the drug testing had better protections.
   15. Morty Causa Posted: March 03, 2012 at 03:50 PM (#4073373)
You wouldn't dare. That sticker had only one day to retirement.
   16. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 03, 2012 at 04:26 PM (#4073379)
And nobody answered in the other thread so since some eyeballs on this one -- not accusing the guy of anything but how hard would it be to tamper with the vial before Braun pissed in it? Rub a drop of something around the vial? Or just get contaminated somehow?

I'm assuming still not very easy since I assume it's in some sort of "hygienic" wrapping.


You wouldn't want to mess with the collection cup, because the donor might notice. If you were going to do this, you'd contaminate the vials that the sample gets transferred into.
   17. Sleepy supports unauthorized rambling Posted: March 03, 2012 at 04:44 PM (#4073386)

The cup I pissed in at a physical yesterday was sealed with a sticker; if I had wanted to, I could easily have removed and then replaced it. I would hope the drug testing had better protections.


I have to provide drug test samples regularly, and they always ask me to inspect, then rinse the vial in the sink before filling. All while being watched by the administrator. I guess something oily and clear could survive that, since it's usually just a perfunctory rinse, and of course there's no guarantee MLB players follow a similar process, but it makes sense.
   18. The District Attorney Posted: March 03, 2012 at 04:49 PM (#4073388)
I shudder to think what Braun's pee would get on E-Bay.
FWIW, this is not allowed.
   19. Davo Dozier Posted: March 03, 2012 at 05:19 PM (#4073394)
On Law and Order: SVU, when Chain of Custody gets broken on a case, that's the end of the case. There's no "Oh, well, maybe we can try it another way." No. It's dead, because once the Chain of Custody is broken you no longer have any evidence. Also

Stabler: Our victim is a 36 year-old tobacco executive.

Benson: I guess it's true what they say. Smoking kills.

CHUNG CHUNK
   20. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 03, 2012 at 05:25 PM (#4073398)
I shudder to think what Braun's pee would get on E-Bay.


FWIW, this is not allowed.

But when he croaks, you can sell his skull and his bones for medical research, as long as he's not a Native American Indian.

Allowed

Items that contain human scalp hair (such as lockets or wigs)

Clean, articulated (jointed), non-Native American skulls and skeletons used for medical research
   21. Greg K Posted: March 03, 2012 at 05:37 PM (#4073401)
Clean, articulated (jointed), non-Native American skulls and skeletons used for medical research

Are Canadian First Nation skulls allowed?

It is very important that I get an answer on this by 3pm Monday.
   22. birdlives is one crazy ninja Posted: March 03, 2012 at 05:37 PM (#4073402)
The cup I pissed in at a physical yesterday was sealed with a sticker; if I had wanted to, I could easily have removed and then replaced it. I would hope the drug testing had better protections.

The NY Times interviewed Laurenzi and provided details about the collection process.

Inside the collection room, players select an individually wrapped collection cup and are told to wash their hands. Collectors must have a clear view of the player when the sample is produced. The player puts a cap on the bottle after the sample is produced and then selects a sealed collection kit and opens it.

The collector pours the urine from the cup into two sample bottles and snaps the caps on top. The player is asked to verify that the I.D. number on the chain-of-custody form matches the number on the seals. The player is given a statement that verifies his awareness of the process.

The two sealed bottles are put in a plastic bag that is sealed and placed in a specimen box, which is also sealed with a security sticker. The box is placed in a FedEx package for shipment. The player’s name is not on any of the containers.
   23. DA Baracus Posted: March 03, 2012 at 05:55 PM (#4073406)
But when he croaks, you can sell his skull and his bones for medical research, as long as he's not a Native American Indian.


That's bullshit. I have all these Native American Indian skulls and bones lying around my basement that I want to sell, and they're interfering with me reaching potential buyers. Free market, yeah right.
   24. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 03, 2012 at 07:10 PM (#4073419)
That's ########. I have all these Native American Indian skulls and bones lying around my basement that I want to sell, and they're interfering with me reaching potential buyers. Free market, yeah right.

Maybe if you stuck one of those Mohegan cigarettes in the skull's mouth you could call the skull a cigarette holder. There'd be a certain amount of irony involved, but ebay is famous for its sense of humor.
   25. depletion Posted: March 03, 2012 at 07:39 PM (#4073427)
what could he do that would make you think "Wow, this guy really isn't cut out for this"?

Always be forgetting where his keys are. Be drunk. Have used motor oil all over his hands. Use a completely unique procedure every time you do the sample acquisition. Laugh at an inopportune time.
   26. Ron J Posted: March 03, 2012 at 09:13 PM (#4073447)
Who the hell would collect urine as a ####### hobby?


Howard Hughes?
   27. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: March 03, 2012 at 09:25 PM (#4073451)
not accusing the guy of anything but how hard would it be to tamper with the vial before Braun pissed in it? Rub a drop of something around the vial? Or just get contaminated somehow?

I'm assuming still not very easy since I assume it's in some sort of "hygienic" wrapping.


It's incredibly easy to taint the sample cup prior to it being sealed. Not to mention, in the universe of fraudulent activity, it's basically childs play to unseal and reseal the sample.

I explained in the prior thread(s) that the PED Braun tested for is probably the easiest to plan into a sample. Axiron, the T found in the sample, is usually distributed as an under-arm application, like deodorant. You can simply swipe a finger on the applicator and while handling the sample and sealing it, you can easily touch under the cap or edge of the inside rim of the cup. Easy.

The claim that the sample is secure merely because there is a bag, within a bag, within bag is silly and it ignores the simplicity of tampering prior to being sealed.
   28. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: March 03, 2012 at 09:26 PM (#4073452)
is probably the easiest to plan into a sample


*probably the easiest (PED) to plant a sample*
   29. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: March 03, 2012 at 09:28 PM (#4073454)
At least Dino Laurenzi isn't a Cubs fan. Oh wait!
   30. Walks Clog Up the Bases Posted: March 03, 2012 at 09:53 PM (#4073456)
Now I’m not saying that because Dino is a Cub’s fan that he did this.


Whenever I see or hear someone say, "Now I'm not saying..." I think about Louis C.K.'s bit about people who literally say "the N-word." Yeah, they aren't actually saying it, but they are definitely planting the idea in your head.
   31. Walt Davis Posted: March 03, 2012 at 10:01 PM (#4073458)
You wouldn't want to mess with the collection cup, because the donor might notice.

(1) I didn't realize there was a transfer from cup to vial and tampering with the vials would be the easiest but ...
(2) I assume a teeny-weeny amount, less than a drop, directly in a urine sample is plenty so a dab with a q-tip, not sure that's noticeable.
   32. Bob Tufts Posted: March 03, 2012 at 10:26 PM (#4073464)
I hold in my hand the urine sample. As a child of four can plainly see, these containers have been hermetically sealed. They've been kept in a #2 mayonnaise jar in Dino Laurenzi Jrs. basment refrigerator since 5pm on Saturday. No one knows the contents of these containers, but you, in your borderline divine and mystical way, will ascertain the progesterone/estradiol ratio having never before seen these vials.
   33. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: March 03, 2012 at 10:29 PM (#4073466)
My whole life I had wonderfully relaxed urination. Then, when I was 18, I had to take a drug test for a job at a movie theater. Well, sir, for whatever reason I was unable to eliminate when required. I was there at the drug testing place for like an hour. It was humiliating.

Ever since then I dread drug tests. I have to drink two Wendy's biggie diet cokes before the test to even have a chance.
   34. RJames Posted: March 03, 2012 at 11:10 PM (#4073475)
Then, when I was 18, I had to take a drug test for a job at a movie theater.


?? Cripes, they drug tested you for a crummy movie usher job? What's the worst thing that can happen if you show up to work wrecked- eat too much of the popcorn?
   35. Mark Donelson Posted: March 03, 2012 at 11:10 PM (#4073476)
Yeah, they aren't actually saying it, but they are definitely planting the idea in your head.

The Greeks had a name for that kinda thing...
   36. RJames Posted: March 03, 2012 at 11:25 PM (#4073478)
I was listening to Jason Stark on the MLB radio channel and he was saying the other players are pissed at Braun for slipping this, then claiming innocence. This article reinforces the idea that the players want a fair and rigorous testing program, and are becoming less tolerant ot their peers who are still trying to cheat.
   37. Ron J Posted: March 03, 2012 at 11:46 PM (#4073480)
   38. SouthSideRyan Posted: March 03, 2012 at 11:48 PM (#4073481)
I can't believe Lion is still running with the tampering because he's a Cubs fan idea.
   39. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 04, 2012 at 12:05 AM (#4073485)
#33
You are not alone


I've been a comics page addict since I was about 3 years old, and with the possible exception of Pogo, I can't think of a strip that's ever been as consistently funny for as many years as Dilbert. Unlike almost every other strip this side of Dreams of the Rarebit Fiend, he almost never has a truly bad day. Pearls Before Swine approaches it, but it still hasn't quite gotten all the way up there.

It may just be that my taste runs to misanthropic sarcasm much more than to stupid puns or ha-ha jokes, but I still think that Scott Adams is a ####### genius, and I've never worked in an office.
   40. Downtown Bookie Posted: March 04, 2012 at 12:25 AM (#4073492)
not accusing the guy of anything but how hard would it be to tamper with the vial before Braun pissed in it? Rub a drop of something around the vial? Or just get contaminated somehow?


Not speaking for or against the feasibility of such a plot; but it seems to me that if the Cubs fan piss collector had hatched a scheme to snare Ryan Braun with a tainted sample holder, then it would be in the piss collector's best interest to do everything in his power to make sure that the tainted sample was delivered as quickly as possible, so as to avoid attracting suspicion.

Indeed, if one really wants to go all conspiracy theory [cue appropriate music] consider this: perhaps Braun, knowing that he would likely test positive, made a deal with the piss collector to deliberately fail to follow the required delivery procedure, thus making a way out for Braun.

I mean, if we're going to think way outside the box, let's think outside all sides of the box.

DB
   41. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: March 04, 2012 at 04:18 AM (#4073530)
I can't believe Lion is still running with the tampering because he's a Cubs fan idea.


I've wrote several times I think it is more likely Braun used T than Dino planted T. I'm merely sharing evidence that Dino was a Cubs fans and offering a possible motive for planting. Just about every crime needs a motive, being a Cubs fan probably isn't enough, but it isn't meaningless when trying to come up with a motive.
   42. Zach Posted: March 04, 2012 at 07:12 AM (#4073541)
It's incredibly easy to taint the sample cup prior to it being sealed. Not to mention, in the universe of fraudulent activity, it's basically childs play to unseal and reseal the sample.

Actually, successfully doping a sample sounds like it's harder than you might think. Most of the obvious tricks seem to have been planned for, and we haven't even touched the issue of altering the concentrations in two samples to be
1) consistent with each other, and
2) biologically plausible

The discussion about tainting samples seems kind of unmoored, like dorm-room bull sessions about committing the perfect murder.

   43. Zach Posted: March 04, 2012 at 07:24 AM (#4073543)
Bill James has a good bit on "motive, means and opportunity" in his popular crime book. He thinks they're virtually useless in determining someone's guilt or innocence, and I'm inclined to agree.

The trouble with motive is that, by definition, anybody who commits a crime had a motive sufficient to make them do it, while anyone who didn't, didn't.

Being a super-deranged Cubs fan who would do anything to get a rival player suspended the next season would certainly be one of the odder motives you'd ever read about. If you had proof that the guy did it, it certainly might help put an odd crime in perspective. But it would be really strange to see someone throw away their personal reputation and a job they had held for 16 years based on fandom. You'd almost expect mental illness as a contributing factor.
   44. RJames Posted: March 04, 2012 at 09:20 AM (#4073554)
I've been a comics page addict since I was about 3 years old, and with the possible exception of Pogo, I can't think of a strip that's ever been as consistently funny for as many years as Dilbert.


The Far Side? Life in Hell? Those were always funny, in a misanthropic, sarcastic kind of way.
   45. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: March 04, 2012 at 10:06 AM (#4073561)
Being a super-deranged Cubs fan who would do anything to get a rival player suspended the next season would certainly be one of the odder motives you'd ever read about. If you had proof that the guy did it, it certainly might help put an odd crime in perspective. But it would be really strange to see someone throw away their personal reputation and a job they had held for 16 years based on fandom. You'd almost expect mental illness as a contributing factor.


Since when are criminal motives always rational? Motive is almost always present in crimes. Sometimes a motive is simple, like wanting more money, etc. #43, there is a key distinction between using motive to determine guilt and using it as a lead in an investigation, very different.
   46. Joey B. "disrespects the A" Posted: March 04, 2012 at 10:21 AM (#4073565)
The discussion about tainting samples seems kind of unmoored

You've been around here for a while, so a discussion unmoored from reality should hardly come as a surprise to you.
   47. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 04, 2012 at 10:34 AM (#4073568)
I've been a comics page addict since I was about 3 years old, and with the possible exception of Pogo, I can't think of a strip that's ever been as consistently funny for as many years as Dilbert.

The Far Side? Life in Hell? Those were always funny, in a misanthropic, sarcastic kind of way.


The Far Side blew hot and cold, great at its best but punching a clock much of the time. Life in Hell was a weekly strip and didn't face the same pressure as a daily.
   48. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 04, 2012 at 11:00 AM (#4073585)
we haven't even touched the issue of altering the concentrations in two samples to be
1) consistent with each other, and
2) biologically plausible


Actually, this is probably the easy part. A few minutes of googling will take care of the biologically plausible part, and how hard do you think it is to spike two samples the same way? I think the science geek part would be a relative piece of cake compared to the Neal Caffrey part. Unless you're Neal Caffrey, of course.

But anyway, the whole point of the process is supposed to be to take the collector's character out of the equation. If you have an air-tight procedure and you document that it's followed to a "T" (see what I did there?), then your collectors can all be escaped cons and it won't matter. Similarly, discussions of motive miss the point -- there was opportunity when there should not have been, and that settles the issue right there.
   49. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: March 04, 2012 at 12:03 PM (#4073616)
Similarly, discussions of motive miss the point -- there was opportunity when there should not have been, and that settles the issue right there.

From a legal/arbitrator perpective, yes. But if a person is trying to form their own opinion of whether Braun cheated, it doesn't really settle it.
   50. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 04, 2012 at 12:26 PM (#4073625)
...if a person is trying to form their own opinion of whether Braun cheated, it doesn't really settle it.


If a person is trying to form their own opinion, then whatever they choose to settle it on settles it. It's simply a matter of their own opinion after all. All of this hair-splitting isn't going to change anyone's opinion. Arguments that one opinion is the right one because all the other ones are based on giving this or that too much or too little weight, while perhaps sociologically fascinating, aren't particularly interesting or informative about what really happened in any particular case.
   51. base ball chick Posted: March 04, 2012 at 12:46 PM (#4073641)
motive? just having a motive doesn't mean you do anything about it

i can think of LOTS and LOTS of crimes i have motive to commit. say, for example, having put an end to seligula a LONG time ago before he could destroy my baseball team. and if he had dropped dead in houston it didn't mean that i would have been responsible

   52. Zach Posted: March 04, 2012 at 01:00 PM (#4073651)
Actually, this is probably the easy part. A few minutes of googling will take care of the biologically plausible part, and how hard do you think it is to spike two samples the same way? I think the science geek part would be a relative piece of cake compared to the Neal Caffrey part. Unless you're Neal Caffrey, of course.

Again, this is one of those harder-than-it-looks details. Consider Deca-Durabolin, one of the most common steroids. Deca-Durabolin is actually the commercial name for nandrolone decanoate, and is sold in a suspension of benzyl alcohol. In the body, it's hydrolized to nandrolone, which is metabolized by the liver into 19-norandrosterone, 19-noretiocholanolone, and 19-norepiandrosterone. Other metabolites are not mentioned in the data sheet I found, but may also have to be matched in order to fool a lab test.

So in practice, you can't dope a urine sample with Deca-Durabolin. The presence of benzyl alcohol or nandrolone decanoate in the sample would be a screaming giveaway, and you can't easily come by samples of the metabolites that the test actually looks for.

If you have an organic chemist around to prepare samples of the metabolites, he can't give you your doctoring agent in a solution, because the solvating agent will show up in any test the lab cares to run. On the other hand, the amounts which yield a positive test result are on the order of 2 nanograms per milliliter. So depending on the size of the sample, you've got to add a few hundred nanograms of three or more commercially unavailable metabolites in the right proportions to one another and to the total amount of urine in each sample.

Bear in mind that your request for biologically inactive metabolites of a common steroid will be extremely unusual, and will definitely be remembered by the chemist who prepared them. It will look incredibly suspicious to anybody who knows that you're a urine tester by trade, and any cops who hear about it will be more than halfway to putting you behind bars. A lab test which reports positive for the metabolites you were able to obtain, but negative for the ones you weren't will also be incredibly incriminating.
   53. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 04, 2012 at 01:39 PM (#4073677)
Bill James has a good bit on "motive, means and opportunity" in his popular crime book. He thinks they're virtually useless in determining someone's guilt or innocence, and I'm inclined to agree
They're a screening mechanism. If someone doesn't have MMO, you can rule them out; that doesn't mean that their presence proves guilt.
The trouble with motive is that, by definition, anybody who commits a crime had a motive sufficient to make them do it, while anyone who didn't, didn't.
That sounds like you (or James) are arguing about motive alone, not MMO. To be sure, motive is weakest, because it requires you to speculate about a person's thoughts; the fact that you don't know why someone would have done something doesn't mean he doesn't have his reasons. But someone with no obvious reason is probably not the right person to focus on.
   54. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: March 04, 2012 at 01:41 PM (#4073681)
Bear in mind that your request for biologically inactive metabolites of a common steroid will be extremely unusual, and will definitely be remembered by the chemist who prepared them. It will look incredibly suspicious to anybody who knows that you're a urine tester by trade, and any cops who hear about it will be more than halfway to putting you behind bars.
Of course, if you're a urine tester by trade, you might have access to them without needing to request them...
   55. base ball chick Posted: March 04, 2012 at 01:54 PM (#4073686)
david

that would be complicated. much MUCH easier to do the manufactured testosterone
   56. Zach Posted: March 04, 2012 at 02:46 PM (#4073708)
Of course, if you're a urine tester by trade, you might have access to them without needing to request them...

You could potentially switch out the urine, but that's not what we're arguing about at the moment, and has its own set of difficulties. But again, we're back to arguing ways to commit the perfect crime, without any mooring in fact.
   57. Walt Davis Posted: March 04, 2012 at 04:10 PM (#4073735)
The trouble with motive is that, by definition, anybody who commits a crime had a motive sufficient to make them do it, while anyone who didn't, didn't.

In theory, yes and therefore the absence of motive is an indicator of "not guiltiness".

Although this overstates things anyway. As bbc points out, we all got motive. Also, most crime is a drunk/high idiot doing something without thinking.

Being a super-deranged Cubs fan who would do anything to get a rival player suspended the next season would certainly be one of the odder motives you'd ever read about.

Right, which is evidence that the guy didn't do it ... or he's an obsessed nutbar but we have no evidence of that. You'd have to be way around the bend to believe the 2012 Cubs are better than the Brewers minus Braun for 50 games ... and the Reds ... and the Cards ... and ...

My raising the tampering isn't to accuse the guy of anything -- I've got no reason to think he did so and, hey, I'm a Cub fan so I'm not going to object strongly to Braun missing 50 games which is why I tampered with the sample ... I was just curious because all anybody talked about here was the impossibility of breaking the 15 seals that are slapped around it after the urine was in there. Just noting the blind spot in that discussion and asking what's possible.
   58. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 04, 2012 at 07:50 PM (#4073801)
So in practice, you can't dope a urine sample with Deca-Durabolin.


But unlike Deca-Durabolin with all the complexities of its metabolic breakdown products, you can simply spike a sample with testosterone.
   59. Zach Posted: March 05, 2012 at 03:29 PM (#4074327)
But unlike Deca-Durabolin with all the complexities of its metabolic breakdown products, you can simply spike a sample with testosterone.

No you can't, any more than you can put a $20 bill in a copy machine and expect to pass it at WalMart. A liquid chromatography mass spectrometry machine will show many different peaks for every steroid and metabolite that appears in the sample, whether or not that species is counted toward a positive test result. A sample which only shows testosterone and none of its metabolites will look nothing like a sample which is taken from a true cheater, and the difference will be obvious to any lab tech trained in detecting steroids. You might as well jump up and down waving a sign saying "This sample was spiked!"
   60. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 05, 2012 at 03:50 PM (#4074349)
No you can't, any more than you can put a $20 bill in a copy machine and expect to pass it at WalMart. A liquid chromatography mass spectrometry machine will show many different peaks for every steroid and metabolite that appears in the sample, whether or not that species is counted toward a positive test result. A sample which only shows testosterone and none of its metabolites will look nothing like a sample which is taken from a true cheater, and the difference will be obvious to any lab tech trained in detecting steroids. You might as well jump up and down waving a sign saying "This sample was spiked!"

I love the blithe assumption -- "Hey, the piss collector could just rub a Q-tip of testosterone on the inside of the tube" -- as if no one anywhere, in the four-plus decades of sports drug testing, had ever thought of that.
   61. SouthSideRyan Posted: March 05, 2012 at 04:00 PM (#4074356)
Look you guys can't prove that Laurenzi wasn't on synthetic testosterone himself, made duplicate seals, and swapped out his own piss for Braun's when he had a free moment.
   62. Greg Pope thinks the Cubs are reeking havoc Posted: March 05, 2012 at 04:15 PM (#4074366)
as if no one anywhere, in the four-plus decades of sports drug testing, had ever thought of that.

It is certainly true that it's very unlikely that a bunch of goofballs on a website are going to come up with a simple way to screw with a drug test. One that was negotiated bewteen a high profile company and a high profile labor union. And administered by a company and a lab whose job it is to administer these tests.
   63. Poulanc Posted: March 05, 2012 at 04:20 PM (#4074370)
I think the science geek part would be a relative piece of cake compared to the Neal Caffrey part. Unless you're Neal Caffrey, of course.


A 'White Collar' reference. Thanks!

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Tuque
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogUmpire ejects Braves fan for heckling Bryce Harper
(54 - 7:44pm, Sep 17)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogJoe Girardi: ‘Pitch the right way’
(38 - 7:43pm, Sep 17)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-17-2014
(29 - 7:43pm, Sep 17)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogChris Davis Rescues Man Pinned Under Truck
(40 - 7:42pm, Sep 17)
Last: DKDC

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(2972 - 7:41pm, Sep 17)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogRudman: Clutch hitting the key to Mariners’ playoff hopes
(7 - 7:37pm, Sep 17)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogPedro pens a letter to Clayton Kershaw
(36 - 7:30pm, Sep 17)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogBryan Cranston’s One-Man Baseball Play Inspired By ‘Looney Tunes’ Is Incredible
(68 - 7:13pm, Sep 17)
Last: winnipegwhip

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(263 - 7:10pm, Sep 17)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-17-2014
(17 - 7:09pm, Sep 17)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogWith 8-2 win Tuesday, Orioles clinch first American League East title since 1997
(21 - 6:47pm, Sep 17)
Last: boteman is not here 'til October

NewsblogA’s lose Triple-A Sacramento affiliate
(82 - 6:42pm, Sep 17)
Last: Boileryard

NewsblogBowman: A year’s worth of struggles leads reason to wonder what changes are in store for the Braves
(52 - 5:17pm, Sep 17)
Last: Rickey! trades in sheep and threats

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(829 - 5:11pm, Sep 17)
Last: Jim Wisinski

NewsblogMASNSports (Kubatko): Orioles remember Monica Barlow on the day they clinch
(4 - 5:07pm, Sep 17)
Last: Moloka'i Three-Finger Brown (Declino DeShields)

Page rendered in 0.7731 seconds
52 querie(s) executed